Recently, the Chief of Staff of the Army conducted an in-depth review of the most expensive development program in the Army. The Comanche helicopter system is costing the Army billions and yet we have only two experimental models. Meanwhile, the Marines are developing a replacement for their aged CH-46 series birds. The V-22 Osprey has had it share of problem. Question can someone tell us more about these aircraft and voice an opinion as to their value?
thanks
DJ
History Club
Military history and past events only. Rants or inflamitory comments will be removed.
Military history and past events only. Rants or inflamitory comments will be removed.
Hosted by Frank Amato
Comanche and V-22 Osprey
210cav
Member Since: February 05, 2002
entire network: 6,149 Posts
KitMaker Network: 1,551 Posts
Posted: Thursday, November 27, 2003 - 12:36 AM UTC
blaster76
Member Since: September 15, 2002
entire network: 8,985 Posts
KitMaker Network: 2,270 Posts
Posted: Thursday, November 27, 2003 - 04:31 PM UTC
Well I live in the middle of Osprey country (Dallas/Fort Worth). For this area it's good for the economy, but I don't think that is what you are asking for #:-) . I am certainly no expert, I think that if the Osprey can eventually do what it is planed to do it'll be an interesting system. My concern would be 1. How fast can the tilt system work? If this puppy has to hover while switching the vulnerability in combat would be unacceptable. 2. How easy is this puppy to control while switching? I believe most of the crashes come while doing this. I'm an old time kinda guy. I practiced airmobile back in the day when a slick would run you in and we would all pile out the open doors and run like hell bent over to avoid the main rotor.
greatbrit
Member Since: May 14, 2003
entire network: 2,127 Posts
KitMaker Network: 677 Posts
Posted: Friday, November 28, 2003 - 12:57 AM UTC
im no expert on either aircraft, but both seem to be very ambitious projects.
this may be the reason they are dragging on.
at this rate, both projects are taking so long they might start to seem like they were british defence contracts,
cheers
joe
this may be the reason they are dragging on.
at this rate, both projects are taking so long they might start to seem like they were british defence contracts,
cheers
joe
210cav
Member Since: February 05, 2002
entire network: 6,149 Posts
KitMaker Network: 1,551 Posts
Posted: Friday, November 28, 2003 - 08:38 AM UTC
Joe-- I believe that is the major concern. A ton and then some of money has been invested in the aircraft and we have little to show for it. I know we have several chopper pilots on the net and I trust they will chime in and let us know if it is worth it.
thanks
DJ
thanks
DJ
greatbrit
Member Since: May 14, 2003
entire network: 2,127 Posts
KitMaker Network: 677 Posts
Posted: Saturday, November 29, 2003 - 02:12 AM UTC
i was under the impression the osprey was cancelled, due to its poor safety record.
was this the case, and has the project been re-instated?
cheers
joe
was this the case, and has the project been re-instated?
cheers
joe
keenan
Member Since: October 16, 2002
entire network: 5,272 Posts
KitMaker Network: 2,192 Posts
Posted: Saturday, November 29, 2003 - 03:11 AM UTC
I think I heard that going from vertical to horizonal flight in the Osprey wasn't that bad. However, going from horizon to vertical was discribed as "trying to balance an elephant on a football." I am no engineer but I cannot imagine the stresses all of those univeral joints and linkages must have to take. Remember, the wings on that thing fold up too, adding to potential problems.
Shaun
Shaun
210cav
Member Since: February 05, 2002
entire network: 6,149 Posts
KitMaker Network: 1,551 Posts
Posted: Saturday, November 29, 2003 - 04:39 AM UTC
Quoted Text
i was under the impression the osprey was cancelled, due to its poor safety record.
was this the case, and has the project been re-instated?
cheers
joe
Joe--No. The Osprey program was evaluated and a process know as re baslining performed. Essentially, this means that the development and production schedule were altered allowing more time to evaluate during developmental and operational testing. I trust that one of our chopper pilots will tell us more about Comanche which costs (continues to cost) the Army billions.
DJ
warlock0322
Member Since: January 13, 2003
entire network: 1,036 Posts
KitMaker Network: 152 Posts
Posted: Saturday, November 29, 2003 - 11:09 PM UTC
They were evaluating the Osprey here In Jacksonville no to long ago and while talking with a guy who was working on the project told me that the Aircraft was sound it was the computer software that had the problems. The computers on board along with the pilot transition the plane from conventional flight to verticle flight. He said once they sort out the software "bugs" then It'll be ready to go bar any other complications.
