Sponsor Message:
Military Aviation & Space Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
V-22 As A C-2 Greyhound Replacement?  
User currently offline747400sp From United States of America, joined Aug 2003, 4017 posts, RR: 2
Posted (5 years 8 months 3 weeks 2 days 14 hours ago) and read 18521 times:

I was reading in Navy Times not to long ago, and in NT, there was an article about the USN looking at V-22s as a replacement for our aging fleet of C-2 Greyhounds ( CODs), but a V-22 is a smaller a/c than a Greyhound. Now I wonder could a enlarge design of a V-22 be used as a Greyhound replacement, or could a normal V-22 replace a Greyhound?

43 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineRwessel From United States of America, joined Jan 2007, 2667 posts, RR: 2
Reply 1, posted (5 years 8 months 3 weeks 2 days 13 hours ago) and read 18522 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Other than cost and being a bit short legged, a V-22 would make a plausible C-2 replacement. While in vertical takeoff and landing mode the V-22 can't match the C-2's cargo capacity, but in STOL mode it can carry more (in terms of weight at least). I also has the potential of being able to bring at least some lift capacity to non-carrier platforms.

Now I don't know if V-22 STOL takeoffs have been approved for the big flattops (a Nimitz should be plenty big), IIRC there were issues with that on the amphibs, at least at one point.


User currently offlineSTT757 From United States of America, joined Mar 2000, 17226 posts, RR: 50
Reply 2, posted (5 years 8 months 3 weeks 2 days 3 hours ago) and read 18387 times:

I think it would make a great C-2 replacement as it could transfer personnel and cargo between carriers and land without the need of a runway, it could also operate off LPD, LHD, LSD, LCC's and possibly CDG and DDGs.

It would also make a great ASW platform bridging the gap between MH-60s and the P-8, the spot the S-3 used to fill.



Eastern Air lines flt # 701, EWR-MCO Boeing 757
User currently offlineN328KF From United States of America, joined May 2004, 6590 posts, RR: 3
Reply 3, posted (5 years 8 months 3 weeks 2 days 3 hours ago) and read 18372 times:

Yeah, it seems to me that the V-22 might make a better E-2/E-3/S-3 replacement than it would for the CH-46.


When they call the roll in the Senate, the Senators do not know whether to answer 'Present' or 'Not guilty.' T.Roosevelt
User currently offlineEBJ1248650 From United States of America, joined Jun 2005, 1932 posts, RR: 1
Reply 4, posted (5 years 8 months 3 weeks 1 day 19 hours ago) and read 18263 times:

While the Navy might compromise on load lifting capability, would they do the same regarding the airplane's range?


Dare to dream; dream big!
User currently offlineL-188 From United States of America, joined Jul 1999, 30129 posts, RR: 58
Reply 5, posted (5 years 8 months 3 weeks 1 day 14 hours ago) and read 18200 times:

Seems like a good idea,

It would reduce the number of types carried on ship, and I don't think the carrying capacity is that big of issue.



OBAMA-WORST PRESIDENT EVER....Even SKOORB would be better.
User currently offlineRwessel From United States of America, joined Jan 2007, 2667 posts, RR: 2
Reply 6, posted (5 years 8 months 3 weeks 18 hours ago) and read 18103 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!



Quoting L-188 (Reply 5):
It would reduce the number of types carried on ship, and I don't think the carrying capacity is that big of issue.

Not really. The C-2s tend not to stay on the carriers too long anyway, and usually call a land base home (although there are always exceptions). Besides, it's a modified E-2, so having one on board isn't really introducing that much of a new type into the mix.

On the other side, AFAIK there are no current plans to regularly deploy V-22s on carriers (the amphibs, yes, but not the CVs).

But as I mentioned, if they (if they haven’t already) qualified the Osprey for STOL operations on the Nimitzs, it would actually be able to haul more weight than the Greyhound.


User currently offlineThePointblank From Canada, joined Jan 2009, 2141 posts, RR: 0
Reply 7, posted (5 years 8 months 3 weeks 17 hours ago) and read 18077 times:



Quoting Rwessel (Reply 6):
But as I mentioned, if they (if they haven’t already) qualified the Osprey for STOL operations on the Nimitzs, it would actually be able to haul more weight than the Greyhound.

