27 replies to this topic

[Jwheel86]

http://defense.aol.c...ite-house-pres/

Quote

In 2013, he added, HMX-1, the squadron that flies the president's Marine One helicopter, will begin receiving 12 (V-22) Ospreys that will be used to haul cargo and passengers -- including Secret Service agents, White House staff and the news media -- during presidential trips.

[jigs1]

Seriously the Osprey?

Uhg

[CayceG]

So this makes SIX crashes in its lifetime.

Deary me, it certainly is a deathtrap. ESPECIALLY since it's host to some of the deadliest helicopter crashes in... oh what's that? Deadliest helicopter crashes are all CH-53s, CH-47s and Russian choppers?



Well then.


Seriously, I don't get the stigma behind the V-22 besides the fact that it's an unconventional design and because of it, had a rough testing period.

[Jwheel86]

I agree there is definitely a stigma, but for cause.

Tom Ricks on the V-22:

Quote

I know the V-22 has posted a pretty good record, but I keep on thinking of what a Pentagon official once said to me: No one has ever built a helicopter with jet-engine-like hydraulic pressures (5,000 ppsi) inside its nacelles -- and then landed that aircraft in dusty spots where jet engines fear to go. He said that one little bit of dust inside the nacelle could weaken the hydraulic tubing, which if it sprang a leak would shoot fluid so powerfully that it could cut off a man's arm.
When I was a military reporter, this was the only aircraft I promised my wife I'd never fly in.

[dreammitchconner]

I dunno. They lost 1/3 of the test aircraft to accidents, then got a bunch of marines killed in simulations prior to introducing it to active service.  This isn't the 1960s, and losing testing aircraft like that is a much bigger deal.  

The aircraft has a distinct stigma of being something that should have been given up on for practical reasons, and only survived because they had spent so much money already.

[CayceG]

Losing test aircraft is common. Also, 1/3 of the test fleet was a whopping two aircraft. The stigma is caused by media scrutiny over an unconventional design no one had tried before. You didn't hear about people calling for the Mi-26 production line to be shut down after one was shot down in Chechnya, killing 127 people on board.

I'm not saying it's the best transport aircraft by any means, but it's not the deathtrap people make it out to be.



When a V-22 loaded with the White House Press Corps goes down in flames, then I'll change my tune.

[markot]

Can it do anything normal helis cant do?

[dreammitchconner]

CayceG, on 20 April 2012 - 01:04 PM, said:

Losing test aircraft is common. Also, 1/3 of the test fleet was a whopping two aircraft. The stigma is caused by media scrutiny over an unconventional design no one had tried before. You didn't hear about people calling for the Mi-26 production line to be shut down after one was shot down in Chechnya, killing 127 people on board.

I'm not saying it's the best transport aircraft by any means, but it's not the deathtrap people make it out to be.



When a V-22 loaded with the White House Press Corps goes down in flames, then I'll change my tune.

I don't believe the aircraft is presently unsafe.  But it earned its stigma.

[Anathema-]

CayceG, on 20 April 2012 - 01:04 PM, said:

When a V-22 loaded with the White House Press Corps goes down in flames, then I'll change my tune.

I imagine that tune will be something like a happy irish jig.

[jigs1]

Well I am Irish

[LazyPiranha]

markot, on 20 April 2012 - 01:11 PM, said:

Can it do anything normal helis cant do?

It looks like the top speed on the thing is almost 100 m.p.h. faster than that of the fastest traditional helicopter, so there's that.  I would have to guess that having the rotors on either side means in flight refueling is a lot easier than on other ones.

[Brother_Tempus]

Jwheel86, on 20 April 2012 - 12:07 PM, said:

Obama trying to get White House Press Corps killed

God i can only wish ..

[Air_Delivery]

markot, on 20 April 2012 - 01:11 PM, said:

Can it do anything normal helis cant do?

Higher speed, greater payload, greater range, higher max altitude.

[Dodger]

This thread is so boring

[CayceG]

Dodger, on 20 April 2012 - 10:52 PM, said:

This thread is so boring

Be a man. Be impressed by weapons.

[markot]

Helis are still pretty stupid.  They can be taken down by small arms fire. Pew Pew like the red baron but its 20122222222222!

[freneticburn]

markot, on 20 April 2012 - 11:31 PM, said:

Helis are still pretty stupid.  They can be taken down by small arms fire. Pew Pew like the red baron but its 20122222222222!

Helicopters are fucking awesome.  They're one of the most useful vehicles our military has.

[markot]

For transport, not combat.

[freneticburn]

?  Are you serious?  I understand helicopters are quite vulnerable but the ones equipped for battle are badass at combat.  They're so versatile and agile and terrain doesn't mean shit.  Aside from running underground or in a cave there is nowhere to run or hide.  Any enemy staring up at an Apache Longbow will have to be shitting themselves if they aren't already dead.

[markot]

freneticburn, on 21 April 2012 - 04:17 AM, said:

?  Are you serious?  I understand helicopters are quite vulnerable but the ones equipped for battle are badass at combat.  They're so versatile and agile and terrain doesn't mean shit.  Aside from running underground or in a cave there is nowhere to run or hide.  Any enemy staring up at an Apache Longbow will have to be shitting themselves if they aren't already dead.

Right.  Except that they dont deploy them unless they are 99% sure there will be little resistence on the ground.

They couldnt deploy them in Kosovo early on because they were shit scared they would get shot down so easy.

[Edgekun]

ITT: markot doesnt quite understand the significance of transportation.

[markot]

markot, on 21 April 2012 - 01:15 AM, said:

For transport, not combat.

[freneticburn]

markot, on 21 April 2012 - 04:26 AM, said:

Right.  Except that they dont deploy them unless they are 99% sure there will be little resistence on the ground.

They couldnt deploy them in Kosovo early on because they were shit scared they would get shot down so easy.

Aside from maybe a tank what exactly cannot be destroyed with primitive devices?  The helicopter's pros FAR outweigh its cons.

If our military commanders were scared of using helicopters in war then they were incompetent and probably explains why we can't seem to win a fucking war anymore.

[PaladinSolo]

Attack helicopters are for close air support, sniping tanks/artillery, and defensive structures, not charging headlong into combat.  This is a role they fill extremely well, with their ability to shoot and move as quickly as they do.

[Jwheel86]

In other helicopter news...

No one hurt, pilots survived.

[kaberle]

So happy I was tanker and never had to ride in one of those things.

[freneticburn]

with that mentality you must never enter a car either because it's not like people drive like jackasses and crash all the time or anything

[kaberle]

Assuming that was at me. Apples to Oranges, least when I am driving there is the illusion of control and I feel better due to that illusion. The Osprey, I'm relying on some former frat boy to pilot that death trap effectively. I missed the good days of c-130s to Iraq too. Just as happy about that.