Not long ago I heard this weird noise from something flying over the house, ran outside & it was a pair of those changing from horizontal to vertical right over my yard. What a ridiculously loud aircraft.
Nice. Sweetheart deal for the vendor of the dangerously unreliable Osprey plus killing and maiming more of America's most trained, motivated and patriotic soldiers. Well done, M. I. C.!
This program is an endless contractor cash cow going back to the XV-15 project by Bell in 1971. The bugs are still there after 52 years!!! It was to be do all/move all/shoot all but the advocates of conventional helicopters have exceedingly powerful political and financial allies. It's a noisy Rolex when we need a semi quiet Timex. Did we need the UH-60 or the AH-64? Look at what the Marines did with the AH-1 and UH-1 series. Yuuuge cost savings, easier maintainability and a higher operational readiness rate. But NOOOO....the Army equates Hueys and Cobras with Vietnam and we can't have that. Rant concluded.
yeah, I was a fort fumble when the eval was being done on the blackhawk vs the Utas or something, I forget what it name was. funny thing. the troops who had to get in and out of it ( and we did that shit a LOT) found the other one was easier to do. and they BOTH had the fast rope thingie too. we figured that the kickback was better on the black hawk to the assholes who sign off on that kind of shit. anyway. what really told me the gov't was fucked up was in 1978 when we tested the Carl Gustaf 84mm rocket launcher. it was hands down way better than anything we had at that time. the 90mm stove pipe. lighter, easier to operate and more and way better rounds for it too. they even had a 2 round carrier that could clip on to your ruck ! 3 army generals and 2 Marine ones showed up to watch the demo. the army assholes could not have cared less. I don't think they even watched it. the Marine guys? they asked questions and took NOTES (?) and even got down in the dirt and fired it a few times with us. I think it was maybe 2 years and the army got the dragon and from what I have heard a total POS. so image how I felt when I saw US troops using the carl G in the sandbox and saying how great it was ? so, YES. THE FUCKING ARMY IS BOUGHT OFF AND DAMN STUPID. wasting money on useless shit that gets people killed. I am tired of it all anymore. dave in pa.
When they do something so obviously stupid, it's about the money. And they will win on two fronts. They weaken us,by killing men, they get rid of a superior weapon, forces will either be grounded or forced to go on a mission in unsafe equipment, and I'm betting that those noisy,shoot this way! Things will get knocked down. Nobody who has any sense would propose this and unless the majority are bought, it would get stopped. It won't get stopped.
Working in flight safety at a major jet engine manufacture, it was obvious that the fault modes of a one of two engine outs were rather dicy due the requirement to nearly instantaneously tranfer power to each of two props. Plus all the bearings on the dozens of drive shafts each with a life. Profoundly pathetic. A Marine told me that he would cell his wife to say goodby each time he had to do a mission on one.
As I recall, they tilted the wing and not just the engines. Hard clutch engagement is a serious problem that has not been solved yet, and, in my judgement, is not likely to be.
Armed services helicopters kill 160 soldiers a year, not a word.19 in 20 years died with Osprey's. I don’t know the fleet size difference but the Osprey has a purpose and crashing is part of Military life.
"The V-22 Osprey has had 16 hull-loss accidents with a total of 53 fatalities as of 29 November 2023. During testing from 1991 to 2000, there were four crashes causing 30 fatalities. As of 2023, the V-22 has had 13 crashes which caused fatalities since becoming operational in 2007. The aircraft's accident history has generated controversy over its perceived safety issues." 400 were built.
172 CH-53Es were built. Over 6,300 Blackhawks, 600 later model CH-47s, 2400 AH-64s produced. There are more types in service, but you get the idea. The Ospreys are a drop in the bucket, nor were they assigned the more dangerous combat missions due to their severe limitations.
Not long ago I heard this weird noise from something flying over the house, ran outside & it was a pair of those changing from horizontal to vertical right over my yard. What a ridiculously loud aircraft.
ReplyDeleteThe Blackhawk is of being replaced not to improve our capabilities but to generate a stream of cash to be siphoned into corrupt pockets.
ReplyDeleteYou got it Dan.
DeleteNice. Sweetheart deal for the vendor of the dangerously unreliable Osprey plus killing and maiming more of America's most trained, motivated and patriotic soldiers. Well done, M. I. C.!
ReplyDeleteHow many more have to die in that aircraft?
ReplyDeleteObviously a lot more money to be made constantly replacing crashed Osprey's than there is Blackhawks. Besides that, Blackhawk is a RAYCISS name.
