Earlier this week, my longtime amigo and dogged defense beat reporter Chris Castelli of Inside the Navy had breakfast (along with a number of other defense reporters) with General Conway, the Commandant of the Marine Corps. According to Chris’ report, the commandant said the following:
“You know, I’ll tell you there is going to be a crash. That’s what airplanes do over time. And we’re going to have to accept that when it happens. And we’ll hear some of the folks that are not fans of the program rise up, I suspect, when that occurs.”
That’s an amazing statement for a service chief to make. I don’t remember any similar quotes from any generals or admirals about the Super Hornet or the Raptor or any other platform. Obviously the Corps is still relatively gun-shy about this airplane.
What Gen. Conway didn’t explain was why an Osprey is going to crash. Well, DT is here to help.
Now let me say up front, I’m a fan of the V-22 and believe in its potential. I want the airplane to kick butt once it gets to the tip of the spear this year. I also know a little bit about the program, having worked as PMA-275’s spokesman at NAVAIR for three years (2002–2005) and having flown the sim and gone for flights in the airplane a number of times. But here is a prediction behind Gen. Conway’s statement: In the first three years of fleet V-22 operations, the Marines will suffer six Class A flight mishaps with the Osprey. And here’s how:
- Although VMMT-204, the Osprey RAG, is up and running, the pilots training there are relatively senior compared to other RAGs. Eventually true “nuggets” will make their way to the fleet and they will do “nugget” things.
- The test pilots (both active duty and civilian) did amazing work during the High Rate of Descent (HROD) phase of developmental test at NAS Patuxent River back in 2002 and 2003. They validated the V-22’s vortex ring state (VRS) envelope. (DT readers will remember that VRS was what caused an Osprey to crash near Marana, Arizona back in 2000, killing 19 Marines.) Improvements have been made in the vertical speed displays and aural warning systems. But the fact remains that — while there are no “unknown unknowns” about VRS and that there is a buffer between the operational rate of descent limit of 800 feet per minute and where VRS occurs — the rate at which the V-22 develops a high rate of descent is unique to the V-22. Basically, the crew has to hawk the VSI gauge constantly during a descent. A moment’s inattention can result in the vertical speed getting out of hand. (The test pilots actually had an inadvertant VRS entry during HROD testing because they got distracted for a second.) So imagine junior pilots during high op-tempo periods (deployed) at night, on goggles, and operating with not enough sleep (never happens if you follow NATOPS, right?) Yes, this is a training issue in that crews can be taught to watch the VSI readout on the display, but in spite of the comprehensive understanding Osprey crews have of the phenomenon (thanks to the Developmental Test Team at Pax River), somebody’s going to be tired and distracted (and maybe under fire) and will enter VRS close to the ground. The outcome won’t be good.
- It’s unclear at this point whether or not VMM-263 will self-deploy or embark on an amphib like most USMC assault support aircraft. If they conduct sustained flight ops from an LHA or LHD, again, we will see nuggets do nugget-like things. Somebody will fly into the water while on final approach; somebody will plant one against the deck edge. And I guarantee you these things will happen at night or in bad weather.
- Ospreys will operate as multi-ships, so there’s a high likelihood of a midair. Once again, when it occurs it’ll be at night.
- An Osprey will be lost due to controlled flight into terrain (CFIT).
- An Osprey will have an engine failure (or fire) and be forced into an extended transit to get to somewhere safe to land. During the transit the interconnect drive shaft will fail. (The one true test of the interconnect drive shaft was very early in the program’s history. The mechanism failed grossly.) Because the crew was transiting at medium altitude (8,000 feet or so) they will have the opportunity to keep the V-22 in the airplane mode while intercepting a dual-engine failure emergency glide profile. The Osprey will either ditch in the water or belly land in the desert. The “crumple zones” on the nose will work as advertised; the prop-rotors will “broomstraw” (disintegrate instead of turning into flying chunks upon impact). The crew will survive with minor injuries but the Osprey will sustain strike damage.
- The Osprey has survivability features like self-sealing tanks and composite structures that will allow the airplane to take hits and keep on going. However, one of the other features of a composite fuselage is bullets don’t bounce off, they pass through like a hot knife through butter. The airplane may survive an encounter with small arms fire, but Marines flying in back might not. Another prediction: Just like the Humvee, the Marines will “up-armor” V-22s in time. They didn’t do it to date because that would’ve kept the airplane from attaining its Key Performance Parameters (payload, range, etc.) during OPEVAL.
