The UK for one, but also anyone else operating carriers and or the F35B at sea….
By: Al. - 22nd February 2016 at 23:28
Maybe if the Brits were to acquire Ospreys for some other role it would be a possibility but I can’t envision them ever buying the aircraft just for the COD role.
That was my thinking (well I think mine was that in reverse!)
Buy the Long Range version of Osprey (which happens to be the COD platform) to do lots of jobs it just so happens that one of them would be the one it was originally optimised for
“buy an Osprey, get a fleet air arm”
By: mrmalaya - 22nd February 2016 at 08:17
Its fair to say that buying some spares and keeping them with the carriers is easier and cheaper than a whole fleet of Ospreys.
By: Jinan - 21st February 2016 at 14:09
Would an F-35’s engine fit inside a V-22 or would they sling load it?
The answer is internal cariage. But it’s complicated. Read here
http://aviationweek.com/defense/bell-tests-v-22-jsf-engine-carrying-capability
http://www.naval-technology.com/news/newsus-navy-grants-carrier-onboard-delivery-aircraft-designation-to-v-22-osprey-4802564
By: mrmalaya - 19th February 2016 at 20:06
…and the Chinook?
By: Portagee - 19th February 2016 at 18:27
Would an F-35’s engine fit inside a V-22 or would they sling load it?
It fits inside the v22.
By: swerve - 19th February 2016 at 11:17
The RN just went with the cheapest of the cheapest option regarding Crowsnest because of, well, money… lack of it, and sudenly, Boeing thinks that there´s budget for… the most gold plated platform that money can buy for … COD?! One of those birds costs more than a brand new C-130J.
COD will be by Chinooks and EH101´s.Cheers
I think it’s probably more accurate to say the RN went with the cheapest available option which would give acceptable performance, but in principle you’re entirely right. And definitely right about COD. It’ll be done with what we already have.
By: LastOfGunfighters - 19th February 2016 at 02:28
Maybe if the Brits were to acquire Ospreys for some other role it would be a possibility but I can’t envision them ever buying the aircraft just for the COD role.
By: Glendora - 19th February 2016 at 00:54
Compare the cost of having a reliable stock of spare F-135 e.g. on the QE or Cavour with the cost of buying, operating and maintaining 2-10 MV-22s dedicated to this particular mission + the cost of keeping same reliable stock of engines in base.
I’d rather spend for two F-135 more and keep them aboard then buying two F-135 more and keep them ashore ready to be carried by the mighty Osprey.
MV-22s are great assets, but using them just for delivering spare engines is a non-sense, for a service just little smaller then USMC.
By: Sintra - 19th February 2016 at 00:17
The RN just went with the cheapest of the cheapest option regarding Crowsnest because of, well, money… lack of it, and sudenly, Boeing thinks that there´s budget for… the most gold plated platform that money can buy for … COD?! One of those birds costs more than a brand new C-130J.
COD will be by Chinooks and EH101´s.
Cheers
By: tankdriver67 - 18th February 2016 at 22:29
Would an F-35’s engine fit inside a V-22 or would they sling load it?
By: mrmalaya - 18th February 2016 at 20:45
I don’t think they will replace Chinook, I was making a probably too simplistic link between a very large Chinook fleet and trying to find some cash for CODsprey.
By: Portagee - 17th February 2016 at 23:47
I’d like to hope that some would be bought for and operated by the FAA.
What realistically would be the right number…6?
One carrier at sea with one aboard, 2 forward deploying into the carriers operational area with 3 back home for continuity training of flight and ground crews.
The actual conversion training being outsourced to the US?
On a rare occasion where bother QE and POW were at sea it would be one aboard with only one forward deploying with each leaving 2 back home?
If we are talking Chinook replacements and they still have plenty of life in them yet, then something like the Lockheed Ares ducted fan (Unmanned cargo lifter), even upscaled into a (un)manned Quad for heavier/larger cargo boxes.
By: Al. - 17th February 2016 at 21:40
Boeing agrees with me it seems:
In the case of the UK, ditching Chinooks to help fund an Osprey purchase to support the carriers is a no brainer surely?
I’d like to keep the Chinooks*
But the COD version of Osprey is very attractive as well
It’s reminiscent to me of Lockheed’s marketing campaign for the Herc “buy an Osprey, get a fleet air arm”
* buy P1s instead of P8s to get the savings I say
By: mrmalaya - 17th February 2016 at 12:33
Boeing agrees with me it seems:
In the case of the UK, ditching Chinooks to help fund an Osprey purchase to support the carriers is a no brainer surely?
By: Jinan - 6th February 2016 at 19:25
The UK for one, but also anyone else operating carriers and or the F35B at sea….
A longer range version might also form a suitable basis for a carrier based tanker, if that role is not taken up or only partly taken up by an unmanned aircraft
Sign In
February 4, 2016 at 8:50 pm