There was a story in the Media that got little coverage that some high ranking officials lied about the performance of the Osprey in hopes to get it into service quicker. Thus the re-evaluation.
I think another reason is that the Osprey is suppose to replace the aging (or ancient) CH-46. Parts are becoming scarce and keeping them in the air they are having to rob Peter to pay Paul.
The Commanche question is one I scratch my head over. Why does the Army need this Helo. They have the Apache which by Military Standards is a babe in the woods. Is it suppose to replace the Apache or be used in cooperation with it. Either way I don't understand it either.
Paul
There was a story in the Media that got little coverage that some high ranking officials lied about the performance of the Osprey in hopes to get it into service quicker. Thus the re-evaluation.
I think another reason is that the Osprey is suppose to replace the aging (or ancient) CH-46. Parts are becoming scarce and keeping them in the air they are having to rob Peter to pay Paul.
The Commanche question is one I scratch my head over. Why does the Army need this Helo. They have the Apache which by Military Standards is a babe in the woods. Is it suppose to replace the Apache or be used in cooperation with it. Either way I don't understand it either.
Paul
SS-74
Member Since: May 13, 2002
entire network: 3,271 Posts
KitMaker Network: 0 Posts
Posted: Sunday, November 30, 2003 - 02:37 AM UTC
I think the main reason to get the commanche might be to replace the aging Kiowa Warrior, so there will be a more capable and stealth hunter in the hunter/killer team, and also pack a little of punch itself.
210cav
Member Since: February 05, 2002
entire network: 6,149 Posts
KitMaker Network: 1,551 Posts
Posted: Tuesday, December 02, 2003 - 01:34 PM UTC
Quoted Text
an ever do, but that's the way you get the money in the budgetI think the main reason to get the commanche might be to replace the aging Kiowa Warrior, so there will be a more capable and stealth hunter in the hunter/killer team, and also pack a little of punch itself.
Dave--- right you are! Unfortunately, in order to sell that idea, I believe, the Army oversold the Comanche. Promising that it would do more than it can resonably be expected to be, but you will not the bucks by underselling your program.
DJ
greatbrit
Member Since: May 14, 2003
entire network: 2,127 Posts
KitMaker Network: 677 Posts
Posted: Tuesday, December 02, 2003 - 07:42 PM UTC
as i see it the commanche is a bit of a waste of time,
if it is designed to replace the kiowa, then why does it have to be so complex,
surely a small simple aircraft, possibly of commercial origin, could do the job just as well.
if all the neccessary electronic equipment was fitted why is this a bad idea.
as a weapons platform the commanche is hugely inferior to the apache, as well as the older cobras etc.
a more modern airframe along the lines of the kiowa, with all the latest technology would be fine,
or is that too simple for America?
cheers
joe
if it is designed to replace the kiowa, then why does it have to be so complex,
surely a small simple aircraft, possibly of commercial origin, could do the job just as well.
if all the neccessary electronic equipment was fitted why is this a bad idea.
as a weapons platform the commanche is hugely inferior to the apache, as well as the older cobras etc.
a more modern airframe along the lines of the kiowa, with all the latest technology would be fine,
or is that too simple for America?
cheers
joe
Ranger74
Member Since: April 04, 2002
entire network: 1,290 Posts
KitMaker Network: 480 Posts
Posted: Friday, December 05, 2003 - 05:28 AM UTC
I too have heard that the Osprey is bugged by software issues. The concept is exceptional and will greatly improve the USMCs over-the -horizon invasion capability. The surprise generated by a landing battalion coming in at low level at 200+ knots from over the horizon will revolutionize littoral combat. Current helicopters - H-46 & H-53 just can't compete. Would it help in Iraq or Afghanistan - probably not. The current US Army helos can fly high enough to avoid AAA and RPGs - they current primary adversary. High flight also helps against shoulder launched SAM, if helos equipped with IR supressors and flares.
The Commanche was designed to replace the OH-58 and AH-1, particularly in AIR CAV units and as a recon assets for the heavier AH-64. One major problem - a crew of one!! It must be an extremely stressful job in a combat environment!!!!! #:-) Sensory overload, despite digitization will make operation, particularly at night, extremely difficult. We already have mid-air colisions and crashes at night with UH-60s and CH-47s with four-man crews and four sets of eyes!!!!!! The Commanche was intiated to operate in the defense of Western Europe - stealth, and all.
