Osprey in Iraq-RPG bait?

[comiso90]

At least there is no tail rotor for vulnerability sake.

I wonder how well the props can stand up to heavy machinegun fire?

The Hind's rotors were designed to withstand .50 cal rounds (in theory).

Marines to deploy tilt-rotor aircraft to Iraq - CNN.com

[lesofprimus]

Kloby where are u????



I wish I could be one of those guys...

One thing I got a question on is the armor plating of the engines... How resistant are they to enemy fire??? I did a pretty deep search and all I could come up with is this...

The V-22 must be resistant to flight critical damage imposed by hits in vital areas by 12.7 millimeter (mm) Armor Piercing Incendiary (API) (threshold) projectiles and by 14.5 mm API projectiles (objective) at 90 percent of their respective muzzle velocities (USMC KPP). The 12.7mm and 14.5mm API projectiles are fired from heavy machine guns that are normally vehicle-mounted or emplaced. The 23mm and 30mm projectiles are fired from vehicle-mounted anti-aircraft artillery that can fire a mix of Armor Piercing Incendiary (API) and High Explosive Incendiary (HEI) rounds.

The cockpit seats are armored for protection against 7.62 mm armor piercing rounds.

The lower one-third and appropriate walls of each tank are self-sealing to a 12.7 mm AP threat.The fuel tanks are made of a lightweight synthetic rubber with is highly extensible and has high tensile strength. They are designed to meet a drop test requirement of 65 feet when filled with water.

The proprotor blades are also made of composites. These structures are fatigue resistant and damage tolerant, features particularly desirable for ballistic survivability.

Structural damage tolerance requirements in the V-22 system specification require that the V-22 airframe be ballistically tolerant and that destruction of any single frame member not kill the aircraft.

An interconnecting driveshaft allows the Osprey to continue flying in the advent of an engine failure. Either engine can power both proprotors, although with reduced performance.

The AE 1107C engine and installation in the V-22 incorporate numerous vulnerability reduction features. The volume of fuel contained in engine components and lines is minimized through the use of the FADECs. In addition, the engine compartment contains a single-shot fire suppression system to prevent uncontrolled engine fires.

[comiso90]

Great photo.... I'd like to get my knees in the breeze on an Osprey too!

Lots of helpful info too. thanks. I didn't know that there was a interconecting shaft for the engines... cool.

Do they use ceramic armor? Kevlar?

[lesofprimus]

Im hoping to find out once Kloby gets here, and seein how he flies one, I wait in anticipation...

[mkloby]

Originally Posted by lesofprimus

Im hoping to find out once Kloby gets here, and seein how he flies one, I wait in anticipation...

I'm not an Osprey pilot yet, I am just about finished with multi-engines and have to do rotary wing back in Pensacola...

That's an awesome pic - it surely is my wallpaper. LtGen Castellaw was at our Marine Ball at NAS Pensacola last year. Can't wait to get to the RAG. The first plan was to send VMM-263 on a deployment, although I am not sure if they intended them to actually conduct operations in Iraq... but they have apparently decided to jump straight to sending Ospreys in zone. It has met and exceeded the operational expectations laid out for it to date.


That's a good deal of info that you came up w/ les. I don't have specifics on the armor plating of the engines, but I would certainly think they would be fitted with the newer leightweight composite armor plating that is being installed on some of the older helos, such as CH-46E's. From my understanding, the proprotors are resilient and capable of withstanding HMG fire.

Hitting a helo with a non-guided shoulder launched RPG is not a common occurance. That would likely require close range, slow airspeed, and much luck. An example of when this would be a vulnerability would be when doing assault support and dropping into an LZ. This can be mitigated by providing CAS in support of the operation, hopefully effective enough to suppress the enemy, such as AV-8Bs AH-1Ws...

Another component which will increase survivability is the ALE-47 for chaff/flares. No doubt the biggest worry is the sophisticated manpads being supplied to insurgent forces from outside sources. You can bet the recent incidents are prompting a review and analysis regarding the effectiveness of that system. That's why that 46 we lost several weeks ago to a manpad was such a big issue.

Enroute, speed will obviously make the osprey less vulnerable to enemy fire. Crossing a linear threat abreast well in excess of 200 knots is going to be more safe than traditional helo operations, plus we have the option of climbing higher than a helo is capable of.