So that equals six lost aircraft (seven if you believe the midair will result in the loss of both Ospreys). The next time the topic comes up, Gen. Conway can offer a more complete answer.
Again, you won’t hear the Air Force Chief of Staff or Chief of Naval Operations making similar comments about their new platforms, and it’s not because they’re unrealistic. Obviously, the Marines are still a bit “concerned” about this “revolutionary” technology they’re getting, like it or not.
And beyond the mishap potential are concerns about the Osprey’s sustainability. Remember, this is a program that hasn’t been deployed yet but has obsolescence issues with subsystems. An item — a part of the prop-rotor gearbox, for instance — will fail at a rate not predicted by the engineers. And because they didn’t predict it, the manufacture of it will not have been funded at an appropriate rate. Or worse, the company that manufactures the item will have gone out of business years ago (maybe even without the prime contractors’ or government’s knowledge). There will be none of these items in the supply chain and V-22s will sit idle, perhaps for months on end.
Another maintenance issue: As I mention, the V-22 fuselage is made of composite materials. It’s very light, by design. But over time it’s going to crack both in places the engineers expect and in places they don’t expect. These cracks are going to plague the squadrons for the entire operating history of the Osprey.
And don’t forget the hydraulic system: 5,000 psi and titanium tubing. Let’s see how well that can be maintained in the field for an extended period.
Another major indicator of USMC confidence for the V-22 will be where they choose to base it during the first deployment. Most likely they won’t be based on an amphib, not because of world events but because the Osprey doesn’t really fit on any of the amphibs very well (and it also has this potential problem where it warps the flight deck with its exhaust). The “brown water” Navy isn’t in a big hurry to have them come aboard.
And as far as where they’re based once in theater, let’s keep it very simple: If the Marines believe this is the kick ass airplane that has kept it alive and funded for all the years in spite of the setbacks and the loss of life, then they’ll base VMM-263 at Bagram or Al Asad. That’s where the action is. That’s where the enemy is. Otherwise, if they don’t fully believe, they’ll stick the “Thunderchickens” somewhere around the Horn of Africa and couch the move in terms like “emerging threat.”
As I mentioned at the beginning, I’m a supporter of the program. I know many of the crews who will be leading the squadrons on the first deployments. I worked closely with VMX-22 during OPEVAL II. I would put pilots like “Mongo” Seymour up against the best Tomcat drivers I ever rode behind. In fact, I’ve never met a pilot, crew chief, or maintainer in the Osprey community who didn’t blow me away with his or her professionalism and dedication to the mission. I want to be wrong with my prediction. But remember, I didn’t bring the subject up; the Commandant of the Marine Corps did.
– Ward
{ 29 comments… read them below or add one }
Stupid question: Given the detailed map of the VRS envelope, and that so many envelope problems on aircraft these days are computer controlled (the computer doesn’t let the pilot exceed the flight envelope), is there software to prevent a pilot from going past the safe limits on VRS (perhaps with an override switch?)
Nicholas,
Since the flight control system is digital, limits can be designed in as you suggest, however that would be a major redesign, which takes time and money. It might take a mishap or two to make it a priority. There is precedent for that sort of sequence with earlier airplanes including the Tomcat. We had to lose a bunch due to irrecoverable flat spins before we designed and incorporated digital flight controls. Right now the fleet views VRS avoidance as a training issue.
You state: “The one true test of the interconnect drive shaft was very early in the program’s history. The mechanism failed grossly.”
Yikes! How weak is the drive shaft? Didn’t they do testing with one engine out? Am I correct to assume the V22 can fly and land with one engine and one prop turning (no drive to other prop) in horizontal mode?
I do hope your prediction proves to be too pessimistic…
Hey, Mitch:
The IDS failed because fire melted it (it’s composite). They modified the housing as a result. Some single engine testing was done during DT but it wasn’t exceptionally robust. As an aviator, I’m not sure how much confidence I’d have flying around single engine for very long.
First off, a little background on me
“…one of the other features of a composite fuselage is bullets don’t bounce off, they pass through like a hot knife through butter. The airplane may survive an encounter with small arms fire, but Marines flying in back might not.”
