Bell Boeing signs deal for 167 V-22s

Bell Boeing has signed a 5 year deal to deliver 167 V-22 tiltrotors to the US military. It covers 141 MV-22s for the Marines, and 26 CV-22B Special Operations aircraft for the USAF. This brings the total so far to 299 ordered, with 100 delivered. The USAF is getting 50, the USMC is getting the bulk of them with plans to get a total of 360, and the Navy is planning on getting 50 Search and Rescue HV-22s, but has currently not allocated funding for any of them. Placing a multi-year procurement order will end up saving about $427 million over an annual contract.

Bell Boeing has signed a five-year, $10.4 billion contract to produce 167 V-22 Osprey tiltrotors. This is the first multi-year procurement for the unique aircraft.

The contract covers 141 MV-22 assault transports for the US Marine Corps, plus 26 special-operations CV-22Bs for the US Air Force. Deliveries under the contract will be completed in 2014.

Multi-year procurement is expected to save as much as $427 million over annual contracts, the US Department of Defense estimates.

Source

excellant.

(and hopefully the Navy ponies up)

I love the Osprey, its a big advancement, I'd even wish that it would be the new Marine One.

[edit on 30-3-2008 by Murcielago]

That's a LOT of Ospreys. Good for the recipients, though.

More proof that US marines and soldiers might in fact be the braves people on the planet given the risk of flying in those things.

Yes, yes i know those problems were just as completely resolved as the F-22's problems. What's so wrong with helicopters any ways?



Stellar

reply to post by StellarX


What's so wrong with Tiltrotors?

I happen to like Tiltrotors better than standard helicopters. I think it's an oppressed technology that now is beginning to come into fruition on a much large production scale than previous production tiltrotors.

I mean there was nothing wrong with the gyroplanes, but helicopters phased those out .

Only time will tell if this was a worthwhile investment! I think before than we would be foolish to state it's failures or advancements without proper hindsight.

Shattered OUT...

Originally posted by ShatteredSkies
What's so wrong with Tiltrotors?

So many more things that can, and in combat almost always often do, go wrong for what i just don't consider to be such a vital role. Will it REALLY make all the difference in the world if you bring your troops into combat at half the speed and do you REALLY need a tilt rotor design to give your helicopter a better range? The answer is no, and no and frankly i would much rather get their half again as slowly with the 200 marines ( instead of 20) i could lift there with the four of five Chinooks i could get for the same bloody price! Given the added load capacity of the basic Chinook design you could also add two forward firing mutli barrel guns per chinook ( something the hundreds of highly intelligent engineers and designers that has been stuck trying to 'fix' the Osprey could have probably managed in ten days flat) for a positive firestorm of pilot directed fire support! All this thrown away for the 'coolness' factor. Hell you could probably buy one Chinook to carry twice as many marines and then a few cobra's, or strike planes, as escorts! Cost overruns will rip your heart out!

I happen to like Tiltrotors better than standard helicopters. I think it's an oppressed technology that now is beginning to come into fruition on a much large production scale than previous production tiltrotors.

Sure and i feel the same way! I am of the Robotech generation and we LOVE this stuff but since i also know a bit of war history i know that sending such systems to war is to throw away lives needlessly. I am confident that this technology , how inefficient it is now, will be made to work in the near future but at this time and with the current implementation it's clearly still a unsafe platform despite all the great design work that has gone into it.

I mean there was nothing wrong with the gyroplanes, but helicopters phased those out

.

What do you mean there was nothing wrong? What was RIGHT about gyroplanes?

Only time will tell if this was a worthwhile investment!

Time has long ago spoken as to that particular question and even the F-22 looks like a marvelous investment when compared to this white elephant!

I think before than we would be foolish to state it's failures or advancements without proper hindsight.

Shattered OUT...

Sure it would but i would like to think i have a bit of hindsight as well! I remember that i read about this plane back in high school and the bits i can remember just suggests that this thing had fundamental problems back then that has not been resolved yet!

