CTR
Topic Author
Posts: 299
Joined: Tue Jul 05, 2005 4:57 am

Squadron Photos Of V-22s Deployed To Iraq

Wed Nov 21, 2007 2:39 am

Great series of photos of the V-22s deployed to Iraq as well as honest facts and commentary regarding the aircrafts capability.

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1927157/posts

Have fun,

CTR

[Edited 2007-11-20 18:43:09]
Aircraft design is just one big compromise,,,
 
L-188
Posts: 29874
Joined: Wed Jul 07, 1999 11:27 am

RE: Squadron Photos Of V-22s Deployed To Iraq

Wed Nov 21, 2007 3:21 am

I love the posting where the one guy says he has books that said the F-15 was a waste of money and the F-16 was ruined when it was decided to put a radar in the sucker.
OBAMA-WORST PRESIDENT EVER....Even SKOORB would be better.
 
AGM100
Posts: 5077
Joined: Thu Dec 04, 2003 2:16 am

RE: Squadron Photos Of V-22s Deployed To Iraq

Wed Nov 21, 2007 3:51 pm

Thanks for the post CTR , Nice shots and information. At this years airshow @ DM here in Tucson I had the chance to talk with a Marine pilot at the Osprey display. As I would assume he did not have anything bad to say about the aircraft other than the early development pains. I did not ask the pilot to many questions , but he seemed pretty gung ho about it. I would assume he is flying somewhere in Iraq today..

I am not a combat pilot , but to me these highly complex software balanced aircraft worry me. Hell its hard enough to keep 737's flying. Imagine how complex the V22 is for maintenance . How redundant are flyby wire and software driven subsystems and how they stand up to 37mm penetrations remains to be seen I guess.

All and all I think the aircraft is bad ass and the technology has to start somewhere.
You dig the hole .. I fill the hole . 100% employment !
 
N74JW
Posts: 514
Joined: Sat Oct 06, 2007 12:31 am

RE: Squadron Photos Of V-22s Deployed To Iraq

Wed Nov 21, 2007 11:50 pm

Great shots! Thanks for sharing...
rm -r *
 
dl021
Posts: 10836
Joined: Fri May 21, 2004 12:04 pm

RE: Squadron Photos Of V-22s Deployed To Iraq

Thu Nov 22, 2007 3:38 am



Quoting AGM100 (Reply 2):
to me these highly complex software balanced aircraft worry me

Well, since the F-16 would fall out of the sky without computers stabilizing the airplane and it's been in combat since 1976 or so I'd say they're doing ok. It's a worthwhile concern, but take a good look at the true numbers.

What many insiders seem to be concerned about is the power transfer and transmission systems on this particular aircraft. But I guess we'll see.

Quoting AGM100 (Reply 2):
How redundant are flyby wire and software driven subsystems

Pretty. They're standard these days, and I'd say that an airplane that loses FBW could have just as easily lost hydraulics.

Quoting AGM100 (Reply 2):
I think the aircraft is bad ass and the technology has to start somewhere.

Agreed....and I think it started with the digital F-8 Crusader experimental and went from there.

Quoting L-188 (Reply 1):
I love the posting where the one guy says he has books that said the F-15 was a waste of money and the F-16 was ruined when it was decided to put a radar in the sucker.

Ah....an expert author! You gotta love the flat-earthers. Great content on the thread there, though....
Is my Pan Am ticket to the moon still good?
 
ebj1248650
Posts: 1517
Joined: Mon Jun 06, 2005 6:17 am

RE: Squadron Photos Of V-22s Deployed To Iraq

Fri Nov 23, 2007 12:44 am



Quoting L-188 (Reply 1):
I love the posting where the one guy says he has books that said the F-15 was a waste of money and the F-16 was ruined when it was decided to put a radar in the sucker.

Reading that posting, I noted he didn't appear to agree with what was said about the F-15 or F-16. His point was there were people who did have that opinion. Apparently there were those who wanted the F-16 to be a plain and simple air-to-air machine, little allowing for the fact the airplane was meant to be a swing role airplane from the beginning. And the F-15's combat performance clearly indicates it was definitely not a waste of money. I think you'll agree that the F-16 wasn't ruined ... far too many nations ordered and now fly the airplane and we don't hear them complaining!  Smile
Dare to dream; dream big!
 
iwok
Posts: 979
Joined: Wed Jan 26, 2005 2:35 pm

RE: Squadron Photos Of V-22s Deployed To Iraq

Mon Nov 26, 2007 7:16 am

That all quadrant gatling gun is must!  yes 

I just can't see this thing being safe with only a 50 cal gun that some dude has to squat down and aim without even a bench!  no  The way the thing is set up now, there is no way to defend from the sides, which is just dumb.

iwok
 
Curt22
Posts: 334
Joined: Sat Jul 14, 2007 11:43 am

RE: Squadron Photos Of V-22s Deployed To Iraq

Mon Nov 26, 2007 1:14 pm



Quoting Iwok (Reply 6):
I just can't see this thing being safe with only a 50 cal gun that some dude has to squat down and aim without even a bench! The way the thing is set up now, there is no way to defend from the sides, which is just dumb

"Squatting down" is exactly how US forces fire all ramp mounted weapons from all our helicopters...and it's better to kneel than to squat for greater stability...I'ts not a bad way to shoot, or the services wouldn't be doing this for the last 40 years.
 
dragon6172
Posts: 795
Joined: Sat Jul 14, 2007 9:56 am

RE: Squadron Photos Of V-22s Deployed To Iraq

Mon Nov 26, 2007 7:00 pm



Quoting Iwok (Reply 6):
That all quadrant gatling gun is must!

I just can't see this thing being safe with only a 50 cal gun that some dude has to squat down and aim without even a bench! The way the thing is set up now, there is no way to defend from the sides, which is just dumb.

iwok

That all axis gun is worthless during the landing phase because it has to be stowed. Landing and stopped on deck is when the aircraft is in the most danger, because its slow and big and loud.

The ramp mounted weapon the Osprey has now is probably the best option they have, and will probably remain the only weapon for some time (by the way it is a M240 which is .30cal and a medium machine gun, not heavy like the picture captions state). At least until one gets shot down. It too has problems though, and not just the fact it can only cover the rear. I can tell you as a former CH-46 crew chief and door gunner that a tail gun would have been the most effective weapon for most enroute threats. In fact we took an extra crewman with a M240 lying prone on the ramp when we flew into areas we deemed high threat.

The problem is that landing phase though... thats where you as a helicopter are most vulnerable. Typically you are nose high slowing down, that ramp gun is no good pointing at the ground. Once you have landed, you have to get the weapon out of the way to off/onload your passengers/cargo effectively, otherwise you are spending longer in the LZ than needed, and thats not good. In the third picture it looks like they have a type of mount that allows them to swivel the weapon and clear the ramp. Im not sure how it works, but if it swivels into the aircraft, that leaves you no weapon for suppression while you are sitting in the LZ. If it swivels out you are taking your crewman and having him stand off the back of the aircraft in the LZ, not a terribly bad option. If the threat is on the opposite side of the aircraft that the weapon is mounted though... your passengers are running through your firing lane to offload. Again, not a good thing.
Phrogs Phorever
 
AGM100
Posts: 5077
Joined: Thu Dec 04, 2003 2:16 am

RE: Squadron Photos Of V-22s Deployed To Iraq

Mon Nov 26, 2007 10:07 pm



Quoting DL021 (Reply 4):
Well, since the F-16 would fall out of the sky without computers stabilizing the airplane and it's been in combat since 1976 or so I'd say they're doing ok. It's a worthwhile concern, but take a good look at the true numbers.

Agreed , however my concern is the operation in the sand and dirt with bullets zinging though the fuselage. Again I have never been their , but have read about Black hawks , Huey's leaving LZ's with fuel and hyd leaking out and daylight streaming in...

