The US Navy received the first transport convertiplane CMV-22B

The US Navy received the first transport convertiplane CMV-22B

The United States Navy received the first CMV-22B tiltrotor transport, the machine passed all the necessary tests. It is reported by Flightglobal.


According to the publication, this is the first tiltrotor of forty-eight ordered by the US Navy. According to previously announced plans, the first production CMV-22B should go to the U.S. Navy in 2021.

The CMV-22B transport tiltrotor was developed by order of the U.S. Navy based on the V-22 Osprey tiltrotor and is expected to replace the outdated C-2A Greyhound carrier-based transport aircraft. First of all, the military intends to use such devices to deliver spare parts to aircraft carriers located at a great distance from the coast. The maximum load of the machine is about 9 tons, the optimal one is in the region of 2,5 tons (maximum flight range).

Bell and Boeing, which are leading the development of the new tiltrotor, do not much talk about their new car. To date, it is known that the tiltrotor received conformal fuel tanks of increased volume located on the sides of the fuselage in order to increase the flight range. According to available information, the CMV-22B transport tiltrotor is capable of transporting goods weighing up to 2,6 tons at a distance of up to 2,13 thousand kilometers.

One of the reasons that prompted the U.S. Navy to order the development of CMV-22B, was that in the cargo compartment S-2A does not fit the engine from the F-35 fighter. The new tiltrotor freely carries aircraft engines, which in the future will become the main fighter of the US Navy.

Currently, U.S. Navy aircraft carriers at sea use C-2A Greyhound transport aircraft to deliver fuel, spare parts and provisions. The transporter has a length of 17,3 meters, a wingspan of 24,6 meters and a height of 4,8 meters. The maximum take-off weight is 27,2 tons. It is designed to carry up to 26 passengers or cargo weighing up to 4,5 tons. C-2A is capable of flying at speeds of 465 kilometers per hour over a distance of 2,4 thousands of kilometers. The U.S. Navy X-NUMXA entered service in the 2 year.
Photos used:
US Navy
Ctrl Enter

Noticed a mistake Highlight text and press. Ctrl + Enter

78 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. Nastia makarova 12 February 2020 12: 12 New
    • 2
    • 7
    -5
    do we need these?
    1. Cowbra 12 February 2020 12: 16 New
      • 5
      • 5
      0
      Razit that in a zoo) There is no place to be based, but except for aircraft carriers - this is not necessary for the USA. On land, either turntables or planes perform all their tasks at times cheaper and more efficiently.
      1. ProkletyiPirat 12 February 2020 17: 55 New
        • 1
        • 2
        -1
        Quote: Cowbra
        On land, either turntables or planes all their tasks are many times cheaper and more efficient

        Tolley you did not consider the roofing felts you have problems with mathematics and analytics. Personally, I analyzed and counted, for example, take our Caucasus, put the combat radius of the helicopters, the cost of helicopters, reaction time (1 \ 2 \ 3h), the cost of air force bases with their supply, and miraculously you will find that even in the most ideal conditions (ideal for helicopters) they (helicopters) are still more expensive than konvertoplanov. And I do not take into account the cost of aircraft or the tactical or strategic capabilities of the aircraft.
        Convertibles have problems and shortcomings, like any other type of technology, but one does not have to attribute the problems of Osprey to the problems of convertibles. And the problems of the ospreys should not be exaggerated because in their first decades, helicopters had even more problems due to the worse technological base.
        1. Cowbra 12 February 2020 18: 23 New
          • 1
          • 2
          -1
          Quote: ProkletyiPirat
          they (helicopters) are still more expensive than tiltrotors

          What kind? Spherical convertiplanes in vacuum? Compared to whom? With Mi-2?
          Quote: ProkletyiPirat
          no need to attribute the problems of the Osprey to the problems of convertiplanes

          And what other convertiplanes are there?
          Quote: ProkletyiPirat
          If you have problems with mathematics and analytics. Personally, I analyzed and counted

          Well go ahead, let's get your calculations! Forward - where are they?
          Spring has not yet begun, and some already exacerbate wassat
          Instead of a jolt to you - except the United States, no one has built a tiltrotor - they tried it, considered it expensive. And they sent this venture nafig.
          1. ProkletyiPirat 12 February 2020 18: 43 New
            • 2
            • 1
            +1
            Quote: Cowbra
            Well go ahead, let's get your calculations! Forward - where are they?

