Our reader forwards a blurb from the AP which reports that the Osprey has been getting into some bang bang during some of its insertions of Marines, with Cobras swooping in for the kill as RPGs and small arms zing by.

“insurgents tried but failed to bring down an Osprey aircraft with rocket-propelled grenades as Cobra attack helicopters fired missiles at enemy positions, including a machine gun bunker”

I’ll work to flesh this out with my sources, but it doesn’t surprise me that given the combat environment in Afghanistan as opposed to Iraq when it was first deployed, the Osprey is finally proving it can handle the stress of the real thing. Critics claimed the Corps was holding back in Iraq, keeping its fragile new toy from the fray. But by the time the Osprey got to Iraq, a lot of the hardcore combat had ended, and the pricey plane was used for lots and lots of admin flights.

Afghanistan has proven completely different, with the Osprey finding itself in a pretty heated combat environment from the start.

I haven’t seen any footage of Ospreys in the fight, but I’ll keep my eyes open. If you all come across any, let me know on the Tip Line.

– Christian

All right folks, you’ve had your “cricket” dance with Murtha’s death, now it’s time to look back at his career.

I’d like our readers to list their top three most influential DEFENSE-RELATED things Murtha has done or championed in his more than three decades on The Hill.

Here are mine:

1.) Beating the Soviets: Murtha was a Scoop Jackson Democrat who championed the cause of freedom against communist aggressionand supported the Muj in Afghanistan against the Soviets. He was also in the tiny minority of Democrats who voted in favor of Ronald Reagan’s $100 billion million aid plan to the Contras in Nicaragua, so I give him huge credit for being consistent in his support of defeating the Soviets.

2.) Pushing the V-22 forward: Murtha — for legitimate programmatic reasons or for pure hometown pork — was a strong supporter of the V-22 Osprey program when the program was in its darkest days. The V-22 is a huge leap in technology for rotorcraft and will prove itself over the long run to be the way of the future for air assault and helicopter support operations. Murtha, whether he meant to be or not, was a visionary on this count.

3.) Changing the Army’s Camouflage Uniform: In one of his last, and perhaps most classically executed, moves Murtha bullied the Army into taken a very public relook at their disastrous Universal Camouflage Pattern. He slipped a line into the 2009 DoD Approps bill that forced the Army to evaluate their UCP pattern in Afghanistan, which had the effect of forcing the army to reconsider whether it should change their overall camo plans. This could be Murtha’s most enduring mark on the services.

Now look, my beloved readers, please let’s not use this as an opportunity to debate my selections. Let’s use this instead as a chance to help teach eachother more about what indelible marks Murtha has made on our defense establishment. I want to hear what you have to say.

– Christian

Just now posting a story to Military.com on the death of one of the most influential defense lawmakers on Capitol Hill ever.

I’ve had my beefs with Rep. Jack Murtha in the past, but I truly am shocked and saddened by his death. He was a tireless advocate for Pentagon programs he believed in and forced them down a left-leaning Congress in years where defense spending was less than a priority. And despite our sometimes butting heads over the Haditha incident, he and his staff have always treated me with respect and professionalism.

We’ll slice and dice his record tomorrow, but today, let’s offer his family and staff our condolences and take a moment of silence to honor the decorated Vietnam vet and Marine officer/public servant.

– Christian

We’re running an excellent piece on Military.com today from an embedded reporter who spent time with VMM-261 in Afghanistan. He writes on the air assault mission conducted with MV-22s the other day — Cobra’s Anger — and how it fits into the overall narrative of the program and its track record.

The Osprey squadron mainly has been moving troops and supplies between various bases. In Iraq, this duty led some critics to belittle it as no more than a fabulously expensive flying bus.

The squadron’s commander, Lt. Col. Anthony Bianca of Huntsville, Ala., 42, laughed at that, saying it made no sense to criticize the Osprey for taking on its designated role.

“Yes, we’re moving people and yes, we’re moving supplies, that’s what medium lift does,” he said.

In Afghanistan, though, where distances can be much greater than Iraq, the additional speed and range it offers will boost what the Marines and other units can do.

For one thing, it will allow them to react to information about the enemy much quicker.

The aircraft is so fast, in fact, that it can sometimes make two trips back and forth in the time it takes a helicopter to make one trip.

That capability came into play Friday in the Now Zad operation, as the aircraft made several trips to deliver troops, [Marine spokesman] Pelletier said.