CH-46 and CH-53 skin won’t stop small arms either. At least it didn’t 36 years ago. What is the performance penalty for armor?
mike
I’m a computer security person, I’ve given up on user training if a automated safeguard can be put in place instead. Especially given a system as complicated as a tiltrotor. I trust that the flight envelope is really mapped out, but I wouldn’t trust a pilot to stay within the envelope. There is a long history of aircraft avionics which keep the pilot from doing something catastrophic.
Also, why do so many feel Vortex Ring State is such a big deal? I believe its because:
a: Smaller rotors with higher velocity I think makes VRS easier to get into (the Osprey also has greater downwash, unfortunate F=MA physics, if your rotors only cover 1/2 the area, you gotta push the air down twice as fast).
b: VRS in a single rotor or coaxial-rotor helicopter and it goes straigh down. OWCH, big ouch, but on something like a blackhawk it is designed to hopefully land hard without killing someone inside. On a twin rotor (Osprey, or a twin rotor heavy lift helecoptor), VRS causes one half to lose lift while the other half keeps lift, causing a difficult to recover from roll, so rather than going flat-down onto the ground, it goes nose-in or side-in or even up-side-down.
OTOH, the ability to power forward out of VRS is a big win, if the reaction is fast enough (before roll occurs). Is it possible to just have THAT be in the software?
I’m also a fan of this V-22. The two known problems that were covered by news were the vortex ring state as mentioned, and the freezing of the engine when it flied through clouds at 18,000 feet. Regarding the freezing of the engine that caused a stall, an de-icing system was added to prevent it from freezing. Regarding the issue of VRS, Jim covers it well. The accident that caused the V-22 to crash during the test years ago was traumatic that may have caused many to concern about its reliability and vulnerability to accidents.
The tilt rotor is pretty cool, but what makes us think is where to attach weapons, which those rotors prevent weapons to be attached on the wing. There has been several proposals, such as internal UAVs that will be launched out at danger(just like video games which drones follow the path of the fighter, and shoot together), guns on the ramp, laser. There were also plans about V-22 escort. It will be convenient if there was a MH-60L DAP version of the V-22, which troops will be dropped off and the Armed V-22 provide close air support to the troops surrounding the target. If rocket and missile pods were to be attached, it seems to be forced to be attached somewhere near the front, and the gun underneath. Does anyone have any new news about what’s going on about the weapons planned to be attached on V-22?
By the way, what about the BA 609? Any news about problems and improvements about the BA 609?
Jim:
Like I said in the piece, I respect the hell out of anyone flying the Osprey currently. Guys like SSGT Mike Schneider and other crew chiefs like him at the ITT taught me plenty during my days with the program.
But I think you’ve missed my point. For all the mechanisms in place (including the ones you list beyond what I mentioned) the fact remains that the V-22 develops a sink rate faster than conventional rotorcraft. If you don’t think that’s true, talk to one of the pilots, or even better, have one of them take you to the simulators there at New River. Have him establish the airplane in a hover at say, 1,000 feet, pull the power smoothly to idle, and watch how quickly the vertical speed grows. Now imagine you’re being shot at, there’s a lot of chatter on the UHF and inside the airplane on the ICS. At this point, it’ll take a lot of crew coordination and discipline to stay “heads down.”
I’m not saying this’ll happen a lot or that it’s even likely. I’m saying that if we lose an Osprey in the next three years, that scenario will likely be the culprit.
To your point regarding beeping the nacelles: Even when you beep the nacelles you’re going to lose at least 500 feet of altitude, depending on your vertical speed at the time you recognize you’re into VRS.
It’s ironic really: The logic you’ve posted here is the argument I helped fashion with Col. Dan Schultz, Lt. Col Kevin Gross, and Tom Macdonald. It got us out of the woods inside the Beltway. Now can the airplane succeed on deployment, year after year? The full buy of 360 MV-22s hangs in the balance as does the health and well-being of hundreds of brave Marines like yourself.
And by the way, Jamie Darcy was my hand-picked relief in 2005. We talk all the time.
Thanks for your service to our nation, Jim, and good luck with your V-22 tour. Semper Fidelis.