            Well, look through my komenty on VO was it in the past or in the year before last. In general, you take a pair of compasses, a paper card and decide, the combat mission is as follows: "cover the area of ​​N sq km with forces with a reaction time (time to complete the combat mission) of 1 hour", then iterate the task with a more accurate calculation of the cost of the aircraft, their supply bases, then iterate over more precise introductory ones, and not from Wikipedia, then iterate over the terrain, well, at the end, taking into account tactical and strategic capabilities .... So, for example, in the first iteration (as a first approximation), you get 4 to 1 by the number of vehicles (4 circles to 1), and further the gap will only increase. hi
            1. Cowbra 12 February 2020 19: 08 New
              • 1
              • 1
              0
              Excuse me to bring it yourself ... Reiterate your stories about the cost of supply bases purely for a helicopter laughing
        2. pmkemcity 13 February 2020 05: 57 New
          • 0
          • 1
          -1
          Quote: ProkletyiPirat
          they (helicopters) are still more expensive than tiltrotors.

          Maybe it's all about the cost of fuel? Remove the excise tax, MET and fly to any end of the country even by helicopter, even by broomstick.
    2. figwam 12 February 2020 12: 17 New
      • 5
      • 6
      -1
      Quote: Nastia Makarova
      do we need these?

      They tested it and refined it for 30 years, spent a lot of money, killed dozens of people, our liberals would not have survived such a shame. All its advantage is the speed of 500 km / h.
      1. Avior 12 February 2020 12: 35 New
        • 10
        • 2
        +8
        And range
        And the possibility of landing in a small area
        1. Usher 12 February 2020 13: 45 New
          • 3
          • 10
          -7
          Quote: Avior
          And range
          And the possibility of landing in a small area

          Do you even understand what you are writing?
          Do you understand the meaning of the words of the previous commentator?
          Why crow too much? THE ONLY THING a significant advantage over helicopters of the same weight category, this SPEED. And then the range and vertical take-off? This is a helicopter and a tiltrotor, and it’s so clear that they can land on a small platform.
          You still tell the advantage of the aircraft over the truck, it can also fly.
          1. voyaka uh 12 February 2020 15: 37 New
            • 2
            • 2
            0
            "And here the range" ////
            -----
            Despite the fact that this is the main advantage over helicopters. The range is many times more. Osprey made intercontinental flights (with refueling).
            1. ProkletyiPirat 12 February 2020 18: 02 New
              • 1
              • 0
              +1
              Quote: voyaka uh
              "And here the range" ////
              -----
              Despite the fact that this is the main advantage over helicopters. The range is many times more. Osprey made intercontinental flights (with refueling).

              YOU ARE MISTAKED, THE MAIN advantage is not the range, but "lower fuel consumption: per unit of flight time and per unit of cargo carried." so then the helicopter can fly between the contents in the presence of fuel.
              The main disadvantage of helicopters is that there during the flight part of the fuel is spent on braking, and the greater the flight speed, the greater the mass of the transported cargo and the lower the density of air, the greater percentage fuel is wasted, it is precisely this problem that tiltrotors solve.
        2. figwam 12 February 2020 15: 21 New
          • 0
          • 2
          -2
          Quote: Avior
          And range

          Range increases due to speed.
      2. businessv 12 February 2020 13: 03 New
        • 3
        • 1
        +2
        Quote: figvam
        our liberals would not have survived such a shame.

        A feeling, colleague, that our liberals will survive anything if only they were left at the trough!
      3. Grigory_45 12 February 2020 13: 19 New
        • 7
        • 1
        +6
        Quote: figvam
        All its advantage is the speed of 500 km / h.

        in relation to the helicopter - speed and range, in relation to the plane - the ability to be based on the same sites (ships) as helicopters (take off and land vertically) For UDC - an ideal tool. However, in the quality in which the Americans plan to use it, replacing the ancient transporters for delivering cargo to aircraft carriers, too.
    3. Thrall 12 February 2020 12: 18 New
      • 3
      • 13
      -10
      Quote: Nastia Makarova
      do we need these?

