![]() |
If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Kerryn Offord wrote:
BlackBeard wrote: On Oct 1, 6:11 pm, Kerryn Offord wrote: *** Maybe no more vulnerable to being shot at.. but the effect of being hit? Although there are no perfect survivability systems out there, the systems on the Osprey are 1) more numerous and 2) more advanced, than the survivability systems on the CH-46 SNIP At least the CH-46 gets to auto-rotate if hit... And the Osprey switches to powering both props off one engine and, in plane mode, keeps on flying. Losing an engine while heavily loaded and in hover would present power problems, but the pilot would still have a chance to make a powered landing. OTOH, if either bird loses a *prop* in hover, they're both equally screwed. The Osprey would probably be able to survive losing one prop in "plane" mode, whereas the CH-46 would still be screwed, but most helicopter combat losses take place in/near LZs. so the overall effect of the Osprey's superior survivability in this flight regime probably doesn't shift the overall survivability numbers much. But every bit helps. And comparing the "brand new" V-22 with the CH-46 which is how old? (And last up-graded?) says a lot for just how good the V-22 must be... The Osprey is intended to replace the 46s, so the comparison is not inappropriate. Also, in hover mode the Osprey is more similar to a CH-46 than most other helicopters due to the dual-rotor configuration, so some comparisons are better made against the more similar airframe. How does it compare with a modern military helicopter? Heck, how does it compare in survivability with even a Blackhawk? The Osprey probably has better survivability against engine hits, since its engines are so far apart and the props are cross-connected at all times, IIRC. A serious engine hit or prop hit while in low hover will probably be equally bad for both airframes (although the prop cross-connect might make a survivable landing more possible for the Osprey), but in plane mode the Osprey probably has better odds -- the BH might be able to autorotate (though I've heard from some pilots that the BH autorotates about the way a B-52 glides), but the Osprey has a decent chance of staying airborne. The Osprey lacks a vulnerable tail rotor, though as I mentioned above it shares the CH-46's vulnerability to single-rotor/engine loss while in hover. Just from a perspective of geometry and aerodynamics, the Osprey shouldn't be any more vulnerable while hovering in an LZ than the CH-46, and probably somewhat less than the Blackhawk. Once in full "plane" mode, the Osprey probably has somewhat superior survivability due to higher speed, and the ability to fly on one engine. During transition... hard to say. There might be a window of increased vulnerability, but if so it won't be very long. |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
![]() BlackBeard wrote: On Oct 1, 6:11 pm, Kerryn Offord wrote: *** Maybe no more vulnerable to being shot at.. but the effect of being hit? Although there are no perfect survivability systems out there, the systems on the Osprey are 1) more numerous and 2) more advanced, than the survivability systems on the CH-46 SNIP If it has a cobra escort.. Well.. It loses it's altitude/ speed advantage over alternative modern helicopters.. Rendevous scenario. The Cobras launch from a forward base and meet at the LZ with the Osprey which has travelled from a base further away. BB Is the Cobra really the only possible escort? I'm thinking that the AV-8 could do a pretty decent job during the high speed transit phase. Roger |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Oct 2, 2:48?am, Roger Conroy wrote:
BlackBeard wrote: On Oct 1, 6:11 pm, Kerryn Offord wrote: *** Maybe no more vulnerable to being shot at.. but the effect of being hit? Although there are no perfect survivability systems out there, the systems on the Osprey are 1) more numerous and 2) more advanced, than the survivability systems on the CH-46 SNIP If it has a cobra escort.. Well.. It loses it's altitude/ speed advantage over alternative modern helicopters.. Rendevous scenario. The Cobras launch from a forward base and meet at the LZ with the Osprey which has travelled from a base further away. BB Is the Cobra really the only possible escort? I'm thinking that the AV-8 could do a pretty decent job during the high speed transit phase. Roger- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - AV-8's go too fast to really see what is on the ground. An AV-8 can't supress a treeline the way a Cobra can. I recall reading in the Marine Corps Gazette back in the early 1980's what you've seen me post: 1. Doesn't matter what the range and speed of the V-22 is. It is limited to the range and speed of the escorts 2. The V-22 needs guns of its own, and not one that fires backwards either. If the rotors are tilted forward then no door gunner can get a useful firing arc forward due to the arc of the rotors. 3. A chin turret was discussed (being the only reasonable option) but that was eliminated due to cost. I remember seeing this info in the MCG about 25 years ago. The freaking thing is a grotesque boondoggle. It will never be anything else. I posted a video of a V-22 crash and some of the info I am posting now on the website togetherweserved.com, which is for Marines only, and I was banned within 24 hours. Walt |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Walt wrote:
