quote:

Originally posted by SinePariDonster:
Maybe they should see if they can get it to perform as promised before turning it into a non-flying weapons platform.

This Osprey has become a huge White Elephant and the only reason it's still around it that too many contractors and REMF officers' careers are tied to it. The procurement people have certainly screwed the pooch on this one.

quote:

Originally posted by 15219629:
While it's neat that they want to put a weapons system on this turkey, the one that is being purchased is pretty limited if you look at it. In order to get the 360 deg. frlexibility, the sytems ammo can is mounted outside on the turret mast with the gun, externally. This will make the amount of ammo carried very small. Roughly 2,500 rds. of 7.62 if my measurement and estimate of the ammo can size is even close. I saw a picture of this sytstem on another site. As usual, rather than take something off the shelf, they had to re-invent the wheel and spend a bunch of doe for something already available from the old AH-1G Cobra's!

A better system would have been a modified M-28 turret system with 2 weapons (7.62 mini gun &/or 40mm G. Launcher.) The fact that the A/C already has a rear mounted gun would make this a better choice if left and right fire suppression is the concern and the ability to shoot forward with two weapons would offer better forward fire suppression for LZ's. If I remember right, the old M-28 turret had about a 230 deg. range. If someone remembers, let correct me if I'm wrong.

But, it just wouldn't be as expensive for those who wish to spend the money! Better system, but less money and the name of the game is to spend money.
JD

quote:

Originally posted by SUNLINER81:

quote:

Originally posted by 15219629:
While it's neat that they want to put a weapons system on this turkey, the one that is being purchased is pretty limited if you look at it. In order to get the 360 deg. frlexibility, the sytems ammo can is mounted outside on the turret mast with the gun, externally. This will make the amount of ammo carried very small. Roughly 2,500 rds. of 7.62 if my measurement and estimate of the ammo can size is even close. I saw a picture of this sytstem on another site. As usual, rather than take something off the shelf, they had to re-invent the wheel and spend a bunch of doe for something already available from the old AH-1G Cobra's!

A better system would have been a modified M-28 turret system with 2 weapons (7.62 mini gun &/or 40mm G. Launcher.) The fact that the A/C already has a rear mounted gun would make this a better choice if left and right fire suppression is the concern and the ability to shoot forward with two weapons would offer better forward fire suppression for LZ's. If I remember right, the old M-28 turret had about a 230 deg. range. If someone remembers, let correct me if I'm wrong.

But, it just wouldn't be as expensive for those who wish to spend the money! Better system, but less money and the name of the game is to spend money.
JD

The Osprey is anything but a "turkey", go look up it's accomplishments and talk to the crews and then talk about the aircraft!...
Respectfully, SUNLINER81

quote:

Originally posted by thorin001:

quote:

Originally posted by SUNLINER81:

quote:

Originally posted by 15219629:
While it's neat that they want to put a weapons system on this turkey, the one that is being purchased is pretty limited if you look at it. In order to get the 360 deg. frlexibility, the sytems ammo can is mounted outside on the turret mast with the gun, externally. This will make the amount of ammo carried very small. Roughly 2,500 rds. of 7.62 if my measurement and estimate of the ammo can size is even close. I saw a picture of this sytstem on another site. As usual, rather than take something off the shelf, they had to re-invent the wheel and spend a bunch of doe for something already available from the old AH-1G Cobra's!

A better system would have been a modified M-28 turret system with 2 weapons (7.62 mini gun &/or 40mm G. Launcher.) The fact that the A/C already has a rear mounted gun would make this a better choice if left and right fire suppression is the concern and the ability to shoot forward with two weapons would offer better forward fire suppression for LZ's. If I remember right, the old M-28 turret had about a 230 deg. range. If someone remembers, let correct me if I'm wrong.