The article also brings up the issue of the Remote Guardian gun system, claiming the underbelly weapon is being retrofitted at Leatherneck as we write. And the Corps has changed the rear-mounted M240 7.62 machine gun to a .50cal.

I also got a note from my good friend Winslow Wheeler, dive bombing my earlier post on the Osprey at war and arguing the bird really hasn’t been tested until it’s been in a hot LZ, so the Corps can’t really claim success with Cobra’s Anger.

Look, I understand where Winslow and his fellow Osprey critics are coming from with this argument, but I keep coming back to one main point: if the Corps was dropping Ospreys into hot LZs then someone f-ed up in the planning. It would be just plain stupid to do that, so it’s unfair to criticize the operations of the MV-22 based on that.

How does Winslow think the CH-47 — much less the AH-64 Apache — did during Operation Anaconda? And after that performance, who in their right mind would land in an LZ like that, much less plan for it?

We’ll keep you posted on this as more news comes out about the Ospreys in the Stan…

– Christian

We’re working the Operation Cobra’s Anger story for more inside gouge, but one thing the wires are reporting is that 3/4 and other elements of this morning’s assault on Now Zad involved air assaults using MV-22 Ospreys.

As you all know, the birds from VMM-263 just chopped from the Bataan to Camp Bastion in Helmand province Afghanistan and fell in on VMM-261 who’ll do a pump there. Many Osprey critics hounded the program for not pushing the assault envelope in Iraq. Well, it seems as if the Corps has put the birds to quick use on a 3am lift of Recon troops, infantry grunts and Brits.

I’m working on getting more details from this on the Osprey’s role, but I thought I’d bring this to your attention early on while working the sources…

– Christian

I did notice that the Remote Guardian system is not installed at least on the ones you can see in the footage. I can’t get the Marine Corps to cough up a straight answer on what the status is of that system they said would be capable for the Afghanistan deployment.

Best line: “It’s kind of like going from a VW bus to a Maserati…”

As someone who owned a Westy for a while, I can definitely relate.

I’m sure we’ll soon have more operational footage from the deployment, and when we come across it, it’ll be here.

– Christian

Well, it looks as if the Marine Corps sent over the first contingent of MV-22s to Afghanistan last week, and as we suspected, the Corps decided to fly VMM-263’s birds off the Bataan, through Pakistan and into Camp Bastion in Helmand.

In a release from Task Force Leatherneck in Helmand, the service said all ten of the squadron’s aircraft made the trip and that aviatiors, crew and maintainers from VMM 261 were en route.

Marine Corps Times picked up on this before us…(that’s OK, I’m happy to give my alma mater a shoutout)

“I am very excited to have these new birds here,” said Lt. Col. William Depue, executive officer for Marine Medium Tiltrotor Squadron 263 (Reinforced), adding that the aircraft’s increased speed and range will “cut the size of the area of operations in half.”

The Ospreys, which formed the bulk of VMM-263 (Rein) with the 22nd MEU will join Marine Medium Tiltrotor Squadron 261 as part of MEB-Afghanistan’s aviation combat element, Marine Aircraft Group 40.

“Although we are not the Marines who will operate these birds here, we were happy to be a part of getting them into theater,” said Depue.

The Ospreys will be used for medium-lift assault support, transporting troops and cargo throughout the MEB’s area of operations, and will augment the other fixed– and rotary-wing aircraft that have worked tirelessly since the MEB’s arrival in Afghanistan in May, flying more than 19,000 hours.

well, now the Corps is on the hook for the performance boost they’ve been bragging about. We’ll keep a close eye on the deployment and maybe even join them next year to see how they’re performing. But until then, keep scanning our coverage and don’t hesitate to provide us with feeds of your own on how this deployment goes.

– Christian

I’ve been getting a lot of feedback on the Osprey post from Wednesday, which “speculates” on the Marines’ deployment to Afghanistan, and particularly why the service refuses to talk on the record about it in detail.

Well, I’ve got a little more “informed speculation” on the deployment from a variety of sources and I thought I’d throw them out to DT readers for their pass.

There may be a couple other reasons for why the Corps can’t or won’t talk about the details of the deployment…first of all, let’s get one thing straight: all indicators are that the 22 MEU, which has 10 MV-22s from VMM-263 (the squadron I embedded with in Afghanistan) will chop their birds to 261 for the deployment. It’s pretty weak sauce that the Corps can’t fly 261’s planes from CONUS to Afghanistan — the MV-22 is touted as being “self-deployable”…but I’ll admit it would be a LONG, grueling series of flights to do that.

