V-22 Prop Configuration, 3-vs-4 blades

Rather than follow the advice of Henry Jones Sr., Dan couldn't just let
news:qbTWf.2383$IG.2210@dukeread01 on 30 Mar 2006 go.

Rob Arndt wrote:
Best configuration for the V-22, you ask? In combat, a heap of
burning wreckage or in peace time... a cancelled project piece of
scrap metal. Transitional a/c are inherently dangerous no matter
what, and if the primitive Iraqis can down an Apache how much more
vunerable is the tilt-rotor Osprey... or rather "Easy Prey"?

Imagine an Osprey loaded with troops as it transitions to take off or
land in Iraq. One RPG or heavy MG fire to the rotor system and the US
will be scraping the remains of its troops out of the dirt and sand
with shovels.

Why doesn't someone cancel this flying cemetery already? Like the
F/A-22 seems the number "22" in US inventory= disaster. The Craptor
and Easy Prey need the axe. Cancelling the Craptor will save money
while cancelling Easy Prey will save lives.

Rob

This is from the fool who thinks Japan needs ICBMs, nuclear powered
aircraft carriers and nuclear powered submarines to protect itself
from China and North Korea. Then again he also believes a 34 pound
weapon is an excellent E&E choice for downed air crews, the Earth is
hollow, there's a secret still operational Nazi underground U-boat
base in Antarctica.....etc.

Delurking.....and this has to be one I do it with....sheesh.

I usually just read because the activity in this group seems more
oriented to air crew than ground crew.

My history - 9 years USMC - former Sergeant of Marines - OV-10D/D+ FLIR
tech - also A-6E IR portion of the TRAM and a squidge of F/A-18 IRDS.

While there are some rather foolish criticisms regarding aircraft
selection and policy, there are some sound ones as well.

When the V-22 program first started going through initial trials, there
were some legitimate, negative reactions to its catastrophic lack of air
worthiness. Additionally, I read several pieces about how the Marine
Corps didn't really want/need the V-22 early on. The general line of
reasoning was that the Corps could break out the old patterns and build 5
to 10 CH-46 helicopters for the price of one V-22. The V-22 also
compared poorly when it came to maintenance hours per flight hour.

Yet the V-22 program was impossible to kill because the manufacturer(s)
had carefully placed enough work in as many congressional districts as
possible. Thus it was impossible to vote against the V-22 without voting
against jobs for the folks at home.

Of course we are now much further down the road and the money already
spent makes it harder to kill a program that fails to perform as
advertised. I'm sure the Corps has bought into the program if for no
other reason than swallowing is an easier process than regurgitation.

IMO, the Osprey was deployed well before prudence should dictate. The
program doesn't have a few bugs to figure out (something every program
has). It has one large bug in the primary mechanism that is supposed to
give the Osprey unique capabilities.

--
Regards,
Dann
Blogging at: http://www.modempool.com/nucleardann/blogspace/blog.htm

A big enough hammer can usually fix anything.