      We have. Sorry, there were ...
      1. lwxx 12 February 2020 12: 28 New
        • 10
        • 1
        +9
        And what does MI-12 have to do with a tiltrotor? MI-12 helicopter, albeit with an unusual arrangement of propulsors.
      2. Lamata 12 February 2020 12: 39 New
        • 4
        • 1
        +3
        it’s not at all a convertiplane, and in the series there weren’t even the flyers were afraid of it
      3. Grigory_45 12 February 2020 13: 20 New
        • 3
        • 1
        +2
        Quote: Thrall
        We have. Sorry, there were ...

        Mi-12 is not a tiltrotor. Helicopter cross section.
    4. pl675 12 February 2020 12: 21 New
      • 2
      • 7
      -5
      Quote: Nastia Makarova
      do we need these?


      as practice has shown, it is not even necessary for nothing.
      1. bessmertniy 12 February 2020 12: 57 New
        • 2
        • 1
        +1
        This is all exotic. Crazy waste of money. hi
      2. Grigory_45 12 February 2020 13: 22 New
        • 6
        • 2
        +4
        Quote: pl675
        as practice has shown, it’s not even necessary for nothing

        Do we have experience operating tiltrotors? belay
        1. pl675 12 February 2020 13: 27 New
          • 3
          • 3
          0
          we do not have an aircraft carrier, this is for the beginning of the dialogue, and for its completion.
          1. Grigory_45 12 February 2020 13: 38 New
            • 4
            • 2
            +2
            then why pssazh
            Quote: pl675
            as practice has shown

            ??
            1. pl675 12 February 2020 14: 03 New
              • 1
              • 4
              -3
              Do you know the proverb “learn from the mistakes of others”?
              as the comrades suggest above, the Americans have a sad experience operating these devices, with corpses and disasters.
              very unstable object, moody and expensive.
              1. Grigory_45 12 February 2020 14: 13 New
                • 6
                • 1
                +5
                Quote: pl675
                operating experience of these devices, with corpses and disasters

                name at least one aircraft that would not have accidents and disasters? Which has not claimed a single life? You can recall the Tu-22, Su-24, as well as Tomcat and Strarfighter. It is necessary to evaluate in relative figures - the number of accidents for so many hours of flight. Do you have similar statistics? It could be compared with the above aircraft.
              2. Grigory_45 12 February 2020 14: 26 New
                • 2
                • 1
                +1
                Quote: pl675
                Americans have a sad experience operating these devices

                Do you think that over the past three decades they have not been able to bring it? Why do the Americans themselves do not refuse this type of machine? (now on trial light V-280)
                1. pl675 12 February 2020 17: 02 New
                  • 2
                  • 1
                  +1
                  Quote: Gregory_45
                  Quote: pl675
                  Americans have a sad experience operating these devices

                  Do you think that over the past three decades they have not been able to bring it? Why do the Americans themselves do not refuse this type of machine? (now on trial light V-280)


                  I believe that they could not, yes.
                  because they ALREADY have one, but you suggest we start development from scratch -
                  I am afraid to present only R&D figures.
                  1. ProkletyiPirat 12 February 2020 18: 13 New
                    • 2
                    • 1
                    +1
                    Quote: pl675
                    you suggest that we start development from scratch -
                    I am afraid to present only R&D figures.

                    from complicated and expensive there
                    1) development of composite blades
                    2) development of gearboxes
                    Everything else is taken from existing aircraft and technological methods, for example, instead of a specialized engine like the Osprey, 2 \ 4 \ 6 \ 8 engines from a helicopter are taken with placement in the center of the wing. There is a truth to its own specifics in the development of medium and heavy tiltrotopes, where balancing features are important.
                    1. Crimean partisan 1974 13 February 2020 11: 20 New
                      • 0
                      • 0
                      0
                      , there the balancing features are important ...... and not only, in this case, an Osprey-based envelope, that is, a gondola at the wingtips. Now calculate how the envelope will be safe if one of the engines starts just sneezing. you never know why. birds, dust, raised soil, a banal emergency situation with the engine is not even critical, and it will not be difficult to imagine what the envelope is, the task is complicated because it is a combat vehicle and it will need to be in the zone of shelling. where any AK type rifleman can just knock over a multi-million dollar car, horizontal flight is even more dangerous, one of the engine failures, even having plowed the blades of a bad power unit, will invariably have a flat corkscrew, it doesn’t roll with turntables, military turntables are equipped with 2 engines on one shaft that the pin could function in the event of the failure of one of the two
                      1. ProkletyiPirat 15 February 2020 02: 30 New
                        • 0
                        • 0
                        0
                        Quote: Crimean partisan 1974
                        an envelope based on the Osprey, i.e. a gondola on the wingtips. Now calculate how the envelope will be safe if one of the engines starts just sneezing.

