Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login
Site Notices
9/22/2017 12:11:25 AM
Posted: 9/28/2005 10:42:58 AM EDT
I haven't found a link yet, but it's true.
Link Posted: 9/29/2005 4:18:49 AM EDT
Finally, a link...

Pentagon Approves Osprey Production


Pentagon Approves Osprey Production
Wednesday, September 28, 2005

WASHINGTON — The Pentagon (search) on Wednesday gave the go-ahead to begin full-rate production of the V-22 Osprey (search), the hybrid helicopter-airplane that the Marine Corps considers vital to the future of its air fleet.

The Osprey program has been threatened since 23 Marines died in a pair of crashes during testing in 2000.

The go-ahead to start full-scale production was approved by the Defense Acquisition Board (search).

Sen. John Cornyn (search), R-Texas, said before the official announcement that he anticipated that step.

"Full-ation military aircraft, and would be great news for our national security, our troops and the employees at Bell Helicopter," he said.

"As the military transforms to adapt to new and changing threats, this next generation of aircraft will be critical in keeping America safe and ensuring that our troops have the very best."

A joint venture of Boeing Co. (search) and Textron Inc.'s Bell Helicopter (search) unit builds the aircraft in Texas and Pennsylvania.

According to Bell, the current plans include the delivery of 360 aircraft to the Marines, 50 to the U.S. Air Force and 48 to the Navy. The total program is worth in excess of $19 billion to Bell and Textron through 2018.



"With this decision, tilt-rotor technology has come to life in a big way," said Michael A. Redenbaugh, chief executive officer of Bell Helicopter.

A December 2000 Osprey crash in North Carolina, which killed four Marines, was caused by a titanium hydraulic line that ruptured.

A crash earlier that year in Arizona killed 19 Marines and was blamed by investigators on pilot error.

The Osprey tilt-rotor aircraft can land and take off like a helicopter and fly like an airplane. Commanders say the Osprey can haul more troops and equipment farther than existing helicopters. It was designed to replace the aging helicopters in the Marine Corps fleet.


Link Posted: 9/29/2005 6:09:03 AM EDT
Another:


Thursday September 29, 8:06 AM
Pentagon approves full-rate V-22 production
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Five years after 23 U.S. Marines were killed in flight tests, the Pentagon on Wednesday approved full-rate production of the V-22 tiltrotor aircraft, built by Textron Inc. unit Bell Helicopter and Boeing Co..
The decision to accelerate production of the V-22, which takes off and lands like a helicopter but can fly like a plane, was hailed by company executives, military officials and backers in Congress.

But watchdog groups said they still worried about the ability of the revolutionary new aircraft, also known as the Osprey, to fly into combat.

Members of the Pentagon's high-level Defense Acquisition Board approved the boost in production -- set to peak at 48 aircraft a year early next decade -- at a three-hour meeting.

The decision followed a report this week by the Pentagon's office of test and evaluation which certified that three years of flight tests had shown the aircraft to be reliable, effective and able to conduct its primary missions.

A move into full-rate production frees up as much as $20 billion in potential orders to a 50-50 joint venture of Bell and Boeing, which is building the aircraft for the Marine Corps and the Air Force, the companies said.


"This is great day for the Bell-Boeing team," Bell Helicopter Chief Executive Michael Redenbaugh, calling the V-22 "the most versatile aircraft in the world."

"Today we mark a truly game-changing advancement in the aviation industry," he told Reuters in a telephone interview.

Currently, Osprey production is capped by Congress at a "minimum sustaining" level of 11 per year. The Bell/Boeing output will gradually rise to 22 aircraft a year by 2009 and peak at 48 annually by 2012 under full production.

Marine Corps officials are eager to deploy the Osprey, designed to replace the aging workhorse CH-46 Sea Knight helicopter, after the long delay caused by the fatal accidents. The V-22 can fly twice as fast at more than twice the altitude, with three times the payload and six times the range.

"There literally is no other aircraft in the world that can give you the speed and range of an airplane with the vertical agility of a helicopter," said Loren Thompson, defense analyst with the Virginia-based Lexington Institute.

But Eric Miller at the non-partisan Project on Government Oversight said the decision could prove a costly mistake.