On Oct 2, 2:48?am, Roger Conroy wrote: BlackBeard wrote: On Oct 1, 6:11 pm, Kerryn Offord wrote: *** Maybe no more vulnerable to being shot at.. but the effect of being hit? Although there are no perfect survivability systems out there, the systems on the Osprey are 1) more numerous and 2) more advanced, than the survivability systems on the CH-46 SNIP If it has a cobra escort.. Well.. It loses it's altitude/ speed advantage over alternative modern helicopters.. Rendevous scenario. The Cobras launch from a forward base and meet at the LZ with the Osprey which has travelled from a base further away. BB Is the Cobra really the only possible escort? I'm thinking that the AV-8 could do a pretty decent job during the high speed transit phase. Roger- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - AV-8's go too fast to really see what is on the ground. An AV-8 can't supress a treeline the way a Cobra can. I recall reading in the Marine Corps Gazette back in the early 1980's what you've seen me post: 1. Doesn't matter what the range and speed of the V-22 is. It is limited to the range and speed of the escorts 2. The V-22 needs guns of its own, and not one that fires backwards either. If the rotors are tilted forward then no door gunner can get a useful firing arc forward due to the arc of the rotors. 3. A chin turret was discussed (being the only reasonable option) but that was eliminated due to cost. I remember seeing this info in the MCG about 25 years ago. The freaking thing is a grotesque boondoggle. It will never be anything else. I posted a video of a V-22 crash and some of the info I am posting now on the website togetherweserved.com, which is for Marines only, and I was banned within 24 hours. Walt The chin turret is not just a question of cost. It uses about 10-15% of the already small payload and also "unbalances" the aircraft Vince |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Oct 2, 5:20 am, Walt wrote:
On Oct 2, 2:48?am, Roger Conroy wrote: BlackBeard wrote: On Oct 1, 6:11 pm, Kerryn Offord wrote: *** Maybe no more vulnerable to being shot at.. but the effect of being hit? Although there are no perfect survivability systems out there, the systems on the Osprey are 1) more numerous and 2) more advanced, than the survivability systems on the CH-46 SNIP If it has a cobra escort.. Well.. It loses it's altitude/ speed advantage over alternative modern helicopters.. Rendevous scenario. The Cobras launch from a forward base and meet at the LZ with the Osprey which has travelled from a base further away. BB Is the Cobra really the only possible escort? I'm thinking that the AV-8 could do a pretty decent job during the high speed transit phase. Roger- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - AV-8's go too fast to really see what is on the ground. An AV-8 can't supress a treeline the way a Cobra can. I recall reading in the Marine Corps Gazette back in the early 1980's what you've seen me post: 1. Doesn't matter what the range and speed of the V-22 is. It is limited to the range and speed of the escorts I'm not really sure why you think the Cobras will slow the V-22s down...operationally, it would be idiocy for the troop carriers to arrive over the battlefield at the same time as the gunships, since you want the gunships (and Harriers, to boot) to have arrived overhead and begun destroying targets and softening the LZ well before the larger birds are in the threat zone. If you've got troop carriers, be they CH-46s, Blackhawks, or V-22s cruising in looking for a place to land WHILE the first wave of Cobras is coming in, then it doesn't matter what airframe you're in, the bad guys will target the low, slow, fat with Marines birds and hope they can kill those before the snakes spot them. But with the increased speed of the V-22s, they can make more trips between the boat or base and the LZ in the same amount of time, which means more boots getting on the ground while the enemy is still recovering from the gunships' attention. Let the Cobras and Harriers come and go as fuel and weapons are expended...there will be enough that one flight can always be hitting the target zone while others are en route to or from the launch point. |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
![]() "Walt" wrote in message ps.com... The freaking thing is a grotesque boondoggle. It will never be anything else. I posted a video of a V-22 crash and some of the info I am posting now on the website togetherweserved.com, which is for Marines only, and I was banned within 24 hours. The interesting thing is, my brother, who is a Marine Corporal and veteran of two tours, has seen Ospreys in Iraq and on a ship in the Gulf. -c |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
If it has a cobra escort.. Well.. It loses it's altitude/ speed
advantage over alternative modern helicopters.. Rendevous scenario. The Cobras launch from a forward base and meet at the LZ with the Osprey which has travelled from a base further away. BB Saying that the V-22 will rendesvous with the Cobras at the LZ violates the KISS principle. And it is just ridiculous on its face. It is saying that we can predict what the enemy will do and that is always nuts. No one can guarantee that there won't be a threat en route. It is just nuts to plan that way. And STILL it means that the V-22's operational radius is no greater than the Cobra escorts. The concept of the V-22 was flawed from the first day it was discussed for carrying grunts. It is the best (or worst) example of the Military-Industrial-Complex I know. Walt |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Walt writes:
