I thought a letter after the number meant a different series, not just different mission set.
-
Please take a moment and update your account profile. If you have an updated account profile with basic information on why you are on Air Warriors it will help other people respond to your posts. How do you update your profile you ask?
Go here:
Edit Account Details and Profile
V-22 Chosen to be the new COD
- Thread starter lowflier03
- Start date
I thought a letter after the number meant a different series, not just different mission set.
It just delineates a different version of the same basic aircraft. The differences in the past used to be much more minor to get a different letter (from the A-4A to A-4M and the F-4A to F-4S) but that has changed over time so that an aircraft like the F-16C incorporates many different versions or 'Blocks' as the USAF calls them, to include ones that used to get their own letter (like the F-16CJ). The same with the E-2C and several other aircraft. Why has it changed? More paperwork involved nowadays, that seems to be the simplest answer.
Part of my airplane geek annoyance with the V-22 is that the version designations should be swapped, the USAF should have the 'M' and the Marines the 'C' since it better reflects their roles, and from what I can gather it was largely political since the Marines wanted to advertise it as 'multi-mission' as the 'M' designation suggests.
Well, since the Marine version has picked up RGR, C2, NTISR, and is in testing to get AAR and CAS, while the USAF pretty much only uses it to take people from place to place, maybe they were right!
Hahaha
If a C-130 can, we can. And hover.
Well clearly the V-22 has the long range legs - with tanker support. VMM-764 just did a 4-ship 5400 nm with KC-130 support, non-stop from Miramar to Rio de Janeiro.
http://www.aviationtoday.com/rw/top...hq_l=21&hq_v=4d012d320e#.VmeQ4ishxrM.linkedin
http://www.aviationtoday.com/rw/top...hq_l=21&hq_v=4d012d320e#.VmeQ4ishxrM.linkedin
That long, unpressurized? WOW. Either down in the weather or up high sucking on a hose unpressurized. Either way, super fatiguing.
If we really stuck with the naming conventions, the AFSOC version should be the HV-22, and CV-22 for the Marines. Navy could be the UV-22, but then everyone would get confused thinking it's a UAV.
You might actually get some drone stink on you if you aren't careful!
If they decide to go with MV-22 they should designate it the MV-22C since it would be a distinct version, if they followed the rules. I still think CV-22 makes the most sense since that will be most indicative the primary mission, let's just accept reality that the airframe will still be hauling ass and trash to and from the boat 99% of the time like its predecessor, but that is just the airplane geek in me.
SECNAV has a yen for calling things what they actually are and adding a bit of sanity to the designations systems, so it'd be nice if we got rid of the "M" prefix altogether. Yeah, I know, it's politics and it looks better if we can pretend everything is 'multimission', but it kind of defeats the whole purpose of a designation system if you don't use it right.