"We still have concerns that this is a good aircraft to fly into combat, because of the maneuverability issue and because if you come in too fast, the aircraft will roll and it's almost impossible to recover," he said.

The Marine Corps wants to buy 360 Ospreys, which currently cost $71 million each, although it wants to knock the price down to $58 million by fiscal 2010 in then-current dollars.

Redenbaugh said Bell-Boeing had already taken steps to reduce the cost of the aircraft, and increased production would allow it to negotiate better contracts with suppliers, driving the price down to the Marine Corps goal.

He said the company was already exploring other possible markets for the V-22, including possibly as an Air Force search and rescue aircraft, and foreign military sales. In addition, a smaller Bell tiltrotor, Eagle Eye, already ordered by the Coast Guard, would begin flying this year, he said.

Republican Sen. John Cornyn of Texas, where Bell builds the V-22, called the decision great news for U.S. troops, saying full output "clears the way for a more efficient and lower-cost delivery of this next-generation military aircraft."

The Pentagon halted V-22 testing for 17 months after 23 Marines were killed in two crashes in April and December 2000.

David Duma, acting head of the Pentagon Office of Operational Test and Evaluation, this week concluded over 5,000 flight hours of tests proved that software and hydraulic line issues, blamed for the December 2000 crash, had been fixed.

The CV-22, the Air Force version of the Osprey, is due to undergo a separate operational testing phase late next year.

Textron shares closed down four cents to $68.72 on the New York Stock Exchange. Boeing shares closed up 66 cents at $67.21.



Pentagon approves full-rate V-22 production
Link Posted: 9/29/2005 6:11:56 AM EDT
Woot. I loved watching their flight testing at Pax River when I was working there.

Kharn
Link Posted: 9/29/2005 6:18:46 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 9/29/2005 6:21:09 AM EDT by eye_spy]
Awesome vtol plane! But have they finally gotten all the "kinks" out of the plane? I recall watching a semi documentary about it which said that it had some serious flaws.
Link Posted: 9/29/2005 6:20:31 AM EDT
Cue Flight of the Valkyries!
Link Posted: 9/29/2005 6:44:52 AM EDT
Link Posted: 9/29/2005 6:46:58 AM EDT

Originally Posted By KlubMarcus:
Cue Flight of the Valkyries!



Did you mean Ride of the Valkyries by Wagner?
click
Link Posted: 9/29/2005 6:47:02 AM EDT

Originally Posted By green-grizzly:
imageserver4.textamerica.com/user.images.x/72/IMG_368472/_0705/T520050705194546911.jpg



You old guys need to let go. It will be a solid platform.

Good for them.


I hope it has as long as a career as the 46's and 53's have.

Link Posted: 9/29/2005 6:57:15 AM EDT

Originally Posted By Velox_Mortis:
Did you mean Ride of the Valkyries by Wagner?
click


D'oh!
Link Posted: 9/29/2005 7:13:37 AM EDT
what a fucking waste of money
Link Posted: 9/29/2005 7:22:42 AM EDT

Originally Posted By eye_spy:
Awesome vtol plane! But have they finally gotten all the "kinks" out of the plane? I recall watching a semi documentary about it which said that it had some serious flaws.



Remember when the Black Hawk was being tested. They were so bad thy were called crash hawks, but they became one of the greatest helos the .mil fielded
Link Posted: 9/29/2005 8:40:10 AM EDT

Originally Posted By NonConformist:

Originally Posted By eye_spy:
Awesome vtol plane! But have they finally gotten all the "kinks" out of the plane? I recall watching a semi documentary about it which said that it had some serious flaws.



Remember when the Black Hawk was being tested. They were so bad thy were called crash hawks, but they became one of the greatest helos the .mil fielded



In 40 years the people here will be pissed off becuase the 22 will be replaced with something else. The same way they cried about the F-14 being replaced with a a superior airframe.

Link Posted: 9/29/2005 8:49:52 AM EDT
Ive heard they have problems...but they do look pretty cool.

Heres a video of one crashing.

