Home » Budget Industry » V-22 Osprey Suffers ‘Hard Landing’ in Syria, Two Service Members Injured


V-22 Osprey Suffers ‘Hard Landing’ in Syria, Two Service Members Injured

Undated Photo of US Air Force CV-22. US Air Force Photo

This post will be updated as new information becomes available.

A V-22 has gone down in Syria, injuring two service member sometime on Thursday, a defense official confirmed to USNI News on Friday.

The V-22 that was operating in support of the ongoing Operation Inherent Resolve mission against ISIS forces suffered a “hard landing,” according to the official.

The downing resulted in non-life-threatening injuries to two unidentified service member. Other press reports indicate the aircraft was operating from a coalition ground base and was destroyed following the hard landing.

“The two were evaluated for non-life threatening injuries and quickly transported to a medical treatment facility, where they were seen and released,” read a Friday release from U.S. Central Command.
“The other passengers and crew on the aircraft were uninjured, and no other casualties were reported on the ground.

The official would not identify the variant or the service to which the V-22 was attached.

Defense officials told Fox News that there was no belief the Osprey was downed by enemy action and said it was a “miracle,” more people weren’t severely injured during the crash.

While the V-22 is most closely associated with the Marine Corps, the Air Force operates a special operations variant of the aircraft in limited numbers — the CV-22.

The U.S. has about 500 ground troops in Syria including Marine and Army artillery units as well as unspecified special operations forces in the country.

The following is the complete statement from U.S. Central Command. 

Two U.S. service members were injured after a Coalition aircraft executed a hard landing early morning Sept. 29 in the Middle East. 

The two were evaluated for non-life threatening injuries and quickly transported to a medical treatment facility, where they were seen and released.

The other passengers and crew on the aircraft were uninjured, and no other casualties were reported on the ground.

The cause of the incident is being investigated by the Coalition.

 

  • Packard Day

    I think I would rather trust my life in a Cessna 170 than in a V-22 Osprey…and small private planes just scare the bajeebers out of me.

    • Chimmy Changa

      Thanks for your “thoughts”.

      • Dammit

        D-bag

        • Chimmy Changa

          You should write a book that nobody will read.

          • Ron160

            Some touchy V-22 Osprey pilots on this board.

          • mlopez

            Or industry representative.

    • Kent San

      Does it hurt talking from your a**?

  • Dean Winchester

    late 70s, early 80s: WOW, sure are plenty of Blackhawks crashing, this could not get any worse.

    Osprey: Hold my beer.

    • Christopher Rigby

      Just wait until the Army gets their hands on the V-280 Valor!! Then they can join the party.

      I love the Osprey because I work with them, but your comment just made me laugh.

      • Dean Winchester

        Glad it did. I was a Huey chief for 7 years until they went to blackhawks – so I graciously bowed out and took a non aviator job that did not have to make me worry about playing lawn dart when flying too close to a microwave tower.

  • Guido FL

    The V-22 Osprey has been trouble since day one. There has been major troubles of this “just have to have it” by the Marines with these planes crashing and it’s inability to defend it’s self. These planes are flying coffins, when they fly !

    • Chris Prestridge

      Respectfully disagree having flown in the V-22 often. The aircraft still carries the stigma from its development and early implementation years. The V-22 is no more dangerous, considering the scope of its mission than most other aircraft of similar scope. As for defensive measures, most troop transport in operation are in the same boat.

      • gringott

        Yes, I have found through experience that the most dangerous thing on the modern battlefield is Army Transportation of all types. The enemy is usually a piece of cake.

    • vertical2010

      I would especially never want to take one into enemy territory. The slow transition process from horizontal to vertical flight makes them sitting ducks. And they typically send up a monster dust cloud that announces “we’re right here” visible for 20 miles.

      • mlopez

        Oh, that’s not good.

      • Bud Dawkins

        How many Osprey or helicopter flight hours do you have and in what models?

  • bill1942

    The V-22 Osprey hasn’t been called the “Widow Maker” since 1981 for no reason.

    • mccauley444

      Dad used to call them Marine Killers

    • von Stroop

      F-104, interesting history that one. Speaking of widowmakers.

  • Rupert Chappelle

    Boondoggles have their advantages and disadvantages.

    You couldn’t pay me to get in one of them.

    • You would not be paid, you would be ordered. The choice is then yours – court martial and 5 years in Leavenworth, or 15 minutes to death in an Osprey.

      • vertical2010

        I think a military jury would find that he acted rationally and acquit.

        • Zippoing Vietnam. Leavenworth.

          • Kilo 4/11

            Well, the trooper who did it in front of Safer was a tad stupid. (Why couldn’t little (((Morrie))) have been captured by the commies instead of a good guy like Sean Flynn?) BTW, notice how many Pal houses Israel has leveled with barely a squawk from today’s MSM?

        • boxofvapor

          It would never get that far. He’s get a general discharge of one form or another and go home. That’s it. I suppose if he really, really wanted to push it and ask for a court marshal instead, he could do that. But then he would simply be found guilty of refusing an order and then get his general discharge and go home. I doubt that he would even be allowed to bring into evidence the safety of the aircraft as a defense in the first place. Nothing that I know of would allow an “it’s not safe enough for me” defense. Guys get ordered to do more dangerous things than get into an Osprey every single day and that’s just the way it is. Nobody raises their hands and pledges to serve but only if they are kept completely safe.

      • boxofvapor

        I really can’t recall anyone getting 5 years in Leavenworth for simply disobeying an order. The myth seems to be that everyone who refuses an order or even goes awol etc., somehow gets the book thrown at them. The reality is that they get at most a less than honorable discharge and go home. More often though, they get a general discharge with honorable conditions and are still eligible for about half of their benefits and that is usually after showing a pattern of misconduct over a period of time. It’s not exactly the catch 22 situation it once was. So if a serviceman refused an order to get into an Osprey and cited their belief that it’s a death trap they would quietly be sent home, no court martial, no 5 years in Leavenworth. Just a discharge and they may or may not get to keep their benefits depending on their officers and their own previous service record.