But, it just wouldn't be as expensive for those who wish to spend the money! Better system, but less money and the name of the game is to spend money.
JD

The Osprey is anything but a "turkey", go look up it's accomplishments and talk to the crews and then talk about the aircraft!...
Respectfully, SUNLINER81

The bird has had more than its share of fielding problems. It still has several issues which need to be resolved before it is truely ready for service. Issues such as it is currently unarmed. It also has issues landing in an LZ which has active rotors, drasticly limiting its use as an assault craft.

quote:

Originally posted by SUNLINER81:

quote:

Originally posted by SinePariDonster:
Maybe they should see if they can get it to perform as promised before turning it into a non-flying weapons platform.

This Osprey has become a huge White Elephant and the only reason it's still around it that too many contractors and REMF officers' careers are tied to it. The procurement people have certainly screwed the pooch on this one.

Wow, never have I heard such pure un adulterated bullshcidt!...
Respectfully, SUNLINER81

quote:

Originally posted by greywolfghost:
The gun will saw the props off, then what? And when it lands on an unimproved field, will the gun get crushed, filled with dirt/mud? If it is in close enough contact to need that kind of firepower, it'll be going down anyhow - -

Don't forget how a bunch of commies shot down marine seaking helicopters with RPGs as they came in on a beach trying to rescue the Mayagüez --

"It looked like a walk, but virtually everything that could go wrong did. The marines and helicopter crews never received the good intelligence available about the island’s defenders; they went in expecting 18 to 40 lightly armed militia but instead found a reinforced battalion of elite Khmer Rouge naval infantry. The Cambodians shot down three of the first four helicopters to approach the island, one of them carrying the Marine forward air controller (FAC) team; the fourth was badly damaged and forced to abort. For hours, Air Force A-7s providing fire support failed to find the marines, let alone support them. The marines hung on by a thread while the remaining H-53s of the assault wave fed in reinforcements trickle by trickle; the enemy badly shot up most of the remaining seven helicopters—only three landed in commission at U Tapao. A boarding party, transferred to the Holt by helicopter, seized the Mayaguez, only to find the ship deserted; the Cambodians had taken its crew to the mainland two days earlier."

Going into a hot area with BIG slow aircraft makes for good target pratice for the bad guys - -

quote:

Originally posted by rkgtactical:
Sunliner, the people that usually post negative comments on these types of issues are those who know very little if anything about it. My one son happens to be involved with the Osprey as well as currently a pilot of an CH-53. He has nothing but good things to say about the Osprey. Granted there has een problems. But, all new equipment generally has it's share of problems in the beginning. Take the Huey during Vietnam. There were approximately 2500 ships go down during the entire war. Half of those were due to equipment failure. But, the Huey is still in operation by the U.S. military to date as is other Vietnam era equipment. The B-52 had tremendous amounts of problems, yet it will continue to be a heavy bomber way into the 21st century. Some people just aren't willing to accept new design and equipment. If it doesn't prove itself right of the line than it must be junk.

quote:

Originally posted by SinePariDonster:

quote:

Originally posted by rkgtactical:
Sunliner, the people that usually post negative comments on these types of issues are those who know very little if anything about it. My one son happens to be involved with the Osprey as well as currently a pilot of an CH-53. He has nothing but good things to say about the Osprey. Granted there has een problems. But, all new equipment generally has it's share of problems in the beginning. Take the Huey during Vietnam. There were approximately 2500 ships go down during the entire war. Half of those were due to equipment failure. But, the Huey is still in operation by the U.S. military to date as is other Vietnam era equipment. The B-52 had tremendous amounts of problems, yet it will continue to be a heavy bomber way into the 21st century. Some people just aren't willing to accept new design and equipment. If it doesn't prove itself right of the line than it must be junk.

With respect...


Right off the line?

Who are you kidding?

10 years

How many 10s of billions?...with a 'B'

For what?

I will not change your minds I know...but mark my words years from now. This is a money pit that will eat dollars and lives like no weapons system in years.

The project that wouldn't die...but will kill.