Comments on: Ospreys to the Stan (Updated)

By: Wap

Wap — Sun, 15 Mar 2009 19:45:02 +0000

I’ve read where there’s a 4-engine version of the Osprey in the works. Somebody must like them.
I’ve never been a marine, but if I was to be flown off an amphibious ship to prepare for a battle, DEEP inside some territory, I’m pretty sure I’d prefer to get there and get set up as quickly as possible. I suspect that’s what the Osprey will be used for.
Also, if injured, I suspect I would prefer to be medivac’d out just as quickly as possible.

By: Oblat

Oblat — Fri, 13 Mar 2009 03:53:34 +0000

For those who still doubt that Osprey they need to listen to satctech’s press release of Marine Gen. George Troutman
“the mere presence of the V-22 in Iraq, because of its speed and range, helped the Marines pacify Anbar province by making it much harder for insurgents to operate.“
The osprey won the war in Iraq! I’m convinced now.

By: Oblat

Oblat — Fri, 13 Mar 2009 03:49:06 +0000

Like satctech I urge everyone to go look at the 140 pages of Osprey press releases (most by satctech himself obviously in Osprey PR) that comprise the “vigorous discussion“
http://forums.military.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/5671946761/m/591104612/p/136

By: Greg

Greg — Thu, 12 Mar 2009 23:25:46 +0000

@lad
Well what do you propose then?

By: lad

lad — Thu, 12 Mar 2009 21:12:29 +0000

It wont need gunship support, because it will not be used to assualt any objective… Yes it fly fast but it still cant get into congested HLZ’s. It will due just what it always does, fly cicles around MEGA-bases for the military channel.

By: Wembley

Wembley — Thu, 12 Mar 2009 19:48:25 +0000

Put the Ospreys in. See what happens.
But be prepared for people to say “I told you so” and start thinking about alternatives now. In spite of all the lipstick smeared on it, the deployment in Iraq was less than impressive.
This is a massive PR effort to justify the continued billions being spent on procuring the Osprey. Let’s just hope it doesn’t cost any more lievs.

By: Greg

Greg — Thu, 12 Mar 2009 18:58:36 +0000

To all of the osprey nay sayers, what do you propose then. What can the corps do right this second to fill the tactical airlift gap? I read a lot of messages saying that the osprey is junk, well what better alternative do they have at the current? Blackhawks weren’t the best in the high hot altitude either, maybe the M model is, but there aren’t any ready to deploy this year. It may take several years. The superhawk is expensive also, more conventional yes. How long would it take to field them. Would you prefer they keep using the vintage ch-46? Complaining with no solutions is useless.

By: TB

TB — Thu, 12 Mar 2009 18:19:04 +0000

Al,
I can accept a teething period for maintenance and operational deployment matters. I’ve defended the Osprey’s “safe” Iraq deployments on this premise. IMO, the article is worded to imply they don’t know what salt water will do to the bird.

By: pedestrian

pedestrian — Thu, 12 Mar 2009 18:10:38 +0000

There are test flights of flying A-10s with V-22s. While A-10 has advantages to fly at slow speed that is a good harmony with V-22, and may fly at high altitudes, it is still not a VTOL that may land at a same spot. F-35B may be an alternative with VTOL capabilities, but its survivability at low altitudes remains a question. X2 is one of the possible future option as a gunship for escort, but while a VTOL, it is slightly slower than Osprey, and the capabilities at high altitudes are unknown, but with potentials to fly in mountainous regions. A-10, F-35B, and X2 are the three candidates of V-22 Ospreys. However, I believe a gunship version of this would be the best, with a rocket launcher unit and light vulcan in front.

By: al

al — Thu, 12 Mar 2009 17:27:16 +0000

“I find it funny that after 20 years of development and 2 years in the operating force, the Corps is just now seeing if the Osprey can handle salt water? WTF? You’d think that’d be the first thing they’d test after getting this thing in the air.“
I think this a “test” along the lines of how the Iraq deployment of the aircraft was a test to see how it handled dust. Yes they tested this stuff before but you can never get a real handle on how the stuff really affects the aircraft and which parts wear out until you get a full deployment of beating the airframe to hell.