V-22 for US Army

Helicopters and tilt-rotor aircraft
  • Author
  • Message
Offline

discofishing

Elite 1K

Elite 1K

  • Posts: 1421
  • Joined: 07 Nov 2008, 22:15
  • Location: USA

Unread post15 Jun 2013, 09:38

I figure this would be a good place to talk about the US Army and its relationship with the V-22 program; past, present, and future. My preference would be to leave its development history out of the thread, because the aircraft is here to stay with a hot assembly line and with future potential users on the horizon, whether anyone likes it or not.
Offline

lookieloo

Elite 1K

Elite 1K

  • Posts: 1244
  • Joined: 16 Feb 2013, 08:04

Unread post15 Jun 2013, 11:10

The Army needs volume product, which is probably why costs precluded involvement. However, space is at a premium on ships, so one wants the most capability possible... and the V-22 is vastly more capable than any other rotary-winged vehicle. There's also the matter of size (it's a bit bigger than the Army wants) and complexity (the Army doesn't need it to fold up).

Personally, I'm betting that the Blackhawk's replacement (JMR winner) will be based on the Sikorsky X-2 platform as it's the competitor that offers the fewest changes to footprint and operations. Then again, I'm not holding my breath; the Army has a very poor record of seeing major projects through to the end.
Offline

discofishing

Elite 1K

Elite 1K

  • Posts: 1421
  • Joined: 07 Nov 2008, 22:15
  • Location: USA

Unread post15 Jun 2013, 19:39

Sometimes I really question the competence of US Army aircraft maintainers. I don't think the Army trains them well enough, especially avionics and electrical techs, based on my experience being one. Introducing the V-22 into the Army would require a bit of a paradigm shift, however if Soldiers were sent through USMC/USAF tech training then I don't think there would be much of a problem. I think the best use for the Osprey in the Army would be found in the 160th SOAR, where they have the most technically and tactically proficient helicopter units in the world. Those guys are beyond high-speed. If the V-22 worked out well there, then maybe there is a chance for the regular Army. If I was shot and was going to bleed out in 2 hours, I'd want a V-22 to get me instead of a UH-60. I think 20 V-22s for the SOAR would work out very well.
Offline

Roscoe

Elite 1K

Elite 1K

  • Posts: 1320
  • Joined: 29 Jun 2004, 20:14
  • Location: Las Vegas

Unread post16 Jun 2013, 22:33

lookieloo wrote:...the V-22 is vastly more capable than any other rotary-winged vehicle.

Based on what evidence? Yes, faster and more range but significant deficiencies as well. Turns out the wing loading and therefore the downwash of an Osprey is significantly higher than any rotary wing bird flying...we learned that fast roping from a V-22 is a nightmare. The cargo volume of a V-22 is significantly less than an MH-53 or a Chinook meaning that some cargo that the special ops folks like to carry no longer fit inside.
Roscoe

"It's time to get medieval, I'm goin' in for guns" - Dos Gringos
Offline

lookieloo

Elite 1K

Elite 1K

  • Posts: 1244
  • Joined: 16 Feb 2013, 08:04

Unread post17 Jun 2013, 04:33

Roscoe wrote:
lookieloo wrote:...the V-22 is vastly more capable than any other rotary-winged vehicle.
Based on what evidence? Yes, faster and more range but significant deficiencies as well. Turns out the wing loading and therefore the downwash of an Osprey is significantly higher than any rotary wing bird flying...we learned that fast roping from a V-22 is a nightmare. The cargo volume of a V-22 is significantly less than an MH-53 or a Chinook meaning that some cargo that the special ops folks like to carry no longer fit inside.
How much fast roping did the Marines do out of their CH-46s? Also, I don't recall the V-22 being slated to replace the MH-53 or CH-47 in cargo roles. As for the USAF... Yeah, I get that fast-roping is cool; getting to your downed pilot before the enemy does is a lot cooler. :roll:
Offline

discofishing

Elite 1K

Elite 1K

  • Posts: 1421
  • Joined: 07 Nov 2008, 22:15
  • Location: USA

Unread post17 Jun 2013, 18:33

Based on what evidence? Yes, faster and more range but significant deficiencies as well.


Being way faster and having way more range is a vast improvement in capability if you ask me.

Turns out the wing loading and therefore the downwash of an Osprey is significantly higher than any rotary wing bird flying...we learned that fast roping from a V-22 is a nightmare.


I think the downward facing exhaust coupled with the proprotor wash is the reason for this. If you noticed Bell's next tilt rotor project doesn't move the whole nacelle, it just moves the proprotors.

The cargo volume of a V-22 is significantly less than an MH-53 or a Chinook meaning that some cargo that the special ops folks like to carry no longer fit inside.



I think this is why the USAF is still looking for a heavy lift style airframe to replace the Pavelow

How much fast roping did the Marines do out of their CH-46s? Also, I don't recall the V-22 being slated to replace the MH-53 or CH-47 in cargo roles. As for the USAF... Yeah, I get that fast-roping is cool; getting to your downed pilot before the enemy does is a lot cooler. Rolling Eyes


Funny, the CV-22 is an AFSOC aircraft and was not intended to replace the Pavehawks in the Rescue Squadrons, however, the first high-profile mission the MV-22 does is rescue a downed pilot in Libya. Interesting huh?

I'm starting to think the military doesn't want the V-22 to replace anything, rather they love having the enhanced capabilities of range and speed when it counts. It augments traditional helicopters quiet well if you ask me. I think the Army should pick up on this and add about 20 V-22s to its arsenal in the 160th SOAR.
Offline

lookieloo

Elite 1K

Elite 1K

  • Posts: 1244
  • Joined: 16 Feb 2013, 08:04

Unread post17 Jun 2013, 20:38

discofishing wrote:I'm starting to think the military doesn't want the V-22 to replace anything, rather they love having the enhanced capabilities of range and speed when it counts. It augments traditional helicopters quiet well if you ask me. I think the Army should pick up on this and add about 20 V-22s to its arsenal in the 160th SOAR.
Well, it is replacing the CH-46. As for the 160th, stuff tends to magically appear for units like that when there's a mission need. In other words, they can probably demand the use of anyone's V-22s (and crews) whenever they want, so there may be little need to have copies of their own.
Offline

discofishing

Elite 1K

Elite 1K

  • Posts: 1421
  • Joined: 07 Nov 2008, 22:15
  • Location: USA

Unread post18 Jun 2013, 00:06

Generally, speaking if the 160th asks for an aircraft, they'll get it. They will not absorb assets from other branches because they have more rotory-winged capability than the other branches. There's a reason why other branches use the 160th, not the other way around.

Return to Rotary Wing Aircraft

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests