Sucks, having to live in the real world.

We are in agreement. The Osprey does need more eval time, but I guess the leadership has signed off on ‘acceptable risk’. As we used to say during the first a/c build, ‘There comes a point when its time to shoot the engineers.’

Would I fly on an Osprey? Certainly. Would I blame someone if it sort of fluttered out of the sky? Maybe only Newton for inventing gravity.

8-;

First off. I truly hope you are right and I am wrong.

I only operate in the realm of the risk hazard matrix when I approach the Osprey. No gut feels. No anecdotes, just strict hazard severity vs. frequency based on number of flight hours. While it’s not my bidness to conduct analysis on that platform I know where it would plot out.

Put in the values and do your own: MIL-STD-882D System Safety methodology

Acceptable risk? Somone up high has signed off…that’s called leadership.

B2

There is two, tremendous differences between the V-22 and other military transport air frames.

1. She’s new, unproven in combat and replaces a venerable (read old, aging) workhorse.

2. The engineering test and flight test programs killed many people, including many who were not test pilots.

Please look to the examples of the MH-53D/E and the CH-47. Even those birds fall from the sky with some regularity and they’ve been in service for how long?

Don’t get me wrong, no one regrets the loss of life more than I. But the Osprey is unique in the world of military aircraft and I hate to see her get a bum rap.

Oh, and to Craig – when the Tomahawk’s fire control computer was first installed, we had to put it in upside down. We expected the bird to fly the same way.

That ain’t good enough if my kid was a Marine infantryman and riding in the friggin thing…Professional aviators taking risks flying (AV-8Bs) are one thing..being delivered to assault something is another.

IMO, the Marines will use this craft to perform the missions they did before in the -46. That ain’t good. Round peg in a square hole and all. V-22 is no way, a one-for-one replacement for the H-46. SOF, on the other hand will look at the aircrafts attributes and adapt a mission around the aircraft.

re- “..it seems that the Osprey might be capable of one other thing that Helos are traditionally very poor at: gliding.”

Check that aspect ratio, better ain’t much better…There’s no wing beyond that huge prop arc. In fact you could say the engine nacelle is the wing.

re- “even today, I don?

That ain’t good enough if my kid was a Marine infantryman and riding in the friggin thing…Professional aviators taking risks flying (AV-8Bs) are one thing..being delivered to assault something is another.

IMO, the Marines will use this craft to perform the missions they did before in the -46. That ain’t good. Round peg in a square hole and all. V-22 is no way, a one-for-one replacement for the H-46. SOF, on the other hand will look at the aircrafts attributes and adapt a mission around the aircraft.

re- “..it seems that the Osprey might be capable of one other thing that Helos are traditionally very poor at: gliding.”

Check that aspect ratio, better ain’t much better…There’s no wing beyond that huge prop arc. In fact you could say the engine nacelle is the wing.

re- “even today, I don’t think the envelope is completely understood.”

Proves my point.

b2