Yes, the XV-3 from the 1950's seems to me the earliest looking Osprey type prop craft. The XV-15 came later in the late 1970's.

Originally posted by GradyPhilpott

Don't be surprised if the Corps is still using the Osprey in 2045.

Yes, they will used the (qty 3) Osprey left after all the other ones were either shot down or crash.

Like the old Seaking that the Canadian Army is still using.

Originally posted by Canada_EH
That on top of your pointless statement about V-22 numbers being ridiculously low in 50 yrs to the point of 3 airframes sorta puts doubts about how seriously your statement can be taken.

If you have no sense of humour, you got a bigger problem, then I do...

Originally posted by PopeyeFAFL

Originally posted by Canada_EH
That on top of your pointless statement about V-22 numbers being ridiculously low in 50 yrs to the point of 3 airframes sorta puts doubts about how seriously your statement can be taken.

If you have no sense of humour, you got a bigger problem, then I do...

No, I don't think so.

The lack of ability to autorotate to a safe landing is also going to be a serious problem with the V-22. If power is lost below 1600 ft. while in helicopter mode the most likely outcome is a fatal crash. How can you have a combat transport that will be hauling loads of troops into hot LZs and not be able to safely land when the inevitable hits to engines and proprotars occure.

I understand how bad the Marines want this aircraft to work, unfortunatly for a combat transport that is how it operates...badly.

The lack of ability to autorotate to a safe landing is also going to be a serious problem with the V-22. If power is lost below 1600 ft. while in helicopter mode the most likely outcome is a fatal crash.

I wonder, even in “plane” mode, how do you feather props that big, and how much drag will they have?

Even in level flight, what will happen to lateral stability when one engine cuts out and its giant rotor/props will start creating its own vortex?

Does Osprey even have enough wing lift to belly land with 50% or o power? How will the props be sheered of, automatically, (explosive mounts like on LA-50/52) or will they just tear the crap out of the entire craft?

Maybe it’s just me, but the last time I was in a Caddical dealership, while the salesman was telling me everything about the Northstar/GPS/heated seats and infrared camera, I was pushing in the door metal with my thumb thinking why is it that I can do that so easily, and what would happen when a Ford CrownVic taxi driven by a guy that had his license for a week T-bones me at a fast intersection, in spite of all those “curtain” airbags.

I went to a body shop to actually look at what the inside of that door looks like, and then immediately said no thank you, I’ll stick to German/Japanese cars.

I feel the same way about the Osprey. All looks, no guts, and a shocker of a sticker price that only a fool will for.

So what happens, any news?

It has been, something like 6 months that a couple of V-22 are deployed in Iraq.

If it was that great, we would had surely heard about it, right?

If it was bad, maybe we would not have heard about it, right?

Since there are no news on how thing goes, what to conclude? (that they are simply doing the work, uneventful, too simplistic answer).

In the meantime, Textron stock are not doing well, since few months (despite the fact that Fortune Magazine rated Textron as a company to watch, based on what?).

Then I guess it performed so-so huh?

Shattered OUT...

The problem there is that the source is a blog that was created SOLELY to bash the new KC-45 since it's not a Boeing plane. They are going to find anything that they MIGHT be able to come up with to find problems with it. I haven't seen any sources yet other than them that say this, but I'll see what I can dig up on it from a REAL source.

As I thought, the KC-45 CAN refuel the V-22, but the USAF said that the KC-767 is BETTER SUITED to refueling the V-22. The KC-45 has a couple of minor issues with the refueling system that will be easy to fix during development.

Originally posted by what-lies-beneith
The lack of ability to autorotate to a safe landing is also going to be a serious problem with the V-22. If power is lost below 1600 ft. while in helicopter mode the most likely outcome is a fatal crash. How can you have a combat transport that will be hauling loads of troops into hot LZs and not be able to safely land when the inevitable hits to engines and proprotars occure.

I understand how bad the Marines want this aircraft to work, unfortunatly for a combat transport that is how it operates...badly.

For that to hapend, both engines need to die simultaniously...

the Osprey is build so that one engine can power both blades if a single engine fails.

Originally posted by Phoebus

Originally posted by what-lies-beneith
The lack of ability to autorotate to a safe landing is also going to be a serious problem with the V-22. If power is lost below 1600 ft. while in helicopter mode the most likely outcome is a fatal crash. How can you have a combat transport that will be hauling loads of troops into hot LZs and not be able to safely land when the inevitable hits to engines and proprotars occure.

I understand how bad the Marines want this aircraft to work, unfortunatly for a combat transport that is how it operates...badly.

For that to hapend, both engines need to die simultaniously...

the Osprey is build so that one engine can power both blades if a single engine fails.

Who cares about that? The short answer to the question would be:

"When was the last time a helicopter safely autorotated into a hot LZ?"

Let's inject a little reality into the "autorotate" debate.

Ask any military helo pilot, they all say the same thing, they spend the majority of combat time below the minimum safe height for autorotation landings.

Given that Osprey is a replacement for both the DHC-4 Caribou and the CH-47 Chinook, I ask the same question as previously, but slightly more specific:

"When was the last time a Chinook safely autorotated into a hot landing zone?"

Don't demand of the next aircraft what the current one is incapable of delivering and then say it doesn't stack up.

You have seen Blackhawk Down, right?

Not much in the way of safe autorotations going on there...