-
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
Most controllers understand what MV-22 is capable of so I've never had an issue with confusion as to how or what I would do in the terminal environment. We tend to keep it simple due to the rotor wash considerations and just land on the active runway abeam the taxiway.
In talking to controllers (SoCal TRACON specifically) they have expressed some frustration with having Ospreys take vectors at 240 knots and then shoot the ILS at 115. Understandably that can gum up the sequencing with fixed wing guys.
In talking to controllers (SoCal TRACON specifically) they have expressed some frustration with having Ospreys take vectors at 240 knots and then shoot the ILS at 115. Understandably that can gum up the sequencing with fixed wing guys.
File a flight plan. Plopters are not a rare sight over the Potomac. HMX-1 flies them.
One thing to consider with V-22 approaches... they're already covered in CV NATOPS, along with launch procedures. Around the boat isn't a big deal... it's on and in the boat that will prove a challenge to overcome. Plus the real challenge will be the organization/logistics ashore and operating as a det. The USMC doesn't operate them like a C-2 det operates.
I'm hoping the CV-22 det model can help the Marine Corps figure that part out. This airplane doesn't need to tied to ships the way we did with the HMM. The Marine Corps needs to get away from the inexplicable need to shoehorn 12 Ospreys onto ARG shipping.
I've heard that the Special MAGTFs deploy with a standard 12 aircraft squadron, so I think you'd have to look at the logistics and maintenance capability if you had a smaller det. The Navy has to figure that part out, so I'm sure the USMC will be able to learn quite a bit. This really is a learning process for both services, leveraging the knowledge of the Osprey on the one side with the knowledge of expeditionary logistics dets on the other side.
So I've gone back finally and read through this entire thread. There was a question asking for insights from COD guys on this. Pretty much everything Hoover(COD)Pilot has said is spot on. Here's a broad brush look at the issues from my perspective:
*Name: MV-22 and CV-22 are already taken. CMV-22 doesn't follow the joint <ahem: USAF> instruction. I'm not sure what the latest is from OPNAV on this, so I'll refer to it as the V-22 (N).
*Range: Disregard operating ranges for the current CV/MV-22. The Navy version has different requirements.
*Mission creep: We all acknowledge that the aircraft has capability, but the big question remains on whether there will be any excess capability when it comes to the detachment. If a V-22 (N) detachment is replacing a C-2 detachment, then it has to do what the C-2 det can do before it can do other things. That is unless you somehow reduce the demand coming from the CSG. So while it's cool that it can go land on L-class and potentially other ships, will the Navy buy enough of them to do those missions concurrently with COD? Who knows...
*CNA study: A team from the Center for Naval Analyses has conducted a det size analysis at the request of Air Boss. They're now looking into some more specific detachment logistics/manning/operations issues. I'm as eager as everyone else to see what they come up with.
*What percent get Ospreys? 42.
*Name (part 2): There's been one suggestion to call it the Shotgun Messenger, an old nickname for stagecoach express messengers. On one level, it works... "who's riding Shotgun today?" or "two Shotguns in the break."
Did I miss any other questions that I may be able to address?
*Name: MV-22 and CV-22 are already taken. CMV-22 doesn't follow the joint <ahem: USAF> instruction. I'm not sure what the latest is from OPNAV on this, so I'll refer to it as the V-22 (N).
*Range: Disregard operating ranges for the current CV/MV-22. The Navy version has different requirements.
*Mission creep: We all acknowledge that the aircraft has capability, but the big question remains on whether there will be any excess capability when it comes to the detachment. If a V-22 (N) detachment is replacing a C-2 detachment, then it has to do what the C-2 det can do before it can do other things. That is unless you somehow reduce the demand coming from the CSG. So while it's cool that it can go land on L-class and potentially other ships, will the Navy buy enough of them to do those missions concurrently with COD? Who knows...
*CNA study: A team from the Center for Naval Analyses has conducted a det size analysis at the request of Air Boss. They're now looking into some more specific detachment logistics/manning/operations issues. I'm as eager as everyone else to see what they come up with.
*What percent get Ospreys? 42.
*Name (part 2): There's been one suggestion to call it the Shotgun Messenger, an old nickname for stagecoach express messengers. On one level, it works... "who's riding Shotgun today?" or "two Shotguns in the break."
Did I miss any other questions that I may be able to address?
Just one: how are we going to shut down the carrier L/R cycle while we land what is essentially an H53 every day? I watched it during the testing and it looked to me like everyone wanted it so badly to be the "new C-2" and refused to accept the idea that it's a giant helo when it's on deck.
Time on deck was specifically measured during the 2013 MUA. If you can get a copy of that, I recommend giving it a read. You're right in implying that it's like having a H53 come aboard every day, at least in the sense that you won't be doing any fixed wing ops during that time. How long was an H53 on deck typically? The deck time of the V-22 (N) will be pretty quick... just how fast will vary on how you handle the cargo (loose loading, pallets, containers, etc.). I would think of it as more in line with a helo break than with a 53 coming aboard.
There will be changes when the V-22 replaces the COD. We'll find ways to work around the shortcomings, and ways to use the new capabilities. The CODs are old, and they need a replacement. For all the Plopter-hating, there is no viable alternative that gets a new airplane on flight decks within ten years. New-build CODs aren't viable - St Aug doesn't have the excess capacity, and it'd require a big capital investment to tool up to make them even if capacity could be found. If it was a viable possibility, NGC would be pushing it. The "C-3" is just a neat-looking artist's concept right now, that's all. The V-22 can do the mission and it's in full rate production.
Could you expand on the first half of this sentence? What are you defining as the mission?
I think they're going with HV-22, which doesn't make any sense as that's the designation for SAR aircraft (e.g., AFSOC and CG HC-130), but whatevs.
Hauling pax and trash to the Boat and back. I know there's a lot more to it than that, and I know you know that better than I, but that's the end of the day requirement. I work in an MPRA command and there are still guys complaining about how the P-8 'can't do the mission' the P-3 can, though what they mean is it can't do the same things the same way. Sounds like much the same with the CODsprey.
You could always just tack a C on the end of either, MV-22C or CV-22C, and be good with it.
Don't get me started, I think I ranted on this earlier in the thread but the whole designation scheme for the V-22 variants is bass ackwards to begin with. The logical thing would be to call it the CV-22C but that would likely make too much sense.
So the HV-22 name is a holdover from when it was competing with the HH-60. That's how old that goes back. The Navy variant will not be the HV-22, especially since CSAR isn't the main purpose of the airframe like Uncle Fester indicated. So Flash is right in that at least MV-22C or CV-22C would make sense, or maybe MV-22N for Navy. If we're going to combine cargo and multi-mission designators, the only one "per instruction" would be MCV-22.
The Marines I speak with say the same thing about the MV-22 and the CH-46. It can and can't do the mission, depending on how you're defining it. For the Navy, can the Osprey take stuff out to the ship? Yep, about 40% of what a C-2 can typically take. So can a single V-22 do the same mission that a single C-2 can do? Nope. Not if we're comparing 1 aircraft to 1 aircraft. Given enough aircraft and enough sorties though, then yes a V-22 detachment can match a C-2 detachment. Figuring out those exact numbers is what we (the Navy) are doing now.