                        Thanks neighing, did you even see the osprey scheme? there take a closer look inside the wing there is a shaft for power transfer. Actually, due to its availability and mandatory nature, it makes no sense to put expensive special engines in gondolas and you can get by with helicopters ...
                        And take an interest in “miraculous rescue of helicopters after engine failure”, even if you can’t understand the cause-effect relationships, at least you will stop spreading this myth (even if it’s not quite a myth, but the facts are stubborn).
          2. Lamata 12 February 2020 16: 53 New
            • 1
            • 1
            0
            Cool answer)))) hi
    5. Invoce 12 February 2020 13: 15 New
      • 1
      • 0
      +1
      Quote: Nastia Makarova
      do we need these?

      What is there? belay
      Price and how much is available?
  2. Igor Borisov_2 12 February 2020 12: 18 New
    • 2
    • 1
    +1
    Quote: Nastia Makarova
    do we need these?


    And for what? In the absence of aircraft carriers ....
    1. novel66 12 February 2020 13: 14 New
      • 1
      • 1
      0
      if you start developing now - at the same time as the aircraft carrier they will appear (or at the same time will not appear lol )
    2. God save the king 12 February 2020 15: 48 New
      • 3
      • 3
      0
      A machine that takes a lot, flies quickly and far at the same time can not only land a landing, but also pick it up, would be a good help in the Airborne Forces or MTRs, for example.
      1. ProkletyiPirat 12 February 2020 18: 18 New
        • 2
        • 1
        +1
        Quote: God save the King
        A machine that takes a lot, flies quickly and far at the same time can not only land a landing, but also pick it up, would be a good help in the Airborne Forces or MTRs, for example.

        And also for the Ministry of Emergencies, the Ministry of Internal Affairs, the FSB, border guards, and especially sailors. For example, a navy could save from 50% to 90% of the budget allocated to protect coastal waters through a tiltrotor of a certain design, and put the savings on the ocean fleet.
  3. Avior 12 February 2020 12: 34 New
    • 3
    • 1
    +2
    The next step just begs the replacement of Hokai on AWACS based on Osprey.
    Of the most beloved requirements in the US Navy, the requirements for the unification of equipment, so that there are a minimum number of different types on board.
    And this will be a direct path to turning UDC into an easy, but full-fledged, aircraft carrier
    1. Grigory_45 12 February 2020 13: 24 New
      • 1
      • 1
      0
      Quote: Avior
      replacement of Hokai on AWACS based on the Osprey.

      Well, no, Osprey is not suitable for this purpose. The tiltrotor propellers are not optimized for horizontal flight or hovering. They are universal, and therefore compromise. For an AWACS aircraft, it is important to hang in the air as long as possible, winding circles at cruising speed. The plane is out of competition
      1. Avior 12 February 2020 13: 41 New
        • 1
        • 1
        0
        Have you compared how long Osprey can patrol and how many Hokai?
        The time is comparable, and additional tanks were put on it, as the article says
        They have very close characteristics in terms of maximum mass, sadness, range, speed and so on.
        1. Grigory_45 12 February 2020 13: 47 New
          • 0
          • 0
          0
          Quote: Avior
          Have you compared how long Osprey can patrol and how many Hokai?

          deck version of the E-2D Advanced Hawkeye - 5 hours. How much can Osprey spend in the air without refueling?
          1. Avior 12 February 2020 14: 42 New
            • 1
            • 1
            0
            Judging by the fact that their flight range is similar, it is similar.
            They usually write about Hokai for 4 hours, about Osprey - there is no such information, since there are no patrol modifications yet
            1. Grigory_45 12 February 2020 14: 47 New
              • 0
              • 0
              0
              Quote: Avior
              Judging by the fact that their flight range is similar, it is similar.

              is not a fact. Super Hornet has a comparable range (2,5 thousand km), but it can only be in the air for 2,5 hours. Flight time depends on the amount of fuel and gluttony of the engines, cruising speed. With all other things being equal, the plane here wins.

