The Dream Machine - V-22 Osprey Program History

[Mark Nankivil]

Hi All -

Last week I bought a new book in preparation of serving jury duty this week. I went to the book store with a 50% off coupon and one book in mind but came across a book titled "the Dream Machine - The Untold History of the Notorious V-22 Osprey" by Richard Whittle. The title initially turned me off but I took a cursory look thru the book and did not find the negativity it implied and thought what the heck, I'll read it. I'm about half way thru it right now and have found it to be a fair and balanced view of the program and figure that the "notorious" moniker being the book editor's way of catching one's attention. Right now, I would expect someone buying this as a way of securing their negative view of the program will be disappointed.

http://www.amazon.com/Dream-Machine-Untold-History-Notorious/dp/1416562958

Enjoy the Day! Mark

 

[Vpanoptes]

Hi -
Being cheap, I sat in B & N and actually read the whole book. I would agree that it is not a diatribe against the machine nor certainly is it a puff piece. I was impressed with the level of detail and the thoroughness of the treatment. While one can still question the wisdom and relevance of this program, it was/is certainly a "worthwhile read".

- Dan

 

[mz]

Here's an interview of the author by Jon Stewart:
http://www.thedailyshow.com/watch/tue-april-27-2010/richard-whittle

 

[Stargazer]

Given the less than impressive development history and operational performance of the Osprey so far, I'm surprised the book wasn't called "The Nightmarish V-22" instead...

 

[Mark Nankivil]

I'm not sure I understand the view of less than impressive - the book goes a long ways towards showing where efforts were blunted in getting some sort of orderly effort into getting it built. Yes, the manufacturer's had some serious issues with the development of the aircraft (the book has a very interesting inside view of the work environment at both Bell and Boeing and how they did or did not work well together) but the political side of the equation is the primary reason why - my opinion - the too long development time involved and the resultant higher cost of the aircraft. Add to that the need to make it the "do all" airframe which pushed up weight, then size, power and round and round they go. I've been lucky enough to speak with a number of Osprey crews (USMC & USAF) and they all love what they have and think highly of it - I had no sense they were spewing the party line either. The USMC guys were so glad to be out of the Phrog and able to actually fly versus beating the air into submission.

I look forward to reading an in depth overview of its use in Iraq & Afghanistan and how that has gone.

Enjoy the Day! Mark

 

[Stargazer]

I was refering to the numerous technical troubles that plagued the problem from the very start of the FSD phase, with two of the six prototypes crashing (if I'm not mistaken), the colossal increase in costs, the withdrawal of the Army and Air Force from the deal, the 25-year delay in getting that thing operational... I was an ardent enthusiast of the XV-15 and welcomed the V-22 program with great expectation. I talked with a few guys working at Bell on international airshows throughout the 1990s, and everytime they'd say basically: "We've overcome the obstacles and the V-22 will come of age soon, it's a great aircraft" but nothing really materialized.

The stubborn pursuit of the complicated tilt-rotor solution and its intricate network of gears and shafts that don't seem to work so easily on large aircraft, instead of the reliable and easy-to-operate tilt-ducts (a configuration which Bell had thoroughly explored in the X-22A program) also seems a risky challenge. By putting all their eggs in the single basket of tilt-rotor technology instead of procuring a bit of both, it seems to the military delayed the widespread use of an operational multipurpose VTOL aircraft by a couple of decades.

 

[gatoraptor]

One of the prototype crashes -- the one that took place in Wilmington on its first attempted flight -- was not the fault of the design, but a communications breakdown between Bell and Boeing. It resulted in reversed controls -- a difficult situation for any pilot to manage.

And the later accident in Virginia was the result of a misguided decision to go too far too soon, although the situation that caused the crash was one that would have happened sooner or later, and it was entirely corrected after this crash, so the victims did not perish in vain.

I think that now that the Osprey is in service, that it will acquit itself quite well and have a long and useful career.

 

[Grey Havoc]

I hear that the JMSDF is still interested in a potential ASW version, although Boeing doesn't seem to be actively marketing such a version (or indeed any export variant) at the present time.

 

[F-14D]

Just for the record,

One crash was caused when the flight crew pressed on with a problem when they should have landed (plenty of divert airfields on the way and since it's a VTOL, could also have landed on about any patch of ground).

One was caused because part of the flight control system was installed backward and so the a/c was uncontrollable as soon as it left the ground.

One was caused by pilot error, exceeding the cleared flight envelope. This was the accident that caused all the "Vortex Ring State" hysteria in the uninformed press. Ironically, further flight testing revealed that the Osprey was less vulnerable to VRS that conventional helos, and much easier to recover (although the technique--blip the nacelles forward, wasn't known at the time of the accident).

One was caused by a design flaw compounded by pilot error (multiple reboots).

Although the official report has not yet been published on the CV-22 loss, preliminary info seems to indicate the aircraft was in extremely low flight and hit an obstruction/terrain.

As far as the AF withdrawing, that's news to them. They're taking delivery of what they ordered, the birds are operational, and they're trying to get funding to double their order.

The book is a bit dry in places, but it's very,very good. I recommend it. Interestingly, it's also available as an unabridged audiobook.

 

[yasotay]

Incredibly good book. I have had the honor of talking at length with the author and heard him speak on the subject on two occasions. The "Notorious" is indeed a publishers decision toward sales with the book. I highly recommend the book to anyone who wants to get a glimpse at the Byzantine precess that has evolved (mutated is probably a better word) in the US toward high technology aircraft. He wants more than anything else for people to understand he went into the process without an agenda. Knowing several of the people in the book they have all said that it is far toward them and the process.

Also I must agree with F-14D. I have on numerous occasion pointed out that V-22 suffers no more than most other rotorcraft and aircraft in its development woes. The others just did not have pervasive infosphere to deal with. Other than wanting to drive up the readiness rate, which is again to be expected for an aircraft at this point in its career the USMC seems pleased. AFSOC (nominally part of USAF) seems satisfied as well.