Deep Intel on Why ALL Ospreys are Grounded
Vložit
- čas přidán 6. 12. 2023
- Ward reviews the details of the Naval Air Systems Command's announcement that they were grounding all Navy and Marine Corps V-22s in the wake of the AFSOC CV-22 mishap off of Okinawa last week.
Subscribe to THE MOOCH REPORT (this channel's free weekly behind-the-scenes update) here: eepurl.com/hDfbsj
Support this channel by using the SUPER THANKS (heart icon above) or by becoming a Patron at / wardcarroll
Buy one or all three of the books in the PUNK'S TRILOGY, Ward's popular first three novels about life a Tomcat squadron, at www.usni.org/punks-trilogy-re.... Use the PUNKYT discount code at checkout for 25% off to CZcams channel subscribers.
Also available in KINDLE format here: www.amazon.com/dp/B09R1MX8SY
And as an audiobook here:
PUNK'S WAR: www.audible.com/pd/Punks-War-...
PUNK'S WING: www.amazon.com/Punks-Wing-Pun...
PUNK'S FIGHT: www.amazon.com/Punks-Fight-Pu...
Get official channel gear at my-store-b7f9c9.creator-sprin... - Zábava
I was the Senior Enlisted Marine of India 3/5 when the 2000 Marana accident occurred. I lost 15 great men that night and the Marine Corps lost 19. I had flown in the aircraft the previous day and remember that night like it was yesterday. It was made clear by leadership that we should not make any disparaging statements about the aircraft because the program was too important to the Corps. I was asked by a reporter if I would still fly in the Osprey. I dutifully said, "Yes I would". I regret making that statement to this day.
Hindsight is 20/20. I'm young enough to remember the New River accident. Old enough to have roped out of 22's a number of times. Glad I was off them every time, but like you, not something I'll articulate in front of the Marines. Old men can reflect on the would have, should have and could haves'. S/F
I've flown aircraft knowing the type has had crashes
I'd be less keen to fly ones where the cause was unknown or the design itself was suspect
WHY would you regret making that statement unless the flight the day before suggested there was an on-going fault which was being ignored?
@@thelegionisnotamused8929I consider you didn’t grasp the meaning of the comment. A little flippant in my view. He was discussing the great loss of losing comrades and the severe pressure of command. This is not hindsight because put him in that the exact situation at the same time and he would say the same again.
54 dead so far in Ospreys crashes.
No integrity. Especially since you knew better.
Sad to see this happening. Deepest sympathies for all the lost crew members and their families
Absolutely
Its standard good practice to ground a type on the basis of suspicion of component failure or design fault, that doesn't automatically mean component failure or design fault cause this particular crash.
We won't know until thorough investigation is complete
[A Cynic might suggest we won't necessarily know then either as what's disclosed could be 'slective']
@@babboon5764 The concept is unsafe. Total dependency on computers is always a bad thing and will end in disaster
@@gdiwolverinemale4th I agree, how many more service people have to die before they pull that POS from active service !? 🇺🇸
At first glance, an issue of pilot training. Is there a flight sim for Ospreys?
@@scottlindquist8417 The dead pilot would be scream at you for suggesting such thing ( I heard he a stout defender of V-22 )
As a former Avi maintainer that had been assigned to VMX-22 during OpEval, it warms my heart to see the old pictures of the LRIP birds and the VMX-22 personnel. It's pretty cool to see a picture of BuNo 6391 and know that I had a hand in maintaining that aircraft. That aircraft and her sister ship (BuNo 6392) were testing some of the Air Force capabilities that they were interested in and we had to be a little more careful on those birds than the rest of them.
@caseytaylor1487 *Ye mean BuNos 166391 and 166392.* The Bureau Number repeaters on the tail are usually restricted to the last four digits - at least that was the case for the Douglas A4D (USDoD after 1963: A-4) and F4D (USDoD after 1963: F-6) and McDonnell F4H (USDoD after 1963: F-4).
@@BCSchmerker Yes, they are six-digit numbers. I don't remember if they are 16xxxx or not, I would have to dig out some of my old memorabilia to validate that. I do know they were squadron airplanes 22 and 23.
Your channel provides the most accurate and in depth information on Naval operations available. Keep up the good work.
The tilt rotor has always been a great idea, but there's just too damn many critically important moving parts that, if they fail, tend to kill people.
In that respect it’s like every other rotary winged aircraft. A formation of single point failures all trying to be the first to fail.
@@chrissmith7669 there is always someone like you, quick to stop the conversation by bringing up the what about others.
@@1k20a How so? They're pointing out the innate dangers of rotary-wing airframes, presumably to further highlight the insanity that is adding the issues of variable geometry into the mix of potential failure points as well.
@@1k20a it’s a valid point. The original post claimed to many critically important parts of, my point is it’s no different than others. You want safe, staying the couch. You want to get a boat load of marines to a destination in a hurry, use an osprey or helicopter that takes longer. Similar level of risk
@@1k20a - Chrissmith makes a good point. If you disagree, fine, but there is really no need to make it personal.
That bicycle wheel analogy is brilliant!
Very informative video, Ward. Thank you for doing this. RIP to our fallen AF service members.
May God comfort the families of service members who've perished. My sincerest condolences. Thank you for this critical analysis Ward.
Original requirements for the V-22 was it be able to autorotate. When this was not possible they dropped it as a requirement.