They probably should qualify the V-22's for STOL ops on the CVN's, for various reasons (such as special operations).


User currently offlineOzair From Australia, joined Jan 2005, 1050 posts, RR: 2
Reply 8, posted (6 months 2 weeks 5 days 13 hours ago) and read 11564 times:

Defence News is reporting that the V-22 has won the USN COD replacement contract.

Breaking Defense obtained a Jan. 5 memo, signed by Secretary of the Navy Ray Mabus, Chief of Naval Operations Adm. Jonathan Greenert, and Marine Corps Commandant Gen. Joseph Dunford. It stipulates that the Navy will buy four V-22s each year from fiscal 2018 to 2020.
http://breakingdefense.com/2015/01/n...v-22-ospreys-for-carrier-delivery/

This is the result several of us were expecting, especially after the V-22 had successful trials aboard CVN-75 and a redesigned F135 housing which allows the engine to be carried internally on the V-22.


User currently offlinebunumuring From Australia, joined Jan 2014, 1611 posts, RR: 9
Reply 9, posted (6 months 2 weeks 5 days 10 hours ago) and read 11489 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting Ozair (Reply 8):
Defence News is reporting that the V-22 has won the USN COD replacement contract.

Breaking Defense obtained a Jan. 5 memo, signed by Secretary of the Navy Ray Mabus, Chief of Naval Operations Adm. Jonathan Greenert, and Marine Corps Commandant Gen. Joseph Dunford. It stipulates that the Navy will buy four V-22s each year from fiscal 2018 to 2020.
http://breakingdefense.com/2015/01/n...v-22-ospreys-for-carrier-delivery/

This is the result several of us were expecting, especially after the V-22 had successful trials aboard CVN-75 and a redesigned F135 housing which allows the engine to be carried internally on the V-22.


Hi mate,
Yes, I was expecting this as well...
I remember artists' impressions From about the of 80s of everything from Fokker F-28s to BAe 146s in US Navy colours landing on CVNs in the COD role, as replacements for Greyhounds. Then the US Navy chose the Greyhound to replace the Greyhound!
The Osprey is a logical replacement this time around, if there had to be a Greyhound replacement other than the Greyhound itself. It will be a tough gig for the Osprey, but the technology has matured and with the first export orders announced (Japan and Israel, although it seems the latter has already cancelled!), it seems the aircraft is going from strength to strength.
I would love to see Australia get some, for special forces, SAR/CSAR or just plain standard cargo/troop carriers, supplementing the mighty Chinooks. Probably won't happen, but I think it would be great. They would probably be useful in a 'COD' role with HMAS Canberra and HMAS Adelaide too.
Cheers,
Bunumuring.



I just wanna live while I'm alive!
User currently offlineThePointblank From Canada, joined Jan 2009, 2141 posts, RR: 0
Reply 10, posted (6 months 2 weeks 2 days 15 hours ago) and read 10709 times:

I question how often COD has actually delivered complete engines to carriers. Not to say that it is never done. Surely someone will come along and say that it is. But I don't recall it being an issue.

What a carrier usually does is that they take a couple spares along for the trip and you have shops that fix them. Actually a spare part, even electronics, arriving on a COD would be extremely unusual. It's mostly mail. Coupled with the fact that carriers usually visit port every month or so, I can't foresee a very large need for COD to be delivering engines.

The only thing I can see as being a benefit with the V-22, and this is the big one, is that the V-22 can carry significantly heavier cargo from the carrier to other ships at a much longer distance. This could reduce the frequency of UNREPS, which ties ships up and reduces maneuvering flexibility.


User currently offlinestudedave From United States of America, joined Oct 2006, 517 posts, RR: 0
Reply 11, posted (6 months 2 weeks 2 days ago) and read 10563 times:

Quoting ThePointblank (Reply 10):
What a carrier usually does is that they take a couple spares along for the trip and you have shops that fix them.
Actually a spare part, even electronics, arriving on a COD would be extremely unusual. It's mostly mail. Coupled with the fact that carriers usually visit port every month or so, I can't foresee a very large need for COD to be delivering engines.

The only thing I can see as being a benefit with the V-22, and this is the big one, is that the V-22 can carry significantly heavier cargo from the carrier to other ships at a much longer distance.
This could reduce the frequency of UNREPS, which ties ships up and reduces maneuvering flexibility.