I can understand a inefficient platform if there is a specific duty that just needs to be performed but until someone can point out to me why this damn thing is needed it's hard for me to grasp why lives and money needs to be wasted in such prodigious quantities. This thing has killed four times more people than the Apollo program did and it hasn't seen combat or gone to the moon just yet!

Since i like to refresh my memory, i too forget or just remember what i like, feel free to check out some of these:

www.g2mil.com...

www.time.com...

www.theregister.co.uk...

www.washingtonpost.com...

en.wikipedia.org...

en.wikipedia.org...

en.wikipedia.org...

Stellar

[edit on 1-4-2008 by StellarX]

You said it yourself Stellar, in time this technology would have matured to the point that it is efficient and worthwhile.

Everything you said about the V-22, could possibly hold true for several other important and pivotal designs and production craft from the past.

If we think it's not worthwhile now, it'll never be worthwhile and it'll never see the development needed to make it worthwhile.

No one jumps to the top of the efficiency ladder with the first leap, you need to step up, get your foot in the door sort of thing. You don't build from the top, down do you?

Shattered OUT...

Originally posted by ShatteredSkies
You said it yourself Stellar, in time this technology would have matured to the point that it is efficient and worthwhile.

I am confident that it eventually will and there is no doubt that the 20-30 odd billion the USMC has so far invested have made a huge difference. What i wanted to make clear is that the project should not have been taken on at the time and canceled when it became obvious that fundamental issues were not being resolved. The USMC could have benefited more by investing the money in additional production runs of other tested designs or started a more modest redesign of a operational/tested system.

Everything you said about the V-22, could possibly hold true for several other important and pivotal designs and production craft from the past.

Sure but why emulate the torturous processes that led to some other pivotal designs? Why didn't they just cancel it in the early 90's after four of the original ten test platforms crashed? Why not wait a decade, or two, for some technical breakthroughs before starting a fresh project or continuing the previous one? I understand the role of politics in such programs but what opportunities did the USMC lose over the last twenty years as 70% of their research budget was for years and years on end expended on this design?

f we think it's not worthwhile now, it'll never be worthwhile and it'll never see the development needed to make it worthwhile.

It's still not a safe plane despite all the funds invested and i'm just saying that had this project been started a decade and half later you would still have had planes deployed to Iraq in 2007 at possibly half the cost and few of the current risk factors. This thing was either very badly mismanaged or just started before it's time as the idea is not nearly as bad as it's implementation has proved to be.

No one jumps to the top of the efficiency ladder with the first leap, you need to step up, get your foot in the door sort of thing. You don't build from the top, down do you?

Sure but you also need to wait for certain technologies and knowledge to become available before you attempt certain projects. There is a reason why we didn't even try to send men to the moon in 1850!

Stellar



[edit on 2-4-2008 by StellarX]

427 million dollars!!! That we don't have!

Our current national debt is a whopping 9 trillion and counting! That's 9000 Billion, that's 900 thousand million!!!!!

National Debt Clock, watch it grow!

Cost of Iraq war could surpass $1 trillion

One thing is certain about the Iraq war: It has cost a lot more than advertised. In fact, the tab grows by at least $200 million each and every day.

MSNBC Source

Cost Of War Counter

9 Trillion huh? I was under the impression we owed more money. There's been a deficit for a long time now.

Besides, what does the economy's budget have to do with 167 V-22's being purchased for order?

Shattered OUT...

Originally posted by ShatteredSkies
9 Trillion huh? I was under the impression we owed more money. There's been a deficit for a long time now.

That's the federal debt, yes, but state and various other adds up to about 6 or 7 times that.

mwhodges.home.att.net...

Besides, what does the economy's budget have to do with 167 V-22's being purchased for order?

Shattered OUT...

I have no idea but some people don't even attempt a pretense at staying on topic and just get right to lecturing/preaching. At least my attempts are generally better disguised!

Stellar

I figure if you're not a weapons/airplane enthusiast, then these forums aren't for you!

Shattered OUT...