    • Doc_Brown

      still better than a B-24 Liberator!

      • Rupert Chappelle

        When was the last time one crashed?

      • Kilo 4/11

        You mean the B-26 widowmaker?

      • Viper17

        The B-24 served my father well thru 27 missions in the ETO (8th Air Force). He made it home! Retired 25 years later, USAF

  • Ron160

    How do you confused a Marine. Spray paint the wall brown and tell him to hit the beach. I guess things never change. When I was a Jarhead in 82 (PX Kelly) these things were dead traps. Follow the $$$$.

    Unit cost: 71,300,000–71,300,000 USD (2005) EST
    Program cost: US$35.6 billion after planned procurement of 408 aircraft
    Engine type: Rolls-Royce T406
    Number built: 200+ as of 2014
    Manufacturers: Bell Helicopter, Boeing Rotorcraft Systems

    • Bud Dawkins

      Tell us exactly which model of Osprey was flying in the fleet in ’82.

      • Ron160

        Reading is fundamental. Never said I WAS in one. Thank God. I said follow the $$$. I will write this slow for you! Why did they keep putting money in trash? Seven years after 81 the 1st Osprey flew and crashes have been mounting. Contract after Contract. $$$$ after $$$ hence brown wall…keep hitting…..must be a beach.

        • Bud Dawkins

          Reading is fundamental, and so is sentence structure which is obviously something you never learned. I know you never said you were in an Osprey, but you did say when you were “a Jarhead in 82 these things were dead traps.” That would be “death traps” and no Osprey was flying in 82 for the Corps, hence, no possibility they were “dead traps” as you so eloquently state. You’re pinned down on that beach you keep mentioning.

  • Jim Hary

    I would never get in one of these contraptions.

    • muzzleloader

      I know an engineer who works for Navair and worked for a time on the osprey project, and he refused to fly on it.

  • Susan Vue

    Hacked by Deep State Muslims Obama installed into our government

  • Kent San

    The last 6 V-22 mishaps have been perfectly fine aircraft screwed up by the aircrew. Taking off with the engines set at the power wash setting and not flight, taking off downwind and rotating the nacelles prematurely, hit a refueling hose with a prop, screwed up a ship landing after waiving the ship landing training syllabus, simple hard landing in Yemen, repeated long and stupidly slow landing in a dust cloud until engine compressor stalls. This one sounds like a hard landing too. Couple this with growing mishaps of other aircraft throughout DoD. The correlation is absence of training flight hours, not a specific aircraft. From 2005 -2015, the V-22 had the lowest mishap rate of all DoD rotorcraft.

    I realize there are a lot of dolts here that know nothing more about it than a 60 Minutes 20 minute segment in 2000, but facts are facts..

    • vertical2010

      Yeah, but after every “pilot error ” crash they seem to make a NATOPS modification so other pilots don’t find themselves in the same circumstances. At some point you have to say there are issues larger than simply pilot error.

      • Kent San

        You’re just making stuff up. Aside from the initial mishaps related vortex ring state that revealed that it’s actually the easiest aircraft to get out of vortex state, most of them didn’t lead to NATOPS manual changes. I think, don’t hit the aerial refueling hose with your prop rotor and don’t lift off the ship with the engine still set up to water wash them aren’t required. How about, do perform the required ship training before trying to land on a ship full of Marines? That need special NATOPS coverage.

        Of course, your statement is just plain uneducated. “The NATOPS manual is written in blood” has been true since it existed. EVERY aircraft in the fleet gets multiple NATOPS and emergency procedures changes constantly.

    • mlopez

      I enjoy facts and the overriding fact appears to be we have an aircraft that is too complicated and difficult for our average pilot to fly day in and day out.

      • Christopher Rigby

        What’s an average pilot? Someone with a basic PPL? Would you put an average pilot in the cockpit of a fighter jet? Or how about a fighter jockey in the cockpit of a helo without specialized training in the functionality of the system? I think not. The V-22 pilots go through specific training for their weapon system just like any other operator. Yours in an asinine comment.

        • mlopez

          Asinine comment, maybe, but your comments are the ones explaining why no accidents are happening and yet, here we continue to read the reports. The story and resultant posts aren’t about the crash that didn’t happen.

          Look, it’s you who defends the aircraft as sound. It’s you who blames the crashes on pilot error. It you who says there can be nothing wrong with adequately trained pilots.

          And don’t even use the word average. It’s on or off, black or white, sufficient and adequate or not. One can only surmise there must be no issues, no crashes, no “Hard landings. Or perhaps these kids are crashing the birds because they want to?

          And yet, the conversation goes on…about crashes that still aren’t happening… I think not. Asinine? Really? What’s an average pilot? Well, I’m not sure I can define that, but more and more I’m thinking you might not make the cut.

          • Christopher Rigby

            I’d like to see where in any of my comments where I say that accidents are not and have not happened.

            I will defend the aircraft as sound because it is. Any aircraft carries an inherent risk when it is on mission and has the potential for failure just like any other machine. It could be something missed in the maintenance checks. It could be improper maintenance…it happens. It could be a system or subsystem failure. It could be pilot error. It could be a gap in training scenarios available in the flight sims for pilot use. There is no black/white position. That’s a false dichotomy because it could be a combination of any and/or all of the above plus more that I can’t think of. What’s happening here is people reading that a plane goes down and then jump on the bandwagon of hating on a platform because it’s a good whipping boy even though investigations are not even started on the incident.

            No one batted an eye when a C-130 recently crashed in the US and killed 16 Marines. Helo pilots regularly experience hard landings and sudden loss of altitude when maintaining hovers or on final in brown-out conditions. Did you know that an F-16 crashed near Joint Base Andrews early this year? No fewer than 3 blackhawks have crashed in this year (Yemen, Hawaii, and Maryland) resulting in multiple fatalities. None of these get the hate mongering like the V-22 even though it has had a good track record since entering initial operational capability in 2007.