              Quote: Avior
              4 hours usually write about Hokai

              about old Hokka - yes. No wonder I pointed out a specific type
              1. ProkletyiPirat 12 February 2020 18: 25 New
                • 1
                • 1
                0
                1) Take the range and divide by the cruising speed there just 4-4,5 hours for both, but this is without taking into account additional fuel.
                2) Osprey-AWACS can have a radar extendable down or towed
                1. Grigory_45 12 February 2020 18: 42 New
                  • 0
                  • 0
                  0
                  Quote: ProkletyiPirat
                  Osprey-DRLO may have a radar retractable down

                  he can only have one. Or flat AFAR like .СААБ 340

                  or E-7A Wedgetail


                  The "plate" as in Hockey will not allow the screws to be placed in the "helicopter" position
                  1. ProkletyiPirat 12 February 2020 18: 59 New
                    • 0
                    • 1
                    -1
                    Quote: Gregory_45
                    The "plate" as in Hockey will not allow the screws to be placed in the "helicopter" position

                    Nope, your statement is wrong because 1) the radar can be retractable 2) the radar can be segmented, so it can be from the bottom and top and back. In my opinion, it is best from the bottom + back.
                    1. Avior 12 February 2020 23: 31 New
                      • 0
                      • 0
                      0
                      According to the first draft and the plate was placed.
                      And then we switched to antennas with electronic scanning.
                      But really no one has ordered yet.
                  2. Avior 12 February 2020 23: 20 New
                    • 0
                    • 0
                    0
                    different versions were
                    V-22 AEW proposed to the British in 1990.

                    and this is the 1998 version

                    there were options with comfortable antennas on the sides below, as in the Israeli AWAC Conformal Airborne Early Warning and control, CAEW based on the Gulf Stream
                  3. Avior 12 February 2020 23: 24 New
                    • 0
                    • 0
                    0
                    the latter was offered by India,

                    with tactics

                    in Pakistan even got nervous smile
                    https://defence.pk/pdf/threads/northrop-grumman-offered-e-2d-advance-hawkeye-to-indian-military.405915/page-2
                    there are other versions, I don’t know how real
                    but while there was no real customer, they didn’t do anything
                    Osprey needs some improvements to AWACS, for example, sealing for high altitudes, but in general it fits no worse than E-2 for this purpose
    2. God save the king 12 February 2020 16: 04 New
      • 0
      • 3
      -3
      While everything depends on money.
      For Britain, the EV-22 turned out to be overwhelming in finances; for the United States, it was not very demanded when there were hockey aircraft carriers.
  4. Magog 12 February 2020 12: 46 New
    • 5
    • 3
    +2
    We are laying the construction of the UDC at the Kerch shipyards. My question is related to this: for what military-political operations are these ships laid down? Respectively. "We need / do not need us konvertoplany" to some extent depends on the clarity of the tasks of using these ships. The Kuznetsov aircraft-carrying cruiser, like its predecessors (with verticals and helicopters), did not need convertiplanes - at least, such statements were not visible from our side.
    1. Sandor Clegane 12 February 2020 12: 53 New
      • 2
      • 1
      +1
      Quote: Magog
      We are laying the construction of UDC

      Quote: Magog
      Respectively. "we need / do not need us konvertoplany" to some extent depends on clarity

      there is no causal relationship between the UDC in Kerch and the convertiplane. News about The CMV-22B transport tiltrotor is designed by order of the U.S. Navy
      1. Magog 12 February 2020 13: 01 New
        • 3
        • 1
        +2
        A little higher (not mine) read the question: "do we need these?" Here I am about the same. I understand that you can’t catch this in my presentation.
    2. Grigory_45 12 February 2020 14: 30 New
      • 0
      • 2
      -2
      Quote: Magog
      We are laying the construction of the UDC at the Kerch shipyards. My question is related to this: for what military-political operations are these ships laid down? Respectively. "we need / do not need us konvertoplany" to some extent depends on the clarity of the tasks of using these ships