I only made 3 carrier Cruises and three small boy cruises, but here's what I know...

Parts routinely DO come aboard on the COD.
Not everything can be fixed at sea- no matter how many spares (and shops) you have.
So guess where the parts to fix the parts come from? Yup- they'd show up on the COD.

I'm a little confused about the UNREP comment.
Besides the supply ships- other ships rarely come along side the Carriers for an UNREP.
When a Carrier UNREPs it's about JP-5 more then anything else.
Do other supplies come aboard at the same time? Sometimes.
But helos are already doing most of that work.




StudeDave



Classic planes, Classic trains, and Studebakers~~ what else is there???
User currently offlineThePointblank From Canada, joined Jan 2009, 2141 posts, RR: 0
Reply 12, posted (6 months 2 weeks 1 day 14 hours ago) and read 10405 times:

Quoting studedave (Reply 11):
Parts routinely DO come aboard on the COD.
Not everything can be fixed at sea- no matter how many spares (and shops) you have.
So guess where the parts to fix the parts come from? Yup- they'd show up on the COD.

However, not entire engines, correct? I would imagine that engine components, which are much smaller, will fit in the current COD platforms.

Quoting studedave (Reply 11):
I'm a little confused about the UNREP comment.
Besides the supply ships- other ships rarely come along side the Carriers for an UNREP.
When a Carrier UNREPs it's about JP-5 more then anything else.
Do other supplies come aboard at the same time? Sometimes.
But helos are already doing most of that work.

If the carrier had a COD that arrived that carried mail and supplies meant for the escorts, they would be forced to unpack everything off the aircraft, repack them to be slinged, and have the escorts move closer in for helicopters to transfer the cargo. However, you are weight-restricted for VERTREP, and that depends on the exact helicopter and distance between ships. Otherwise, the escorts will have to pull alongside and perform UNREP alongside the carrier if the cargo can't be broken down any further.

With V-22, you have 15,000lbs of cargo lifting capabilities on the dual external hooks, and the V-22 can fly much further away from the carrier as well.


User currently offlinestudedave From United States of America, joined Oct 2006, 517 posts, RR: 0
Reply 13, posted (6 months 2 weeks 1 day 11 hours ago) and read 10367 times:

Quoting ThePointblank (Reply 12):
However, not entire engines, correct? I would imagine that engine components, which are much smaller, will fit in the current COD platforms.

It'd be rare, but yes- big parts too. Entire engines? I doubt it, but every time I hear someone say 'never' I end up seeing it happen.

Quoting ThePointblank (Reply 12):
If the carrier had a COD that arrived that carried mail and supplies meant for the escorts, they would be forced to unpack everything off the aircraft, repack them to be slinged, and have the escorts move closer in for helicopters to transfer the cargo. However, you are weight-restricted for VERTREP, and that depends on the exact helicopter and distance between ships. Otherwise, the escorts will have to pull alongside and perform UNREP alongside the carrier if the cargo can't be broken down any further.

With V-22, you have 15,000lbs of cargo lifting capabilities on the dual external hooks, and the V-22 can fly much further away from the carrier as well.

What you describe is basically how it is done now- well 'cept for the slinging part.
Carrier Battle group ships are usually within helo range to one another.
And now that the NAVY is all MH-60Rs and MH-60Ss that range is a given.
As such- when a ship has enough mail/parts/people to pick up from the Carrier- they send a helo to go get it. Or another ship (and/or it's helo) gets it, and brings it to them.
We have helos that do this for a living.
When/if all else fails- the part/mail/person will just be waiting at their next port to be picked up.

Something like 80% of my 20 years in the NAVY was spent in helo squadrons- so I know this drill pretty well...




StudeDave



Classic planes, Classic trains, and Studebakers~~ what else is there???
User currently offlineThePointblank From Canada, joined Jan 2009, 2141 posts, RR: 0
Reply 14, posted (6 months 2 weeks 1 day 10 hours ago) and read 10362 times:

Quoting studedave (Reply 13):
What you describe is basically how it is done now- well 'cept for the slinging part.
Carrier Battle group ships are usually within helo range to one another.
And now that the NAVY is all MH-60Rs and MH-60Ss that range is a given.
As such- when a ship has enough mail/parts/people to pick up from the Carrier- they send a helo to go get it. Or another ship (and/or it's helo) gets it, and brings it to them.
We have helos that do this for a living.
When/if all else fails- the part/mail/person will just be waiting at their next port to be picked up.