            But very nice ad hominem at the tail end, there, guy. You laid out a claim that you couldn’t substantiate and then told me I couldn’t be a pilot. Wow…you really got me there. I’m crushed.

          • mlopez

            Hey look, I can see where you are coming from. I am not in any position to make judgments about aircraft and incidents. It seems as, if the Osprey has gotten a lot of bad press. I can not judge, if it is due to the aircraft, or if the Ospreys are crashing at the same rate as other aircraft. And that is the real issue. They certainly had a tough start. If that’s over and problems have been fixed as advocates such as yourself claim, then we are still left with the task of explaining accidents. When a system, or an aircraft draws that type of negative scrutiny at the beginning you just have to deal with it. A bad reputation travels a long way and is hard to overcome.

            I suppose there could be other considerations such as, if the Osprey can do some vital mission that others can’t, or performs better in some way that is vital, or some such thing. Again, I’m not in any position to judge any of that. So stats will tell the tale and only stats can tell the tale.

            As for me and ad hominem attacks. I can’t even spell it, but I do OK defending myself. Anyway, I do what I can and you came in hot and flared and left yourself wide open. You defended the aircraft as, if there couldn’t be any problem on that side of things and then, you defended the pilot end of the equation as a question of properly certified, or not.

            You came on as overly protective of the aircraft and hot and heavy to shut down criticism, but concerns linger and conspiracy concerns over military industrial complex types of issues will go on forever. They just will and not without good reason either. Again, I’m the last person to make or finalize a judgment on such matters.

            If the statistics can’t, or don’t justify both the cost and causalities then some other explanation must be found. Maybe the aircraft is simply overwhelming for many pilots? Hopefully that reads better than “Your average pilot.” I don’t know and this really isn’t one of hobby horses so I’m going to back off.

            I apologize for the faint and counter punch. Fight back is what I do and you left me an opening. The only way you win with regards to defending the Osprey, or so it seems to me is defend it with statistics, flights, or missions per accidents as compared to alternative aircraft.

    • Blain Shinno

      Here is the real issue with the V-22 and its crashes. The Osprey’s operational advantages comes with tactical limitations. It reminds me a lot of the AV-8A. Maybe pilots and planners need to learn more about how to employ the V-22. Or maybe as more restrictions on its employment over time will severely limits its ability to bring Marines in and out of a landing zone.

      I personally think it’s very convenient for the brass to blame the pilots, some whom do not have the ability to defend themselves because they perished in the accident. But the aftermath of the mishap in Hawaii is telling. The Marines blamed the pilot for landing in brown out conditions. He should have known better and gone around – which probably would have not been greatest idea if it was a combat zone. But after the mishap the Marines recommended that the exposure time in reduced landing profiles was reduced from 60 to 35 seconds.

      It also recommended other changes:
      1. Display engine performance and stall margins on the Osprey’s multi-functional display.
      2. Advisories alerting pilots when engine power falls below 95 percent.
      3. More advanced brownout technology, including improved eofngine air filtration systems for the Osprey.

      The key issue is whether the V-22s tactical limitations will impact operations. How quickly could a squadron of 12 Osprey’s land Marines at an LZ with a lot of dust and dirt behind enemy lines in a Middle Eastern country?

      • Kent San

        After reading your post it’s apparent you’re opining, but know nothing about the aircraft or what systems it has and what improvements are being implemented.

        • Blain Shinno

          Is it not a fact that the Osprey is not a helicopter and is more limited when coming into an LZ?

          • Bud Dawkins

            My six year old knows it’s not a helicopter. It is not a fact that it is any more limited than a helicopter coming into an LZ.

          • Christopher Rigby

            I can tell you from first hand experience with the program itself that degraded visuals during landing in brownout is a problem that is still trying to be tackled. I can’t speak to engine performance in heavy dust because that’s not where I work in the program office, but I do know that it’s constantly something that the V-22 is trying to improve through better filtration solutions.

            And Kent, he may be opining, but it’s a pretty astute opinion. I do know what system are on the plane and what improvements are being looked at because I am in the V-22 program office.

    • Alvin Snook

      Look at the DD250s before blaming pilots, those aircraft in the past have come with a lot of waivers and deviations, including in the hydraulics and flight control software.

      • Christopher Rigby

        I saw this same comment you mentioned in another thread. You’re referencing an aircraft with all sort of waivers and stuff. Given that the V-22 didn’t hit IOC until the mid-2000s, you’re clearly referring to a developmental bird. Of course it will be littered with waivers and deviations. I can go to the office RIGHT NOW and read the baseline configuration and reach back to see the engineering changes that took place to make it flight worthy and a solid aircraft. I’ll say it again, you’re reaching back to DD250s for the aircraft before even reaching initial operational capability.

        • Alvin Snook

          So if someone were to look at DD250s for the AC that crashed, it would be free of waivers and deviations? I hope so, haven’t seen it, but I doubt it. DD250s show what specifically was wrong with each aircraft, not just where the aircraft was in the design process.. So the AC that crashed recently will have a DD250 that will show specific flaws in it, not just where the program allegedly is in development. Of course I don’t have that current information, been a while since I looked at the program. But what you’re missing is the AC that crashed previously had flaws beyond problems corrected later by ECOs that were documented in the DD250s. The reason the contractor does this is to insulate itself from future lawsuits concerning AC problems — if DOD accepts the AC with known problems, those known problems are the legal responsibility of DOD, not the contractor.

        • Alvin Snook

          I might be missing your point, but you’re saying AC aren’t airworthy until IOC? Dug up some of my notes. First Low-Rate Initial Production AC delivered in MAY 1999, Opeval began in NOV 1999. The two crashes in 2000 occurred with AC that were alleged to be fully airworthy.