      so the Ka-52 combat Katranas are also based on them. They are suitable only for supporting the landing - one of the UDC appointments is obvious. Turnkey planes and other helicopters can be used for landing and search and rescue operations.
      1. The comment was deleted.
      2. Magog 12 February 2020 15: 59 New
        • 3
        • 1
        +2
        Landing support where? In the military-political sense: TVD. Search and rescue operations - it is clear: UDC for the Ministry of Emergencies (cool!).
  5. Zoomlion 12 February 2020 12: 56 New
    • 0
    • 1
    -1
    And isn’t it easier and cheaper to load 50 pieces of additional engines for the f-35 and other parts on the aircraft carrier itself?
    1. Magog 12 February 2020 13: 05 New
      • 5
      • 4
      +1
      Yes, it looks like they spent an exorbitant amount of money, 30 years of development - now someone needs to work it out. The tasks of the apparatus are clearly far-fetched and painfully "sucked from the finger."
    2. Grigory_45 12 February 2020 13: 52 New
      • 1
      • 1
      0
      Quote: ZoomLion
      And isn’t it easier and cheaper to load 50 pieces of additional engines for the f-35 and other parts on the aircraft carrier itself?

      and is an aircraft carrier rubber? On it, in addition to ensuring the operation of the ship itself, fuel and ammunition for the wing - and not for one day of intense fighting. This is not a land airfield, every cubic meter counts on the ship. Naturally, there are some spare parts (including engines) on board, but what if there is a need to deliver more? And the transport Greyhounds themselves are very outdated and require replacement.
      1. Magog 12 February 2020 14: 28 New
        • 5
        • 3
        +2
        The AUG structure provides for the presence of a large number of ships, including support ships (tankers, dry cargo ships, floating repair facilities, ...) - take any spare parts to health. In addition, a developed network of military bases around the world gives a rare chance for the US Navy to dispense with the urgent supply of spare parts by conventional transport helicopters. Or when replacing an aircraft engine, the bill goes for minutes?
        1. Grigory_45 12 February 2020 14: 33 New
          • 1
          • 1
          0
          Quote: Magog
          The AUG structure provides for the presence of a large number of ships, including support ships (tankers, dry cargo ships, floating repair facilities, ...) - take any spare parts to health. In addition, a developed network of military bases around the world gives a rare chance for the US Navy to dispense with the urgent supply of spare parts by conventional transport helicopters

          why then were the Greyhounds needed? But they still fly
          1. Magog 12 February 2020 15: 00 New
            • 4
            • 2
            +2
            Deliver fresh beer to the whole team! belay Now I will look at their tasks (this is the first thing that I always look at any kind of technique).
          2. Magog 12 February 2020 15: 21 New
            • 4
            • 2
            +2
            "Designed to deliver cargo to the deck of aircraft carriers at sea." (Wikipedia.) Well: At the nearest base (removal up to 2400 km / 2, that is, noticeably further than CMV) we take the load (conditionally, beer) and at the same speed as the CMV-22B (about 500 km / h), we bring to the deck - everyone drinks! Cheap and cheerful. Oversized engines from there, but by helicopters. Engines should be delivered in advance to the bases on large air force transport vehicles in any quantities closest to the proposed AUG actions ... The question remains: "why goat button accordion?"
            1. Grigory_45 12 February 2020 15: 34 New
              • 0
              • 2
              -2
              Quote: Magog
              The question remains: "why goat button accordion?"

              according to your logic, then the Greyhounds were not needed - everything is so simple if you follow your scenario. You can get by with helicopters and Galaxy. Dumb Americans did not guess ..)

              Osprey should replace the obsolete Greyhounds in the snag, taking on their tasks as a deck carrier. In addition, it can be based on UDC, which adds to the mix of flexibility and impact power.
              1. The comment was deleted.
              2. Magog 12 February 2020 15: 48 New
                • 4
                • 2
                +2
                "according to your logic, then the Greyhounds were not needed - everything is so simple if you follow your scenario." Where did you see such my logic and scenario? Engines are an oversized load for "obsolete driftwood", but the need to replace them is not every day.
                "Osprey has to replace the obsolete Greyhounds in a snag." Why is the Osprey better than the Greyhounds that are "outdated" (as applied to aircraft carriers, because they are "tricked" into them)? Only by the fact that they are able to board the UDC? So all the same helicopters are suitable for this.
                1. Grigory_45 12 February 2020 18: 29 New
                  • 0
                  • 0
                  0
                  Quote: Magog
                  Where did you see such my logic and scenario?

                  so, only helicopters can handle everything.
                  Quote: Magog
                  At the nearest base ... we take the cargo ..., we carry it to the deck ... Cheap and cheerful. Oversized engines from there, but by helicopters. Engines should be delivered in advance to the bases closest to the proposed AUG operations on large air force transport vehicles in any quantities