The great benefit of the MV-22 in assault support will be the the increased range, speed, and number of Marines it can transport. When compared to the CH-46E, mission times are cut DRAMATICALLY. It will increase the mobility and flexibility of Marines on the ground to respond to fluid threats.

It's going to be time for the MV-22 to 'put up or shut up,' and we're confident that she's going to do the former. You better bet, though, that squadron is going to be one of the leading targets in the whole country while they are deployed...

[DerAdlerIstGelandet]

I dont think the Osprey will be RPG bait. It is hard to take down an aircraft with an RPG. First of all the RPG is not guided, it flies straight to its target. Second of all it is slow eneogh to evade.

When I was flying in Iraq RPB was the least of my worries.

[comiso90]

“RPG bait” was intended to be a euphemism for “vulnerable to ground attack from crude weapons”. Certainly no one expects Ospreys to fall from the sky, continually battered by un-guided rocket propelled grenades.

I have visions of the Osprey clad in make-shift improvised, slated armor like the type that is worn on Humvees and APCs

[mkloby]

Originally Posted by comiso90

“RPG bait” was intended to be a euphemism for “vulnerable to ground attack from crude weapons”. Certainly no one expects Ospreys to fall from the sky, continually battered by un-guided rocket propelled grenades.

I have visions of the Osprey clad in make-shift improvised, slated armor like the type that is worn on Humvees and APCs

As stated above - it's not the crude, small arms fire that has people worried. It's the newer generation manpads.

I don't think anything like that will happen. Besides, the newer armor fitted on aircraft is lightweight composite stuff, and hopefully the armor layout will prove effective.

[DerAdlerIstGelandet]

Also the Osprey will have built in armour that is specifically designed for the Osprey made out of Kevlar.

You can not just modify and put the kind of make shift armour that is in the Hummers and stuff. It weighs to much and it will mess up the CG. Everything has to be purpose built and approved before it is installed.

We had BPS (Ballistic Protection System) installed in our Blackhawks (designed for our aircraft and would not fit in any other aircraft) and the same will be for the Osprey.

[comiso90]

Originally Posted by DerAdlerIstGelandet

You can not just modify and put the kind of make shift armour that is in the Hummers and stuff. It weighs to much and it will mess up the CG. Everything has to be purpose built and approved before it is installed.

.

Not recommended... Yes.
Highly discouraged... Yes.
Greatly affect aerodynamic capabilities yes.

But would you really say "can't"? If birds were coming back all chewed up, some field improvisation that comprises certain flight characteristics may be an option.

Perhaps they will develop “Heavy Assault” versions that fly slower with a smaller payload. Yes, speed is a key to survivability but some extra armor on a hot LZ may be worth the trade off.

I hate to think that some commanders/politicians think Ospreys are too valuable and the political ramifications of losing one are too great that they are not used to maximum effect.

[DerAdlerIstGelandet]

Originally Posted by comiso90

Not recommended... Yes.
Highly discouraged... Yes.
Greatly affect aerodynamic capabilities yes.

But would you really say "can't"? If birds were coming back all chewed up, some field improvisation that comprises certain flight characteristics may be an option.

Perhaps they will develop “Heavy Assault” versions that fly slower with a smaller payload. Yes, speed is a key to survivability but some extra armor on a hot LZ may be worth the trade off.

I hate to think that some commanders/politicians think Ospreys are too valuable and the political ramifications of losing one are too great that they are not used to maximum effect.

No it will not be done. If you do that to an aircraft you can not fly it. There are rules and regulations set by the military. The days of field modding aircraft is over.

Therefore I guarantee you that a BPS system that is built for all military rotary wing aircraft and type approved has allready been developed.

[Matt308]

Have to agree with Adler. Too expensive of a machine to lose one over field mods and the political repercussions are just too high for the Corps to lose one, especially to non-engineered field expedient mods. Nobody would sign off on that.

[DerAdlerIstGelandet]

You do anything to an aircraft the maint has to be signed off by a TI. No TI will sign off on that because it is there ass that will be in jail.

[majorwoody10]

does an osprey have to be actually struck by something to fall out of the sky ? .i thought they were supposed to be self imolating ..

[mkloby]

Originally Posted by majorwoody10

does an osprey have to be actually struck by something to fall out of the sky ? .i thought they were supposed to be self imolating ..

What do you mean by that? The V-22 has not had any major mishaps in a long time - yet people bring things up from 5 years ago and more. Do a little research beyond what morons that write for TIME magazine spew - which was little more than a diatribe with an agenda.