Posted on 12/04/2006 4:09:10 PM PST by SandRat
| WASHINGTON, Dec. 4, 2006 -- Coalition forces have recovered the bodies of all three missing servicemembers lost during an emergency water landing by a helicopter yesterday.
A U.S. Marine Corps CH-46 helicopter from 3rd Marine Aircraft Wing made an emergency water landing near the shore of Lake Qadisiyah in western Anbar province. Sixteen personnel were on board, including the crew. |
| Related Articles: Helicopter Crash Kills Marine; Five Other Servicemembers Die in Operations Related Sites: |
Rest in peace, brave soldiers.
3rd Marine Air Wing is from San Diego, MAS Miramar
The Sea Knight is still in service because of politicians, most notably one Dick Cheney, and lobbyists, not Generals.
I don't know where you factor Cheney into the equation, however, I do know almost every General wants the biggest, fanciest and most expensive toys he can get Congress to fund (if you doubt that, I suggest you read Boyd: The Fighter Pilot Who Changed the Art of War).
I also know the Marines have been trying to get the Osprey to work for over 20 years, and THAT'S why the Sea Knight is still in service. For more that two decades billions have been thrown down the Osprey rat hole and the thing is barely in limited production. In the meanwhile, the Marines could've been flying a far better bird than the Sea Knight for many years by now. I think the Osprey is a great technology demonstrator and should've been funded as such (R&D) for the last two decades. Maybe by now the Marines could've begun replacing the Sea Knight's replacement with a reliable (which the Osprey is not) second generation tilt rotor aircraft. But no, that didn't happen, and it's not because of Dick Cheney. It's because of the Generals. It verges on the criminal.
At least the Bush Administration had the sense to cancel the Crusader and Comanche, a pair of very expensive, yet worthless programs. Boy--did that ever pi$$ off the Generals!
In 1986 the cost of a single V-22 was estimated at $24 million, with 923 aircraft to be built. In 1989 the Bush administration cancelled the project, at which time the unit cost was estimated at $35 million, with 602 aircraft. The V-22 question caused friction between Secretary of Defense Richard B. Cheney and Congress throughout his tenure. DoD spent some of the money Congress appropriated to develop the aircraft, but congressional sources accused Cheney, who continued to oppose the Osprey, of violating the law by not moving ahead as Congress had directed. Cheney argued that building and testing the prototype Osprey would cost more than the amount appropriated. In the spring of 1992 several congressional supporters of the V-22 threatened to take Cheney to court over the issue. A little later, in the face of suggestions from congressional Republicans that Cheney's opposition to the Osprey was hurting President Bush's reelection campaign, especially in Texas and Pennsylvania where the aircraft would be built, Cheney relented and suggested spending $1.5 billion in fiscal years 1992 and 1993 to develop it. He made clear that he personally still opposed the Osprey and favored a less costly alternative.The program was revived by the incoming Clinton administration...
You obviously don't know much about Cheney's behavior, along with that of one David S. Chu, while he was SecDef. You also obviously don't know much about the Osprey program as demonstrated by your careless use of long refuted generalities.
It verges on the criminal.
What is and was criminal was Cheney illegally diverting funds appropriated for the Osprey to other projects. Something he continued to do until threatened by Congress with legal action, including criminal prosecution. What is also criminal is trying to force the Marine Corps into buying inadequate H-60s, thus funneling business to United Technologies, because you have relatives working there, which Cheney did.
I just know what my Dad told me about it. He's a retired military rotary wing pilot with about 5,000 flight hours. Taught helicopter maintenance for years. And he did the original LSA on the Osprey nearly 20 years ago.
He said they'd never get the thing to work reliably. Simply put: too many moving parts
It seems like Cheney put his trust in those who agreed with my father. Oh, it also seems like he was trying to be fiscally conservative.
BTW--What's your expertise in the field?
Thank you so much for posting this. May this bring comfort to their families.
How much of it at the controls of a V-22?
He said they'd never get the thing to work reliably. Simply put: too many moving parts
He's quite mistaken as demonstrated by the results of OT-IIG and the work of VMX-22, VMMT-204, VMM-263, HX-21, etc. The Osprey requires less MMH/FH than both platforms it will replace; by a factor of nearly three compared to the CH-46E and a factor of nearly five compared to the CH-53D.
It seems like Cheney put his trust in those who agreed with my father. Oh, it also seems like he was trying to be fiscally conservative.
Bravo Sierra. Cheney and Chu don't know squat about rotary winged aviation and neither could generate an ATO for a MEU if their lives depended on it. Their behavior has cost the taxpayer a hell of a lot more money than if they had simply done what they were instructed to do from 89-93, rather than breaking the law.
BTW--What's your expertise in the field?
Firsthand experience with the V-22 - zilch. I am, however, acquainted with several aviators who actually fly the aircraft and I'll take their word over yours any day of the week. In addition, freeper Pentagon Leatherneck was one of the authors of the following: http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/ac/v22-report.pdf and has thousands of hours as a pilot. If you continue to doubt what I'm telling you then ask him, he'll be more than happy to set you and your father straight.
Yeah. If you're going to be critical of the V-22, fine; everybody's entitled to their opinion. But don't expect to convince anyone using hyperbole and outdated information. Current data and experience are building confidence in the Osprey. Ask anyone flying it, and I'll bet 99% will say they love it.
TC
I don't doubt the airframe maintenance will be an order of magnitude lower (composites don't corrode). But how about the other critters on the ship?
According to FAS (last updated 12/01/05):
...reliability and maintainability of a few subsystems will require management attention. Despite these concerns, the V-22 design remains potentially operationally effective and suitable.
Hmmm...which "subsystems" are those? They sound eerily like the mixer and gear boxes. They've been a "minor problem" on the Osprey long enough for me to father a child, send him/her to college, and have his/her's spine snapped by a hard landing in a Sea Knight.
If the the Osprey was put into production today it would still be a 20 year-old design that couldn't even hover over water. If that's what you want for our troops, however...
Bravo Sierra. Cheney and Chu don't know squat about rotary winged aviation and neither could generate an ATO for a MEU if their lives depended on it. Their behavior has cost the taxpayer a hell of a lot more money than if they had simply done what they were instructed to do from 89-93, rather than breaking the law.
Maybe you should spread your expertise to the guys in the moon suits:
BTW-When does production start?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.