No, the original requirement was that any design had to achieve a power off landing from a given height and speed either by autorotation OR gliding. The Osprey team chose the latter. Therefore, the final requirement for production birds dealt only with gliding.
Don't forget, most larger helicopters (CH-47 excepted) don't autorotate all that well.
Sad to hear the losses, thank you Carroll for keeping us to date with this videos!! ❤
Excellent summary! It's great that you highlighted the operational impacts of this grounding. Thoughts and prayers out to the family and friends of the airmen who perished in this mishap.
This report and update was fantastic. So much detail shared in a simple well thought out way.
Just for reference the CH-46 Sea Knight crashed 304 times throughout its career many times taking Marines and Sailors lives with it. Since 2007 there have been 16 crashes of the V-22, doesn't diminish the losses or that the problem with the V-22 needs to be corrected. Just information about the previous platform, Navy and Marine Corps aviation is inherently a dangerous business.
The 46 was also produced and immediately sent into combat operations in Vietnam and in a much shorter timeframe than the V-22. We were crashing ospreys before 2007, so this isn't a fair comparison. 304 crashes over a 40 year career isn't too shabby considering everything that we threw at that aircraft. We gave up certain capabilities moving from the 46 to the osprey. It's not a great trade-off.
@lclfav2 304 That is awful, what on earth do you mean lmao that's 7-8 crashes a year over its whole career. Today we would never allow that and scrap an airframe that crashed that much
Does that statistic distinguish between mrechanical failures shoot downs and salvageable mishaps on the flight deck? Keep in mind alot of the Ospreys crashes are mechanical failures and total losses with significant casualties. A quick review of a Google search does not indicate that was the case for the Sea Knight but that would probably require significant research
Are those numbers really useful as a comparison? It may be more helpful to break it down by loss type I would think. As an outside observer it seems to me that many losses with the V-22 happen within basic normal design flight parameters, and continued losses despite all the billions spent and loss of service hours trying to correct a most critical problem.
How many crashes per sorty? How many per hour flown? How much cost per sorty and per hour?
I was in the squadron that does the flight testing for the Air Force CV22. I remember the crash on Eglin AFB blaming the air crew. In reality it was a lack of charts for the air crew to use. Based on the info the crew had they were good to go, but in reality they were not. I got to see the charts in question and was a flight engineer at the time. The charts nearly killed the crew.
@@cvr527 I can say having been a maintainer and aircrew that aircrew have no clue about maintenance and maintainers have no clue about flying. Both deal with things while doing their job that the other could not even comprehend. Many in parameter manuevers do break the aircraft over time. Maintainers need to remember they are working on a proverbeal formula 1 car. When operating at the limit and getting shot at thing happen. You have to fly at the limit in training if you are going to do it in combat. When flying at the limit we have to remember these are humans and the air force plans for this. Why do you think aircrew do not get in trouble when going over the limit. It is simply part of doing business. I heard that from 4 stars down to squadron commanders.
What do you mean by lack of charts?
@@johnlillyblad5188 So when in certain fly profiles a chart will be available on the CV22 as to how close they can fly to another CV22 while doing formation. The thing that happened was say the chart ends at 500ft you would think you were good if you were aat 700ft behind the other aircraft. Turns out the crew was not ok and nearly died at eglin AFB. The numbers are made up and not what the actual chart says. The charts were also plastered with a warning that the charts were tentative till flight testing could be completed. Essentially the charts were made using computer modeling.
Mr. Carroll - I was a CH-46 transition pilot and flew the MV-22 in my final years in the Corps (2010-2013), including a deployment to Afghanistan, where I was the Aviation Safety Officer. The condition in Marana was not VRS (vortex ring state) but something they later termed 'dynamic rolloff'. I think that was the name (it's been ten years) - but essentially it was dirty air going over one of the prop-rotors while the other was in clean air. This caused a rolling event that was likely to be unrecoverable. As with many things in aviation, it is simply knowing about a dangerous phase of flight that prevents us from getting into it. We were trained to avoid flying into the wake of the bird ahead of us.
I had some great missions in the V-22 but at the end of my ten years in the Corps I had my own concerns about the pace at which we were pushing the envelope of not only the aircraft but also the crews. I do think that there is a great future for tilt-rotor aircraft, but the limitations of naval deployment add so many complications (I'm looking at you, blade fold wing stow) that I wonder if we will ever truly get this aircraft type to the optimal design. Given the increasingly poor record, I think we might abandon it before realizing that. My own experience with the Osprey was great - but the 'no-fail' organizational ethos around the aircraft hurts more than it helps. The cost is in blood and the payment is in funerals. Above all, I hope that these crews are launching into the air with a solid bird beneath them. We owe it to those families that lost so much to get it right.
Thanks for the comment, David.
My favorite way to say that is that it "is written in blood and punctuated with funerals." Feel free to use that.
Your comments are very thoughtful, and you have way more experience in flying than me.
The problem is this, And it is the problem in every profession including mine of engineering:
Only a small Minority of people in any profession are really good at it. This is a fact, it is not conjecture. Given this, and given an aircraft that is on the edge of total danger anytime, when the incident happens, Most of the pilots cannot handle it. However, with a more forgiving aircraft like they a conventional helicopter, the odds of a good outcome are way better.
You mean well, but given the nature of humans, it does not make sense to risk the lives of our soldiers with dangerous aircraft. It makes no sense at all.
I would never want to work around or with someone like you. Because you don’t understand what is really going on.