I currently work for Southwest Airlines but I used to be an avionics tech on the CH-46E’s back around the turn of the millennium at New River. I otherwise like the Osprey and was already for it to begin replacing our aged Phrogs back in the fall of 1999 when we came back from our Med deployment which involved ops in Kosovo. I’ve flown the V-22 sim and it’s great, but unfortunately I don’t think it works quite as well in the field as it does in the sim in terms of variables the sim does not convey such as maintenance issues and such.
But what gets me on the Osprey and what apparently no one can offer a logical rebuttal to is the cost of the program, as if it has some kind of unlimited well in which to tap (I’m sure the F-22 people would have liked to have been able to tap into that well more than a few times, too.)
We’ve already spent upwards of what, $12 to $15 Billion on the program over nearly two decades now? To help perhaps put that figure in a little more tangible perspective, Southwest Airlines had about 481 Boeing 737′s at the end of December 2006 which included about 191 new Next Generation -700 models. The insured value of all of these aircraft you might ask? $10.83 billion.
The Corps could already have H-92 or US-101′s on the ramp and in the field in Iraq for just the amount of money invested in the Osprey to this point and we still have how many billions more to go to actually buy the V-22′s now that they are supposedly “ready” for production?
The Osprey may be the greatest aircraft the USCG ever fielded but for the Corps to ride into harms way at what point can you no longer financially justify the Osprey program given so many other glaring holes in the Marine Air Wing? All the more so in our current political environment where those that be want to slash the DOD’s funds at every whim, at what point has the Osprey floated it’s last hot check?
Ryan:
Decent point. The cost of the program ultimately will be $50 billion. One should hope that buys next generation capability. We’ll see . . .
Overall, the government has spent even more on entire tilt rotor projects dating back to XV-3. It took about 50 years to get a tilt rotor (V-22)in service since XV-3. If the Osprey wasn’t built, all the money spent since XV-3 and 50 years of experiments on tilt rotors may have been trashed for nothing.
I’m no expert on this matter but I have followed all that goes on with the Osprey. Don’t think this aircraft is going to make it as much as I would like it to work, the reason is very simple; too many moving parts…..any can fail.
Ward,
Thanks for the reply…let me round out my background by saying that I am USAF FE on the CV-22, but was stationed at NR for two years with VMX-22. Additionally, I average about three flights a week and have unfettered access to the simulators. Also, let me point out that I mean you no disrespect through my comments.
You are right, the rate of decent does ramp up rather quickly when power is removed from the rotor system…the same way it does/did on my previous helicopter (and others) that I flew on for eight years prior to coming to the V-22. The FACT is that the V-22 is no more at risk from VRS than any other conventional helicopter would be if it were flown outside its performance envelope. Equally, the tools that the V-22 has to first stay out VRS (indications, training, testing, etc) and the warning systems that exist to alert the crew to its onset, can be found on no other helicopter in the world.
Although you used the General’s comment as the focus for your piece, and claim to be “supporter of the V-22″, and despite some very savvy use of name dropping, its looked a lot like something we would see on POGO or G2mil.com. Maybe you are “a fan of the V-22 and believe in its potential”. And maybe you “want the airplane to kick butt once it gets to the tip of the spear this year.” But lets get a few things straight…your piece is FULL of fallacies, mistruths, and inaccuracies. Additionally, the pending deployment for the MV-22 does not mark the V-22s arrival at the tip of the spear…that won’t truly happen until AFSOC sends the CV-22 into harms way at the end of this decade. Finally, you are right, the General did open up a can of worms, but he is right as well, V-22s will crash, just not for all reasons you stated. I only hope that the program is ready to deal with the sh!t storm that will ensue the first time a V-22 crashes.
I forgot to add to help put it my comparison into a little better perspective in regards to the Southwest Airlines fleet is they are now the largest domestic airline in the United States and the only other US carrier who has more airplanes total is American, but even they do not have as many single aisle “domestic” aircraft as Southwest does. I know US-101
[quote]The FACT is that the V-22 is no more at risk from VRS than any other conventional helicopter would be if it were flown outside its performance envelope.[/quote]Jim, I just don
Ryan,
The pilots who had were in the Marana crash were form mixed backgrounds; one was an experienced 53E driver, who had just finished an exchange tour with an AFSOC 53 unit and the other was a former KC-130 driver. All that aside, the communities knowledge of VRS and how it related the V-22 was light-years behind where we are today.
