If they can get this thing right, it would be a hell of a aircraft. I would really like to see this become a reality, but I think the hurdles are a little to high right now.

I remember flying the Osprey when I was playing LHX Attack Chopper in the early 90's. Even then it sucked.

That was a great game.

No chance I'm getting on one of these deathtraps...

yes, but does it go underwater?

"Wherever you want to be is where the aircraft can go. We think we have hit a good spot. "
-- Don Barbour, Bell/Agusta Aerospace


I want to be somewhere where I'm not dead. Can you handle that?

E-man, whoa...that brought back memories. I haven't thought of LHX in a long time. I never could get the Osprey to fly in a straight line, it seemed.

Hmm, it must be "old video game" day for TheMatt, what with LHX and the Dungeon Master thread on Slashdot.

The Technology for a machine is just not here yet. This thing has 10x the stress and maintenance of a helo let alone letting Marines with 1/4 the money take care of it.

There will be a Jet version in the future before this becomes a good operational transport.

You would have to be Farking stupid to fly on one of those. They never have worked, and I don't understand the fantasy that they will. The military wanted to cancel the program, but congressman of that district needed the pork so they kept it limping along.

Gah! That thing kills Marines like nothing else? I sure as hell don't want to get into a civilian version.

Military-nut jumping in to say "but the Marines really NEED this!!!" and consequently completely missing the point in 5...4...3...

That question mark should be an explanation point.

I hope this is a candidate for Air Force One.

If the U.S. military and their billions of dollars can't get it to work, I would never want to fly in a civilian version.

The marines really need this kind of technology, though.

Civilian Blackhawk would rule!

Anyone who's watched any anime knows that they have the design all wrong.

An-Unnecessarily-Long-Name :
There will be a Jet version in the future before this becomes a good operational transport.

I used to have a game called X-Plane on my PC that allowed you to design your own aircraft...it had a very realistic physics and atmospheric model that calculated everything in real time. Anywho, I took the basic crappy deathtrap Osprey, trashed the blades, and threw on jet engines instead. That thing rocked.

My point? Don't have one.

/nerd

Gte269 :
The marines really need this kind of technology, though.

The problem is that too many of them are willing to accept this piece of shiat because of their "need"...rather than cutting their losses and applying what they've learned to something more viable.

Considering all of the crap spewing from the brass and contractors regarding this craft during trials ... I'd rather take mass transit, or a pogo stick. Maybe we can sell it to Saddam. :)

Maybe the military is just deperate for money. I wish Bush would stop ignoring them and increase military spending.

and i don't close my ital tags well!!

[i]
He also said there is a higher tolerance among the users of smaller aircraft for crashes than there is for commercial passenger planes or military aircraft.
[/i]

I don't find this statement very reassuring.

Airwolf ownz Osprey pu$$y shiznat!

Pablogott :
Maybe the military is just deperate for money. I wish Bush would stop ignoring them and increase military spending.

Yeah, you'd think, until you hear stories from ex-Navy folks on Fark about how they'd dump perfectly good equipment into the ocean and write them off as "combat losses" just to justify their budget.

This looks like the ACME to someone's Wyle Cyote, to coin a phrase in a somewhat base mettle.

I used to have a game called X-Plane on my PC that allowed you to design your own aircraft...it had a very realistic physics and atmospheric model that calculated everything in real time.

I had the same game. It was pretty advanced for just a computer game. The most inventive thing I ever came up with was a Cessna with an engine clutch, so that you could rev the engine up really high and then engage the prop. The prop tips would go supersonic instantly.

He also said there is a higher tolerance among the users of smaller aircraft for crashes than there is for commercial passenger planes or military aircraft.

I don't find this statement very reassuring.

Neither did John Denver.

Only the preposterously rich will be using these things, and die a firey death in them, so the rest of us can just relax.

And WarmBeer, a buddy of mine who fought in Gulf War: Episode 1, said that on the trip back from Iraq, instead of thoroughly cleaing their equipment (i.e. Hummers, choppers, guns, etc.) they just threw them overboard and wrote them off as "operational losses".

The sheer audacity of it is so impressive I buy him his beer whenever we go out together.