Another bothersome thing about the aircraft , looking at the side profile from say a enemy gunners view. The engine provides a huge target sticking out their. I hope their is a good bit of armour on the outboard sides of the engine nacelle.

Quoting DL021 (Reply 4):
What many insiders seem to be concerned about is the power transfer and transmission systems

Looking at the 30" cutaway drawing on my wall of the Osprey... the drive gearbox and transmission system looks hugely complex (duh). Curious how the aircraft would operate with 1 engine out looks pretty harry to me.
You dig the hole .. I fill the hole . 100% employment !
 
UH60FtRucker
Posts: 3252
Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2005 9:15 am

RE: Squadron Photos Of V-22s Deployed To Iraq

Mon Nov 26, 2007 10:26 pm



Quoting AGM100 (Reply 9):
Agreed , however my concern is the operation in the sand and dirt with bullets zinging though the fuselage. Again I have never been their , but have read about Black hawks , Huey's leaving LZ's with fuel and hyd leaking out and daylight streaming in...

I never had a hit to the hydraulics. I only know a select few who have. The hydraulics are located right above the pilots and door gunner's heads. A rather small target, and with the numerous built in redundancies... it is one of our most reliable systems. The same goes for fuel leaks. The tanks are durable and self sealing. The areas I always worried about was the crew cabin, cockpit or any flight control mechanical parts, such as the drive shaft, or anything to do with the main and tail rotors.

From personal experience, most damage occurs in the tail. Mostly because Iraqis cannot shoot for shit. They aim for the cockpit, but fail to lead their target, so the bullets end up in the tail... which is just a hollow frame.

I know a few people mentioned we rarely go into "hot LZs" anymore, which is fairly true. We are pretty good at employing CAS, and indirect fire, to prep the LZs before landing. But there were numerous times I went into LZs, which were called ICE, but started taking fire as soon as we got there.

The CH-47s have only tail guns, and because of that and their size, they are not sent into dangerous areas. They primarily fly at night and to-and-from secure locations. I don't know if I would want to be in a fire fight and not have that side protection offered by the door guns.

-UH60
Your men have to follow your orders. They don't have to go to your funeral.
 
AGM100
Posts: 5077
Joined: Thu Dec 04, 2003 2:16 am

RE: Squadron Photos Of V-22s Deployed To Iraq

Mon Nov 26, 2007 11:01 pm



Quoting UH60FtRucker (Reply 10):
From personal experience, most damage occurs in the tail. Mostly because Iraqis cannot shoot for shit. They aim for the cockpit, but fail to lead their target, so the bullets end up in the tail... which is just a hollow frame.

Guess that Black-hawk tail is pretty well designed , thats good news.

So I guess the idea will be to use the Osprey like the CH-47 ? Flying special ops and keeping them out of hot LZ 's ? I guess thats cool , except the damn thing costs enough it should do it all .

Any plans to fly the V-22 UH ? Could you transition ?
You dig the hole .. I fill the hole . 100% employment !
 
Curt22
Posts: 334
Joined: Sat Jul 14, 2007 11:43 am

RE: Squadron Photos Of V-22s Deployed To Iraq

Tue Nov 27, 2007 3:14 am



Quoting AGM100 (Reply 9):
Agreed , however my concern is the operation in the sand and dirt with bullets zinging though the fuselage. Again I have never been their , but have read about Black hawks , Huey's leaving LZ's with fuel and hyd leaking out and daylight streaming in...

It might be useful to remember the V-22, like all military acft undergo a series of extensive live fire tests to evaluate both the airframe and dynamic components (drive train etc), and the V-22 had to pass the same (if not more stringent) criteria as the acft you called out above.

Any acft runs the risk of the "golden BB" but modern acft like the V-22 built with positive safe separation of systems and elimination of single point failures by means of triple redundancy should fair as survivable as any of other legacy machines....of course one way or the other, time will tell.
 
iwok
Posts: 979
Joined: Wed Jan 26, 2005 2:35 pm

RE: Squadron Photos Of V-22s Deployed To Iraq

Tue Nov 27, 2007 6:12 am



Quoting Dragon6172 (Reply 8):
That all axis gun is worthless during the landing phase because it has to be stowed. Landing and stopped on deck is when the aircraft is in the most danger, because its slow and big and loud.

