It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by Lonestar24
What I still dont get is why they designed the cargo section so small that NONE of the current vehicles (US and foreign, armored or not) fit in
Originally posted by Murcielago
Originally posted by Lonestar24
What I still dont get is why they designed the cargo section so small that NONE of the current vehicles (US and foreign, armored or not) fit in
The Marines RST-V Shadow does fit in it, which it was designed for...the vehicle lowers to minimize its size, then it can fit in it.
Originally posted by Murcielago
Originally posted by Lonestar24
What I still dont get is why they designed the cargo section so small that NONE of the current vehicles (US and foreign, armored or not) fit in
The Marines RST-V Shadow does fit in it, which it was designed for...the vehicle lowers to minimize its size, then it can fit in it.
...
Originally posted by Intelearthling
While the concept of the Osprey is a good one, I'd rather swim in full combat gear to a combat zone than flown in this folly of an aircraft.
I believe replacing the rotaors with turbo-fans would fare better than the transport they have now.
I say it's time to give it up. Just think. If one engine were to malfunction on approach to an LZ, that would be just a waste of life on all the soldiers or Marines on board.
Originally posted by GradyPhilpott
The osprey has been in development for at least twenty years. If the Marine Corps didn't have faith in its capabilities, it would not be where it is today. It's fine for everyone to speculate here on the board, but it's the Corps that will make this beast work, not those of us who watch from the bleachers.
Originally posted by GradyPhilpott
Do you have some source for that incident that we can read for ourselves or was this something you witnessed yourself?
In the course of shipboard testing in 1999, the V-22 demonstrated a tendency to tilt along its lateral axis when sitting on the flight deck behind a hovering aircraft - a phenomenon known as "uncommanded roll-on-deck." Because the Osprey has a digital flight control system, engineers are able to reprogram the flight controls to eliminate undesirable characteristics such as roll-on-deck. Previous shipboard suitability phases have tested the performance of the Osprey behind a hovering H-1, H-46, and H-53. Phase IVB was designed to test the effect on a V-22 behind a hovering V-22.
"All of our test results with regard to roll on deck were as good as or better than anticipated," said Marine Corps. Lt. Col. Kevin Gross, government flight test director and chief V-22 test pilot. "The handling of the Osprey in the shipboard environment is proving to be one of its strong characteristics."
www.dcmilitary.com
Originally posted by GradyPhilpott
This is the most recent reference that I can find to the problem you cite. I suggest you read it.
In the course of shipboard testing in 1999, the V-22 demonstrated a tendency to tilt along its lateral axis when sitting on the flight deck behind a hovering aircraft - a phenomenon known as "uncommanded roll-on-deck." Because the Osprey has a digital flight control system, engineers are able to reprogram the flight controls to eliminate undesirable characteristics such as roll-on-deck. Previous shipboard suitability phases have tested the performance of the Osprey behind a hovering H-1, H-46, and H-53. Phase IVB was designed to test the effect on a V-22 behind a hovering V-22.
"All of our test results with regard to roll on deck were as good as or better than anticipated," said Marine Corps. Lt. Col. Kevin Gross, government flight test director and chief V-22 test pilot. "The handling of the Osprey in the shipboard environment is proving to be one of its strong characteristics."
www.dcmilitary.com
Originally posted by orca71
The fundamental problem with the V-22 is its trying to lift too much weight (48,000lbs) with two small rotors that are spaced too far apart from, and not high enough above, the concentrated mass of the main chassis.
Originally posted by GradyPhilpott
Originally posted by orca71
The fundamental problem with the V-22 is its trying to lift too much weight (48,000lbs) with two small rotors that are spaced too far apart from, and not high enough above, the concentrated mass of the main chassis.
Well, what do I know? I never would have believed that sixteen B-25 bombers could have taken off from an aircraft carrier.
[edit on 2006/3/5 by GradyPhilpott]
Originally posted by GradyPhilpott
Well, what do I know? I never would have believed that sixteen B-25 bombers could have taken off from an aircraft carrier.
[edit on 2006/3/5 by GradyPhilpott]
“This technology will have inestimable value to future presidents of the United States,” said Gen. Robert Magnus, the assistant commandant of the Marine Corps. “The price is very high for being slow; the price is very high for being poorly equipped, for not having enough combat power.”
“What you are looking at here is the future of the Marine Corps,” he said. “And it’s not the aircraft. It’s the Marines. It’s the Marines, stupid.”
www.newbernsj.com