E-man + others,

Best part of LHX was the fact that you could get a radar lock on camels and horses. No better way to annoy the Iraqi's then to launch hellfire rockets at their SUCs (Sports Utility Camels).

Also flying the chopper and TOE missle through buildings was fun. The Osprey was great until a rocket took out the ability to go back into Heli mode.

/Thanks for the memories

Isn't there already a civilian tiltrotor? I seem to recall that there is and that it has a pretty good record.

The "basic" civilian version works fine (5-6 passengers), it was the upscaling of the craft to carry a bunch of troops and cargo that seems to have pushed it over the edge.
Not to mention the fact that engines and blade configuration are different, the aircraft in the civilian version will never be put in the same flight paramaters that the marines will use.
That said I want to see at LEAST 5 years of full daily use before I step one foot in it

Soo DJ that thing flies at 440mph? Dont think so. Maybe you want to do your math again?

As for "combat" losses I havent heard about the overboard, but in order to not have to get their equipment agriculturally inspected some army units dug big pits put in whatever they didnt want to clean, burned it and covered it.

"He also said there is a higher tolerance among the users of smaller aircraft for crashes than there is for commercial passenger planes or military aircraft.

"They will tolerate a higher accident rate than the passenger community. It is considered a work-place hazard," he said."

Those statements pretty much say it all. Brought to you by the same great corporate logic that decided leaded gasoline and paint, faulty SUV tires, and cars without collapsable stearing columns were "acceptable risks".

I'd hit it. Wait... what?

Golfer Greg Norman wants one. Ashhat.
Cancel my order please. Seemed like a good idea at the time but now that HE wants one .... nnnnnnno.

/mutter mutter mutter

To the death of the 23 marines: the first crash was due to inproper flight control hookup - stick left, it went left, stick right, it went LEFT.

The second crash was completely 100% pilot error - some asshat in the Pentagon decided that we needed fixed wing pilots flying, not rotorcraft pilots. The pilot got into a situation known as 'settling with power' In a helo, when you are decending rapidly without enough forward speed, you 'fall' into your own dirty air, the rotor blades stall due to turbulence, and blam, gravity takes over. This is what happened during the training exercise that killed all those marines.

The craft is actually an amazing piece of machinery that will be great for avation.

I dont know about you, but I would much rather be in a new osprey than a 25 year old blackhawk with 30,000 hours on it

(my father is a retired test pilot and my next door neighbor is a flight test engineer on the Air Force version of the V-22)

The problem is if the marines had a plane/Helo mix this would be a huge step forward in Marine abilities. Its a good concept waiting on a good design.

The "Last Frontier" of commercial aviation is VTOL / STOL exploitation. The current civilian "sardine can" approach to mass transit is inconvenient at best.

The V-22 design can transition from VTOL to "normal" flight, and most importantly, to "normal" speeds. The Helicopter, that horrible collection of compromises, is a maintenance nightmare and highly inefficient, not to mention that fact that most sports cars can travel faster than a helicopter's top speed.

The safety of the V-22 is in the spotlight because it is new and different. It is still remarkably more safe than your Honda.

The Osprey is a tremendous airframe with much more than a CAS niche. As soon as I can board one for Chicago, I want an aisle seat, and Coke, no ice.


thanks, and

Best Regards,


eolon

.::.

Tallskinnywhiteguy :
(my father is a retired test pilot and my next door neighbor is a flight test engineer on the Air Force version of the V-22)

Was he one of the guys who fudged the testing results?

An-Unnecessarily-Long-Name :
Its a good concept waiting on a good design.

Well put.

Hmm The osprey is already obsolete is it not? Isn't ducted fan technology better?

Bell made a tilt engine vertical takeoff plane in the early 70's. They tested it near my house,it's in a Niagara Falls air museum now. They worked out all the glitches and got it near perfect, but no one ever bought it. It was loud, but sure looked fun.

http://avia.russian.ee/vertigo/bell_x-22-r.html

Eolon
Well put, and I, for one, concur.

OUTstanding headline.

This thing has killed more Marines than the Iraq's army. Other than that it's Great!