Jeff
The Commanche was designed to replace the OH-58 and AH-1, particularly in AIR CAV units and as a recon assets for the heavier AH-64. One major problem - a crew of one!! It must be an extremely stressful job in a combat environment!!!!! #:-) Sensory overload, despite digitization will make operation, particularly at night, extremely difficult. We already have mid-air colisions and crashes at night with UH-60s and CH-47s with four-man crews and four sets of eyes!!!!!! The Commanche was intiated to operate in the defense of Western Europe - stealth, and all.
Jeff
210cav
Member Since: February 05, 2002
entire network: 6,149 Posts
KitMaker Network: 1,551 Posts
Posted: Sunday, December 07, 2003 - 12:19 PM UTC
Jeff-- I do not detect anything positive about the Comanche from your input. Is that correct?
DJ
DJ
Ranger74
Member Since: April 04, 2002
entire network: 1,290 Posts
KitMaker Network: 480 Posts
Posted: Sunday, December 07, 2003 - 12:56 PM UTC
DJ,
I do not see the requirement with the contemporary OPFOR, to spend so much money on a stealth helicopter, especially one with a one man crew. From everything I have heard concerning Iraq, the USMC Super Cobras have been working as well, with fewer losses than the Apaches. If what was earlier stated about radar reflective/adsordbent surfaces is true, the SW Asian desert is no place for the Commanche. I believe against the great majority of threats we will meet, a cheaper small observation/light attack helicopter with some form of anti-missle defense system will be as effective and more efficient than the Commanche. I have always been able to either hear or see teh atmospheric distuburbance generated by rotorwash, long before I could see the helicopter, even at night. I don't see the advantage of anti-radar-stealth when heat-seeking missles and unguided shoulder launched rocket grenades have been the big killer. A two man crew would greatly relieve operator stress, most gunships have a pilot/gunner combo and same with jet strike aircraft: F-4 Phantom, F-15E, A-18, Tornado, etc.
I still think Osprey has a good future, unlike Commanche.
Jeff
I do not see the requirement with the contemporary OPFOR, to spend so much money on a stealth helicopter, especially one with a one man crew. From everything I have heard concerning Iraq, the USMC Super Cobras have been working as well, with fewer losses than the Apaches. If what was earlier stated about radar reflective/adsordbent surfaces is true, the SW Asian desert is no place for the Commanche. I believe against the great majority of threats we will meet, a cheaper small observation/light attack helicopter with some form of anti-missle defense system will be as effective and more efficient than the Commanche. I have always been able to either hear or see teh atmospheric distuburbance generated by rotorwash, long before I could see the helicopter, even at night. I don't see the advantage of anti-radar-stealth when heat-seeking missles and unguided shoulder launched rocket grenades have been the big killer. A two man crew would greatly relieve operator stress, most gunships have a pilot/gunner combo and same with jet strike aircraft: F-4 Phantom, F-15E, A-18, Tornado, etc.
I still think Osprey has a good future, unlike Commanche.
Jeff
SS-74
Member Since: May 13, 2002
entire network: 3,271 Posts
KitMaker Network: 0 Posts
Posted: Sunday, December 07, 2003 - 04:04 PM UTC
Quoted Text
DJ,
I do not see the requirement with the contemporary OPFOR, to spend so much money on a stealth helicopter, especially one with a one man crew. From everything I have heard concerning Iraq, the USMC Super Cobras have been working as well, with fewer losses than the Apaches. If what was earlier stated about radar reflective/adsordbent surfaces is true, the SW Asian desert is no place for the Commanche. I believe against the great majority of threats we will meet, a cheaper small observation/light attack helicopter with some form of anti-missle defense system will be as effective and more efficient than the Commanche. I have always been able to either hear or see teh atmospheric distuburbance generated by rotorwash, long before I could see the helicopter, even at night. I don't see the advantage of anti-radar-stealth when heat-seeking missles and unguided shoulder launched rocket grenades have been the big killer. A two man crew would greatly relieve operator stress, most gunships have a pilot/gunner combo and same with jet strike aircraft: F-4 Phantom, F-15E, A-18, Tornado, etc.
I still think Osprey has a good future, unlike Commanche.
