Loose Bolts Ground V-22 Ospreys; Four Aircraft in Iraq Will NeedFixes

First flight is one thing: actual operational use is another matter
altogether. Sometimes things are discovered with some Fleet use. Problems
are noticed, diagnosed, and fixed, often in the field. By your reasoning,
the B-29 shouldn't have been fielded as it had so many problems. But those
issues were fixed, and the plane served well.
"Vincent Brannigan" wrote in message
...
vaughn wrote:
"Jack Linthicum" wrote in message

...

Compromising control of the rotor sounds like a fatal crash to me. I
have seen military blogs that say that all of the production must be
finished and accepted before the first major accident can occur.
Wishing or making sure?

This is the type of stuff that happens with any new aircraft. We
"learn
by doing". With something as complex and as "different" as the Osprey,
we
will probably see a significant list of these issues. And yes, some of
them
will probably cause accidents before the learning is all over.

Vaughn




"new" ? any idea how long this sucker has been teething?

First flight was 19 March 1989

20 years ago !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


Keep making excuses for the turkey

Vince

"Matt Wiser" wrote in message
...
First flight is one thing: actual operational use is another matter
altogether. Sometimes things are discovered with some Fleet use. Problems
are noticed, diagnosed, and fixed, often in the field. By your reasoning,
the B-29 shouldn't have been fielded as it had so many problems. But those
issues were fixed, and the plane served well.

it didn't take 20+ years to perfect the B-29.
the V-22 has had it's chance.how many more decades will you give it?

As long as it takes. The USMC has a habit of getting its way on procurement,
so either get on board or get out of the way. Not to mention that it's been
a number of years since the last crash (the one that had 19 Marines killed),
and the aircraft has been tested, evaled, and tested again. If you've got an
alternative aircraft to replace the H-46, let's hear it. If not, follow the
above advice.
"Raymond O'Hara" wrote in message
...

"Matt Wiser" wrote in message
...
First flight is one thing: actual operational use is another matter
altogether. Sometimes things are discovered with some Fleet use.
Problems
are noticed, diagnosed, and fixed, often in the field. By your
reasoning,
the B-29 shouldn't have been fielded as it had so many problems. But
those
issues were fixed, and the plane served well.

it didn't take 20+ years to perfect the B-29.
the V-22 has had it's chance.how many more decades will you give it?

"Matt Wiser" wrote in message
...
As long as it takes. The USMC has a habit of getting its way on
procurement,
so either get on board or get out of the way. Not to mention that it's
been
a number of years since the last crash (the one that had 19 Marines
killed),
and the aircraft has been tested, evaled, and tested again. If you've got
an
alternative aircraft to replace the H-46, let's hear it. If not, follow
the
above advice.



there comes a point when it's obvious the thing doesn't work as advertised.
the V-22 passed that 5 years ago.
the B-29 had no more than normal teething troubles and was soon enough
sorted out.

Then explain its record in Iraq and Afghanistan so far. No combat losses or
crashes in-country. Like I said, if you have an alternative platform to
replace the H-46s, let's hear it. Otherwise, either get on board or get out
of the way.
"Raymond O'Hara" wrote in message
...

"Matt Wiser" wrote in message
...
As long as it takes. The USMC has a habit of getting its way on
procurement,
so either get on board or get out of the way. Not to mention that it's
been
a number of years since the last crash (the one that had 19 Marines
killed),
and the aircraft has been tested, evaled, and tested again. If you've
got
an
alternative aircraft to replace the H-46, let's hear it. If not, follow
the
above advice.



there comes a point when it's obvious the thing doesn't work as
advertised.
the V-22 passed that 5 years ago.
the B-29 had no more than normal teething troubles and was soon enough
sorted out.

Matt Wiser wrote:
Then explain its record in Iraq and Afghanistan so far. No combat losses or
crashes in-country. Like I said, if you have an alternative platform to
replace the H-46s, let's hear it. Otherwise, either get on board or get out
of the way.

doing what kind of operations at what kind of tempo..

last we heard (SMN) it was doing the mail runs.. and running through
their engines at a high rate of knots...

As for alternatives.. any number of proper helicopters... Things that
can carry the same cargo with a third of the power requirements.. And
can fly quite easily with a slung load... (If the V-22 fly with a slung
load you'd be better off using helicopters... they're only any good if
you can fly with internal cargo only.. and even then it gets a bit
cramped....