V-22 Crash




Link Posted: 9/30/2005 6:15:28 AM EDT
Hey, can a V-22 dogfight? If so, we should load it up as a gunship to go after enemy attack helicopters.
Link Posted: 10/2/2005 5:02:34 AM EDT
Anyone else see the cool poster of the V-22??

poster story
Link Posted: 10/2/2005 5:16:41 AM EDT

Originally Posted By ALLANJ:
Anyone else see the cool poster of the V-22??

poster story







Link Posted: 10/2/2005 5:30:34 AM EDT
TAG: after watching that video again, I'm glad I won't be riding in that thing.

the words sitting duck come to mind.[gulp]
Link Posted: 10/2/2005 6:08:26 AM EDT
I think production of the Osprey is a terrible mistake. This is a political decision that will kill hundreds of our soldiers. Bear in mind that these aircraft being flown and crashed are piloted by professional test pilots. There is a history of this happening before with the AV8 harrier, which we in the military used to call "camouflaged body bags".
Link Posted: 10/2/2005 6:35:26 AM EDT
About time. And that poster is cool.
Link Posted: 10/2/2005 6:48:22 AM EDT

.... i took this one........





seem to fly fine to me

-Roth
Link Posted: 10/2/2005 6:53:09 AM EDT
Link Posted: 10/2/2005 6:54:12 AM EDT

Originally Posted By eye_spy:
Awesome vtol plane! But have they finally gotten all the "kinks" out of the plane? I recall watching a semi documentary about it which said that it had some serious flaws.



If it still has a 6000psi hydraulic system in a combat vehicle they have not corrected the serious flaws.
Link Posted: 10/2/2005 6:58:11 AM EDT
The other problem is survivability. Everything that makes the A10 great, the Osprey doesnt have. The A10 took some serious hits and came back home, even if it never flew again. The Osprey is most likely going down. It is too complex and too vulnerable.
Link Posted: 10/2/2005 7:02:19 AM EDT
The fact that everything on the aircraft is designed to be as light as possible to the exclusion of reliabilty and survivablity is worrysome on a Marine transport. I would sooner take the space shuttle into combat.
Link Posted: 10/2/2005 7:04:54 AM EDT

Originally Posted By ARDOC:
The other problem is survivability. Everything that makes the A10 great, the Osprey doesnt have. The A10 took some serious hits and came back home, even if it never flew again. The Osprey is most likely going down. It is too complex and too vulnerable.



This comparison means nothing.

It's no more vulnerable than any other helicopter and offers much better capabilities.
Link Posted: 10/2/2005 7:12:43 AM EDT

Originally Posted By unkempt1:
TAG: after watching that video again, I'm glad I won't be riding in that thing.

the words sitting duck come to mind.[gulp]



The video shows what happens when a tech reverses the fly-by-wire connections on your cyclic. Somewhat controllable at altitude when the pilot has time to think about reversing control movements, but far less so close to the deck when a helo pilot makes multiple minute corrections every couple of seconds.
Link Posted: 10/2/2005 7:13:31 AM EDT

Originally Posted By scoutabout:
I think production of the Osprey is a terrible mistake. This is a political decision that will kill hundreds of our soldiers. Bear in mind that these aircraft being flown and crashed are piloted by professional test pilots. There is a history of this happening before with the AV8 harrier, which we in the military used to call "camouflaged body bags".



The two planes that crashed and killed the 23 Marines were piloted by active duty Marine pilots, not test pilots. One crash was the result of mechanical failure, the other was an issue of the flight envelope the plane was being flown at. If you think the Harrier is the only SUCCESSFUL aircraft that had issues early on in it's life, then you are mistaken. I would certainly rather take my chances in than continue to fly in 40 year old Phrogs.
Link Posted: 10/2/2005 7:21:52 AM EDT
It should read "Pentagon OK's full production of USMC's new Lawn Dart".
Link Posted: 10/2/2005 11:14:58 AM EDT
ironic that so much smack is talked about the v-22 on an AR-15 board.
Link Posted: 10/2/2005 12:09:55 PM EDT

Originally Posted By sniper1az:
It should read "Pentagon OK's full production of USMC's new Lawn Dart".



Quite ironic, as the F-16 was the previous owner of said unofficial title... It's now quite successful...

