thedrifter
11-04-07, 06:56 AM
Osprey will endanger Marines in combat
By: J. STRYKER MEYER - Staff Writer
Design flaws still make tilt-rotor aircraft unacceptable for imminent Iraq deployment There's so much to admire about the Marine Corps. The fighting quality and spirit of the combat Marines who go into harm's way are second to none. For more than two centuries Marines have fought hard for this country, often with horrific death tolls, such as during the bloody Pacific Islands campaign during World War II.
During the Vietnam War, I had the privilege of working with Marine Corps helicopter gunship crews while running secret missions into Laos, Cambodia and North Vietnam as a member of Army Special Forces.
I'm alive today thanks to the courage of Marine aviators, including men from HML 367, which had the unique radio call sign of "Scarface." Today's Marines in Scarface continue to fly into harm's way in Iraq and they continue to serve honorably.
However, there's an aviation and high command component of the Marine Corps that defies logic today by continuing to foist off the experimental tilt-rotor aircraft that flies like an airplane but takes off and lands in a helicopter mode of flight.
It converts to the helicopter mode after its two wings rotate 90 degrees upward, moving the two 38-foot rotors from a traditional airplane position to a locked position above the fusilage.
During the last two years, the Corps has kicked into high gear its public relations specialists and numerous supporters in aviation and military press touting its great potential as the Marines' aircraft of the future.
This is happening despite years of opposition from many quarters across the country, all of which are ignored by the Corps.
No desert testing
In the near future, the Marine Corps is going to begin to use the MV-22 Ospreys in the war zone, which is a desert, a sandy area of operations.
This will happen despite the fact that, as reported in the Oct. 8 edition of Time magazine, "The (M)V-22's tendency to generate a dust storm when it lands in desertlike terrain wasn't examined (during official tests) because 'an unusually wet spring resulted in a large amount of vegetation that prevented severe brownouts during landing attempts,' the Pentagon's top tester noted."
Thus, the MV-22 will go into a desert combat zone, carrying combat troops, without having been tested for how it performs in a desert environment.
Time's scathing article is one of the thorough pieces written about the MV-22's troubled past and inflated expectations by the Corps, and noted how the military-industrial-congressional complex has ignored major problems with this aircraft.
In 2006, former Marine Lee Gaillard penned a damning report for the Center for Defense Information, "V-22 Osprey: Wonder Weapon or Widow Maker?" Gaillard's report raised significant issues that have been ignored by the Corps or glossed over and respun by the public relations arm of the Corps.
What experience has taught me
But, my criticism stems from my personal experience of having run top-secret military operations for more than 18 months during the Vietnam War and from interviews with knowledgeable warriors in the Corps today and in the Special Operations Command based at MacDill Air Force Base in Florida.
My concerns are basically threefold:
1) The MV-22 until recently had no defensive weapon system on it, despite the fact that in 2000 then-Commandant of the Marine Corps Gen. James L. Jones told me in an interview that he had demanded that one be placed on the tilt-rotor aircraft. Jones had wanted a weapon that could fire forward of the aircraft. However, after dragging their collective feet, program designers finally placed a small-caliber weapon on the ramp of the MV-22, which can fire only behind the aircraft and slightly to the sides ---- not forward. And, it can fire only when the ramp is down.
From my personal experience, when an aircraft goes into a landing zone, that's when it is the most vulnerable to enemy gunfire. With today's helicopters, everything from the old CH-46 and CH-53 to the newer UH-60 Blackhawk models have doorgunners on them that can protect the aircraft's flanks. The trained military personnel flying in the MV-22 will not be able to defend themselves from enemy fire.
2) The MV-22 has tiny windows that impede passengers' ability to see the terrain the aircraft is descending toward. Time and again during the Vietnam War, while flying in UH-1Ds, commonly called Hueys, we ---- as passengers in the choppers ---- were able to see land hazards and better prepare for the target. In the MV-22 the troops are essentially blind. Also, due to the configuration of the MV-22, previous passengers (i.e., young Marines) complained in surveys about getting queasy from flying in the Osprey and feeling sick when they landed.
3) Any military special operations troop will tell anyone who listens how vital quick insertions into the target area are in order to begin a successful operation. In 'Nam, we trained for hours exiting and entering helicopters quickly.
A key component of successful insertions was the chopper descending quickly into a landing zone, the troops exiting in a matter of a second or two, and the aircraft exiting the area ASAP.
Today's MV-22 can do neither: It can't descend rapidly into a landing zone ---- regardless of what a few Marine generals have said in recent months ---- although it can leave a target area quicker than it descends.
