• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

V-22 Osprey safety record looks worse than we were told.

dawp

dawp

Lifer
http://www.wired.com/dangerroom/2011/10/osprey-down/all/1

Seems the Marines adjusted the numbers to make the V-22 looks better.

Not sure if this is standard operating procedures but it is very troubling if this true.

This is our government so we better believe all they tell us, right?

Until 2009, a Class A mishap involved damages up to $1 million. Then, the standard changed to $2 million. In an initial interview, Holden said the Marines had “reclassified mishaps,” applying the new and higher threshold to older incidents. In other words, the Corps artificially shrunk the apparent, relative severity of past accidents — a practice forbidden by the Naval Safety Center.
Click to expand...

also:
Today, an assembly plant in Amarillo, Texas churns out four V-22s a month for the Marines and Air Force — and manufacturers Bell and Boeing are pressing the Pentagon and Congress to add another 122 copies to the existing order for nearly 200. The companies are also pushing the Osprey as an export item for America’s allies, including Canada and Israel.
Click to expand...

shouldn't it be the other way around? We ask the companies for more if we need them and not bowing to pressure from the manufacturers to produce more?

edit: added 'safety record' to title.
 
Last edited:
ROFLOL.

A horridly written biased attack article that ignores some of the most basic tenants of engineering, and Jstorm and Gevorg commenting on an article that puts the military in a bad light.

*Golf clap*
 
Pulsar said:
ROFLOL.

A horridly written biased attack article that ignores some of the most basic tenants of engineering, and Jstorm and Gevorg commenting on an article that puts the military in a bad light.

*Golf clap*
Click to expand...

I was just mentioning the thing looks comical. But you shouldnt let your lovefest for a government institution get in the way of your sense of humor.
 
Technically a difficult machine. But a wonderful example of engineering.

How does it control position ? I assume fly by wire and sensors ?
I can imagine that the strain on the rotating joints must be considerably high.
The engines are placed at the tips. That makes sense as well. I wonder how the weight distribution is.
A lot of slack is needed for fuel pipes and rotor control and motor control and feedback information with respect to the rotating joints. I assume the rotor blades can be adjusted as well ?
 
It is a more advanced piece of engineering then i initially thought. Both engines can drive both rotors when needed. That means that in the rotating joints, there is probably a drive shaft present as well. 😱




EDIT:

V-22_concept.jpg
 
Last edited:
Well, duh.... If one engine goes out in helicopter mode ... KISS your ass good bye. Can you imagine what would happen if you lost power to one engine while hovering if the other engine didn't have a driveshaft to balance it out? Instant death for all on board. I would assume that the driveshaft would only be connected in hover mode since, I'm sure when it's flying if one engine went out then no big deal as in a modern air craft they design the plane to fly on a single engine just as they most likely designed it to hover on a single engine.
 
I assume the rotor blades can be adjusted as well ?
Click to expand...
Variable pitch, absolutely!

It's a cool plane. I'm kind of surprised it wasn't cancelled a while ago after all the accidents but now that it's in service it can only get better.
 
I don't care what political bullshit people spread to whine about the Osprey program. I flew all over Iraq and Afghanistan in the back of them and it's easily the best aircraft the Marines have. It blows the old POS 46 away and is better than the 53 too. I absolutely love the Osprey.
 
Nintendesert said:
I don't care what political bullshit people spread to whine about the Osprey program. I flew all over Iraq and Afghanistan in the back of them and it's easily the best aircraft the Marines have. It blows the old POS 46 away and is better than the 53 too. I absolutely love the Osprey.
Click to expand...

It may be a nice aircraft to fly in but the safety record isn't what the marines make it out to be. Keep that in mind next time you fly in one.
 
ericlp said:
Well, duh.... If one engine goes out in helicopter mode ... KISS your ass good bye. Can you imagine what would happen if you lost power to one engine while hovering if the other engine didn't have a driveshaft to balance it out? Instant death for all on board. I would assume that the driveshaft would only be connected in hover mode since, I'm sure when it's flying if one engine went out then no big deal as in a modern air craft they design the plane to fly on a single engine just as they most likely designed it to hover on a single engine.
Click to expand...

It is not really a matter of duh for me. What i was trying to touch as subject is that this means there is a lot of power distribution by drive shafts from both engines to both gearboxes and rotors through the main rotational joints at the end of the wings. The rotor blades can be tilted as well. This means that just as with a helicopter there is a lot of maintenance and regular checking. I am not really familiar with this kind of maintenance scheduling but i would think it is often and specifications and tolerance checking is very tight. I would assume almost every advanced military vehicle(especially flying material) has a lot of maintenance scheduling. I know from my brief time of working with commercial flight maintenance that commercial airplanes have a strict maintenance scheduling and even replace parts in advance just to be on the save side. I expect the military to do the same at least.

EDIT:
But as we all know, accidents can happen.
Bad quality material for example.