                  Transport deck in this scenario nafig not needed


                  Quote: Magog
                  Than Osprey is better than Greyhounds obsolete

                  They are changing the transport plane (morally and physically obsolete) for convertiplanes. Not only because of the need to carry engines to Lightnings. Change the transporter for something fresher. And capable of being based on UDC - unification.
                  1. Magog 12 February 2020 22: 02 New
                    • 4
                    • 2
                    +2
                    "Gregory," where "..." instructed, quoting me. You are famously using context! Magician. Even objecting is stupid of me!
                    1. Grigory_45 12 February 2020 22: 06 New
                      • 0
                      • 0
                      0
                      Quote: Magog
                      Famously you use context

                      what's so bad? Removed lines about beer. The meaning has changed? I just freed a comment from the husk, so that it was better perceived
                      1. Magog 12 February 2020 22: 14 New
                        • 2
                        • 1
                        +1
                        "Together with water and the child" as they say. "Beer" - a symbol for small-sized cargo for a deck transport PLANE. For oversized cargo - F-35 engine - a transport helicopter. That's the whole "husk" associated with the "beer" ... Next, about the "assistant professor" I recall ...
  6. rocket757 12 February 2020 13: 09 New
    • 1
    • 0
    +1
    The car is certainly cool ... to each his own.
  7. Alex2 12 February 2020 14: 55 New
    • 1
    • 0
    +1
    The presence of one state and the absence of another of this product indicates the technological capabilities of these countries.
    1. Magog 12 February 2020 15: 26 New
      • 5
      • 3
      +2
      Well yes ! One country, for example, has coaxial helicopters (and their availability is justified!), While the other does not and is not expected. Or RD-180.
      1. Grigory_45 12 February 2020 18: 25 New
        • 2
        • 1
        +1
        Quote: Magog
        One country, for example, has coaxial helicopters (and their availability is justified!), While the other does not and is not expected

        yeah, is it shot in Hollywood, or computer graphics?
        1. Magog 12 February 2020 21: 58 New
          • 4
          • 3
          +1
          They tried, found out: problems above the roof. Our Kamovites, too, brought to mind for a long time, but managed. Americans work so rarely - probably never. Then, when someone in the world has solved a particular technical problem, it is easier for followers. However, there are still no coaxial helicopters in either the United States or NATO (banned in Russia).
          1. Grigory_45 12 February 2020 22: 10 New
            • 0
            • 0
            0
            Quote: Magog
            Neither in the USA nor in NATO (banned in Russia) there are still no coaxial helicopters.

            Yes, they do not favor co-alignment, preferring simpler helicopters of the classical scheme. But, as practice shows, if necessary, they can pile together an ally. As far as we know, the Raider is now in trials, and it seems to fly quite well
            1. Magog 12 February 2020 22: 23 New
              • 4
              • 3
              +1
              “God help” - finally, and their progress has been identified.
            2. Magog 12 February 2020 22: 35 New
              • 3
              • 1
              +2
              "The application from the Americans, for which Sikorsky developed a helicopter made using a coaxial system with a pushing propeller, was very serious. It was assumed that the helicopter would be able to reach speeds of up to 407 km / h (according to some sources - up to 460) and replace OH- helicopters The 58D Kiowa Warrior, which has been in service with the US ARMY since the Vietnam War, but having made its first flight back in 2015, the S-97 Raider has still not been brought to mind by and large. And the last test flight in general ended in an accident - a helicopter crashed at the West Pairoko airport in Florida, barely rising from the runway. Fortunately, none of the two crew members were injured. "
          2. Grigory_45 12 February 2020 22: 13 New
            • 0
            • 0
            0
            Quote: Magog
            when someone in the world has solved a particular technical problem, it’s easier for followers

            well, this is only if the pioneers shared sacred knowledge. When Yakovlev made the "flying carriage", the Americans already flew their "bananas." And Yakovlevites grabbed with a longitudinal scheme, they had to go the same way as Pyasetskiy. And - the helicopter did not go ....
            1. Magog 12 February 2020 22: 19 New
              • 2
              • 1
              +1
              Yakovlev succeeded, only t.s. "tender" won Miles, as I recall. KB Mil was chosen for the future as a pure helicopter - they are all in one's hands.