Osprey Crash

Pilot Fighter said:
My father, an Osprey program manager, would agree with your statement if he were still alive. He was working on a book on the subject before his death. I’ve shared his notes with a number of writers that have showed interest in the subject.

Among his favorite talking points was his disbelief that the A-12 was cancelled and the V-22 survived.

While it’s easy to blame Bell-Boeing for all the problems with the V-22 program, the untold story is the incompetence at NAVAIR, with its revolving door of LCDR’s that had a poor understanding of engineering and defense contracting. Think about it, while the USAF managed ground-breaking aircraft like the F-117, B-2, F-22, and F-35 (yeah, I know), the Navy only succeeded with low-risk programs like the Hornet, Super Hornet, and Growler.

The untold story is that Boeing didn’t really give a damn about the Osprey and was surprised that it wasn’t cancelled.

Boeing had issues with training programs and thought that every V-22 unit would need a dozen tech reps. NAVAIR squelched these recommendations.

The Osprey is a problematic aircraft, primarily because NAVAIR was silent on what it would take to make it work. I’m holding my breath waiting for the first COD mishap.
Click to expand...
YOU should write the book!
 
MikeD said:
Jointness isn’t a bad word. There have been a number of successful programs amongst all of the services. F-4 Phantom, UH-1 Huey, to name a few.

Accidents will unfortunately happen with revolutionary technology. Sometimes to one nation and their military more than others. AV-8A Harrier, USMC version, compared to the same GR1 version in RAF service, is a prime example. The USMC accident rate was high. Even though I like that small sized Harrier much more than the larger airframe it grew into as the B model.
Click to expand...

Adaptation is certainly easier than a joint blank-sheet development program.

A-1, A-3 (B-66), F-4, A-7 were all mature designs adapted by the Air Force. Not a lot of jointiness in these programs.

The big joint programs that come to mind are the F-111 and F-35 programs. Those programs struggled.

Your Huey example is interesting in that it was primarily an Army program and it would have continued even if other branches dropped out. I believe that the Osprey program would have continued even if the Air Force bailed out. Maybe it needed the AF until production was guaranteed.

Until the maturity of ejection seats, test pilots died. It was the cost of doing business. Heck, until the 1980’s, accident rates were horrendous with mature designs.
 
I dunno - I'm kind of a fan of the V-22. I got to walk around in one at a static display at Andrews about 12 years ago (which is what drove me to the book) and chatted for a while with the pilot - a Marine who had "Trainwreck" embroidered on his flight suit. I was dying to know the origin of that call sign but was too polite to ask.

They're really cool/interesting birds.

If you've never seen/heard one, they make a unique, low thrumming sound. We'd see them running up and down the Potomac to/from Bolling or The Pentagon, presumably from either Davis or Quantico....I never knew for sure. For the first couple years we lived across the street from Nats park, when I'd hear them, I'd run out of the house and walk the block and a half to the river to see if I could spot them coming up. Was completely dorky but fun.
 
I don't have military experience, but I have a military background with the Osprey, playing it in Microsoft Flight Simulator - As Real As It Gets. And I'm fully qualified to make the statement, the Osprey sucks.
 
killbilly said:
Additional story about this, slightly different info included for a more complete picture, too
(full disclosure: personal relationship with reporter)

apnews.com

Military's Ospreys are cleared to return to flight, 3 months after latest fatal crash in Japan

Japan says it'll join the U.S. military in returning its Ospreys to flight following the deaths of eight U.S. service members in a crash there in November. U.S.
apnews.com apnews.com
Click to expand...

The interesting question is whether the V-280 will survive
 
Pilot Fighter said:
The interesting question is whether the V-280 will survive
Click to expand...
Assuming it has a good safety record, no reason why not?

Big difference: the whole nacelle doesn’t pivot on the 280. Curious about that from the engineering side.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top