Critics of the troubled aircraft point to the April 1999 crash in Marana, Ariz., that killed 19 Marines as deadly proof that the aircraft isn't capable of a quick descent into an LZ. They say that aircraft crashed because it descended into the landing zone too quickly.
Also, it was revealed at that time that the MV-22 had a unique problem, a phenomenon that surfaced with helicopters called vortex ring state.
That phenomenon limits the rate of descent into a target by an MV-22. This means the Osprey will be a sitting duck going into a target ---- a defenseless sitting duck.
Officers concerned
In the last year, I've had informal discussions with special operations warriors who might someday find themselves riding in the Osprey to a target area.
One high-ranking general told me that the Green Berets who conduct clandestine operations behind enemy lines hold the MV-22 in utter contempt and feel it's a killer of men incapable of meeting the insertion/extraction capabilities of today's Blackhawks. "The only people who want this damned bird are the contractors and Marine generals who haven't been on the ground as a special operator," said one general.
A high-ranking Marine officer echoed that sentiment: "The ground pounders hoped the Marine Corps would get an aircraft that gets us into and out of target areas quickly, such as the Blackhawk. Instead, they gave us a billion-dollar space shuttle."
Endorsing their opinions, as quoted in Time, was Philip Coyle, the former top Pentagon weapons testing official, who said the V-22s aren't suited for "combat situations where they will have to do a lot of maneuvering."
Air Force repeating mistake
From a personal concern, there's one more element: The Air Force is purchasing 50 CV-22s, which are versions of the Osprey with "enhanced capabilities tailored" for the unique mission requirements of the Special Operations Command.
The exact specifications that make the CV-22 different from the MV-22 aren't specified in general press releases. However, the basic bird that costs more than $100 million per aircraft still has the same major flaws that I outlined earlier.
The only good news is the Air Force isn't scheduled to activate that unit until 2009, whereas in the weeks ahead, there's a good chance that the first MV-22 will fly into harm's way and crash. The first question will be: Did it crash and kill good Marines due to its inherent flaws or vulnerability in desert areas of operation, or due to enemy fire?
Staff writer J. Stryker Meyer is the author of "On the Ground: The Secret War in Vietnam," (2007" Levin Publishing Group, LLC). He can be contacted at (760) 901-4089 or jmeyer@nctimes.com. To comment, go to nctimes.com.
Ellie
By: J. STRYKER MEYER - Staff Writer
Design flaws still make tilt-rotor aircraft unacceptable for imminent Iraq deployment There's so much to admire about the Marine Corps. The fighting quality and spirit of the combat Marines who go into harm's way are second to none. For more than two centuries Marines have fought hard for this country, often with horrific death tolls, such as during the bloody Pacific Islands campaign during World War II.
During the Vietnam War, I had the privilege of working with Marine Corps helicopter gunship crews while running secret missions into Laos, Cambodia and North Vietnam as a member of Army Special Forces.
I'm alive today thanks to the courage of Marine aviators, including men from HML 367, which had the unique radio call sign of "Scarface." Today's Marines in Scarface continue to fly into harm's way in Iraq and they continue to serve honorably.
However, there's an aviation and high command component of the Marine Corps that defies logic today by continuing to foist off the experimental tilt-rotor aircraft that flies like an airplane but takes off and lands in a helicopter mode of flight.
It converts to the helicopter mode after its two wings rotate 90 degrees upward, moving the two 38-foot rotors from a traditional airplane position to a locked position above the fusilage.
During the last two years, the Corps has kicked into high gear its public relations specialists and numerous supporters in aviation and military press touting its great potential as the Marines' aircraft of the future.
This is happening despite years of opposition from many quarters across the country, all of which are ignored by the Corps.
No desert testing
In the near future, the Marine Corps is going to begin to use the MV-22 Ospreys in the war zone, which is a desert, a sandy area of operations.
This will happen despite the fact that, as reported in the Oct. 8 edition of Time magazine, "The (M)V-22's tendency to generate a dust storm when it lands in desertlike terrain wasn't examined (during official tests) because 'an unusually wet spring resulted in a large amount of vegetation that prevented severe brownouts during landing attempts,' the Pentagon's top tester noted."
Thus, the MV-22 will go into a desert combat zone, carrying combat troops, without having been tested for how it performs in a desert environment.
Time's scathing article is one of the thorough pieces written about the MV-22's troubled past and inflated expectations by the Corps, and noted how the military-industrial-congressional complex has ignored major problems with this aircraft.