Something like 80% of my 20 years in the NAVY was spent in helo squadrons- so I know this drill pretty well...

Good explanations, thanks.

Do you think that with the V-22 becoming the COD platform for the USN, do you foresee a decline in the helicopter cargo squadrons? Or do you think that some of the squadrons will convert to the V-22?

Either way, the USN is getting a much more flexible COD capability that allows COD to arrive on practically every ship in the USN's inventory.


User currently offlineWoodreau From United States of America, joined Sep 2001, 1110 posts, RR: 6
Reply 15, posted (6 months 2 weeks 1 day 3 hours ago) and read 10266 times:

Once you get to a theater of operations like the Arabian gulf, not everything goes thru the carrier. The fleet activity in Bahrain schedules a daily pmc run to hit all the ships in theater regularly or even daily so the carrier is not the hub for cargo runs. Bahrain is.

Enroute and in transit cargo gets routed thru Diego garcia or Guam or pearl to get loaded onto the supply ship that is tasked to refuel the task force. So again the cargo hub is not the carrier. The cargo gets transferred from the supply ship directly to the end user during the connected refueling.

All a v-22 or c-2 would provide is a longer ranged capability to supply cargo from a land base. It wouldn't supplant or replace helo cargo ops. Unless the navy has decided to replace the MH-60s with v-22s

Range is usually not a consideration for vertreps. Where is distance between pickup to drop off is about 180feet to 3 miles. 2-3 helos can usually move about 200-300 pallets a hour during a replenishment.

[Edited 2015-01-18 07:14:54]


Bonus animus sit, ab experientia. Quod salvatum fuerit de malis usu venit judicium.
User currently offlinestudedave From United States of America, joined Oct 2006, 517 posts, RR: 0
Reply 16, posted (6 months 2 weeks 23 hours ago) and read 10178 times:

Quoting ThePointblank (Reply 14):
Or do you think that some of the squadrons will convert to the V-22?
Quoting Woodreau (Reply 15):
Unless the navy has decided to replace the MH-60s with v-22s

Let's hope cooler heads prevail, and that NEVER happens!!!

Quoting ThePointblank (Reply 14):
Either way, the USN is getting a much more flexible COD capability that allows COD to arrive on practically every ship in the USN's inventory.

So long as they don't want to land- yes.

Quoting Woodreau (Reply 15):
Enroute and in transit cargo gets routed thru Diego Garcia or Guam or Pearl to get loaded onto the supply ship that is tasked to refuel the task force. So again the cargo hub is not the carrier. The cargo gets transferred from the supply ship directly to the end user during the connected refueling.

It does sometimes happen like that as well, yes.

One nit- DG isn't in the picture too much anymore since the Fleet is nowhere near it these days.
The VRC Det hasn't been there in decades, and now the VPs don't deploy there either.
Which is sad really- that place is one of the best kept secrets in the NAVY!!!




StudeDave



Classic planes, Classic trains, and Studebakers~~ what else is there???
User currently offlineThePointblank From Canada, joined Jan 2009, 2141 posts, RR: 0
Reply 17, posted (6 months 2 weeks 14 hours ago) and read 10027 times:

Do you also think that the lack of available airframes for C-2 re-manufacturing played a significant role in the decision? If the Navy wanted to increase the number of airframes to perform COD, the fact that the USN would not get more aircraft out of re-manufacturing would play a role. In fact, during the time they would be re-manufacturing aircraft, the USN would temporarily lose aircraft for long periods.

Also, if you go back to the article Ozair referenced, it does mention that USMC and USN commanders of amphibious groups found that using the V-22 to ferry troops and cargo around the group allowed the ships to conduct separate operations at ranges far greater than possible when the old CH-46 Sea Knight were their primary supply aircraft. Food for thought.