Thank you for your detailed review. I'm impressed by the engineering and the piloting required for this aircraft.
The tipping point from viable flight to disaster has been awfully thin for the V-22. Heartfelt sympathies for crew families.
Thank you so much for the deep dive in such a short informative video!
I learned more in those few minutes than an hour long worth of reports by various news sources.
It is a pleasure to be well-informed by somebody who knows what they are talking about. I sincerely wish there were many more channels like this.
I have a buddy who was almost court martialed fpr refusing to fly in one of these. During a night insertion the aircraft settled with power and crashed onto a ledge--destroing the left engine. After this and several other events he had enough and refused to fly in one any more.
Sometimes you just get premonitions. I had a very vivid one a few years ago minutes before my car was totaled. Still crazy thinking about it.
Thanks for the update Ward, I look forward to each one of your updates and stories. Love the interviews my wife and I would like to wish you a merry Christmas and happy New Year’s.
Multiple complex systems working to stay in the air, such a tricky airframe.
A part might meet the specifications. But if one in a batch of 20 isn't up to snuff it can fail. Even after nondestructive quality control testing.
@@theduplicator3270 definitely. And overtime the spec itself can be found to be insufficient. Spent 20 years in aerospace, and the amount of revisions from the original can be staggering, but necessary.
@@theduplicator3270 But aircraft are supposed to have redundancy built in just in case of that. However, there are too many places in the system where one small thing fails and it leads to no back up and a catastrophic failure.
@@alec_f1 redundancy yes, but catastrophic failure unfortunately spreads, and interferes with other systems. A bit of a cascading effect.
Great reporting! Awesome voice over with tons of technical explanation. This guy knows his stuff!
Thank you sir for the update!.. Your depth of knowledge is always impressive!..
I'm just a layman who has never flown nor engineered anything other than a household item. However I am a rabid US Military AirFan. If I am not mistaken the V22 was well into working models in the mid 70's with earlier air examples of the tech existing and working about 15 years prior. The exact same problems that plagued this engineering early on has not completely been resolved 40 years later. Either its under built for the movement and torquing that happens on its systems or their is a fatal flaw in transition concept as laid out. Dont get me wrong the Craft are brilliant and Work Horses. I just see the same accidents occurring yearly 40 years into its development.
Wouldn't that be somewhat natural though? Many of the early 2000s crashes were sadly due to pilot error. It would make sense that the same problems cause crashes. For instance, helicopters also crash because of VRS. That's not a problem unique to any airframe.
This does not account for the recent crashes due to mechanical or material issues.
Actually, the LTV XC-142 flew in the 1960s, crashed and proved the idea to be idiotic. It was revived as a way of making more money for the arms merchants. The Osprey has never met its design goals and is a killer more than a practical aircraft.
I would dispute that analysis. Most incidents are pilot related, not a inherent design issue.
@WALTERBROADDUS I agree but also disagree. Yes its pilot error but it is a design and implementation error inherently if the craft is far harder too fly for trained pilots and their ability of control in these situations. That's Engineering something far more complex or not complex enough than you are giving the pilots an ability of control safely and reliably. Idk again all just layman here
@@WALTERBROADDUS If it crashes a lot and most crashes are due to pilot error, then the craft is inherently difficult to fly. If it is difficult to fly, that is a design issue.
Don't you just hate when your parts suplier just goes out of business without telling you?
It doesn't say much about our vendor auditing system either.
@@trespasserswill7052 It says it's a sad state of affairs...
But the USMC always finds a way to get their mission done nonetheless.
@@FinalLugiaGuardian That's why we are proud of the few.
Its almost as if they navy etc say they will buy ~1000 of something... you tool up for 1000 of something and then .... NoTHING as politicans and eggs/braids can't pull their thumbs out of their asses and allow the engineers to actually do their job... Ya don't say they went out of business. No one else is buying Titanium tubing.
It shows you how out of touch Bells purchasing dept is with their suppliers!
I love how concise, direct you deliver all of your content. Tech moves fast.I am not a pilot or engineer. I am 35 year California firefighter who jumps in HH60's and CH 47's to fight fire. I believe and trust that they will figure this stuff out.
Thanks for this report. Well done, as usual!
I’m a C-130 flight engineer, recently we had the fleet (that doesn’t include the J, only the legacy fleet) grounded due to propeller issues that have since been mitigated, and ultimately the implementation of the NP-2000 nullified it anyways. Groundings like this are always a bummer.
I’ll be honest, as complex as the CV/MV-22 is, I’m surprised it hasn’t had more grounding incidents. It has been a workhorse all over the world for a while, albeit with continued issues.
RIP to the crew and peace be with their families.
Retired AF C-130 E&H2 nav here! We were deployed to the desert in late ‘17/early ‘18, when the prop issue was being addressed (due to the USMC C-130 crash in July ‘17).
@@chriscon8463 yes that was another one, the issue I’m referring to was even more recent than that. The last 5 years were not good to these props.
My Sun was USMC airframe mech on ch46s and V22s in the late 90s. After a few weeks he refused to fly on the V22. It may have help end his career, but as he told his parents, the V22 can't kill me if I don't let it. It killed several of his freinds.
I was in in late 90s when that lt colonel was falsifying the test and maintenance records while it was under trials and it killed marines week after week after week.
Sometimes wisdom is not popular, but, hey, they will not die your death, only you will.
Yep. I was stationed near Tustin working fast movers and some of my rotor friends had the same opinion.