Good point which I never considered. From what I read, it seems as though the tail gunner was an after thought and Boeing was mostly concerned about payload/range in the design phase. I would have though that side protection is must, but there seems to be no option unless the all axis gun can be modified to not have to retract during landing.

Quoting Dragon6172 (Reply 8):
The problem is that landing phase though... thats where you as a helicopter are most vulnerable. Typically you are nose high slowing down, that ramp gun is no good pointing at the ground. Once you have landed, you have to get the weapon out of the way to off/onload your passengers/cargo effectively, otherwise you are spending longer in the LZ than needed, and thats not good.

Also a good point which an armchair dude like myself would not have thought about. I think you are correct that it a V22 goes down due to a lack of protective fire, expect action to replace the 30 cal tail gun with something more useful. Trouble is that the additional ammo will have a negative effect on the mission profiles.

Quoting UH60FtRucker (Reply 10):
I don't know if I would want to be in a fire fight and not have that side protection offered by the door guns.

I agree with you on that.

Quoting Curt22 (Reply 12):
and the V-22 had to pass the same (if not more stringent) criteria as the acft you called out above.

It don't matter what the Mil Spec is. Mil Spec certification always yields wavers and modifications and if one is not careful the final product can be worthless. Just like the Stryker which everyone knew could not withstand RPG rounds, yet is was built and certified, and now wears an exterior "fence" for protection, or like the Hummers which everyone knew had issues with APR and mines, yet they were built, certified and shipped, only now to be replaced with the mine resistant vehicles.

iwok
 
CTR
Topic Author
Posts: 299
Joined: Tue Jul 05, 2005 4:57 am

RE: Squadron Photos Of V-22s Deployed To Iraq

Tue Nov 27, 2007 11:48 am



Quoting Dragon6172 (Reply 8):
The problem is that landing phase though... thats where you as a helicopter are most vulnerable. Typically you are nose high slowing down, that ramp gun is no good pointing at the ground.

But the V-22 is not a helicopter. The V-22 is a Tiltrotor and has the capability to tilt the nacelles back to slow down and maintain the fuselage at a much more level pitch angle than a conventional helicopter.

At air shows the V-22 and it's little brother the BA609 demonstrate this capability. As part of the finale they often hover steady while bowing the the fuselage up and down.

Have fun,

CTR
Aircraft design is just one big compromise,,,
 
CTR
Topic Author
Posts: 299
Joined: Tue Jul 05, 2005 4:57 am

RE: Squadron Photos Of V-22s Deployed To Iraq

Tue Feb 05, 2008 11:58 pm

V-22 reaches 2,000 flight hours including some in combat...

Have fun,

CTR

"Pretty Pleased" With Osprey in Iraq: The Marine Corps sent the MV-22 Osprey to Iraq last fall, as promised, for the aircraft's first combat deployment, but news of the tilt-rotor's performance has been muted for a reason, Marine Corps Commandant Gen. James Conway told the Defense Writers Group Feb. 1. "We have not wanted to over promise and under deliver with regards to this first Osprey deployment," Conway said, adding that the Corps has tried to minimize the amount of news being generated about the aircraft until the deployment winds down. There will be a full after-action report from the initial deployment, Conway said. "I will tell you in the interim that we are pretty pleased with what we're seeing," he added. At just over the halfway point, the Osprey force, intended to replace the heavy-lift CH-46s and medium-lift CH-53Ds, has racked up more than 2,000 hours in combat, evacuation, mobility, and other missions—and has been shot at, Conway said. Readiness rates have gone up to around 75 percent in theater after some early supply chain issues with slip rings kept several aircraft grounded in the early going.

http://206.204.189.217/AFA/Reports/2008/Month02/Day04/
Aircraft design is just one big compromise,,,

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 7 guests