The Marines have been playing around with hanging hoses out of the back of Plopters too.
-
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
Not surprising. In other news.....
http://foxtrotalpha.jalopnik.com/the-v-22-osprey-finally-gets-the-missiles-and-rockets-i-1668338371
Yes, I've already had one of these dudes talk a bunch of smack to my face about it.
http://foxtrotalpha.jalopnik.com/the-v-22-osprey-finally-gets-the-missiles-and-rockets-i-1668338371
Yes, I've already had one of these dudes talk a bunch of smack to my face about it.
This topic has come up before (re: carrying an engine to the boat), and I know you've done your share of Vertrep. We already manage engines to LHDs for Harriers without the benefit of COD assistance, so it's a (slightly) straw man argument. This would be more of the same. A Sierra from a USNS would get the engines from CONREP/UNREP station and replenish the boat's spares that can't be fixed in the engine shop.
Recently, we picked Hornet engines (not sure what flavor) a few times on our deployment. It was sporty but doable, depending on the day. This was a Block 3B, empty aux, low-ish fuel, in the AG. I think it was a ~4.4k pick if memory serves.
CVN handlers across the fleet all just threw up their arms and said "fuck it." Seriously though, I've worked with several of 'em who complain that modern deck loading is too difficult - and that was before the whole HSL -> HSM helo-palooza idea.
Despite it's ability to contort into downward-facing plopter, and other assorted poses - it's still a really big silhouette on the deck (even bigger in the bay).
Any plopter guys around here know how long it takes this thing to go from contorted to spun up and ready to go?
Despite it's ability to contort into downward-facing plopter, and other assorted poses - it's still a really big silhouette on the deck (even bigger in the bay).
Any plopter guys around here know how long it takes this thing to go from contorted to spun up and ready to go?
Last edited:
20 min from spotted to ramps up. It unfolds really quickly.CVN handlers across the fleet all just threw up their arms and said "fuck it." Seriously though, I've worked with several of 'em who complain that modern deck loading is too difficult - and that was before the whole HSL -> HSM helo-palooza idea.
Despite it's ability to contort into downward-facing plopter, and other assorted poses - it's still a really big silhouette on the deck (even bigger in the bay).
Any plopter guys around here know how long it takes this thing to go from contorted to spun up and ready to go?
It can taxi and you don't have to shut it down to offload. Handlers, Air Bosses, and Air OpsOs will just have to learn to deal with it. Will it change the dynamic? Sure. Will it prevent the CVW from doing its mission? Not in the least.
The engine argument is a straw man. The motors will get to the boat one way or another. If Mom has to carry more motors, so be it. If it has to conrepped, so be it.
This decision is not surprising and represents the lowest cost and risk to replacing the COD, something that needs to happen now.
What do you call a quick unfold. Saw it once and thought it was slow.
Wait, hasn't airwing size shrunk over time?
I see what's going on here...CVN handlers across the fleet all just threw up their arms and said "fuck it." Seriously though, I've worked with several of 'em who complain that modern deck loading is too difficult - and that was before the whole HSL -> HSM helo-palooza idea.
Despite it's ability to contort into downward-facing plopter, and other assorted poses - it's still a really big silhouette on the deck (even bigger in the bay).
Any plopter guys around here know how long it takes this thing to go from contorted to spun up and ready to go?
Attachments
By which you mean "work it in between the cycles like every other RW asset on the boat?" I didn't even stay at a Holiday Inn Express; I just stood XR for workups and a cruise. But am I missing something here? Like squorch said, airwings used to be bigger, no?
Worst case, you need to recover your COD det to go blue water. Launch a cycle 15min early, land the plopters while the plane guard is still on station, stuff them, then signal Charlie 15 late. If you put it in the air plan and ensure you have enough gas airborne for the baby Hornets, then nothing is fucked, yes? Assuming that the knock-on effects of crews walking, starting, and such before the launch don't put people in plopter downwash, which I have heard is -53esque? Sipping on bourbon right now, and not really interested in doing air plan math.
That article made my brain hurt. This will solve the "osprey escort problem". Now if they get shot at on their way to an LZ, they just need to turn around, rotate their nacelles up, fly back into the WEZ they just left (at 110 knots) and shoot tiny rockets with the exceptional proficiency and tactical acumen that only the assault support community could provide.
My favorite part:
Harriers could never keep up with an Osprey's awesome speed or astonishing range with an actual payload, and they certainly wouldn't be able to survive in the high threat environments that Ospreys can handle with ease. The Harriers would get shot down immediately, but the Ospreys would solve the problem with 20+ Marines in the back, at medium altitude, at 110 knots, shooting tiny rockets.