Renting an amphib to ship them over would probably give the Navy heart palpitations on the costs — so that’s a no go after the political pressure of the “first” deployment is gone (remember, they shipped 263’s planes to Kuwait via a solo-mission amphib for the Osprey’s first ever deployment).

So let’s agree that the Ospreys are coming from the MEU. I’ll betcha fleet commanders are loath to admit that they’ll be losing all the ERG’s medium lift capability, so they’d prefer not to broadcast that fact too widely (though I think that’s a pretty weak argument too since they’ll have 53s to execute any contingency ops).

There’s also the potential CENTCOM angle. In order to get the Ospreys into Helmand, they’d have to fly over Pakistan. Now, it’s one thing to fly KCs and fighters over Pakistan at high altitude, but the Ospreys will have to fly well within visual range of some civvies who might not take too kindly to their airspace being used by US forces to eventually help kill Talibs. Maybe CENTCOM hasn’t finished a deal with Pakistan for overflight rights?

Anyway, I’m hearing indicators that jibe with DT commenter “Ed” insofaras Gates might have pushed this announcement ahead of the Corps’ readiness to talk about it. Get the damned thing over there, already! he’s saying. Well, let’s do it.

PS — Am still trying to line up a more detailed interview on this but all indicators are that the Remote Guardian system will be retrofitted to the Ospreys in-country.

– Christian

My colleague Jamie McIntyre has a post over on his new blog, The Line of Departure, on the Osprey’s pending deployment to Afghanistan.

He forwards some intel from the Rainman of all things Osprey, Rick Whittle, who covered the plane as a reporter for the Dallas Morning News and took the buyout a few years ago to write his upcoming book on the helo/fixed wing hybrid transport “The Dream Machine: The untold story of the notorious V-22 Osprey.”

I’ve worked with Rick a lot on stories back in his regular journalism days and I consider him a friend and colleague. He forwarded a note to Jamie giving his take on the deployment, which is now set for November, and I invite you to read the whole post at TLOD.

This is the first deployment to Afghanistan and it should be the acid test, given the terrain and climate and the fact that Al Qaeda and the Taliban will surely be gunning for the aircraft if they see it. The Osprey didnt get shot at much in Iraq because it was flying mainly in Anbar province, which was pretty peaceful at that time. It flew well in Iraq, even in searing heat, but most of that country is barely above sea level. Rotorcraft lose performance at higher altitudes and in hot temperatures, and Afghanistan is pretty high and hot.

Rick’s got a point, though I would caveat it with the fact that in all likelihood the Ospreys will be operating mostly in support of RC-South where the capitol of Helmand provide sits at around 3,400 feet in elevation. I’d be interested to see the inside scoop on whether the Osprey can take off and land in a full-on hover in the altitudes of RC-East, though I suspect like with lots of helos (even the CH-47) there are some weight and landing altitude restrictions that will bracket the Osprey’s operations.

But don’t get all excited about helicopter assault missions and stuff either. Yes, some Marine units deployed for combat operations via CH-53s earlier this summer, but I doubt seriously those chomping for a Robert’s Ridge style air assault test will get what they’re asking for.

I will say this however, the Marine Corps refuses to speak on the record whether VMM-261 is taking its own aircraft or will fall in on aircraft in the area (the 22 MEU has Ospreys aboard its amphibs). If the squadron takes its own aircraft, would it self-deploy them or ship them over? We all know the answer to that one.

The excuse given is that alternatively the Marine Corps is worried about “operational security” by talking about how and when the planes will get there. Don’t worry folks, I cried foul on that one, but was still denied any details. I was then told that the Corps was hoping to reduce the stress any media attention would have on the squadron so best not to say anything which would prompt more questions…

Why the paranoia? Does the Corps worry about opsec when it talks F-18, Harrier, Cobra, 53 and 46 squadron deployments…yes, to some extent, but there isn’t a media blackout on it like there is here. Just what is the service worried about? Didn’t Iraq prove that the plane could do what it was billed to do? Why still the first time jitters? Or is it, as my boss suspects, that there’s something to hide here? Miserable mission capable rates, poor maintenance support, deteriorating parts etc.