@@dougcfrary Look and see how many have died the last 40 yrs on the V22.
@@geraldwilson3559 how many have died in the sea knight or f18?
I've literally NEEDED this channel my entire life. Thank you 🙏
Ward - I thoroughly enjoy your objective and insightful views on these matters. Keep up the great work.
Interesting. I'll be honest, this is the first bit of information I've gotten on the Osprey since I left AFSOC many years ago. Back then it was still in the early stages of production. A couple buddies moved over to them but I moved onto another assignment and that was, as they say, that when it came to my hearing from them or anything about this aircraft. I gotta say, when they pitched it to us I sort of shook my head. I'm more of a fixed wing/prop kind of guy. A lot has changed since I was turning wrenches on aircraft though. The first ones I worked came on line when everyone liked Ike and loved Lucy. But here's the thing, we used to joke that when the Air Force retired the last bomber or fighter because it was going to flying saucers, the crew that flew it to the boneyard would come home on a Herc. Now that I think about it, it's been a long time since I was on one of those. The J-model was just coming on line when I left the field. How time flies. Just the ramblings of an old man I reckon. Thanks for posting this one. Like I say, interesting stuff and good mechanical drawings as well. Brought me back to another time.
If this is “ramblings of an old man” I love hearing it!
@@Jetpusher It is. I haven't been near a flight line in a very long time. Aircraft are a lot different now. One thing about those old birds, they had personality.
Thanks for sharing. The coming back on a Herc joke was good
My prayers are with those crews who were lost.
I was a UH-60 Crewchief in the late 80s, a helo that many called the "crashhawk" for this very reason. Turns out, they needed to change the "stabilator actuators" they were using. When they did, things got better...
The point is, ALL aircraft have teething problems when they're new- including the Huey, the Blackhawk, the Osprey, and (in the near future), the Valor. It is JUST going to happen.
Teething? This thing been in service for a long time
@@CorePathway You got me there- I guess I still think of it as "a new design," but it really isn't 😏
this is incredibly informative. expertly explained. great content
Ward, Thank you for informative discussion, about this sensitive topic. Osprey is probably one the most complex aircraft, ever made. And it is put to the test, in all the most severe conditions! The pubic wants to think that what the military does, is easy! The US military make the extraordinary look easy, ever day! Sometimes the extraordinary is unattainable! Thank you for what you do!
Around 2010 JOAP was working with the ground crews to enable the early detection of failure modes in the Osprey using FDA. They were able to detect materials indicating unusual wear coming from the gear boxes and bearing in those systems this came to an end though when the military decided to shut down the JOAP program.
Current USAF maintenance officer here…we still burn JOAP samples all the time, at least on the F-16. I can’t speak for whether or not JOAP is still being centrally managed as a program, but the capability is still around.
We (RCAF) had an ongoing tail rotor hub issue with our CH-149 Cormorant SAR helos in the early 2000s. Took a long time to discover that a resonance condition was being set up in the rotor, and the fix for it was to tweak the main rotor RPM down by just under 2%. During this period we had a fatal crash that was attributed to training issues, which were severely impacted by the flight restrictions (2 hr max flight followed by shutdown/ tail rotor hub inspection). The Osprey is a lot more complicated, so finding a fix may be out of reach. In the interim, reducing risk is the sensible path to take.
I hope the v280 program takes these lessons into account. I think tilt rotors are valuable especially in time sensitive situations like medical evacuation, but there are a lot of problems that need to be dealt with
I'll believe when it flies for 15+ years with out mishaps not related to operator/mechanic error. Army has a ton of useless soldiers to sacrifice to the tiltrotor God before people start caring.
There's nothing inherently wrong with Russian titanium; minerals are where you find them. The SR-71 was made of Russian titanium. One of Lockheed's coups was obtaining the stuff without Ivan figuring out who was buying so much of it, and why
Until there is a conflict with Russia and they cut off supply and we can’t make any more aircraft. Yeah, nah
It's not just the elemental Titanium, it's the thermomechanical process used to make the final part. Russian manufacturing was nowhere near as good as America's was back then.
@@andyharman3022 The point was that the US needed the raw material,for which it had no other source at the time. It's no good knowing how to work stuff you don't have.
We used Russian Ti on the rotor hubs on Safari Helicopter. Kitpöanrs
Never a problem. Raw block before machining like $600.00
@@kajnummelin1925 Which alloy?
Well-informed clear accurate presentation as always - including context and avoiding sensationalizing - many thanks
What a joke. He's clearly biased as he says he was part of the Osprey program. Whining about the F-35 in comparison. This is the worst video he's ever posted.
In my limited experience with the MV-22 Ii found the type to be reliable and trustworthy... within limits. Once i got over the awareness that it doesn't glide or autorotate.
One disconcerting flight behaviour i observed several times was a slow yaw oscillation that i can only describe as a yaw instability at slow horizontal velocities. I always attributed this to the enormous gyroscopic forces at play ... but now that you mention the potential for intermittent hard clutch engagement - i wonder if there wasn't some sort of emergent control behaviour that we weren't aware of?
Bless you all. So proud of our brave men and women. Thank you all for your service.
The Chinook is still having problems and that was in the Vietnam war. I worked on it in the late 80s and there were several accidents at the time. The V22 is an awesome aircraft. The marines say that it's accident rate is lower than some of its other aircraft
Thank you for the update on this issue, Ward. I have been wondering what next action might result after this latest mishap. I hope the underlying issues can be solved in a timely fashion, especially since our troops have enough to worry about when deployed in hostile environments and don't need to worry about their own equipment being a hazard to their safety.