    • Red Baron

      If all that is true, then the training must suck. I’m also willing to believe that they are going to blame the pilot because otherwise they have to fix the problem, which may be inherent in the design.

    • CharleyA

      How about that Hawaii incident? The aircraft is susceptible to FOD it generates itself in dusty conditions. I wonder where we might expect such conditions? It is a design fault: the intakes rotate with the prop-rotors / nacelles, and the aircraft essential force feeds the turbines with particulates, which fuse to internal engine parts, subsequently causing loss of power (and “hard” landings.) Bell’s new design rotates only the prop-rotors, the engines stay inline on the longitudinal axis. They made that change for a reason.

  • warmwxrules .

    Read an article on these things. Think they had issues with sand/dust bringing them down. Interesting aircraft, but probably still a lot of bugs to work out.

  • Buddy McKenzie

    This thing was bad on paper and the warning bells went off from the beginning, yet they still built the widow maker

    • mlopez

      At a cost of 35.6 billion. Now there’s a fact!

  • Nightmare

    Notorious Vortex Ring blows into the ground.

    • Kent San

      Assure you that’s not it.

      • Bud Dawkins

        That was extreme sarcasm.

    • Bud Dawkins

      You are correct…no other helicopter generates a vortex that blows into the ground, just this POS.

      • Nightmare

        I don’t believe that is correct, any of it.

  • vertical2010

    Have you noticed that V-22s never “crash,” they just have “hard landings,” even if there’s a fireball and the fuselage is in three pieces?

    • Kent San

      NO they don’t have a fire ball or break apart with it’s called a “hard landing.”

      • vertical2010

        That’s exactly what the USMC called the Oahu crash, a “hard landing mishap.” In that case, the fuselage cracked open and aircraft burning. Two dead Marines (R.I.P.), lucky not more.

        In the recent Okinawa crash it was reported the aircraft “landed in shallow water,” despite the fact it was in four pieces.

  • America is Kiked

    If it hadn’t been in Syria (illegally) then I think it wouldn’t have crashed there.

    • IronV

      Thank you for your enlightened pronouncement your Majesty.

    • vertical2010

      I think that’s exactly what the CMC just said over the phone: “What the #%@# was this thing doing in Syria?”

  • tall, blond, and very hot

    Sure glad the guys are OK.

  • Peterg123

    This plane is a disaster and I would not fly in one no matter how much they pay me.

  • The Osprey is a lethal joke. The Joint Task Force Strike Fighter can’t get its oxygen system working.
    The Air Force wants the Warthog off its tarmacs because…because…infantry, armor, buildings, it is an unstoppable precision slayer. One aircraft that delivers will ruin the entire development and procurement business model.

    • Peterg123

      Pray we never have a war..our air systems will be as unprepared and backward as Britain’s in the first two years against the Luftwaffe.

      • Remember the lesson of the Falklands War and one Exocet missile. The US Navy is indefensible. The US Air Force awarded enemies two decades to nullify it. Ballistic nuclear delivery is ugly much all that remains viable. That bluff will be called by North Korea.

        Had The Leader allowed development of a jet fighter or a pressurized heavy bomber, Mountbatten would have reverted to Battenberg. WWI was a family squabble. WWII was Germany asserting European unification. The US desperately wanted to steal the German patent universe. 1940 – a nation of farmers, 1950 – ruler of the planet, 1965 – crushed by social intent (Johnson’s “Great Society” wherein the qualified were disqualified).

        • Kilo 4/11

          Has there ever been another such war leader who had more ways to win that he screwed up?

          • Add three more, Had he made his secular Jews Reichjuden, the Allies would have had mostly WASP brains against the most formidable mentalities on Earth (22% of Nobel Laureates). Kill them post-war, or breed them as a State resource.

            Leave Pearl Harbor untouched. The US Congress never agrees on a declaration of war. Germany – better at war than the Allies in every way, is not drowned in American matériel, personnel, money…and the occasional competent General. England falls to a Kennedy-Germany business alliance.

            Germany’s attempt at a nuclear reactor was passively sabotaged. Borate (intense neutron absorber) is used to aid consolidation of aluminum processing densified graphite electrodes that were cousin to Fermi’s atomic pile in a Chicago squash court. A Fermi colleague knew this. No boron in Fermi’s graphite!

            There is evidence that a member of the German team also knew, and said nothing. Heavy water was a poor development model.

          • Kilo 4/11

            Cultivate relations with Japan to confront USSR with 2-front war; go for USSR’s power grids, chem factories; build APCs; go to full wartime 24 hour production schedule September 2nd, 1939; cut through Spain after fall of France to seal off the Med … In. Fuckin. Credible. that Germany lost.

        • von Stroop

          I read somewhere that the Americans appropriated almost 250,000 German patents after WW2. Don’t know if it’s true.

          • Red Baron

            I know Bayer bought back their own aspirin plant here, as it had been “requisitioned.”

          • von Stroop

            Outfits like GE, Honeywell, Bendix, etc were supposedly big benefactors. Process control technology (Siemens), synthetic oil plant engineering (Oil Sands/shale/coal extraction technology today). Heavy equipt (Krupp), to name a couple. Imagine the sweet deals being cooked up between the Generals and Big Business. This is how MIC’s are made. A lot of money at stake. Obscene amounts. Literally trillions. Saved them years and years of development time.

            As always, the spoils of war go to the victor.

      • Lbt

        Nothing like real war to create innovation, as long as people are patriotic/scared of-course.

    • mlopez

      Sadly, that would appear to be the simple truth. Why stay with tried and true, efficient and cost effective when we can spend tens and tens and tens of millions and kill our own service people into the bargain?

      • vertical2010

        The V-22 was a politically attractive program, with manufacturing spread throughout numerous (and targeted) congressional districts.

        • Alvin Snook

          And John Lehman taking a personal interesting in the program.

          • Red Baron

            The concept was good. The execution, not so good.