Jeff
Totally agree. That's the thing I also thinking myself. The commanche had the high intensity/hi threat enviornment, (i.e. a conflict with major technology advanced foe ) in mind whilst design it. It seems at that time, stealth is the punch line for every thing in military design.
But in the conflicts that face US today, most of them would probably to do with a less radar intensed foe, then why waste the money?
And I just don't see the hover/attack mode as employed by Apache would work too well in the desert, the Marine Corp's using of shallow dive attack run by its Cobra seems to be much more effective. And psychologically more devastating to the dude at the recieving end.
210cav
Member Since: February 05, 2002
entire network: 6,149 Posts
KitMaker Network: 1,551 Posts
Posted: Tuesday, December 09, 2003 - 01:50 AM UTC
Jeff/Dave-- thanks for your feedback and observations.
DJ
DJ
SS-74
Member Since: May 13, 2002
entire network: 3,271 Posts
KitMaker Network: 0 Posts
Posted: Tuesday, December 09, 2003 - 03:56 PM UTC
Cav,
Thanks for a fine moderating job of this forum, and come up with all the awesome discussions. This forum is one of the hardest to moderate in my opinion.
Thanks.
Thanks for a fine moderating job of this forum, and come up with all the awesome discussions. This forum is one of the hardest to moderate in my opinion.
Thanks.
warlock0322
Member Since: January 13, 2003
entire network: 1,036 Posts
KitMaker Network: 152 Posts
Posted: Friday, December 12, 2003 - 10:35 AM UTC
Due to the discussion here recently I thought I would throw out an FYI.
Today while driving around around I saw something that was very interesting. Two V-22 Ospreys flying around and heading for New River Air Station. One flying like a conventional Plane the other with the rotors tilted on approach..
Has some progress been made? Been listening out but haven't heard a word around here.
Anyway thought I would just throw this one out there..
Paul
Today while driving around around I saw something that was very interesting. Two V-22 Ospreys flying around and heading for New River Air Station. One flying like a conventional Plane the other with the rotors tilted on approach..
Has some progress been made? Been listening out but haven't heard a word around here.
Anyway thought I would just throw this one out there..
Paul
210cav
Member Since: February 05, 2002
entire network: 6,149 Posts
KitMaker Network: 1,551 Posts
Posted: Saturday, December 13, 2003 - 04:10 PM UTC
War---
I believe that is awesome! The darn thing is in the air. I share a belief that if the Marines get it, it will serve their needs better than they hoped.
thanks for the spot report
DJ
I believe that is awesome! The darn thing is in the air. I share a belief that if the Marines get it, it will serve their needs better than they hoped.
thanks for the spot report
DJ
warlock0322
Member Since: January 13, 2003
entire network: 1,036 Posts
KitMaker Network: 152 Posts
Posted: Saturday, December 13, 2003 - 08:28 PM UTC
DJ:
Here is an update for ya.
According to a source close the the Air Station, The Osprey has finished it's 1000 flight hours and passed it. Those two are the first of 12 that are supposed to be Stationed here. They have worked the "bugs" out of it (supposedly) and all that they were waiting for was to get those 1000 flight hours out of they way. It was said to see more of them as time goes on.
Just an FYI to throw out there. When the CH-46 and other new aircraft are going to be instated. The amount of flight hours required w/o an incident is only 500. So giving the Osprey a 1000 hours and money, time and man hours spent on this project. Just shows you how badly the Ch-46 needs to be replaced. Other than the fact that there are no more replacement parts to be had for the Aging 46.
Paul
Here is an update for ya.
According to a source close the the Air Station, The Osprey has finished it's 1000 flight hours and passed it. Those two are the first of 12 that are supposed to be Stationed here. They have worked the "bugs" out of it (supposedly) and all that they were waiting for was to get those 1000 flight hours out of they way. It was said to see more of them as time goes on.
Just an FYI to throw out there. When the CH-46 and other new aircraft are going to be instated. The amount of flight hours required w/o an incident is only 500. So giving the Osprey a 1000 hours and money, time and man hours spent on this project. Just shows you how badly the Ch-46 needs to be replaced. Other than the fact that there are no more replacement parts to be had for the Aging 46.
Paul
 |
WEB HOSTING BY
Copyright ©2021 KitMaker Network and Kitmaker Network, a subsidiary of Silver Star Enterprises
All Rights Reserved. Please read our Conditions of Use and Privacy Policy.
All Rights Reserved. Please read our Conditions of Use and Privacy Policy.