"V-22 squadron achieves successin Iraq, USMC says"

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

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.

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.

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


I've seen things you people wouldn't believe.
Barbeques on fire by the chalets past the castle headland
I watched the gift shops glitter in the darkness off the Newborough gate
All these moments will be lost in time, like icecream on the beach
Time for tea.

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.

On Tue, 5 Feb 2008 06:58:07 -0800 (PST), Jack Linthicum
wrote:

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.

As opposed to 'Net presences making up war stories?

On Feb 5, 10:14 am, Bill Kambic wrote:
On Tue, 5 Feb 2008 06:58:07 -0800 (PST), Jack Linthicum

wrote:
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.

As opposed to 'Net presences making up war stories?

Yes Navair is filled with fans of the mercenaries, etc.

http://www.navair.navy.mil/V22/index....detail&id=170

Jack Linthicum wrote:
On Feb 5, 9:25 am, " wrote:



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.


You know being a playa hater is not cool? The Anti Osprey crowd seems to
wish for any snipet of bad news. How about giving the Thunder Chickens
some credit? They have taken it to war and are getting the job done. Any
lack of firing on them again is a sign of good things. Like perhaps the
surge is really calming things over there. Exploding retarded ladies
excepted of course....

On Feb 5, 10:24 am, Tiger wrote:
Jack Linthicum wrote:
On Feb 5, 9:25 am, " wrote:

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.

You know being a playa hater is not cool? The Anti Osprey crowd seems to
wish for any snipet of bad news. How about giving the Thunder Chickens
some credit? They have taken it to war and are getting the job done. Any
lack of firing on them again is a sign of good things. Like perhaps the
surge is really calming things over there. Exploding retarded ladies
excepted of course....

Are you ready for March when Moqtada al Sadr ends his truce?

On Tue, 05 Feb 2008 10:24:07 -0500, Tiger
wrote:


You know being a playa hater is not cool? The Anti Osprey crowd seems to
wish for any snipet of bad news. How about giving the Thunder Chickens
some credit? They have taken it to war and are getting the job done. Any
lack of firing on them again is a sign of good things. Like perhaps the
surge is really calming things over there. Exploding retarded ladies
excepted of course....

Not bloody likely.

Folks like him wish for, long for dead bodies and smoking holes to
validate their own prejudices,

The bird is now in the crucible. Now we'll find out what us taxpayers
have wrought.

Of course success will NOT quell the criticism. Reality seldom
intrudes into the zealot's consciousness.

Bravo Zulu to the Marines at the tip of the spear. They've got more
balls than any 'Net presence I've ever run accross.