        • Red Baron

          It ALWAYS is. Congressmen and Senators need to stop falling for that nonsense. Also, the contracting officers need to question prime contractors exactly why they need to spread work all over the country. Are these REALLY the most qualified subcontractors as well as the best bang for the buck?

          • Oaksford

            The politicos never fall for anything, rather they demand more spending. They always get a cut in cash for the debt they foist upon us. Darn few of them care a wit for anyone stuck with the outcome. Yet with that, even the “good” ones vote aye!

      • Trevor Fuller

        Because we love technology and getting to the fight faster! The v-22 gets the troops to the battle twice as fast as the ch-46 it replaced and has something like double the range. How is that not a good thing? It also manages to get troops out of the danger zone faster. It’s acceleration from a hover is simply amazing!

        • Bonanzadrver

          This reminds me of an old joke, what makes airplanes fly? Answer: Money…the V-22 requires lots and lots of money. At one point, I read it cost 10k per flight hour which is many times that of traditional helicopters. I flew the CH-46 in the Marines. I understand the mission…while the V-22 adds some capabilities, I’m of the opinion that it wasn’t worth the costs and the decades it took to get to the fleet.

          • Trevor Fuller

            Hard to disagree on the cost. It’s an expensive aircraft and the program ballooned. Their were many failures on the program side that added additional costs. But I have to say, every program in the last 15-20years has been over priced.

          • Red Baron

            The problem I believe, is that we don’t have any real engineers anymore. The old slide-rule guys could run circles around today’s engineers. Look at the SR-171. Thank anyone could make that kind of quantum jump today? I seriously doubt it.

          • FromTheMirror

            That’s a very much valid observation. Unfortunately it’s not particular to engineering. The decline in human thinking is widespread. Just compare depression-era bankers who worked with 40% reserve-ratios to the geniuses today whose “model-based” collective delirium has lead to 100-to-1 leverage across the sector. The former built up entire industries, the latter have destroyed everything they went near.

        • Red Baron

          Yes, but there are obviously still flaws.

        • CharleyA

          But with a slow approach to landing – it a hot LZ, not really a good thing.

          • Bonanzadrver

            You hit on a very important point. In the CH-46 we could fly over an LZ at 120 knots, bank hard, pull power and be on the ground in seconds. The V-22 requires in my observation a long, slow, controlled descent. The rotorwash is many times that of a helicopter which creates huge dust clouds in desert environments. True story, Air Force test pilots wanted to buy a radar coupled approach auto pilot for desert landings as you can’t see a damn thing when the dust cloud envelopes the aircraft. I left the Marines shortly after hearing this first hand from a guy briefing Jersey Krupp, the CG of 2dMAW…Jersey thought they were nuts! Knowing the AF, they probably got their radar landing system for the handful of V-22s they bought for Special Ops and CSAR.

          • FromTheMirror

            “..long, slow, controlled descent..” – just the thing you need in a combat situation, I’ll bet.

          • Bonanzadrver

            I believe “sitting duck” is a good analogy. I’ve been out of it for quite awhile. When I left they were still catching fields on fire from the exhaust, and rebuilding the hydraulic system which was behind a previous crash. So, I can’t speak to what’s happening today. I’m sure the troops are happy with it, I guess. Everyone likes the shiny new toy. However, I seem to recall cost reaching 80 million a copy or so…in the early nineties DoD was buying Blackhawks for 5 million a piece. I think the Corps would have been better served with new Blackhawks, a proven performer with a supply and parts chain that was inexhaustible relatively speaking since the Army has about 5k. Old news I know…Old Harry Blot, the father of the AV-8 in the Marines happened to have been the guy who pushed the V-22, and the F35B. His vision was VSTOL across the board for the Marines. Well, the AV-8 was an unmitigated disaster so I’m not sure why anyone would listen to him but they did. He became the head Marine Aviator before he retired. I believe he is/was with Lockheed Martin as he had his fingers in the F35B program. The harrier mishap rate in the early nineties was ten times the fleet average mishap rate. It was so difficult to maintain that pilot’s struggled to get 50 hours/year when 250 was planned. I myself saw them taking off the Belleau Wood in the Persian gulf carrying two 500 lb bombs during Desert Storm…it was a weak sister in all aspects. It’s only claim was VSTOL. When you understand how airwings operate you know that taking off from soccer fields and parking lots is a neat trick but if you don’t have the bombs, gas, and maintenance there it doesn’t work. Whatever! I sincerely hope the F-35B works and doesn’t kill pilots and strain Air Wings to the breaking point just trying to keep it flying. I for one don’t see how they can take this thing to sea, injest salt water and not have failures, lots of them…my two cents and worth just about that…Cheers!

          • FromTheMirror

            That was an interesting piece to read, thanks.

    • Craig Hobson

      An expensive over budget disaster. The A10 is the greatest plane ever.

      • rebman

        **Correction: The A10 is the greatest flying GUN ever! 🙂

        • Aaron Burr

          a flying holster for a 30mm cannon it is.

      • thaidude

        I’m kinda partial to the C-130.

      • Smokey

        Yeah. Ask the Marines who were in C Co, 1st Bn, 2nd Marines in an Nasiriyah Iraq on 23 March 2003 how fucking great they think it is. While you’re at it, ask the USAF what happened to the to the tapes from the airplanes involved in the friendly fire incident.

        • El Kabong

          Or the Canadians at Tarnak Farm, or the British in Desert Storm…

      • Aaron Burr

        love the warthog!

      • El Kabong

        Yeah, sure. Great dogfighter, right?

        Works well in a modern A2/AD environment, doesn’t it?

    • babebig00

      Love that Warthog …i have an inert 30 mm shell that it fires …it’s a ballbuster

    • marty martin

      Uncle Al, my uncle Jim Foody was the head of the design team at Fairchild who designed the A10. He was a genius, who grew up in Northern Ireland, and cancer took him way too young. His first job, was for Lucas in London and he designed the controls for the Harrier. He got hired by Boeing and moved to Seattle. He was put in charge of Boeing’s failed attempt at the C117. Losing at Boeing goes against your trajectory so he took the job at Fairchild. I don’t think he lived long enough to see the awesome power of his A10! Not bad for a poor Irish Catholic kid from Belfast!!

