Return to Article: Lawmaker says he'll urge appropriators to kill Osprey program
-
81864
I'm not sure what aircraft availability rates are. Are they the old OR or FMC rates. What is the availability rate? How low is low. Is the OR/FMC/Availability rate below 70%? As an example in 1975 when the F-15 was new it had low OR rates. Two years later we had the very best day/night/all weather fighter/interceptor in the world and good OR rates.
-
81620
The OSPREY/MV-22 is a death trap.
-
81595
I have no idea what the Air Force will do if the V-22 is killed, but the USMC will continue to fly the same tired CH-46 airframes they have been flying since I was flying them nearly 40 years ago. The CH-46 is a great bird, but it has been in service for over 40 years, and I think it is time to retire the poor thing. I an not sure when they stopped production, but it has been a long, long time.
-
81415
limit operational use of V-22 and do more Testing and Maintenance analysis; especially MTBF and MTTR of systems in the HOT and HIGH.
Lane Narrows DARPA started a C-130E/H STOL Test program several years ago. It to date has been a success, fund $15-20M to complete R and D and send 10 C-130 STOL Aircraft to The Hot and High for delivery of troops and supplies to the forward posts. C-130 STOL provides capability in 1/2 the landing and take off ft needed for C-130J and J-27 for less than 50 percent of the cost.
Only negative is its not a new airplane which many of the Pilots want.
-
81268
If we follow Scott's premise to its logical conclusion then why do we still have the civil service system. Its never worked for the taxpayers and its still around
-
81238
Scott wants to know if there has ever been a weapons system that didn't have teething problems.
Well, I don't know about that, but when I came onboard to work for the Army in 1982 the Army was dropping it as a piece of trash after years of trying. The Marines have been working on it ever since. I think that qualifies it as a waste of money.
-
81234
The V-22 Osprey has a serious aerodynamic problem which, as far as has been reported, remains. The basic fluid dynamics of two large rotors operating in near proximity guarantees a state in some flight configurations where the rotors create a vortex with each other and abruptly lose lift no matter how much power is available.
Current remediation consists primarily of having pilots avoid the type of maneuver and weather where the vortex condition exists. This is related to a particular angle of descent with particular prevailing winds and typically the aircraft is relying almost solely on the rotors to stay aloft when this pattern manifests.
The requirement to transfer power to both rotors cross-coupled from each engine, and maintain this while the rotors tilt from horizontal to vertical operation, and provide appropriate flight controls for vertical vs horizontal flight create an aircraft of unprecedented complexity. This is the source of the extensive parts failure record, and points out that the Osprey will always have a longer and more expensive maintenance operation than a more conventional aircraft.
The question for Congress (and, I might add, for Federal Executive) is the following: "Does the mission requirement met by Osprey justify the risk to personnel and the cost?" The bottom line for warfare is to make the enemy go broke before you go broke (that means run out of fighters and money). So the Osprey must make it possible to complete the mission (1) at a lesser cost than the enemy is forced to pay, and (2) at a lesser cost than the alternative means. Currently, the Osprey's performance is marginal against that criteria.
It is true that we've sunk lots of wealth into the Osprey program. However, no matter how far down the wrong path you go, when you find out its the wrong path, go back.
-
81231
1. BO needs his money to fund the New Socialist America. 2. If it is a parts failure then the Marines should go back to the vendor and get a refund, unless he is givng the same military personnel that is defending the V-22 a kickback.
-
81213
I couldn't agree more with Scott and Ike. When I first worked on the F-14A back in the good old 70s when it was first deployed in the Pacific fleet, the radar wouldn't work as advertised, the drag count was too high, many of the automatic flight control systems had problems and yet it was updated with more reliable radar and components, etc. to make it operationally one of our most sophisticated an only swing wing weapons systems platforms until it was replaced by the F/A-18. And here is a thought. Why not take the money that was going to be appropriated for the now cancelled VH-71 presidential helicopter and transfer that money into putting R&M improvements into the V-22? Remember, the CH-46 that the V-22 is replacing is old, fatigued and being laid to rest. Instead of cancelling the program fix it soit can be a viable weapon system platform. Semper Fi.
-
81204
If the MV-22 is cancelled, what is the alternative for the Marine Corps and the Air Force units slated to use the Osprey?
-
81203
The MV-22 is intended to fill the critical gap in medium lift. If the Osprey is scrapped, do we keep the aging CH-46 in service? There have been times that the ancient bird could only carry FOUR troops with full combat loads, based on the heat, altitude, winds, wieght of full gas tank, etc. That is less lift than a Huey. We had plenty of fuel, so it Frog Taxi service all day and into the night, and that was in friendly skies. Do you propose to get rid of the Osprey, and then shuttle troops into combat for at a time in a flying port-a-john? Don't ask me to send my troops in like that - you volunteer yours into the hostile airspace and landing zones first.
-
81202
The developers have proven that a tilt rotor aircraft can fly. But, what they also determined was that it puts tremendous stress on the rotors and other parts of the aircraft to change from vertical to horizontal and back again. It's a design full of compromises and it results in an aircraft that isn't reliable and it's hard to fly.
It probably should never have gone into production. But certain Pentagon brass and Congressional representatives pushed it through anyway. It just isn't safe and shouldn't be purchased.
-
81199
Did you expect intelligence from a Democrat?
-
81195
Follow the money, both that funding the development and the Congressman's election campaign. Who wants what from who?
-
81184
Edolphus Towns has been in Congress since 1983. It's long past time for Towns to stop feeding off the public teat, get a real job and start making an honest living. This ignoramus should be the poster boy for term limits.
-
81151
Yeh, spend millions of dollars on an airframe, throw in some unfortunate service personnel deaths, and now, just cancel it! What jerk thought that all that effort was wasted? Bet he never served in the armed forces. Check out ANY new concept re military hardware, and you will find similar problems. The time to stop development is BEFORE the things get built. And PS, they are now, to the best of my info. being used sucessfully in combat zones. Why not ask the soldiers who need them, not the legislators who never fight the wars!
-
81128
Has there ever been a weapon system that we have deployed that has not had teething problems?
-
81116
Has there ever been a weapon system that has not been described as "an essential weapon system with unmatched capabilities"?
PROMO RIGHT: EVENTS
UPCOMING WEBINARS
NOVEMBER 18
Speed bumps for Teleworking: What are they and how to avoid them?
DECEMBER 3
Achieve Program Success: Unlock the Management Information in Your Data
DECEMBER 10
Practical Transparency: Applying Exchange Networks for Mission Results
PROMO RIGHT: DIRECTORIES
Post a Comment
To post a comment, you must provide a name and a valid e-mail address. Messages must be limited to 400 words. By using this Service you agree not to post material that is obscene, harassing, defamatory, or otherwise objectionable. Although Government Executive does not monitor comments posted to this site (and has no obligation to), it reserves the right to delete, edit, or move any material that it deems to be in violation of this rule.