If it has a cobra escort.. Well.. It loses it's altitude/ speed advantage over alternative modern helicopters.. Rendevous scenario. The Cobras launch from a forward base and meet at the LZ with the Osprey which has travelled from a base further away. BB Saying that the V-22 will rendesvous with the Cobras at the LZ violates the KISS principle. And it is just ridiculous on its face. It is saying that we can predict what the enemy will do and that is always nuts. No one can guarantee that there won't be a threat en route. It is just nuts to plan that way. And STILL it means that the V-22's operational radius is no greater than the Cobra escorts. The concept of the V-22 was flawed from the first day it was discussed for carrying grunts. It is the best (or worst) example of the Military-Industrial-Complex I know. Hmm, in practice the way to analyse a system (whether a military, or financial trading system) where the future is never known but is bet on anyway because the alternative is to stand aside and do nothing, is to see how it performs under worst-case conditions. That predicates that the "best" system is never the most optimized one, but one which is crude (a relative word, to be sure) but robust. The V-22 I cannot judge given the information available, but it appears to be more of a niche system, rather than one which will be used in every situation where transport is needed. At least, with the current state of technology. But as I said, I cannot judge... -- Gernot Hassenpflug |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
![]() "Kerryn Offord" wrote in message ... Mike wrote: USNI Proceedings Magazine Issue: October 2007 Vol. 133/10/1,256 The Osprey Goes to War By Richard Whittle SNIP "I don't think it's going to be any more vulnerable than the 46 or the 53," Glueck said. A CH-46 can "usually come into a zone a little bit quicker than the 53s. The V-22 is kind of in between the two." *** Maybe no more vulnerable to being shot at.. but the effect of being hit? The V-22 will have fighter or helicopter gunship escorts when going into zones where there's a known threat, Glueck said, and the Marines have mounted a 7.62-caliber M240G machine gun on the rear ramp. The Osprey also has chaff dispensers, infrared suppressors, and electronic defenses. SNIP If it has a cobra escort.. Well.. It loses it's altitude/ speed advantage over alternative modern helicopters.. Can the V-22 fly "like a plane" with the ramp down? At what penalty? I know the CH47 has a MG on the rear ramp, but that's a wider, bigger ramp.. How much of an obstruction is it for troops trying to get out in a hot LZ? I imagine (would guess) there is an airspeed limit with the ramp down (gun in place to be fired), probably in the range of 175 to 130 knots, above that the ramp would have to be up at least level to keep it from acting like a stabilator and pushing the nose down. Remember this is an aircraft with it's center of gravity at the wing. The CH-47 has 3 Machine guns mounted on it, one in the right door , one in the left forward window, and one on the ramp. 160th SOAR CH-47's use miniguns in the forward stations, and an M2 .50 Cal on the ramp floor. On the CH-47 the ramp gun can be quickly removed using a quick disconnect mount. The ramp gun on the MV-22 is side mounted on a 2 piece flex mount, and it can be quickly swung to the right side out of the way of troops exiting the aircraft, after pulling a quick release lock. Helomech |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Paul wrote:
"Kerryn Offord" wrote in message ... Mike wrote: USNI Proceedings Magazine Issue: October 2007 Vol. 133/10/1,256 The Osprey Goes to War By Richard Whittle SNIP "I don't think it's going to be any more vulnerable than the 46 or the 53," Glueck said. A CH-46 can "usually come into a zone a little bit quicker than the 53s. The V-22 is kind of in between the two." *** Maybe no more vulnerable to being shot at.. but the effect of being hit? The V-22 will have fighter or helicopter gunship escorts when going into zones where there's a known threat, Glueck said, and the Marines have mounted a 7.62-caliber M240G machine gun on the rear ramp. The Osprey also has chaff dispensers, infrared suppressors, and electronic defenses. SNIP If it has a cobra escort.. Well.. It loses it's altitude/ speed advantage over alternative modern helicopters.. Can the V-22 fly "like a plane" with the ramp down? At what penalty? I know the CH47 has a MG on the rear ramp, but that's a wider, bigger ramp.. How much of an obstruction is it for troops trying to get out in a hot LZ? I imagine (would guess) there is an airspeed limit with the ramp down (gun in place to be fired), probably in the range of 175 to 130 knots, above that the ramp would have to be up at least level to keep it from acting like a stabilator and pushing the nose down. Remember this is an aircraft with it's center of gravity at the wing. The CH-47 has 3 Machine guns mounted on it, one in the right door , one in the left forward window, and one on the ramp. 160th SOAR CH-47's use miniguns in the forward stations, and an M2 .50 Cal on the ramp floor. On the CH-47 the ramp gun can be quickly removed using a quick disconnect mount. The ramp gun on the MV-22 is side mounted on a 2 piece flex mount, and it can be quickly swung to the right side out of the way of troops exiting the aircraft, after pulling a quick release lock. Helomech Thank you. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Osprey 2 modifications | Terry Mortimore | Home Built | 5 | October 23rd 04 11:46 PM |
Osprey icing tests | Ed Majden | Military Aviation | 0 | February 1st 04 08:43 PM |
Amphib: Coot vs Osprey II | Greg Milligan | Home Built | 9 | December 29th 03 01:48 AM |
Osprey tested in air, at sea | Otis Willie | Military Aviation | 0 | December 10th 03 12:30 AM |
Osprey vs. Harrier | Stephen D. Poe | Military Aviation | 58 | August 18th 03 03:17 PM |