V-22, OSPRAY

Not to start a internet battle... but I think part of the reason for the V22's initial problems were due to the Marines....

Their 'get it done!' attitude had them diving in headfirst with everything. Training, maintenence, operational use, etc... I think this was a new and obviously uniquely designed aircraft, and it had unique needs, and the rest is history.

I have a friend who wrote on the technical pubs for this aircraft and he said the difference in the Air Force and the Marines was hilarious... The Air Force did everything in slow motion, and the Marines wanted everything written up, changed, etc sometime that day! Sounded like almost all the problems were discovered by the USMC during their initial use of the plane. Changes to the pubs/manuals were generally written in blood. (but really that's common in any field... working for the RR I've seen it a lot.)

I think most of the original 'danger' of the V22 has been ironed out. Now days they know the limits and capabilities of the plane pretty well.
 
Yeah - same as the Harrier ...

When it first came on stream. Transition to level flight phase caught out lots of pilots.
 
Widow maker ?

Japanese mass media inform Osprey is called so in the States, true?

N. Amada
JAPAN
 
Last edited:
Like much in American...

military equipment the biggest danger is to the public pocketbook. The Osprey got a lot of bad press back in the day and the following might explain why to some degree..

The V-22's development process has been long and controversial, partly due to its large cost increases.[41] The V-22's development budget was first planned for $2.5 billion in 1986, then increased to a projected $30 billion in 1988.[25] As of 2008, $27 billion had been spent on the Osprey program and another $27.2 billion will be required to complete planned production numbers by the end of the program.[18]
Its [The V-22's] production costs are considerably greater than for helicopters with equivalent capability—specifically, about twice as great as for the CH-53E, which has a greater payload and an ability to carry heavy equipment the V-22 cannot... an Osprey unit would cost around $60 million to produce, and $35 million for the helicopter equivalent.
—Michael E. O'Hanlon, 2002.[42]



Here is some other comment:
http://www.dodbuzz.com/2009/06/23/shut-down-osprey-production/
​
 
Last edited:
The greatest danger to people in Japan the Osprey poses is to the service personnel (who are people too) that will be flying in them.

They primary accidents that have occurred were while taking off or landing. As they are unlikely to try to do either of these things near civilian people, I would say that the people of Japan are likely pretty safe from the Osprey.

In regards to all the possible risks one faces in Japan as a human being, the Osprey is barely on the radar (so to speak) of things likely to kill them.
 
And it's sad to say, but the Osprey is less dangerous to the locals, than the military personnel and dependents that will be over there with it. This comes from someone who grew up as a military brat of a career Naval Aviator.

The military personnel bring lots of financial benefits to the region they inhabit, but they play hard. My parents were always pretty strict, trying to get us to be a good example... little American diplomats so to speak... because it's hard to offset the memories the locals have of service personnel driving drunk, causing fights, etc.

My 4 years in Italy, from age 12 to 16... lets just say you guys haven't heard hardly anything... :whistle:
 
It certainly is a little...

tight.:shock:

Amada-san, don't worry too much, it sounds like the Osprey is so unreliable that they won't be flying much in any event.:whistle: Cold comfort, I know.
 
shonan19328 said:
The accidents occured at that time mostly, understand,,
But please take a look the US air base location in Okinawa.

http://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/普天間飛行場

N. Amada
JAPAN
Click to expand...

Having personally worked the flight line at futema, you are worried over nothing. There is a generous amount of play on the flight line. The pictures in that wiki page don't show it, but the runoff is generous. I have so much more to say, but will refrain from commenting on the uninformed opinions of nobodies.
 
Yes indeed Pat

Ermid has graciously condescended to join us in, by his own description, the 'Cesspit'.

When posting comments, I always consult Mac. Would he allow an inflammatory post? Would he approve? Is it a cogent argument?
Will my comment move to positively contribute to the points raised?

'No' to any of these and I don't post.
 
Pity I did answer his question. A man was was concerned and I gave the time to make an answer.

I wish I recall how many hundreds, possibly thousand meters there are from the flightline to the Nearest civilian housing, but I would be inaccurate at best. I would have no problem having my family live near the flightline.

Further I'd venture to say that the incident rate at futema is bound to be lower than at a base in the US. The squadrons assigned to Futema come in rotations without family. The flightline puts in long working hours on the airframes, because they have no dependents at that base.
 
9151 said:
Ermid has graciously condescended to join us in, by his own description, the 'Cesspit'.

When posting comments, I always consult Mac. Would he allow an inflammatory post? Would he approve? Is it a cogent argument?
Will my comment move to positively contribute to the points raised?

'No' to any of these and I don't post.
Click to expand...

You are exactly why I rarely come in here. Have fun ohhh one of intellect.
 
Very good info....

and I'm sure more informed than other comments. Why blot your copy book with the follow up? Snottiness just doesn't pay in here anymore.
 
Yeah, obstinate....

bad will offends me , as does unprovoked name calling. Your first uncalled for eruption (calling someone-or was it everyone? "nobodies") was bad enough-why the rancour over some subject that is not at all personal? I mean we're talking about an aircraft here. Unless you designed the thing-(and even then)-what is your beef exactly?
 
IMO the residents don't have a leg to stand on.

The airfield was there first, and every one of the owners of those homes built or bought those homes knowing they were near an airfield and as such assumed the risk (accidents) and nuisance (noise, vibrations, pollution) of being near an airfield.

IMO this concept holds just as much for Anytown, USA where residential properties routinely encroach on airfields as it does for Okinawa.

The other question I pose is, Why is there a US base there anyway? I say bring the troops home, demolish the facilities, and sell the land to the highest bidder and wave goodbye.
 
Me too!

:)

But, you know,Dan, that it is going exactly the other direction with the so called "pivot" to the Pacific and away from the Middle East.
The good news in that is the obvious diminishment of our dependence on Arab oil but the bad news is that "pivot" is aimed a very vague (almost Dominoe Effect vague) strategic issues;like somehow containing China. I confess to not understanding what that means in a pratical sense as a China is now our #3 trading partner, but...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top