Moderator: SoƱadora
Tim Ford wrote:Another fatal incident off the coast of OZ. Nine hull-loss incidents in 26 years doesn't sound atrocious, but on the other hand, it seems like a lot. So, questions for all you pilots (and non-piiots too):
- is this aircraft more crash prone than any other military aircraft?
- are the crashes operator error, or a design defect?
- are VTOL and STOL aircraft inherently more dangerous than rotary wing and fixed wing aircraft? (I suspect the answer is DEFINITELY)
I could research this but I'm too lazy and besides, would rather hear what you guys say.
BeauV wrote:Larry & Tim,
My kid, the Marine, says the Osprey is the best! The grunts like getting places fast, but also getting AWAY fast. As he puts it: "There are so many things that are 100 times more dangerous than flying in an Osprey, why worry? The only reason you're asking, Dad, is because you don't know about the really scary shit. We love Osprey."
I just moan and close my eyes.
B
BeauV wrote:Larry, thanks for those insights. I can completely understand the pain of sorting through that sort of data. Yuck! Thank you for doing that sort of job, it must be seriously painful.
I'm always amazed at the attitude of the Marines when it comes to the loss of life. Everything I have is just second hand: my son and his friends talking. There is also a serious amount of "Don't get my Marines killed!" mixed in coming from the commanders. I suppose that some of what I hear is the bravado of young people.
Your description of the problems one can have flying into one's own downwash is really interesting! I can certainly see an aggressive pilot making that error trying to get his passengers on to the ground quickly under fire. A friend was a chopper pilot in Vietnam and talked about hitting the ground so hard coming in under fire that he compressed a disk in his back. It's easy to say: "Don't fly like that." to someone, but I can easily see the pressure of battlefield action pushing that missive out of one's mind.
Ajax wrote:Larry,
Do you think a jet version of the Osprey would be superior? Is it feasible?
kimbottles wrote:This place has an amazing array of smart, talented, knowledgeable people.
I come here for the educational benefits.
LarryHoward wrote:BeauV wrote:Larry & Tim,
My kid, the Marine, says the Osprey is the best! The grunts like getting places fast, but also getting AWAY fast. As he puts it: "There are so many things that are 100 times more dangerous than flying in an Osprey, why worry? The only reason you're asking, Dad, is because you don't know about the really scary shit. We love Osprey."
I just moan and close my eyes.
B
Beau,
For marine leadership, it comes down to the battfeild flexibility. And the Osprey is a winner hands down. Add in the Frog (CH-46) was on its last legs and the Osprey looks great to a company Commander.
I'm caught in the middle. I've been a part of reviewing several Osprey accidents and a close friend lost her husband (and our neighbor) in one so every accident is a renewed trauma for her. Of the 3 accidents where I have "insider knowledge", 2 were material failure leading to an unflyable aircraft and one was a combination of pilot error and command/leadership error. For an aviator, reviewing each data set of a strip chart and then running a slow speed and real simulation of the crash while listening to cockpit tapes is not a lot of fun, particularly when you know the result is that the people die.
Slick470 wrote:Always interesting reading your insights on these things Larry.
A mutual friend of a few on here is working on this program. Was quiet about it for quite awhile until it finally hit the news. https://www.darpa.mil/news-events/2016-03-03
BeauV wrote:LarryHoward wrote:BeauV wrote:Larry & Tim,
My kid, the Marine, says the Osprey is the best! The grunts like getting places fast, but also getting AWAY fast. As he puts it: "There are so many things that are 100 times more dangerous than flying in an Osprey, why worry? The only reason you're asking, Dad, is because you don't know about the really scary shit. We love Osprey."
I just moan and close my eyes.
B
Beau,
For marine leadership, it comes down to the battfeild flexibility. And the Osprey is a winner hands down. Add in the Frog (CH-46) was on its last legs and the Osprey looks great to a company Commander.
I'm caught in the middle. I've been a part of reviewing several Osprey accidents and a close friend lost her husband (and our neighbor) in one so every accident is a renewed trauma for her. Of the 3 accidents where I have "insider knowledge", 2 were material failure leading to an unflyable aircraft and one was a combination of pilot error and command/leadership error. For an aviator, reviewing each data set of a strip chart and then running a slow speed and real simulation of the crash while listening to cockpit tapes is not a lot of fun, particularly when you know the result is that the people die.
Larry,
Thanks for the article, I forwarded it to my son. He let me know that even he had heard about this problem. At least the word is getting out. He then responded with something like: "If we could get in and out of places faster on choppers, we'd choose those. If we could land/take-off C-130s wherever we're going, we'd choose those. The Osprey is loved because of what it lets us do. It is NOT loved because it's a great aircraft. A C-130 is a GREAT aircraft."
Ajax wrote:Wait, let me rephrase the question-
The marine F-35 variant has VTOL capability. Some sort of large fan with a lid that opens. That's not a "jet," I understand.
What if a similar system of these fans were incorporated into a fixed-wing craft? Would it eliminate the VRS?