      • Genius simply is. Grab it and let ti work, whatever its container. Do not attempt to fill empty containers.

        • Trevor Fuller

          My God, it was a hard landing and both pilots walked away. Read up on helicopter crashes and see how many survive. Now go read the accident reports on V-22s and see how many were attributed to pilot error. Then go read up on the Blackhawks and compare.

          • Bob Coco

            A large amount of V22 accidents were pilot error.

          • Alvin Snook

            Perhaps. The one that went down in December 2000 could be scored as pilot error, but there was more to it. That aircraft, AC No. 18 if I remember, had a large number of waivers and deviations on it when it was delivered, including involving the hydraulics and flight control software. The pilots got warnings of low hydraulic pressure, so they reset the system, which is what they were supposed to do, but that further lowered the hydraulic pressure. Proprotor actuators lost pressure, leading to the crash. Problems with leaky pipes and bad software created a situation where the AC made the pilots make incorrect decisions.

          • Michael Taylor

            when i crewed a chinook we always had plenty of extra hydraulic fluid. they said if it wasnt leaking it was running low.

          • Bob Coco

            Funny story, I’m on a CH-53E flying from Cyprus to USS Ship. I’m in my flight suit but there was an admiral in dress whites across from me. He had his cover in his lap. A big ol drop of hyd fluid landed right smack in the middle of his cover. The look on his face was priceless. I could barely hold my laugh in.

          • Mitt Zombie

            funny because your gay

          • Alvin Snook

            The V-22 uses an ultra-high-pressure hydraulic systems and titanium tubing, so there’s less volume to start with and bigger consequences if you lose some fluid. The titanium tubing was/is problematic, titanium has a heavy grain to it, and it suffers from intergranular corrosion when exposed to sources of chlorides such as the bonding agents in the composites or even salt water. The program’s solution for this was to plate the tubing, but the plating flaked off. Titanium weighs about half as much as stainless, if I remember correctly, so the tubing weight reduction was necessary, particularly in the nacelles. Particularly since John Lehman forced the program to use ancient Allison turbines instead of the new engines that had been developed for it.

          • FromTheMirror

            Good post. Refreshing to read about actual technical facts.

          • magic3400

            A new plane and used jets, a used plane and new jets but NEVER a new plane and a new jet…

          • CharleyA

            Funny how most of the instances of “pilot error” included mechanical failures, notably in propulsion systems.

          • magic3400

            True. We had the same problem with the Harriers. Many of the accidents where caused by junior pilots with too few flight hours. If I remember correctly, you had to be a 03 or higher before you could fly AV8s (VMAT-203).

          • Robert Barquero

            ex-helo crewchief…I am a subject expert…you are correct

          • Red Baron

            Sometimes I think they chalk it up to pilot error lest they have to retire the piece of junk quickly and have egg on the face.

      • Geekengineer

        Marty, hats off to your uncle! What a beautiful killing machine… I would have hated to be a Soviet tank commander trying to push the Fulda Gap on Day One. Oh my, what a glorious death that would have been.

        • Red Baron

          Of course, that is assuming that no surface-to-air missiles would take it out. Not kicking the A-10, but that is its weak spot.

      • Godels Proof

        Hat tip to the Irish and your uncle.

      • itsdeplorablespideyman

        Great story. Best to gim and your family.

    • Buzz

      Just saw the A10 perform at an air show. That is some aircraft. Feared by the enemy.

    • JeremyB

      I think they forget that just because it is more expensive does not make it better, I would take 10 F16s or 10 A-10s over the same cost of 2 F35s , OV-22 almost cost as much as a F-35… I say make them use Helicopters more.

    • CicerosGhost

      They JUST ‘delayed’ the discontinuation of the A10, thankfully…

      Was JUST announced.. AND… They have started evaluating the potential for a modernization retrofit of it so that it will continue beyond 2023…

    • Christopher Rigby

      What’s your point here? This is an article on the Osprey and you’re harping on the killing power of an A-10?

      Your logic is thus: The JSF and Osprey are money pits and death machines. The A-10 slays everything it sees therefore it is a better aircraft. Non-Sequitur all day long. Good lord.

      Consider the mission sets of the V-22 variants. The CV-22 is built for special operations. It doesn’t carry offensive weapons. The MV-22 mission is the delivery of troops and cargo. It also carries no offensive weapons. They are built for delivering stuff in the tactical setting at a speed and range greater than any helo can dream of accomplishing. They do those missions well. The A-10 was built to kill tanks….not people. But it does both very well. As an aside, the A-10 has also been used in a fratricide even in the early-mid 2000s. Let’s see the CV or MV be able to make that claim, you tool.

      The JSF is a different story. I’m no fan of that thing.

    • RED MAN

      oxygen problem is not exclusive to f 35 though. T 45, F 22, and F 18 have the same problem. oh and warthog is kinda old and useless against near peer enemy.

  • Bob Elfers

    Lots of Osprey-haters here. Why the hate?
    Osprey has had a great run. Since they fixed the early problems, that is.
    Hard to get over that, but they did.

    • vertical2010

      It’s wonderful, if you’re looking for an aircraft that can’t fly formation, is potentially a death trap in dusty LZs, is incapable of water rescues, is poorly designed for shipboard operations, has exorbitant maintenance costs & poor reliability, and costs – with everything factored in – a mere $120 million each.

      • Bob Elfers

        If you are trying to convince me, you will need to suggest another platform suited to the role and provide some cost comparisons. I prefer moving forward by developing new technologies rather than patching up the old ones. Also consider that unit cost rose when orders were cut from 1000 to 500, and maintenance costs have fallen from ~11k to 8k/hr.
        One comparison that I did make was CH-53K at $87M unit cost (projected).