As for the A-10 and 'survivability' comments, this is a TRANSPORT HELICOPTER (with a nifty turn-into-a-plane capability)... It's no more/less complex, and no more/less armored than the Blackhawk...

P.S. Very few modern aircraft haven't crashed in testing... That this one happened to crash with passengers on board is unfortunate, but that has no bearing on the quality of the aircraft itself...
Link Posted: 10/2/2005 4:40:55 PM EDT

Originally Posted By Dave_A:

Originally Posted By sniper1az:
It should read "Pentagon OK's full production of USMC's new Lawn Dart".



Quite ironic, as the F-16 was the previous owner of said unofficial title... It's now quite successful...

As for the A-10 and 'survivability' comments, this is a TRANSPORT HELICOPTER (with a nifty turn-into-a-plane capability)... It's no more/less complex, and no more/less armored than the Blackhawk...

P.S. Very few modern aircraft haven't crashed in testing... That this one happened to crash with passengers on board is unfortunate, but that has no bearing on the quality of the aircraft itself...



The nickname "lawn dart" did not arise from any shortcomings with the F-16 itself. It simply outflew the pilot and caused some of them to blackout. A G-limiter in the fly-by-wire system prevents G's above 9G (?). It must really suck to have a plane that's that maneuverable. Other than that kaptan wire chafing issue, the F-16 is our most successful fighter program.

The USMC needs the V-22 desperately. So does the Air Force in support of SpecOps and pilot recovery. Now, don't get me started on VSTOL aircraft and the Harrier mistake.
Link Posted: 10/2/2005 4:52:06 PM EDT
Cool. Beats the hell outta old Shithooks and the rest of the rusted out crap rotary wings most army/usmc/navy pilots get to try not to kill themselves in.
Link Posted: 10/2/2005 5:00:47 PM EDT

Originally Posted By CFII:
Cool. Beats the hell outta old Shithooks and the rest of the rusted out crap rotary wings most army/usmc/navy pilots get to try not to kill themselves in.



Speaking of Hooks, you take a round in the C-box and you are going down.
Link Posted: 10/3/2005 3:07:25 AM EDT
Anybody see the add that Bell put out without checking first with Boeing? It showed SF rappelling from an Osprey onto a mosque. Caption reads something like this:

"It descends from the heavens."

"Ironically, it unleashes hell."

Boeing and Bell tried to have it pulled, but it showed up in a couple Armed Forces Journel and last week's National Journal magazine. I've got a *.jpeg of the ad, but it's not too terribly clear, unfortunately.

Merlin
Link Posted: 10/3/2005 3:13:35 AM EDT
I would think the Osprey, due to it's design and performance, would be less vulnerable or at worst equal to the best transport helicopter in inventory to ground fire.
Link Posted: 10/3/2005 3:17:29 AM EDT

Originally Posted By Merlin:
Anybody see the add that Bell put out without checking first with Boeing? It showed SF rappelling from an Osprey onto a mosque. Caption reads something like this:

"It descends from the heavens."

"Ironically, it unleashes hell."

Boeing and Bell tried to have it pulled, but it showed up in a couple Armed Forces Journel and last week's National Journal magazine. I've got a *.jpeg of the ad, but it's not too terribly clear, unfortunately.

Merlin




Check out page one of this thread.
Link Posted: 10/3/2005 3:56:15 AM EDT
Someone compared and A10 to a V-22
Link Posted: 10/3/2005 3:56:38 AM EDT

Originally Posted By ARDOC:
The other problem is survivability. Everything that makes the A10 great, the Osprey doesnt have. The A10 took some serious hits and came back home, even if it never flew again. The Osprey is most likely going down. It is too complex and too vulnerable.



WTF?

The A-10 is a lot less rugged than a M1 Abrams. A solid 100 ton block of hardened steel is tougher than an Abrams. I guess instead of Ospreys we should buy large chunks of steel. That will a very survivable system.
Link Posted: 10/4/2005 7:27:43 AM EDT

Originally Posted By 2A373:
....


Check out page one of this thread.



Thanks. One of the downsides of posting at work: can't read all the responses, especially in a multi-page thread.

Thanks,

Merlin
Top Top