I’m still on it, but let’s energize the grid to get some answers folks.

Also, one last thing — still checking up on the deployment of the Remote Guardian gun system. We reported that the Corps planned to arm the Afghanistan MV-22s with the underbelly gun, but now there’s some doubt based on the mystery surrounding which planes will be part of the deployment. The 22 MEU birds don’t have the guns, and I’m not sure if the 261 planes have it either…so can the system be retrofitted in country?

– Christian

DoD Buzz contributing editor Greg Grant has a great piece running on our sister site about maneuvering restrictions placed on Osprey pilots that could make them more vulnerable to MANPAD encounters in combat.

GAO also said: The V-22 had maneuvering limits that restrict its ability to perform defensive maneuvers. The wording in that sentence sounded odd. Is GAO saying the plane cannot perform defensive maneuvers or is there some regulation against it performing certain maneuvers? Not the same thing.

I asked a Marine officer who is very knowledgeable on the subject of V-22 survivability about the GAOs findings. The officer requested anonymity so as to speak frankly about a politically charged issue and I thought it important to at least present another voice in the Osprey debate.

The officer said the maneuvering limits in the official Naval Air Training and Operating Procedures Standardization were set by engineers who did not carry out the full battery of tests on the plane because of money shortages during the operational test phase. The Ospreys troubled developmental history meant the focus was on keeping the plane in the air, not on testing it in battlefield situations.

Read his entire story HERE to see what led to the NATOPS restrictions on radical pitching of the V-22 to lure surface to air missiles into countermeasures and more on why those restrictions were put into place and whether the Osprey can actually endure the maneuvers anyway.

But I also wanted to point out here a great comment that followed the story in the Buzz discussion session.

According to a current V-22 pilot (seems from AFSOC) the critics are full of it:

and lacks the maneuverability to evade hostile ground fire.

Compared to what? A helicopter? A C-130? A fighter? It is none of theseso how can one say it lacks sufficient maneuverability? Ignorance and drinking too much kool-aidthats how.

I have been flying on this aircraft for 5+ years. Before that, I spent 8 years on the MH-53 Pavelow. The CV-22, like the MH-53 is designed (IR and RF countermeasures) to go into anything up a medium threat environment. Very few aircraft go into a high threat environment. Those that do, do it with a gorilla package of support (SEAD, CAP, ect). Further, to my knowledge NO tactical transport aircraft today or ever, go into, intended or otherwise, a high threat environment without lots of support and even then, the threat is usually degraded beforehand.

You take my word for what it is worth

The V-22 or at least the CV-22 is perfectly capable of operating in a medium threat environment. The combination of defensive countermeasures, speed, altitude, noise signature, IR signature and yes, maneuverability makes the aircraft very capable in a combat zone.

Most of these hacks are just repeating what some anti-V-22 lobbiest said to them or some biased report contains. The bottom line here is that this just another effort to cancel the V-22. NEWS FLASHit wont happen.

The USMC has retired over half of its H-46s and is fully invested in the transition to the V-22. USSOCOM is fully behind this aircraft and what it willis bringing the SOF war fighter. Additionally, there is WAY too much support from members of congress, on both sides of the aisle, to keep this program going.

I will agree, however, reliability leaves a lot to be desired. However, I have seen marked improvement over the last 12 months. The issue we are dealing with has to do with partsnot the capability or safety of the aircraft. The biggest issue has been parts that arent supposed to break, breaking. Parts that are supposed to have a 500 hour life breaking at 250 hours and all of this with a VERY immature supply system. The positive side of things here is that he engineers have been very responsive and effective at improving their parts. The aircraft is very capableat least from my USAF/SOF perspective. I will concede however, that if reliability continues to be a problem in the long term, eventually capability will be impacted.

We have put almost 60,000 hours on the V-22 since we returned to flight in 2003. To date the V-22 has been on only 4 combat deployments over the last 20 months. Simply put, we are only in the 1st quarterthere is long way to go.

You all well know I’m a minority supporter of the V-22 for various reasons, not least of which for its superior performance. Most of the critics of the plane have never flown in one — and have particularly never flown in one in a combat zone under austere conditions. I have.

But don’t take my word for it, take the word of AFSOC pilot “Jim” who says the plane is more capable than its helicopter predecessors and that the problems that critics cling to are being worked out as the plane increasingly flies in the hands of combat-veteran pilots throughout the services.

– Christian