Yeah we'll see.
Two interesting tidbits I read in the leaked MOU (I missed on the first pass that this wasn't an official Navy release):
I imagine the mods would include some sort of extra gas, pressurized cabin for pax-hauling, and possibly the cabin modifications mentioned. It'd be interesting if the Navy decides to buy that tanker package Boeing has been pitching. Solve, or at least ameliorate, the problem of wearing out the Rhinos with recovery tanker, and it'd give the Marines organic tanking off the 'phibs.
So Navy guys would go to the Marine FRS for at least a little while. And if the Marines really did agree to help cover COD dets, just goes to show how desperate they were to get a Navy buy-in on this.
I imagine the mods would include some sort of extra gas, pressurized cabin for pax-hauling, and possibly the cabin modifications mentioned. It'd be interesting if the Navy decides to buy that tanker package Boeing has been pitching. Solve, or at least ameliorate, the problem of wearing out the Rhinos with recovery tanker, and it'd give the Marines organic tanking off the 'phibs.
So Navy guys would go to the Marine FRS for at least a little while. And if the Marines really did agree to help cover COD dets, just goes to show how desperate they were to get a Navy buy-in on this.
It's interesting to me how many people salivate over the C-3 thing. It's an interesting idea, but what I'm hearing is "the C-3 could do this, this, and this" when it's nothing more right now than concept art, planes in the boneyard, and a list of promises. G-d knows what a contractor promises an airplane can do is usually what it winds up being able to do... The Plopter isn't perfect or totally suitable, but at least its sins and shortcomings are known.
Guys are talking about "just take the boneyard Hoovs and build a new fuselage" like that's the easiest thing in the world. It wouldn't just be cutting a hole in the back for a ramp and boom, you're done. Here's what you'd need to do: build a totally new fuselage, which would be plumbed with 30+-year-old hyds and wiring. That requires a production line, new tooling and so on, all of which are overhead costs that Lockheed is going to pass on to the Navy and gets folded into the unit cost. Assuming no issues with the design and production of that fuselage (ahem), and no issues with the parts they're pulling out D-M (ahem), now you've got a new airplane. It doesn't matter that it just looks like a stretched S-3, as far as NAVAIR's concerned, it's a new-build airplane. It would have to go through the same flight test regime as any other new airplane, including working it up at the Boat. That's going to take years and, again, all that gets folded into the unit cost. And we're talking about maybe 40-50 airframes at the most. At some point, even if there absolutely no major issues that crop up during this whole process, the Navy would have to justify to Congress and the GAO why they're spending a huge amount of money on building and testing a C-3 when the V-22 was already in production. It appears the plan is for the Navy to start getting their planes in 2018...anyone think a C-3 would be ready in 3 years?
I do think there might be merit in also refurbing some S-3s as US-3Bs. V-22s for heavy trash hauling and palletized cargo, US-3s for high-priority, longer-range stuff (like VRC-50 did with theirs back in the day) and as organic tanker. Unlike the "C-3", it doesn't require any major mods, and what mods it does require, were already worked out with the US-3A. So we kind of get the best of both worlds.
Guys are talking about "just take the boneyard Hoovs and build a new fuselage" like that's the easiest thing in the world. It wouldn't just be cutting a hole in the back for a ramp and boom, you're done. Here's what you'd need to do: build a totally new fuselage, which would be plumbed with 30+-year-old hyds and wiring. That requires a production line, new tooling and so on, all of which are overhead costs that Lockheed is going to pass on to the Navy and gets folded into the unit cost. Assuming no issues with the design and production of that fuselage (ahem), and no issues with the parts they're pulling out D-M (ahem), now you've got a new airplane. It doesn't matter that it just looks like a stretched S-3, as far as NAVAIR's concerned, it's a new-build airplane. It would have to go through the same flight test regime as any other new airplane, including working it up at the Boat. That's going to take years and, again, all that gets folded into the unit cost. And we're talking about maybe 40-50 airframes at the most. At some point, even if there absolutely no major issues that crop up during this whole process, the Navy would have to justify to Congress and the GAO why they're spending a huge amount of money on building and testing a C-3 when the V-22 was already in production. It appears the plan is for the Navy to start getting their planes in 2018...anyone think a C-3 would be ready in 3 years?
I do think there might be merit in also refurbing some S-3s as US-3Bs. V-22s for heavy trash hauling and palletized cargo, US-3s for high-priority, longer-range stuff (like VRC-50 did with theirs back in the day) and as organic tanker. Unlike the "C-3", it doesn't require any major mods, and what mods it does require, were already worked out with the US-3A. So we kind of get the best of both worlds.