February 5th 08, 03:22 PM
posted to rec.aviation.military, rec.aviation.military.naval,sci.military.naval, us.military.army
|
|
|
"V-22 squadron achieves successin Iraq, USMC says"
On Feb 5, 10:17*am, "William Black"
wrote:
wrote in message
...
On Feb 5, 9:58 am, Jack Linthicum wrote:
On Feb 5, 9:25 am, " wrote:
On Feb 5, 9:12 am, Jack Linthicum wrote:
On Feb 5, 9:10 am, Typhoon502 wrote:
On Feb 5, 9:02 am, " wrote:
On Feb 5, 6:07 am, "Mr.Smartypants" wrote:
No one has really shot at them yet.
They'll be sitting ducks when in transition mode.
Moreso than a hovering helicopter?
That's helicopter mode. Mr. Smartypants thinks that somehow the
transition state, when the nacelles are neither horizontal nor
vertical, is something scary. The fact is, during transition, the
aircraft retains enough forward velocity to make the wings generate
useful lift, and if the pilot needs to lay on speed, those nacelles
can drop and those big blades can get that bird moving in a hurry.
Also, V-22 structures have been shot plenty of times in the test
phase. Its ability to take hits is not some nebulous unknown
quantity.
Cite-
http://www.navair.navy.mil/V22/index....detail&id=170
This paragraph
"But what if the aircraft is hit by enemy fire? How vulnerable is it?
The MV-22 has undergone an extensive live fire test and evaluation
(LFT&E) program consisting of no less than 60 test events and totaling
more than 592 ballistic test firings (more than any aircraft in
Department of Defense history). All flight control actuators were
proven to be resistant to light antiaircraft artillery armor piercing
incendiary (API) at 90 percent muzzle velocity. During tests of the
wing structure, multiple 23mm (API and high-explosive incendiary
(HEI)) shots failed to compromise the load carrying integrity of the
wing. Portions of the structure were actually determined to be
invulnerable to all API and HEI projectiles up to and including 23mm.
Overall the LFT&E effort determined that the probability of an
aircraft kill (given a hit) was significantly less than that of
existing helicopters."
reads just like the discounted first few. I would like to see a nice
unclassified test and evaluation report, even a document number, that
tells me this has elements of the truth in it and is not some
Henderson Hall flack making up war stories.
* *I don't know....helicopters are not known for their survivability,
so the standard isn't necessarilly all that high. The Osprey can go
faster, higher, and longer with a greater payload. If it's just as
serviceable and survivable as a helicopter, it's a step forward.
-------------------------
I thought the major issue was their nasty tendency to fall out of the sky if
they fly too close together.
--
William Black
That seems to be a failure of darn near all aircraft.
|