As a sidenote to mechanical failures :
Here is an example of the disaster in the Bijlmer, Amsterdam in October 1992.
http://www.nlr.nl/id~4823/lang~en.pdf
 
Last edited:
How did this program even manage to creep into the defense budget?
I think I remember Secretary of Defense Darth Cheney cancelling this program in the Bush Sr. administration during the early '90s.
 
lothar said:
How did this program even manage to creep into the defense budget?
I think I remember Secretary of Defense Darth Cheney cancelling this program in the Bush Sr. administration during the early '90s.
Click to expand...

It was probably slipped in some random bill just as the crusader of united defense under Bush jr. United defense was bought up by Carlyle investment group where at the time Bush sr was on the payroll as an adviser.

This happens a lot i would think. Those bills have to many pages distracting from the main subject to be completely read and thus everything can be put in. It is not uncommon though or special for the US. It happens a lot here in the EU as well. The western political system needs an overhaul. To much paperwork and distraction lower efficiency a lot.
 
Last edited:
Posted as new post.
Almost forgot, you know who canceled the program ? Donald Rumsfeld did. The crusader did not fit with the new modern view of the US military. I am not a specialist and as such i will refrain from any comment. I will just write that if you look up what contracts United defense received later on, you will see there has been a indirect form of financial compensation during the Iraq wars by use of multi million dollars maintenance and repair contracts. If you want details, google is your friend to sift through newspapers and second source sites .
 
William Gaatjes said:
It was probably slipped in some random bill just as the crusader of united defense under Bush jr. United defense was bought up by Carlyle investment group where at the time Bush sr was on the payroll as an adviser.

This happens a lot i would think. Those bills have to many pages distracting from the main subject to be completely read and thus everything can be put in. It is not uncommon though or special for the US. It happens a lot here in the EU as well. The western political system needs an overhaul. To much paperwork and distraction lower efficiency a lot.
Click to expand...
Crusader(along with many other useless defense programs) was cancelled by Rumsfeld during the Bush Jr. administration.
I'm not sure, but I doubt the Osprey was approved then...
But yes, I do remember Bush Sr. being an adviser to Carlyle group.

The problem is not paperwork.
The problem is defense contractors farm out their defense contracts to 25-50 states, and all senators and congressmen want to defend those jobs for their district.
Much more effective than lobbying congress.
 
William Gaatjes said:
Posted as new post.
Almost forgot, you know who canceled the program ? Donald Rumsfeld did. The crusader did not fit with the new modern view of the US military. I am not a specialist and as such i will refrain from any comment. I will just write that if you look up what contracts United defense received later on, you will see there has been a indirect form of financial compensation during the Iraq wars by use of multi million dollars maintenance and repair contracts. If you want details, google is your friend to sift through newspapers and second source sites .
Click to expand...
I think I remember him doing this...I remember him canning a buttload of useless defense programs.
I was writing my other post before you posted this new post.
 
lothar said:
Crusader(along with many other useless defense programs) was cancelled by Rumsfeld during the Bush Jr. administration.
I'm not sure, but I doubt the Osprey was approved then...
But yes, I do remember Bush Sr. being an adviser to Carlyle group.

The problem is not paperwork.
The problem is defense contractors farm out their defense contracts to 25-50 states, and all senators and congressmen want to defend those jobs for their district.
Much more effective than lobbying congress.
Click to expand...

Indeed you are also right. But paperwork is also a major concern, believe me.
Also here in the Netherlands i have enough disturbing examples of how independent advisors are hired who will create large investigations and will delay any government project because then they can financially bill for more money. I have seen and heard many examples. One i find most funny is where a certain public facility that produces a time on a display (HH:MM) format was tested with an atom clock to see how much delay it would cause. Conveniently ignoring that the internal clock is synchronized externally often enough to take into account the error. And conveniently forgetting that the time is in HH:MM format and is a notification only and not meant for exact time keeping purposes. But i am wondering off because i am sitting in my armchair again. 😎

To return to the subject.
A major issue that should not be under estimated.
It is scary that a state is not able to be self sufficient enough to be able to withstand the influence of large companies. The only way these companies can influence legally and without corruption state senators is by showing a stack of dollars. Dollars that are so desperately needed by the state to pay for public maintenance and other typical government spending. If there was a slight higher tax, then these companies would not be able to wield their financial power that easily.
 
I remember reading some years ago about the osprey not being very safe and that Dick Cheney wanted to kill the osprey. The thing went through a lot of problems during development and I wouldn't be surprised if some of them haven't been addressed.
 
lothar said:
I think I remember him doing this...I remember him canning a buttload of useless defense programs.
I was writing my other post before you posted this new post.
Click to expand...

It seems so. But the money wasting is evident. We need to restructure in the western world. There is to much nonsense.
 
Last edited:
William Gaatjes said:
major issue that should not be under estimated.
It is scary that a state is not able to be self sufficient enough to be able to withstand the influence of large companies. The only way these companies can influence legally and without corruption state senators is by showing a stack of dollars. Dollars that are so desperately needed by the state to pay for public maintenance and other typical government spending. If there was a slight higher tax, then these companies would not be able to wield their financial power that easily.
Click to expand...

it's the military industrial complex president eisenhower warned us about...
 
Worked on Osprey system support S/W development back in '98-99.

Boeing would send a new drop of the Mission Computer package for testing/verification every month. Flaws were caught within a couple days every time.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top