In 2006, former Marine Lee Gaillard penned a damning report for the Center for Defense Information, "V-22 Osprey: Wonder Weapon or Widow Maker?" Gaillard's report raised significant issues that have been ignored by the Corps or glossed over and respun by the public relations arm of the Corps.
What experience has taught me
But, my criticism stems from my personal experience of having run top-secret military operations for more than 18 months during the Vietnam War and from interviews with knowledgeable warriors in the Corps today and in the Special Operations Command based at MacDill Air Force Base in Florida.
My concerns are basically threefold:
1) The MV-22 until recently had no defensive weapon system on it, despite the fact that in 2000 then-Commandant of the Marine Corps Gen. James L. Jones told me in an interview that he had demanded that one be placed on the tilt-rotor aircraft. Jones had wanted a weapon that could fire forward of the aircraft. However, after dragging their collective feet, program designers finally placed a small-caliber weapon on the ramp of the MV-22, which can fire only behind the aircraft and slightly to the sides ---- not forward. And, it can fire only when the ramp is down.
From my personal experience, when an aircraft goes into a landing zone, that's when it is the most vulnerable to enemy gunfire. With today's helicopters, everything from the old CH-46 and CH-53 to the newer UH-60 Blackhawk models have doorgunners on them that can protect the aircraft's flanks. The trained military personnel flying in the MV-22 will not be able to defend themselves from enemy fire.
2) The MV-22 has tiny windows that impede passengers' ability to see the terrain the aircraft is descending toward. Time and again during the Vietnam War, while flying in UH-1Ds, commonly called Hueys, we ---- as passengers in the choppers ---- were able to see land hazards and better prepare for the target. In the MV-22 the troops are essentially blind. Also, due to the configuration of the MV-22, previous passengers (i.e., young Marines) complained in surveys about getting queasy from flying in the Osprey and feeling sick when they landed.
3) Any military special operations troop will tell anyone who listens how vital quick insertions into the target area are in order to begin a successful operation. In 'Nam, we trained for hours exiting and entering helicopters quickly.
A key component of successful insertions was the chopper descending quickly into a landing zone, the troops exiting in a matter of a second or two, and the aircraft exiting the area ASAP.
Today's MV-22 can do neither: It can't descend rapidly into a landing zone ---- regardless of what a few Marine generals have said in recent months ---- although it can leave a target area quicker than it descends.
Critics of the troubled aircraft point to the April 1999 crash in Marana, Ariz., that killed 19 Marines as deadly proof that the aircraft isn't capable of a quick descent into an LZ. They say that aircraft crashed because it descended into the landing zone too quickly.
Also, it was revealed at that time that the MV-22 had a unique problem, a phenomenon that surfaced with helicopters called vortex ring state.
That phenomenon limits the rate of descent into a target by an MV-22. This means the Osprey will be a sitting duck going into a target ---- a defenseless sitting duck.
Officers concerned
In the last year, I've had informal discussions with special operations warriors who might someday find themselves riding in the Osprey to a target area.
One high-ranking general told me that the Green Berets who conduct clandestine operations behind enemy lines hold the MV-22 in utter contempt and feel it's a killer of men incapable of meeting the insertion/extraction capabilities of today's Blackhawks. "The only people who want this damned bird are the contractors and Marine generals who haven't been on the ground as a special operator," said one general.
A high-ranking Marine officer echoed that sentiment: "The ground pounders hoped the Marine Corps would get an aircraft that gets us into and out of target areas quickly, such as the Blackhawk. Instead, they gave us a billion-dollar space shuttle."
Endorsing their opinions, as quoted in Time, was Philip Coyle, the former top Pentagon weapons testing official, who said the V-22s aren't suited for "combat situations where they will have to do a lot of maneuvering."
Air Force repeating mistake
From a personal concern, there's one more element: The Air Force is purchasing 50 CV-22s, which are versions of the Osprey with "enhanced capabilities tailored" for the unique mission requirements of the Special Operations Command.
The exact specifications that make the CV-22 different from the MV-22 aren't specified in general press releases. However, the basic bird that costs more than $100 million per aircraft still has the same major flaws that I outlined earlier.
The only good news is the Air Force isn't scheduled to activate that unit until 2009, whereas in the weeks ahead, there's a good chance that the first MV-22 will fly into harm's way and crash. The first question will be: Did it crash and kill good Marines due to its inherent flaws or vulnerability in desert areas of operation, or due to enemy fire?
Staff writer J. Stryker Meyer is the author of "On the Ground: The Secret War in Vietnam," (2007" Levin Publishing Group, LLC). He can be contacted at (760) 901-4089 or jmeyer@nctimes.com. To comment, go to nctimes.com.
Ellie