User currently offlinestudedave From United States of America, joined Oct 2006, 517 posts, RR: 0
Reply 18, posted (6 months 2 weeks 1 hour ago) and read 9917 times:

Quoting ThePointblank (Reply 17):
Also, if you go back to the article Ozair referenced, it does mention that USMC and USN commanders of amphibious groups found that using the V-22 to ferry troops and cargo around the group allowed the ships to conduct separate operations at ranges far greater than possible when the old CH-46 Sea Knight were their primary supply aircraft. Food for thought.

Here's more food for thought~

The flight decks of the ships in a Gator Group are much larger then say a Cruiser or Destroyer or Frigate~ so those guys are bummin'. But they do usually have two helos of their own, so maybe they'll be okay.
We always got by with ours.





StudeDave



Classic planes, Classic trains, and Studebakers~~ what else is there???
User currently offlineTWA772LR From United States of America, joined Nov 2011, 3030 posts, RR: 3
Reply 19, posted (6 months 1 week 4 days 15 hours ago) and read 9576 times:

So this is confirmed? When should it be implemented?


A landing EVERYONE can walk away from, is a good landing.
User currently offlineThePointblank From Canada, joined Jan 2009, 2141 posts, RR: 0
Reply 20, posted (6 months 1 week 4 days 13 hours ago) and read 9543 times:

Quoting TWA772LR (Reply 19):
So this is confirmed? When should it be implemented?

It needs approval in the DoD's budget, but it should pass. First delivery to the USN would be in 2018, with 4 aircraft per year until 2020, and the birds will come from what would have been allocated to the USMC, with the USMC getting later build aircraft.

Quoting studedave (Reply 13):
It'd be rare, but yes- big parts too. Entire engines? I doubt it, but every time I hear someone say 'never' I end up seeing it happen.

Been poking around for more answers, and many current and former servicemen can't remember when they saw an entire engine brought in via COD.

Not that it mattered too much; the old TF-30 and F110 engines that were found on the F-14 were too long to fit inside a C-2 anyways.

Anyways, details of the V-22 loading an F135 has been demonstrated in mockup:

http://www.navyrecognition.com/index...tion=com_content&task=view&id=2333



[Edited 2015-01-21 21:41:14]

User currently offlineThePointblank From Canada, joined Jan 2009, 2141 posts, RR: 0
Reply 21, posted (3 months 2 weeks 2 days 13 hours ago) and read 7108 times:

USN to purchase 48 V-22's for COD mission:

http://www.navyrecognition.com/index...tion=com_content&task=view&id=2622

The V-22's will perform COD, SAR, and Special Ops among other missions. The USN is also looking at improving range by enlarging the wheel sponsons to increase fuel capacity.


User currently offlineNBGSkyGod From United States of America, joined May 2004, 882 posts, RR: 1
Reply 22, posted (3 months 1 week 6 days 21 hours ago) and read 6483 times:

Quoting ThePointblank (Reply 21):

Looks like not only will it replace the C-2 but perhaps also the MH-53's as well in the mine sweeping role. Would be interesting to see a V-22 pulling a sled.



Pilot's are idots, who at any given moment will attempt to kill themselves or others.
User currently offlineSTT757 From United States of America, joined Mar 2000, 17226 posts, RR: 50
Reply 23, posted (3 months 1 week 6 days 7 hours ago) and read 6243 times:

Quoting NBGSkyGod (Reply 22):
Looks like not only will it replace the C-2 but perhaps also the MH-53's as well in the mine sweeping role. Would be interesting to see a V-22 pulling a sled.

It could also replace what the former S-3 Vikings used to offer in terms of anti-Submarine warfare.



Eastern Air lines flt # 701, EWR-MCO Boeing 757
User currently offlinebikerthai From United States of America, joined Apr 2010, 2313 posts, RR: 4
Reply 24, posted (3 months 1 week 6 days 5 hours ago) and read 6208 times:

Quoting STT757 (Reply 23):

It could also replace what the former S-3 Vikings used to offer in terms of anti-Submarine warfare.