Skipper Grissom used to say “safety is NOT #1. If it was, we’d pull these Tomcats in the hangar and shut the doors”
Pitts.............At least in a Tomcat you could eject.
Correct!! We all know making profits for defense contractors is job # 1.
The pilots killed by f-104's was staggering.
the Spanish disagree
@@grigorkyokuto7546why?
Im in NC and I witnessed an Osprey flying yesterday Dec 8th.
Thanks for posting. Very informative.
One of my former units was an AFSOC maintenance unit for CV-22s. You cannot believe how many significant issues these aircraft are riddled with that pose more than significant safety issues. Couple that with an unsustainable logistics model that is filled with parts that will never be attainable due to bureaucratic financial constraints and processes, and contracts even for basic consumables specific for this airframe that are half a decade out for something as simple as O-rings. The only thing solid about this aircraft are the RR engines, which are basically the same engines as the newer MC-130J airframe. The people working on these are fantastic techs who have to pull miracles just to keep them airworthy enough to appease leadership so ops can get their flight hours.
If you work with ANY military aircraft you can say this same thing. I worked on F15s and 16s and there were constant issues with airframes and electronics. We deal with it and we move on, often with tie wire lol.
@@tonymorris4335 On one deployment in an undisclosed location we had a crew we thought went down because they went dark, no coms, no nothing. 25 minutes later we had all hand in line rounding up mattresses, and anything soft we could find because the CV-22 had lost power, lost all auxiliary power, and was only able to make it back by crash landing with one fully operational engine and no battery power. The pilot had to set her down hard on the pile of soft stuff we all rounded up because they couldn’t even get the landing gear to open. The entire aircraft just decided to basically “die” mid flight for reasons we still don’t fully understand. I’ve worked with many airframes…from 4 different MAJCOMs over the years, everything from B2, B1, F-16, F-15E, F-22, MC-130J, AC-130U, AC-130W, AC-130J, C-130H, T-38, CV-22, MQ-1/9 and a few others I’m forgetting. In my opinion, the CV-22 is by far incomparably worse in terms of unique issues that create safety concerns. The issues with other platforms is they are aging, and are tired with a natural progression of problems that arise from being old. In this case, the Ospreys are a newer platform that are just riddled with engineering, logistical, and operational problems right out of the manufacturing facility. I won’t even get into my personal experience flying on them, which is just as bad as the deployment experience mentioned above. This aircraft needs to be replaced before more meaningless deaths occur.
After flying and maintaining the Osprey, I agree with what you said about the aircraft riddle with safety issues. My experience, it seems the engineers designed the aircraft with the goal to have a small profile, thus cramming all the components together. With an aircraft that has a high vibration profile, cramming all the wires and parts together in the nacelles makes a maintenance nightmare.
Stuff enough $$$ in the right pockets, U get anything you want.
Military Industrial Complex. The politicians market the war to the masses for support, the companies reap the profits 👍 late stage capitalism 💰💰💰
Every year or so for 30 years now we have had an article of an Osprey falling from the sky and grounding of all Osprey while ;they' investigate it. Ospreys have one HUGE flaw. They cannot glide. A helicopter can auto gyrate to a landing, the rotors can become an ersatz wing. Airplanes have wings and if the engine shuts down they can glide,, often back to the airport or use a field or highway. The Osprey can do neither. If a screw comes loose,, the fuel is contaminated, a drive shaft breaks,, anything goes wrong, mechanical or operational,, the Osprey falls to the ground. It has no way to glide or ease the descent. They are expensive,, and every malfunction will result in a crash.
An Osprey can glide in airplane mode or continue single engine in airplane mode. Just can’t hover
You pretty much listed all of the things that appear to have no possibility of an engineering solution, well said. No glide rate (none that's survivable anyway), no autorotation capabilities, loss of one rotor means disaster, and it just seems to be chock full of potential single catastrophic failure points. I wouldn't want anyone I care about to risk their lives in these things, and I very seriously doubt that any of the higher ups who manufacture them would want their family members in them either. Amazing concept but way too flawed approach to delivering mission critical elements into a battle scenario in my opinion.
A lot fixed wing aur=craft can't glide without power either. Planes like the F-22 and F-35 are inherently unstable and rely on computers making hundreds of micro adjustments every second or minute to keep the thing stable and flying. If they lose power and/lor their flight computers, the only thing the pilot can do is eject since the pilot won't be able to keep the plane steady enough to glide without computer assistance. Not to mentions that starting with the F-16, modern military aircraft (and many civilian airliners) are fly by wire and have no physical connections from the stick or yoke to the control surfaces, so no power means no control.
@@chrissmith7669 A glide ratio of 4 to 1 and with a forward speed required of 160 or 170 knots with a sink rate of 3500 to 4000 feet per minute,, This all assuming both engines out, You are in the realm of a skydiver in freefall. Operationally, how often does an Osprey have a meaningful speed of 160 knots,, how often does an Osprey have even 5000 feet of altitude AG? Yes, they can glide. and with one engine out they can continue in straight ahead flight,, no hover ability, The reason for my statement is the normal operational use, speed, altitude, of an Osprey means they have the glide capability of a thrown brick. It is inherent to the basic design. IF they want to make it possible to survive, there are many ballistic parachutes in use today,, but even that thought,, the normal near ground operations,, even a ballistic chute will not have sufficient time to deploy half of the time. Ospreys will continue to kill. The fox is in charge of the chickens.
