US Defense Department approve full production of V-22 Osprey tiltrotor aircraft

[Taylor187]

Full article - http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/library/news/2005/09/mil-050928-textron01.htm

Textron's Bell Helicopter Granted Approval for Full Rate Production of V-22 Osprey Tiltrotor
Company Brings Entirely New Category of Aircraft to Aviation Industry

Textron Press Release
In-Depth Coverage

Providence, RI & Fort Worth, TX - September 28, 2005 - Marking a major milestone in aviation, Textron Inc. (NYSE: TXT) today announced that its Bell Helicopter unit has been granted approval by the United States Defense Department for Full Rate Production (FRP) of the Bell Boeing V-22 Osprey tiltrotor aircraft. Current plans include the delivery of 360 aircraft to the U.S. Marine Corps (USMC), 50 for the U.S. Air Force and 48 for the U.S. Navy. The total program is worth in excess of $19 billion to Bell and Textron through 2018.

With FRP, the U.S. Government has authorized Bell and Boeing (NYSE: BA) to increase current low-rate production of 11 aircraft per year up to 48. Today's FRP decision by the Defense Acquisition Board (DAB) follows the successful completion of extensive Operational Evaluation testing, conducted last summer by the USMC.

V-22 info http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/systems/aircraft/v-22.htm


Wow, I thought the Osprey was tossed in the crapper same as the Comanche awhile back. A bit of information on its life. The first prototype flew in 1989. As of early 2000 three test aircraft had crashed: no one was killed in the 1991 crash, an accident in 1992 killed seven men, and the third in April 2000 killed 19 Marines.

I could of sworn after the 2000 crash the V-22's were grounded and were being reassessed.

 

[ArmyRick]

I remember being a young army cadet reading about the V22 Osprey program in a US Marine magazine (it was around 1987 or so) and I thought it was cool. Congress killed the program at the time. Now many many moons later, it was brought back, researched and now it is going into service.

Does anybody think the first fighter planes, tanks and machine guns did not have growing pains? They did. Lots.

Who knows, maybe the XM8 AGS (Not the rifle) will come back on line as part of FCS.

 

[The Bread Guy]

Speaking of the V-22, who's the marketing genius that came up with this?

http://ca.today.reuters.com/news/newsArticle.aspx?type=topNews&storyID=2005-09-30T211119Z_01_KRA076281_RTRIDST_0_NEWS-TRANSPORT-BOEING-COL.XML

"Boeing Co. apologized on Friday for a mistakenly published advertisement for its V-22 Osprey aircraft showing troops dropping onto the roof of a mosque in what appears to be a simulated battle scene.  The ad, coming amid rising concern among Muslims over U.S. military action in Iraq and Afghanistan, prompted immediate complaints from the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR), which demanded the withdrawal of the campaign...."

Haven't found a copy of said ad, and even though I'm not very politically correct, SOMEONE must have e known now was not the time to be assaulting mosques in ads.

 

[teddy49]

Despite it's problems, It's killed fewer people than the F-14 program did.  But the capability and speed that it gives adds a new dimension to Air mobility.  And that was a capability that needed to be developed.  Now if they weren't 100 million a pop

 

[KevinB]

Sir, - excellent point.

 

[Blue Max]

There still seems to be some question as to where to place defensive gun positions in the Osprey. Except for the obviouse (at the back of the ramp) this is a small problem due to its unique engine design, that I am sure will get sorted out soon enough.

 

[Taylor187]

A question that has floated around in my mind is, how much damage can those engines take before they are inoperable? The engines both sit way out to the side so unlike a helicopter which is tucked in above the airframe which could offer some ground fire protection those little fellers are sitting ducks to the sides.

 

[scm77]

Here's the ad for those who haven't seen it yet.

 

[condor888000]

I've long been wondering, where would we be in the CL-84 Dynavert program hadn't been scrapped back in the 60's I beleive it was.....who knows what might have been flying around going from vertical to forward flight....

 

[WogCpl]

Some cool history!

http://www.exn.ca/FlightDeck/Aircraft/Milestones/cl84.cfm

 

[a_majoor]

The Dynavert was also considered for a ground attack aircraft, with a chin mounted autocannon and hard points for rockets or bombs. The V-22 in its present form could have a chin mount, but the wings and transmission system could be more profitably be attached to a new airframe optomised for ground attack.

This is how the UH-1 "Huey" become the AH-1 "Cobra", and would be a sensible step to take for logistical reasons and to make airspace management easier (all the planes in the package have similar characteristics). The other plan would be to lead the attack with an AC-130 Specter gunship, or some A-10s.....

 

[Infanteer]

I seen one of these flying over my head when I was in the States; definately different.

 

[Steel Badger]

Majoor.....

He said it!  He said "DYNAVERT"!!!!

 

[a_majoor]

Majoor.....

He said it!    He said "DYNAVERT"!!!!

Because typing CL-84 is sometimes such a pain.....

 

[Mountie]

If it didn't cost $100 million I would think it would be a good SAR aircraft for Canada.  It could replace both the Hercules and the new Cormorant.

 

[Infanteer]

It could replace both the Hercules and the new Cormorant.

Ouch