USN Cluster F*ck Naming of COD Replacement -

[IKE]

Almost anything would be better than "Knighthawk" (pronounced Keh-ni'-git). We didn't name the 60B "Spritehawk" or the 60F "Kinghawk." We should just let old airframes/names die.

My vote is to call the CODsprey "Stork," although it's more likely to take babies off the ship.

 

[picklesuit]

Hmmm, replacing the COD...

"Day Ideally VMC Aircraft, Pilot Landing At Night an Emergency"

Shortens to DIVA-PLANE

I kill me...

 

[Pags]

Almost anything would be better than "Knighthawk" (pronounced Keh-ni'-git). We didn't name the 60B "Spritehawk" or the 60F "Kinghawk." We should just let old airframes/names die.

My vote is to call the CODsprey "Stork," although it's more likely to take babies off the ship.

Despite the HC community's best efforts I believe the official name of the MH-60S is still Seahawk. Not that anyone ahs ever called any variant of the H-60 a Seahawk. It's always just called The 60 and is flown by 60 drivers, etc.

And the Osprey has a name: Princess.

 

[Redux]

As a old E-2 A&B wrench turner that has been away for decades............... why? Other than the obvious vertrep capabilities what advantages does it have over the existing COD??? Hasn't the Osprey been basically a bag of worms that took forever to develop?

 

[Brett327]

The COD is old and those airframes can't fly forever. This is the most economical solution when we don't have the luxury of designing a replacement from scratch.

 

[Hotdogs]

And the Osprey has a name: Princess.

Nailed it.

 

[Redux]

I

The COD is old and those airframes can't fly forever. This is the most economical solution when we don't have the luxury of designing a replacement from scratch.

I'm sure you know what you're saying and I imagine they looked at it from a million angles but from what little I have read the Osprey has no legs, speed, hull capacity and is very payload restricted compared to the C-2. Sometimes building a new existing old mousetrap is better than a newly designed one.......

 

[Flash]

I'm sure you know what you're saying and I imagine they looked at it from a million angles but from what little I have read the Osprey has no legs, speed, hull capacity and is very payload restricted compared to the C-2. Sometimes building a new existing old mousetrap is better than a newly designed one.......

I think it was just too much money for the Navy to invest for what would basically be a 'new' aircraft for such a small production run. While they are still building E-2's from what little I know there would have to be extensive work down to restart the C-2 production line in addition to updating the design. We have better things to spend money on nowadays.

 

[Brett327]

Irrelevant, as they're not building a new COD. The Osprey is the least worst option.

 

[phrogdriver]

Hmmm, replacing the COD...

"Day Ideally VMC Aircraft, Pilot Landing At Night an Emergency"

Shortens to DIVA-PLANE

I kill me...

The Osprey is a way more robust IMC platform than any USN/USMC helo out there, and when I last served as a DOSS its mishap rate was better than competing platforms, so...uh...suck it.

CODsprey will do fine as a Navy nickname. The USN will have problems with it...mostly because every strike group CO will want to use it to do every mission possible in order to beef up their fitrep bullets. It won't be available to do COD, once the SEALs and everyone else decide to hitch rides on it.

It's the most high-demand, low-density asset in the USAF and USMC for a reason.

 

[Treetop Flyer]

It's not too late! There are plenty of C-9's laying around.

 

[Flash]

...The USN will have problems with it...mostly because every strike group CO will want to use it to do every mission possible in order to beef up their fitrep bullets. It won't be available to do COD, once the SEALs and everyone else decide to hitch rides on it.

It's the most high-demand, low-density asset in the USAF and USMC for a reason.

I doubt even the SEAL's will be higher priority than VVIP visits, mail and parts.

 

[squorch2]

VIP tours > all else.

 

[Hotdogs]

The USN will have problems with it...mostly because every strike group CO will want to use it to do every mission possible in order to beef up their fitrep bullets. It won't be available to do COD, once the SEALs and everyone else decide to hitch rides on it.

I don't think a strike group CO will have a need to justify the Osprey's existence like the Marine Corps...and I think the SEALs and SOF dudes would prefer to just take over the LHD when shit hits the fan like they always do anyway. That's just my opinion. Ospreys aren't important as they think they are - we've just dumped too much money into that program to see it fail. VIP lifts and CSAR are fair game though.

 

[Uncle Fester]

I think it was just too much money for the Navy to invest for what would basically be a 'new' aircraft for such a small production run. While they are still building E-2's from what little I know there would have to be extensive work down to restart the C-2 production line in addition to updating the design. We have better things to spend money on nowadays.

Pretty much. There's no COD line to restart; Calverton's long gone. SAMC isn't tooled up to build CODs, and if you tried to do it - anything' possible with enough money - folding the startup costs into such a small production run would result in an obscene per-aircraft cost. Plus you'd have to either fit it in to the existing build sequence at SAMC between E-2Ds, which would get you maybe 1-2 CODs a year, or do the run at the end of the D run, and it'd be years before the new CODs showed up.

Irrelevant, as they're not building a new COD. The Osprey is the least worst option.

So yeah, that. The navy kicked the can on a cod replacement for so long that now it's stuck with picking the least worst option.