ReplyDeleteThis program is an endless contractor cash cow going back to the XV-15 project by Bell in 1971. The bugs are still there after 52 years!!! It was to be do all/move all/shoot all but the advocates of conventional helicopters have exceedingly powerful political and financial allies. It's a noisy Rolex when we need a semi quiet Timex. Did we need the UH-60 or the AH-64? Look at what the Marines did with the AH-1 and UH-1 series. Yuuuge cost savings, easier maintainability and a higher operational readiness rate. But NOOOO....the Army equates Hueys and Cobras with Vietnam and we can't have that. Rant concluded.
ReplyDeleteyeah, I was a fort fumble when the eval was being done on the blackhawk vs the Utas or something, I forget what it name was. funny thing. the troops who had to get in and out of it ( and we did that shit a LOT) found the
Deleteother one was easier to do. and they BOTH had the fast rope thingie too. we figured that the kickback was better on the black hawk to the assholes who sign off on that kind of shit. anyway. what really told me the gov't was fucked up was in 1978 when we tested the Carl Gustaf 84mm rocket launcher. it was hands down way better than anything we had at that time. the 90mm stove pipe. lighter, easier to operate and more and way better rounds for it too. they even had a 2 round carrier that could clip on to your ruck !
3 army generals and 2 Marine ones showed up to watch the demo. the army assholes could not have cared less. I don't think they even watched it. the Marine guys? they asked questions and took NOTES (?) and even got down in the dirt and fired it a few times with us. I think it was maybe 2 years and the army got the dragon
and from what I have heard a total POS. so image how I felt when I saw US troops using the carl G in the sandbox and saying how great it was ? so, YES. THE FUCKING ARMY IS BOUGHT OFF AND DAMN STUPID.
wasting money on useless shit that gets people killed. I am tired of it all anymore. dave in pa.
Nah, go ahead, do the F-35 now.
Deletecoulda woulda shoulda had the CL-84 60 years ago.
Deletehttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q6SxyIoSvMM
too much "not invented here" going on across the board.
When they do something so obviously stupid, it's about the money.
ReplyDeleteAnd they will win on two fronts. They weaken us,by killing men, they get rid of a superior weapon, forces will either be grounded or forced to go on a mission in unsafe equipment, and I'm betting that those noisy,shoot this way! Things will get knocked down. Nobody who has any sense would propose this and unless the majority are bought, it would get stopped.
It won't get stopped.
Working in flight safety at a major jet engine manufacture, it was obvious that the fault modes of a one of two engine outs were rather dicy due the requirement to nearly instantaneously tranfer power to each of two props. Plus all the bearings on the dozens of drive shafts each with a life. Profoundly pathetic. A Marine told me that he would cell his wife to say goodby each time he had to do a mission on one.
ReplyDeleteJuan Brown explains the mode of failure on those birds here; https://youtu.be/QDBXwWlU64M
ReplyDeleteIt’s one of those things that’s really great as a concept, but God preserve you from the reality. Excellent for making money and long careers though.
ReplyDeletemeanwhile, the XC-142 and the canadian CL-84 worked just fine about 60 years ago.
ReplyDeleteAs I recall, they tilted the wing and not just the engines. Hard clutch engagement is a serious problem that has not been solved yet, and, in my judgement, is not likely to be.
Deletestill, keeping the moving components together as a unit is bound to be more reliable than "let's just pivot the engines".
Deleteplus both the CL-84 and the XC-142 could take off and land mostly conventionally (the CL-84 had to pivot the wings up 5 degrees, the XC-142 none)
People have tried to tell the Army it was making a bad choice. The Valor would require much larger LZs, unlike a Helo. No hover holes for the valor.
ReplyDeleteArmed services helicopters kill 160 soldiers a year, not a word.19 in 20 years died with Osprey's. I don’t know the fleet size difference but the Osprey has a purpose and crashing is part of Military life.
ReplyDelete"The V-22 Osprey has had 16 hull-loss accidents with a total of 53 fatalities as of 29 November 2023. During testing from 1991 to 2000, there were four crashes causing 30 fatalities. As of 2023, the V-22 has had 13 crashes which caused fatalities since becoming operational in 2007. The aircraft's accident history has generated controversy over its perceived safety issues." 400 were built.
Delete172 CH-53Es were built. Over 6,300 Blackhawks, 600 later model CH-47s, 2400 AH-64s produced. There are more types in service, but you get the idea. The Ospreys are a drop in the bucket, nor were they assigned the more dangerous combat missions due to their severe limitations.