This.
Thank you for your information & Knowledge of such an Important plane.
What a great researched video on the V-22.
Thanks! Always good intel and timely content about defense and our brothers/sisters in harm's way. Thank you!
I was out yesterday surfing at San Onofre (infront of the nuclear station) and there was an MV-22 buzzing around. Could also see CVN72 off in the distance. I was watching it fly wondering if they were going to ground it again…
Thank you for the expert analysis and report. My son is deployed in the region and I have come to depend on your expertise.
Excellent summary !
I know the V-22 is a capable aircraft, but I have always thought that thing looked incredibly dangerous. Thanks for the fantastic rundown Mooch!
For 21 years I was in the USAF, 1970-1991. I've seen many aircraft, got close to many due to my job. I've seen F86s, F15s, F16, T-38s, Blue Angles, Thunderbirds, bombers, tankers, and many foreign aircraft. This Osprey just doesn't look right.
I love the look. Could look better but it had to fit in the same box as a phrog
@bondgabebond4907
Way too complicated
Literally no different than the CH-46 or CH-47.
incredibly dangerous--a regular heli has too many moving parts but there is still a chance to get it down with a malfunction--the v-22 your dead--my son a ex army heli pilot said he would not want to fly it
I worked in the factory that makes the very large bearings that allow the engines to rotate. I maintained the machines that made the parts. There were lots of checks and double checks in the fabrication of those monstrous bearings. One time in the heat treat department, one of that section left a zinc hammer in the furnace. When the bearings went through for firing, the hammer vaporized, depositing contaminate on all the components of the bearings. That entire batch, worth hundreds of thousands of dollars, was scrapped.
They could have converted the batch into vitamins.
Fascinating stuff. You were one of the legion of unsung heroes, whose skill, knowledge, and experience turn technological improbables into reliable reality.
Lebanon, NH ?
@@johnbrennan3735 Yes.
Thanks for the insight Ward!
Thanks for the explanation
I remember when I was a kid there were issues with the F16 Falcon. Pilots were being killed in accidents that couldn't be explained. It was using fly by wire which was brand new technology. People were saying it was unsafe and should be scrapped. What was finally determined was a wire harness allowed chaffing and critical electronics became damaged causing catastrophic loss of control. The V22 is and will continue to be a great platform as long as pilots don't try and make it perform in a manor it is not capable.
The thing about the F-16 though, is it still didn’t continue to be a problem 20 years later. Then, you have the option of punching out if things go sideways. Pilot error has been the number one reason we’ve lost F-16s over its lifespan. Not so with the CV-22. Even when pilot error contributed to the crash, it would have been more survivable in a traditional fixed- or rotary-wing aircraft. I’m not saying CV-22 can’t be operated safely, but it certainly needs more mechanical attention, along with testing and evaluation and improvements continuously than any other aircraft.
@@AdamKeele I think the real problem is the military maintenance culture. Im not talking about maintainers and mechanics. Im talking about logistics. I think the air-frame needs more replacement parts then the service is willing to allocate. Some of these comment imply many airframes are kept going using whatever the mechanics can get ahold of because leadership demands air-worthyness and the mechanics dont have the authority to declare the frame isnt going to be air worthy with what they have on hand.
This leadership culture means that ospreys which need new parts arent getting them and are being wrongly signed off on as air-worthy.
I heard there was a near-accident with an early F-16A that flew normally until it hit Mach 1. Then the flight controls reversed. It turned out that somebody had mixed up the left and right connections for a set of air data sensors used for supersonic flight. I'm fairly certain one of the connector sets was modified in subsequent builds to prevent such mis-mating.
After 10 years as a CH53E crew chief working hand in hand with V22s I saw first hand the many benefits and drawbacks of the platform, but moreso drawbacks especially while deployed and/or in the desesert environment. Shitters will always be the primary heavy lift but most importantly will provide for support to the V22 workload requirements during these tough time. Thoughts and prayers to the crews family.
Warms my heart to know the 53 is still called the shitter. What are they calling the Kilo??? The 'King Shitter?' or 'Shitter King?' I like the last one.... :p
Thank you for the detailed history of the Osprey.
Thank you for your insight on the V-22
Thanks again Ward for your insight. I have followed the V22 since the late 80s, during my enlistment, and through today. It's a complicated aircraft. All aircraft in DoD inventory are complicated. I remember the problems with the C141 and the wing spars. Even retrofits didn't cure the issues. Any airframe when placed into operational status is going to have some quirks and failures arise. There's a reason these folks get flight pay. Any routine mission in a military aircraft can encounter problems. It's the nature of business. We don't like it, but there it is. Same is true of space flight, deep sea exploration, and many other endeavors. I know of several that have actually praised the dust off for concealment when bugging out. Also troops appreciate it's ability to get out of dodge in a hurry vs a regular helo. Prayers for the heroes families.
Rest in peace to the men or women who lost their lives!
Good report well stated with the facts. THANKS sir!
That was an excellent technical report.