Your assertion that VRS in the V-22 has something to do with rotor size is a little of base…first the V-22s rotor loading is very high due to its smaller size when compared to a helicopter of equal size/weight. The conditions that lead to VRS are no different between helicopters and the V-22; power applied to the rotor system, rates of decent in excess of 800fpm and airspeed at or below 40KIAS, all at the same time. The fact is, TESTing indicated that the V-22 has a wider performance envelope with the regard to VRS and when compared to conventional helicopter; anywhere from 875 fpm up to 1800fpm, based on weight, airspeed and altitude. Currently the VRS crew alerting system will only let you get up to 1100fpm
When the Osprey begins operational deployment why not let the pilots get a few hundred, or a thousand hours in them, before filling them with Marine grunts. None of the Marines killed on the other crash(es) needed to be on the aircraft. They were there for PR reasons ONLY. Parents can only stand so much of this kind of bullshit. Keep their kids SAFE. That’s all they ask of the Corps. They know it is a dangerous business, but to risk young peoples lives for corporate PR is criminal. The officer who ordered troops to be flying on a test vehicle should be in Leavenworth. As a former Army pilot I always felt the parents of my PAX had a right to a safe aircraft and a safe pilot. Missions can be changed, altered, cancelled or delayed. Lives can’t be restored after they were wasted by some commander trying to make a name for himself.
Does anyone not remember the maintenance and safety stand downs of the CH46 (the Ospreys predecessor) in the 60′s because the aft pylons falling off in flight? All new aircraft of a type suffer from the fact that they are new and don’t have the like experiences of the sme type of aircraft to fall back on.
is this a great democracy or not?
my son worked on the v-22 at boeing wichita. he left when they combined the program at Phila.
single engine survivability was a problem ib 1987 because of the gearbox & shaft longevity BUT boeing was not FORCED to solve this problem! 20 yrs later it’s it’s still a problem?
I remember the av8B harrier had to have new lighter wings for increased fuel & payload b4 the corps bought it (1970).
these planes are COMPARABLE LEAPS FORWARD IN CAPABILITY!
Patience, patience, patience!
the v-22 will cause the NEXT GREAT LEAP FORWARD IN CIVIL AVIATION!
This ship will play an important role in Emergency Medical Evacuations both Civil and Military, however it should not be used in any method as an attack assault aircraft asset for our folks who ride in it. People understand what happens to an aircraft with rotating wings and the centrifigal forces of tons of pressure when the slightest upset of balance is displaced. One small explosion at the prop vicinity and this aircraft will tear itself apart due to imbalance. Please keep this wonderful technology within the confines of RESCUE and not in combat.
I
THE C-17 HAS NEVER CRASHED OR BEEN SHOT DOWN SINCE 1993—TO INCLUDE COMBAT.
Its time we over-ride marine narcissism and MICC-TT corporate greed and stop making c’est la guerre excuses for a flying deathtrap that cannot even prevail over the forces of the earth let alone enemy humans–and cancel the V-22 and cut our multi-billion dollar and over two dozen lives lost.
Buddy:
Good to see you haven’t mellowed out in the last year and a half.
Thanks for the post.
Fly safe, friend.
s/f, Ward
So we have financial issues that preclude normal rotations and extension of those already deployed. Yet we will find the financial resources to deploy this circus sideshow jobs program where I’m sure it will still be kept well out of harm’s way. Someday we’ll be in a real fight. I only hope this worthless machine will be shutdown by then.
I always adhere to and keep a distance from everyone. Until now, I did not have a true friend, although I was a lonely, although I did not like the other players that they have many friends send them cheap zeny, I must be rely on myself, at least I will not hurt anybody, and perhaps this is kind of happiness.
I recognized her is an occasional, When I was just upgrade and earn rappelz gold. She also just through, and she is a new player, she saw me my number is high. So she asked me how to play. And I said I was a bad people, I asked if did you not heard in this game. She said she heard, but she did not believe. I smiled. So I took her to play, I told her how to play, how to upgrade.
So I decided to closed my own heart, I played lonely, I gave up to find, put aside feeling. I upgrade, take account and earn goonzu money a person. I live a little good; I think I have been really put aside.
Initial contact this game, I did not very like. Since find good reason to release point, I also began to like it. Every day after work, I always go to play this game. Perhaps little girls will like me, in order to give went to all I like it. I dull playing a few weeks, very few speak to people and I have 26 levels and also I earn a little GuildWars Gold.