      • Bud Dawkins

        Every characteristic you described could be said of every helicopter in its early development and utilization.

        • CharleyA

          V-22 have been in development for 20+ years, and come in 70+ plus configurations (which they hope to depot-mod into 5.) Pretty indicative of all the changes that had to be made to “production” aircraft that should have been resolved prior to IOC, or at least FOC.

          • vertical2010

            It’s been in development since 1981.

  • Robert Richard

    OH WELL cant declare war over it, you can only invade a nation once.

  • Ferrous Mike

    Living example of the adage, a committee was formed to create a horse and out came a camel.

  • lrs24

    I just got through watching the PBS Vietnam special and this is what I’ve learned. The people in DC don’t make any better decisions now than they did then. Our leadership is dumb as a post.

  • Joe Met

    They need to get rid of this debacle. Its a killer.

  • Jake Lakota

    I saw them testing this huge waste of money and POS in the 80’s. They had it hovering while it was tethered. This thing should never have been conceived much less built.

  • Don Steele

    The Osprey SHOULD NEVER have made it to production. You take an aircraft…rotorwing at that…..and ADD 10 MILLION parts and systems……totally unproven….except PROVEN in the fact it is hard to fly…and CRASHES…ALOT!!

    • Kent San

      How many hours do you have in it? Oh, none, just talking out your butt.

  • Johnny Utah

    So whats that,..the 23rd one to crash? But don’t worry military members, it’s totally “safe”. ROTFL!!!

    • Kent San

      Just pulling numbers from the sky and you think that doesn’t make you appear a fool?

      • Bud Dawkins

        It’s okay. This is the 363rd stupid comment he’s posted in the last 496 days.

      • Johnny Utah

        Look it up fool

  • johnstephano

    This air craft has been a disaster right from the beginning. How many Marine have to die or be injured before they get rid of it?

  • staff office

    How about getting the fuck out of Syria?? Why the fuck are we still their?

    • lrs24

      Because we have to be on the opposite side of Russia even if if they are on the right side.

  • oncemorearound

    Just who is getting paid off to force our men and women to fly and ride in these pieces of garbage……

    • Bud Dawkins

      No one. Ridiculous statement.

  • Don Francis

    PLEASE DOD scrap this death trap [V-22] and save lives!! Never should have been put into production!!!

  • certbobdobbs .

    Russia will be blamed…..never ever the McCain backed rebels he provided weapons to

  • JWM

    As an Engineer, the motive should be is “if it can happen, then someday it will happen.” What the military has forgotten in its quest for technology, is to – K.I.S.S.
    And yes, the Osprey is junk, and the A10 is fantastic.

  • Buzz

    The Osprey is a mechanical nightmare.

  • Alvin Snook

    The proprotors are all prop and no rotor and have poor lift characteristics. There’s a limit to how hard you can beat the air and keep the aircraft aloft.

    • Kilo 4/11

      Interesting. Not able to increase/decrease blade pitch?

      • Alvin Snook

        That’s not the problem. A helicopter’s rotor blades are true wing segments, so you’re getting much more efficiency out of them versus a propeller, which is why they use them with helicopters. The V-22’s proprotors are almost complete helixes , with very little surface like a wing, hence the greatly increased downdraft. So when landing, when the air is swirling from the downdraft, the propellers cannot grip enough air to keep the heavy V-22 up.

        • Bud Dawkins

          And yet it still flies and hovers.

        • Kilo 4/11

          I see. And the reason they don’t install a more rotor- or wing segment-like blade is that would sacrifice forward airspeed?

          • Alvin Snook

            I believe so, and the idea was to remain in vertical mode as little as possible. All aircraft have range issues, so you need to optimize for that, and that drove the proprotor shape. The shape of the proprotors, along with the general shape of the aircraft, also meant that unpowered landing was not possible. To autorotate, you need the high efficiency of a wing segment in the rotors, since you’re relying on that and the residual energy of the rotor movement. In terms of wing/body lift, the V-22 had very little, the space shuttle had better glide characteristics.

  • bloogao

    Regardless of the aircrafts deficiencies, the service members have no choice but to fly in them.

    God bless these brave people and I’m praying for their speedy recovery. They are protecting and sacrificing for my freedoms.

    PS: the NFL don’t know crap.

    • EL ZORRO

      I spent 33 years in the Marines, most of my time being a high-class muscle man for big business, for Wall Street and the bankers. In short, I was a racketeer for Capitalism.— from War is a Racket.
      Brigadier General Smedley D. Butler

  • EL ZORRO

    “The U.S. has about 500 ground troops in Syria including Marine and Army artillery units as well as unspecified special operations forces in the country”.TRANSLATION… The U.S has about 500 grounds troops and unspecified special forces ILLEGALLY in Syria, supporting their INTERNATIONAL MERCENARY TERRORISTS I.S.I.S and SDF.

  • Jlo

    well the UH-60 had a horrible reputation upon its integration replacing the UH-1, names like “crash hawk” and “lawn dart” still follow it to this day, but they fixed it. It doesn’t appear that they are fixing the V-22

    • Bud Dawkins

      Good point and most civilians have no idea this is the case with most new aircraft. I would have loved to see the Marines pick up an H-60 variant to replace the CH-46, especially because the Army and Navy had already worked out a lot of the issues you mention. Leadership became enamored with the new capability.

  • I’m not Racist,but

    Someone told me some of the Navy mechanics call it the “Junkspray” because it never lands with all of it’s parts.

    • Trevor Fuller

      And in the ARMY we called blackhawks crashhawks. Chinooks were calls shithooks. So what’s your point?

      • Bud Dawkins

        He doesn’t have one..someone told him..

  • I Am Becoming

    They were re-supplying an ISIS unit.

  • Jon (PTA)

    It was a hard landing or a soft crash. Hoping troops are okay.