In the last couple of days I have had no less than 9 CMV-22B's fly over my house…sticks of three in a row separated in time and space. All in groups of three several minutes apart obviously spaced out on a cross-country flight headed East across Central Texas. White tops and grey bottoms they have to be CMV-22Bs. The VRC-40 "Rawhides" COD unit is now shifting over to VRM-40 (establish 6APR22) yet but was well on the way. Perhaps that is what this is. The first V-22 grounding release I saw was for everyone but CMV-22B and that made sense to me because VMR-30 is fully employed supporting our CVNs in the Western Pacific. I guess that changed?
TORCH OUT
That's interesting, cuz yesterday (the 6th) on Camp Lejeune, I saw more Osprey than usual. They were doing 3 ship insertions over my barracks all day.
I guess they knew the grounding was coming and were trying to get some training knocked out.
We have daily flight schedules in the aviation community. Basically, a breakdown on whose flying at what time for what mission specific set. Its not necessarily they knew it was just planned already.
Congrats on 500K subs!
“Nothing is as inevitable as a mistake whose time have come.” ~ Tussman’s Law.
I'll have total trust in the Osprey when Marine One is an Osprey!
hear, hear!
Are you implying the military places different values on human life?
Don't they use a couple?
I'd like to see a chart comparing fatalities per flight mile flown, by year, and comparable charts for aircraft the Osprey has or is proposed to replace, such as the CH-46 and C-2. Is or is not the Osprey a much more dangerous aircraft than the types it is replacing?
Mishaps are typically calculated per flight hours, not miles.
IIRC, last I heard the Osprey wasn’t really a standout for mishaps. But they tended to have more fatalities. Being that it often Carrie’s passengers it would need to be compared again to aircraft with similar passenger loads, as well as fixed wing and rotary aircraft to get a good picture of the situation. And again broken down by combat, non combat, and training mishaps.
Lots of data to pic through and some might not be readily available. But I don’t think it’s flight record is actually that bad. Just very bad consequences when something does go wrong.
Ward, you give so much insight Thank you.
Just found your channel. Your way of speaking and expression is excellent. You sound interesting to listen to.
Pretty scary piece of equipment. A lot of moving parts that seem to either over engineered or under engineered. Juan Brown on the Bkancolirio clog really did a good job of explaining the drive system. Enjoy your vlogs Ward.
As you have said repeatedly, NATOPS is written in blood. Unfortunately, it isn't the only document written in blood. With each incident we try to prevent future failures. Building new military equipment is like doing Science. If you aren't making mistakes, you're doing it wrong. If you don't fix those mistakes, you're doing it REALLY wrong. If you won't admit you make mistakes, you're not doing it at all. The Mk14 torpedo comes immediately to mind as an example of the latter.
Except the Mk 14 torpedo didn't kill Navy personnel, the detonator in the early models was a dud. The V-22 is killing service members.
@@jefflebowski918 IIRC we lost at least two submarines to circular shots from the Mk 14. The biggest problem was BuOrd wouldn't test under real world conditions as a cost savings measure. To top off that they refused to admit there was a problem. As a result it didn't get permanently fixed until late 1943. That cost lives.
Thanks for the video.
Excellent report as usual. One quibble at 1:19 “Vortex ring state” can lead to “settling with power” which any helicopter will get into if descending too fast with too little airspeed. Vortex ring state by itself will not cause a crash if recognized and recovered from.
Unfortunately, the Osprey does not operate like a normal helicopter with Vortex ring state happens. One big issue is, only one rotor could experience it while the other has normal lift, thus causing a rapid loss of control.
The trouble with this design is inherent, when operating in vertical take off or landing, if one engine loses power it tends to flip over, which is bad.
Spot on!
The v22 definitely gives off space shuttle vibes
Don't think so, they have crosslinked power trains.
Another problem is that when you get into a high rate of sink > 600 fpm, the smaller rotors make it difficult to arrest the high rate of sink by adding more power. 🧐
@@jamesburns2232That is not the birds problem, that is totally on the pilots coming from big powerful helos .
Thank your professional input. Being only a private pilot, but also a veteran and hobbyist race car mechanic. This aircraft boggles my mind with its core thrust component complexity, and that a the power units actually rotate as well. I’ve just always thought that often times less is more, aka KISS. The Osprey IMO, and sadly, seems to use opposite logic.
I spent many years building the telescoping ballscrew assemblies that rotate the engines up and down.
We get Ospreys flying over our house on a regular basis where I live in Norfolk UK, They use the old Sculthorpe base for training in some fashion, also they pass over on the way to the North sea training areas.
"The more they overthink the plumbing, the easier it is to stop up the drain." Montgomery Scott a/k/a Scotty from "Star Trek III: The Search for Spock." I am all for technology advancing, but it appears that we are on a trajectory where military hardware will get so expensive, complicated, hard-to-maintain and hard-to-operate that instead of strengthening our defenses and warfighting capabilities, it will degrade them.
People have been arguing this point for over 3,000 years but for as long as having a quantitative edge wins fights... and wars, weapons, tactics and strategy will continue to evolve. Technology either reacts to change or leads it but it will always become more sophisticated. Besides, oftentimes the supposedly 'overly' complex technology has a much better safety record than alternatives and predecessors but that admitting that doesn't generate clicks like sensational news media stories do.
Agree its really sad when your more worried about your own equipment killing you than the enemy killing you.
@aymonfoxc1442 the basic fact is that when a helicopter fails it can more or less be put down with a degree of safety but the osprey seems to have parts of its flight regime that all to often lead to more fatalities than mortal kombat finishing moves.