On Thu, 26 Mar 2009 02:21:41 -0400, "Raymond O'Hara"
wrote:


"Matt Wiser" wrote in message
...
As long as it takes. The USMC has a habit of getting its way on
procurement,
so either get on board or get out of the way. Not to mention that it's
been
a number of years since the last crash (the one that had 19 Marines
killed),
and the aircraft has been tested, evaled, and tested again. If you've got
an
alternative aircraft to replace the H-46, let's hear it. If not, follow
the
above advice.



there comes a point when it's obvious the thing doesn't work as advertised.
the V-22 passed that 5 years ago.
the B-29 had no more than normal teething troubles and was soon enough
sorted out.

The development of the B-29 was long, expensive and difficult for
the time. There was a direct and urgent need that made it worth
the trouble. Under similar pressure the V-22 might have worked
two decades ago.


Peter Skelton

Matt Wiser wrote:
As long as it takes. The USMC has a habit of getting its way on procurement,
so either get on board or get out of the way. Not to mention that it's been
a number of years since the last crash (the one that had 19 Marines killed),
and the aircraft has been tested, evaled, and tested again. If you've got an
alternative aircraft to replace the H-46, let's hear it. If not, follow the
above advice.
[ SNIP ]

New CH-46's? I'm not being entirely facetious here...other folks
suggested this back in the '90's, although the idea would have been to
manufacture an improved CH-46.

One of our (any country, not just the US) biggest defense procurement
problems is whenever a weapons system or vehicle or
radio...whatever...starts getting old, we almost always feel the need to
design and build a *new* thing. I'll buy that concept for electronics,
but it's not obvious to me that if a truck fleet or a buy of helicopters
or rifles gets worn out, that we need to spend 10 or 20 years designing
entirely new ones.

AHS

On Mar 26, 2:58*pm, Arved Sandstrom wrote:
Matt Wiser wrote:
As long as it takes. The USMC has a habit of getting its way on procurement,
so either get on board or get out of the way. Not to mention that it's been
a number of years since the last crash (the one that had 19 Marines killed),
and the aircraft has been tested, evaled, and tested again. If you've got an
alternative aircraft to replace the H-46, let's hear it. If not, follow the
above advice.

[ SNIP ]

New CH-46's? I'm not being entirely facetious here...other folks
suggested this back in the '90's, although the idea would have been to
manufacture an improved CH-46.

One of our (any country, not just the US) biggest defense procurement
problems is whenever a weapons system or vehicle or
radio...whatever...starts getting old, we almost always feel the need to
design and build a *new* thing. I'll buy that concept for electronics,
but it's not obvious to me that if a truck fleet or a buy of helicopters
or rifles gets worn out, that we need to spend 10 or 20 years designing
entirely new ones.

AHS

I don't recall any of the aviation magazines reporting that (AvWeek,
AFM, WAPJ, etc.). The last H-46s were built new in 1971. CILOP
produced the CH-46 Echo version in the 1970s. The production line
would be too dormant to restart in any event. The only other serious
consideration was the Sikorsky H-92, and it hadn't even flown yet when
the V-22 was revived. The New York Twits is the only major newspaper
recently to call for the program's termination, but then again,
they've been so anti-military since the Reagan years....

On Mar 26, 8:25*pm, Matt Wiser wrote:
On Mar 26, 2:58*pm, Arved Sandstrom wrote:



Matt Wiser wrote:
As long as it takes. The USMC has a habit of getting its way on procurement,
so either get on board or get out of the way. Not to mention that it's been
a number of years since the last crash (the one that had 19 Marines killed),
and the aircraft has been tested, evaled, and tested again. If you've got an
alternative aircraft to replace the H-46, let's hear it. If not, follow the
above advice.

[ SNIP ]

New CH-46's? I'm not being entirely facetious here...other folks
suggested this back in the '90's, although the idea would have been to
manufacture an improved CH-46.

One of our (any country, not just the US) biggest defense procurement
problems is whenever a weapons system or vehicle or
radio...whatever...starts getting old, we almost always feel the need to
design and build a *new* thing. I'll buy that concept for electronics,
but it's not obvious to me that if a truck fleet or a buy of helicopters
or rifles gets worn out, that we need to spend 10 or 20 years designing
entirely new ones.

AHS

I don't recall any of the aviation magazines reporting that (AvWeek,
AFM, WAPJ, etc.). The last H-46s were built new in 1971. CILOP
produced the CH-46 Echo version in the 1970s. The production line
would be too dormant to restart in any event. The only other serious
consideration was the Sikorsky H-92, and it hadn't even flown yet when
the V-22 was revived. The New York Twits is the only major newspaper
recently to call for the program's termination, but then again,
they've been so anti-military since the Reagan years....

You realize stopping a "bad" but politically "hot" program can be pro-
military, don't you? I would think that Sikorsky could be working up a
"new" H-46 right now and build it in the abandoned plant they had to
close.