  • Bob Coco

    Hard landings are usually pilot error.

    • Bud Dawkins

      You base this on what data or experience exactly? I was a USMC helicopter pilot and aviation safety officer that did accident investigations. I’d say you are wrong and likely have no credentials or facts to back your statement. Pilots usually get blamed, but weather and other environmental factors, maintenance factors, human factors, and those pesky “management” issues are huge contributing factors in almost every accident and mitigations in those areas could have broken the chain of events that led up to the accident.

  • shernado

    The problem is the Osprey and Blackhawk are to complex for flying. They try to do things the machines and pilots can’t do or do at the same time. Bring back the Hueys and let Nam pilots show you how to operate with a lot less mechanics as well as a battle tested machines. Stop letting our service people die or get hurt for no good reason.

    • Bud Dawkins

      Agree that the Osprey is very complicated, but they aren’t too complex for flying. I was trained in the late 90’s by a lot of Vietnam era pilots and the knowledge and experience was greatly appreciated. We now have an entirely new and young crop of combat tested pilots that are carrying that torch. Today’s Huey is one thousand times better than those flown in the Vietnam era.

  • MoooHAMmud

    Jesus H….quit flying those death traps.

  • Ray Black

    Hard Landings, sounds like Sabotage by gay wannabes.

  • Mickey Dee

    Airlifting ISIS terrorists out of danger?

  • TLT11

    This was a trainwreck from day one….pure junk!

  • Amrik Morel

    America should throw off the jew and destroy it – U.S. Grant(and others) recommended as much…

  • Dale

    I recall articles from years ago saying the Osprey is a disaster. In contrast, Britain has their Harrier vertical take-off jet, and it’s been completely reliable. It would make sense to ditch the Osprey before any more servicemen are hurt or killed, and buy the plane that will do the job more reliably.

    • Bud Dawkins

      Yeah, it would make sense to ditch an aircraft they’ve already sunk billions into and are just now starting to see a return on. Every aircraft the military has fielded has cost lives. How many Marines died after the CH-53E came on line? A lot more than have been killed in V-22s. I was a USMC pilot from 1995-2007 and will tell you the overwhelming majority of pilots I knew in the helo world at that time did not want this and would have preferred an H-60 variant. But sometimes the shiny toy gets the attention. Granted the platform brings an entirely new warfighting capability, it just seemed to complicated and delicate to survive the places Marines fight.

      • Christopher Rigby

        I don’t know, man. A CV came back from a personnel recovery mission in Sudan with bullet holes all through it without any impact to performance. Seems pretty sturdy to me.

    • Ed L

      The Harrier A model (AV-8A) around 90 Class A mishaps of the 278 built and of that over half the pilots were killed. Now the AV-8B has a far better safety record.

  • Rebel

    The Osprey is what the Ford Pinto was to the car industry.

  • LiveFreeOrDie1776

    One hard landing and the trolls come out to attack this fine aircraft once again. Ignore them.

  • Jon Fast

    When are the services going to ship this POS aircraft to the bone yard before it kills and injures more. Just follow the money and see who got it. Guess the money is worth more than the safety of our servicemen and women.

  • Tony Murphy

    Remind me – what are US armed forces doing in Syria? Has the legally established government of that country invited them in? If not it’s illegal and the perpetrators should be prosecuted for war crimes.

    • Duane

      I’ll remind you – UN Resolution 2249 that requested that all member nations provide military forces as able to destroy ISIS, whose acknowledged and claimed world headquarters is in the lawless region of northeastern Syria, which has not been under Syrian government control for five years since the civil war broke out.

      Also, the Congressional Authorizations for Military Force (AUMF) of 2001 and 2002 which authorized the President to go after the perpetrators of 9.11.01 whereever they are in the world. ISIS is a direct descendant of Al Queda in Iraq, which was of course a branch of Al Queda.

      So there you have it – both international and Congressional authorization to fight ISIS in what used to be Syria.

  • Johnny Reb

    More technically enhanced junk, where are they getting the parts made ? In China !

    • Duane

      Virtually all Osprey accidents have been well documented pilot errors, not mechanical failures, unlike helicopter accidents that frequently experience mechanical failures.

  • ryanshaunkelly

    Bell Boeing V-22 Osprey
    THE WIDOW-MAKER

  • Duane

    The Osprey, contrary to internet meming, does not have a poor safety record. A total of six accidents in the decade since it went into service, including seeing a lot of war action in the Middle East and Afghanistan, with only 9 fatalities. It is a much more survivable aircraft than transport helicopters such as the CH-47, such that even hard landings that destroy the aircraft do not result in fatalities, as in this accident. Hundreds have died in non-combat accidents in the CH-47 Chinook over the decades, virtually all due to mechanical failures. Virtually all of the Osprey accidents have been due to well-documented pilot errors.

    • b2

      “6 total… “only” 9 fatalities? Wrong.
      Six class A mishaps in the last year I can count since Yemen incident(s) alone. Expensive losses all. Anyone can connect the dots on this aircraft, however it is now a foregone conclusion. Why? The Bell-Boeing-Marine syndicate, Ospreys assembled in the HASC chairman’s own district, and of course we have Mattis, Kelly, Dunsford in place. There’s more…OOH-Ra…..
      We love our Marines but not their acquisition choices nor their “off the reservation” self serving non-joint strategies…..

      • Duane

        It matters not what you prefer – you’re a nobody. It matters completely what the Marines want, and they love their Ospreys.

  • Ed L

    The Harrier A model (AV-8A) around 90 Class A mishaps of the total 278 built (WORLD WIDE) and a lot of those pilots were killed in those class A mishaps. Now the AV-8B has a far better safety record.

  • Duane

    As of today (Monday Oct 2), the incident is not reported in the Navy Safety Center website, and therefore the cause is not listed as either materiel or pilot error – which seems to suggest that it was a combat casualty. It was certainly in a combat zone, in northeastern Syria.