What are you a communist? These need to be complicated so they remain innovative and lucrative to produce
Thanks for the detailed update. Here near MCAS Yuma, I was wondering why I hadn't heard any more Ospreys overhead. They're much easier on the ears than the f35s. Not an accurate comparison I know.
I lived in Yuma for many years. I have seen it a lot of the MCAS MAD Days at the base.
One house that I lived in for a little while was right across the highway from the base. Every now and then if they changed runways the Harriers would come into land. Right over the empty field that was next to my house. So close I could wave at the pilots and count the rivets in the plane. Good times back then.
The F35 can definitely make a racket
@@chrissmith7669 as an Air Force brat I've heard plenty of jet aircraft but the f-35 is the loudest! They are the true THUNDER jet. I think that was the f-89 that had that title
good info shipmate
Thanks Mooch! 🇺🇸
I saw the first crashed V-22 Osprey in a hangar at Boeing Vertol in Philadelphia. It was hidden behind a huge canvas tarpaulin. The engineer I was visiting said he wasn't supposed to, but he gave me a peak at it.
Elaborate the detail of it
@Dr.Pepper001
You should have asked him, what were you thinking when you designed this monstrosity?
Is the osprey actually more dangerous than other rotary wing craft? I was under the impression that it got its bad reputation from crashes early on, but the majority of the problems have been fixed and its pretty safe compared to helos now
im pretty sure that all the crashes are just very highly publicized. no one talks about the black hawk that crashed in california the day after the cali osprey crash, which also happened on the same range
From what I have heard, the V22 Osprey has had less issues than the AV-8 Harrier. Yes, I know they are very different aircraft but they are both dual mode aircraft that must make a thrust direction change between vertical and horizontal. As you mentioned, this transition probably not easily modeled and we just don't have that many hours on it compared to traditional signal mode aircraft (helicopters and airplanes). The loss of life is not something you want but the capabilities the V22 brings for quick evacuation and quick deployment will also save lives as well).
Every aircraft has had its issues. That being said, the death toll from the V-22 is well Into the 50s (including 19 lost in the Marana incident), whereas the AV-8 has killed 40+ pilots... one at a time... in an aircraft with an ejection seat. There's a reason the the AV-8 series is called "the widowmaker", "the Scarier", and my personal favorite, "the North Carolina lawn dart".
Hey, I love your channel and the videos. I especially enjoy seeing that R9 in the background in your man cave. Just a friendly reminder unless you already know, the cheaper stands have foam cushions which can cause a reaction with the nitrocellulose laquer on your guitar and leave a nasty looking melted burn mark in the finish. I always put a T-shirt or cotton polish cloth down on the stands, when the guitar is resting on them for any length of time. Also put a cotton cloth between the guitar neck and the stand. Keep on rocking 🎸.
I read the book "Dream Machine" about the Osprey. It seemed like an exercise of willpower and promises with the best intentions. I see the Osprey as a transitional platform from helicopter to a more advanced system. The Osprey is the awkward platform that will be replaced by a better system in the future.
Yes! However zillions will be wasted in the meantime. This follows on the failed naval Zumwalt-class. Guess somebody is getting paid off!
As a former Navy Marine Engineering type (Black Shoe), ENC (SW) retired, I had no idea how the loss of one asset could cause the almost total loss of logistics throughout the various deployed fleets. This sounds like the classic case of putting "too many eggs in one basket". Perhaps the upper military management is vesting too much time in social engineering and kissing ass to do their jobs anymore. Thanks Ward for bringing us up to date!
Rotating a spinning bicycle tire is a GREAT analogy. 👍
I remember in 2011 seeing a bunch of them sitting on the flight line at Kandahar Airfield(KAF)
Like the Harrier, the Osprey is a system that requires special skills and understanding to fly safely and effectively. Some of the points you make were new to me - the concept of rotating a spinning bicycle wheel and the forces involved. THAT is a tough one.
On thing I thought about was the comment about how long it would take to field a replacement for the Navy or the Marines. I went looking at the DM Boneyard and noticed that there are rotary wings there, but; I couldn't identify any dual rotor helos. Plenty of attack helos and some H53s HH3s, but if there are any CH-47s Chinooks or ch46s they are well hidden. Unless there is another boneyard for Helos it looks like a permanent grounding of the V22 would be a disaster for the services.
The Harrier definitely fills a niche, though. At least the navalized one does. If you’re got smallish carriers and need a decent strike aircraft to stick on it at a fairly reasonable price, the Harrier fits the bill. I feel like most of the things the Osprey does would be served by a helo or a prop aircraft.
In the 1980's I was working for the Turbomach Division of Sundstrand Aviation, which was based in San Diego. Our primary products were APU's for corporate aircraft and Jet Fuel Starters for the F-16. A group from Bell-Boing came and pitched the idea of the V-22 to us. They specifically mapped out how the failed Iran hostage rescue in 1980 could have been successful had the V-22 been available. Then they old us how they "sold" the program to the military. They invited Sen. Barry Goldwater for a ride on one of the prototypes. Having been a pilot in WW2, Barry fell in love with it, and made a phone call to the Commandant of the Marine Corp.. He said "You have to come and fly this thing". After flying in it, the Commandant said "I want 300 of these!' And the rest, as they say , was history.
Any sprag clutch once engaged does not slip. The aircraft needs to be flown within the approved envelope to prevent a hard "re-engagement"
Thank you for explaining thins in a way most people can understand. We take our design jobs very seriously for everything that takes it's wheels off the ground.