Roll that torpedo right off the aft ramp?

bt



Intelligent seeks knowledge. Enlightened seeks wisdom.
25 STT757 : How many did the S-3s carry?
26 ThePointblank : 4 MK-46 torpedoes. I would also add that V-22's could become a permanent part of the air wing, not just as a visitor to the carrier like the current
27 SSTeve : There's room to hangar several??
28 ThePointblank : The Nimitz and Ford class carriers have the hangar height to allow them to bring a V-22 under decks. Furthermore, USN CVN's aren't exactly packed to
29 angad84 : Why not? I'm sure a palletised delivery kit could be developed if necessary (ie: if USN decides the V-22 should do ASW) Cheers Angad
30 bikerthai : These torpedoes are small enough now that I guess you can have hard points mounted to the fueslage. How easy would it be to replace the aft ramp? If y
31 angad84 : I want to see this happen. Can we do a kickstarter? Cheers A
32 Ozair : Don't forget the need for a sonar buoy dispenser. I doubt the V-22 would use a dipping sonar and there is no point replacing the MH-60R. Keep a V-22
33 angad84 : I still think the poop idea will be more fun, and therefore worth it. Where would the hardpoints go? They're having a hard enough time putting a pidd
34 Post contains links ThePointblank : On the topic of armed V-22's dropping weapons off the aft ramp; the USMC and DARPA have tested arming a V-22 with rockets and missiles: http://www.ja
35 angad84 : At the cost of weapons? (assuming internal storage/launch) Interesting work, but wouldn't a Harvest Hawk manage just fine? The V-22 is all about the
36 bikerthai : It's a start. A Mark 54 torpedo is 10X heavier than these rockets. For anti-submarine, you only need a couple of torpedoes or depth bomb. The speed a
37 angad84 : And sonobuoys and/or a sled? I could be wrong, but based on pictures and a cursory run around google, the V-22 might be a bit too cramped... Sorry, t
38 L-188 : A V-22 can land a lot shorter
39 Post contains images N328KF : What I want to know is, when do we see the Ralph Peters version?
40 ThePointblank : It's the idea that since the V-22 was probably the one dropping the Marines off, it's the closest asset to provide support, and a more heavily armed
41 angad84 : ... I don't know what that is, but 3 is better than two, so I want one! Cheers Angad
42 bikerthai : On the same line, you can carve out part of the sponson's forward section to mount the torpedo conformally. The nose radome should be able to house t
43 N328KF : It was a book written in the early 1990s, while the Osprey was still being developed. The book itself is speculative fiction. The standout feature of
Top Of Page
Forum Index

Reply To This Topic V-22 As A C-2 Greyhound Replacement?
Username:
No username? Sign up now!
Password: 


Forgot Password? Be reminded.
Remember me on this computer (uses cookies)
  • Military aviation related posts only!
  • Not military related? Use the other forums
  • No adverts of any kind. This includes web pages.
  • No hostile language or criticizing of others.
  • Do not post copyright protected material.
  • Use relevant and describing topics.
  • Check if your post already been discussed.
  • Check your spelling!
  • DETAILED RULES
Add Images Add SmiliesPosting Help

Please check your spelling (press "Check Spelling" above)


Similar topics:More similar topics...
Boeing C-17C As C-5 Galaxy Replacement? posted Fri Oct 10 2008 06:27:49 by Keesje
US Considers A380 As AF1 And C-5 Replacement! posted Wed Oct 17 2007 04:08:39 by LifelinerOne
B777-200ER As KC-X posted Wed Oct 14 2009 17:26:55 by PolymerPlane
F-22 Two-seater posted Wed Oct 14 2009 08:52:42 by EBJ1248650
Brazil Selects Rafale As New Fighter A/c posted Mon Sep 7 2009 09:53:33 by Chuchoteur
Suitability Of V-22 Osprey For CG SAR Missions posted Thu Aug 13 2009 08:29:18 by BOACVC10
V-22 Osprey IN Hollywood Movie posted Tue Jul 21 2009 07:56:36 by Andrewastroboy
V-22 Still Only Generating Mixed Results? posted Tue Jun 23 2009 15:18:35 by AirRyan
787-9 As Reconn Or Electronic Surveil' Platform posted Sat Jun 6 2009 09:00:05 by EBJ1248650
Pave Low Retirement - Replaced By AF V-22 Variant? posted Sun May 31 2009 11:14:48 by LHCVG
F-22's Back In The Air Soon posted Tue Sep 20 2011 16:02:14 by j.mo
F-22 Temporary Flight Authorization posted Sat Aug 27 2011 12:55:38 by moose135

Sponsor Message:
Printer friendly format