US Navy Rear Admiral: New CMV-22B Osprey convertiplanes should form the basis of the transport wing of aircraft carriers of the future

The US Navy confirmed the achievement of initial operational readiness with a new modification of the Osprey tiltrotor. This is a modification of the CMV-22B Osprey, which passed the final tests on February 17-18. The main task that the command sets in terms of operating the new version of convertiplanes is the task of operating as part of the aviation wing of aircraft carriers.

US Navy Rear Admiral Andrew Loizel:

The first deployment of a new modification of the CMV-22B Osprey tiltrotor in conjunction with the air wing of the aircraft carrier USS Carl Vinson took place. This is an operational success, which personally instills confidence in me in terms of talking about the great future of this technique.

The American rear admiral says that the new modification of the tiltrotor should provide more effective support for the crews of aircraft carriers, including the prompt delivery of goods.

Andrew Loizel:

These convertiplanes should form the basis of the transport wing of aircraft carriers of the future. During the tests, they confirmed their performance.

It is reported that the new modifications of the CMV-22B Osprey convertoplanes will replace the US Navy's C-2A Greyhound tactical carrier-based transport aircraft. American media reports say that the CMV-22B Osprey convertiplanes delivered payloads aboard the aircraft carrier Carl Vinson during test flights. These are provisions, mail, accessories. Also on board the convertiplane, groups of US Navy and Marine Corps personnel were delivered to the aircraft carrier.

Now, the CMV-22B Osprey tiltrotor aircraft have received IOC (Initial Operational Readiness) status, which allows them to be used in transport missions.

The new modification of the well-known American tiltrotor is characterized by increased payload and an increased range of use by about 120 km.

Comments

[Egoza]

new modifications of the CMV-22B Osprey convertiplanes will replace the US Navy's C-2A Greyhound tactical carrier-based transport aircraft.

In the meantime, they will replace, how much money can be cut! )))

[alone]

Quote: Egoza

how much money can you cut! )))

Now it’s fashionable to cut ... moreover, everywhere .. The USA is no exception

[3danimal]

Saw - how is it? When do the children-students of the Secretary of Defense get luxury real estate (somewhere in New York or Los Angeles)? For which dad with a ministerial salary had to work on bread and water for 30 years?
It is unlikely: the journalists there are not afraid, they will quickly unearth and print. And after the scandal, the minister will be buried ..

[alone]

Quote: 3danimal

Saw - how is it?

There are so many ways .. You probably know that the US defense budget is 700+ billion dollars .. Corporations are doing everything possible to get a tidbit from this amount ..
We can endlessly repair roads, change asphalt, etc.
For them, this system works differently .. For their ministers, the children of students, at best, work in some kind of cafe or couriers .. It is our offspring who have villas and a business whose turnover is tens and hundreds of millions of dollars .. And there is no demand ..

[3danimal]

Corporations are doing everything possible to get a tasty morsel out of this amount.

The most they can do is raise the cost of the work. Or fill up R&D by spending funds. (As when creating the A-12 deck) But this causes publicity and proceedings, courts.
A more reasonable intention of corporations is to simply get a contract from the army / navy / air force, which in itself is already very profitable, and even good for reputation.

It is our offspring who have villas and a business whose turnover is tens and hundreds of millions of dollars .. And there is no demand ..

We know who broke checks and balances, publications about suspicious expenses of officials do not entail any consequences (except if the command is given "from above")

[alone]

Quote: 3danimal

(except if the command is given "from above")

This happens when the official decided to play not according to the established "rules."

[3danimal]

Right.
In other cases, the official is covered (and compromising evidence remains in reserve as a guarantee of loyalty)

[Thrifty]

I doubt that such a replacement with a convertible transport aircraft will be equivalent. In the pros, the first has only vertical takeoff and landing. But, in bad weather, this is also its minus! For example, you can take an ordinary turntable, landing in a storm is almost a feat with a risk to the crew and equipment. Or, are the Yankees sure that when the oxpreys take off and land, the weather will be constantly good?

[Free wind]

There is a concept of non-flying weather. and in such weather they try not to fly. True, you will not envy the rescuers. Most accidents occur in non-flying weather. But how do they manage to fly? And envelopes can take off and land on an airplane, like helicopters. The carrying capacity is slightly increased and fuel is saved.

[Thrifty]

Free wind convertibles are not a full-fledged replacement for a transporter !!!

[Avior]

Ospreys are not inferior to transport Greyhounds in key characteristics.

[Pete mitchell]

Taking into account the fact that comrades, God forbid, of course, do not worry about the cost of production and operation, where Osprey is in the lead - a normal move, solid pluses

[Avior]

in the total cost of operating an aircraft carrier and its air wing, these are insignificant costs.
There are only three dozen Greyhounds, for all 11 aircraft carriers.
And the benefits are obvious.

[Pete mitchell]

Quote: Avior

in the total cost of operating an aircraft carrier and its air wing, these are insignificant costs

How is one aircraft carrier there: at sea from lyama a day, 11 seems to be AUG for today, with ..

Quote: Avior

There are only three dozen Greyhounds, for all 11 aircraft carriers. And the benefits are obvious.

Logical actions, bastards ....

[Alexey RA]

Quote: Pete Mitchell

Taking into account the fact that comrades, God forbid, of course, do not worry about the cost of production and operation, where Osprey is in the lead - a normal move, solid pluses

"Osprey" is good because it is already being mass-produced. So you don’t have to pay for the development of a new aircraft - and then scatter this amount on production cars. Given that the US Navy needs only 38 carrier-based transporters, the new-designed vehicle would become golden (like the Marine EFV that got into a similar situation, which, after all the reductions in purchases, became a multiple more expensive than the Abram).
And the transport "Osprey" can simply be re-ordered.

[Avior]

In principle, the carrier-based AWACS Hokai is the same aircraft as the C-2, and it is also purchased as a land-based one, so the market will be noticeably larger if AWACS is made on the basis of the new machine. But we still went to use Osprey.

[Pete mitchell]

Quote: Avior

this is the same aircraft as the S-2, and it is also being purchased as a land aircraft, so the market will be noticeably larger if based on the new aircraft and AWACS.

I think it’s structurally a little more difficult to place an antenna sheet here, but if they figure it out somehow, we’ll see Osprey AWACS

[OgnennyiKotik]

Quote: Thrifty

Free wind convertibles are not a full-fledged replacement for a transporter !!!

Agree. They are a superior substitute.
V-22 exceeds more than 2 times the C-2 in terms of carrying capacity, more than 9 tons versus 4,5 tons. In terms of flight range, 4100 km versus 3700 km. Plus, the ability to take off and land with a jog or vertically, which makes it possible to deliver cargo up to frigates, destroyers with a suitable helipad; the possibility of lifting oversized cargo on an external sling; more compact storage.
Of the minuses, only the price and complexity of maintenance. Which is not significant in comparison with the capabilities that the tiltrotor gives.

[expert]

For me, just an amazing device. Price? With today's and tomorrow's military budget, ugh.
Difficulty in maintenance? What was difficult yesterday is routine tomorrow.
Maybe not a completely correct comparison, but when they switched from ZILs to KAMAZ trucks, they also talked about complexity ...

[TANKISTONE]

Free wind (ALEXANDER)

And envelopes can take off and land on an airplane, like helicopters. With those screw diameters?

[3danimal]

This refers to a shortened takeoff, when the engines are tucked at an angle of 45 '. In this case, the carrying capacity increases.

[Oleg-Monino]

What the hell are aircraft carriers? Last century. Composition of the group? F-35? Osprey? Missiles on approach 15 minutes for everything, almost anywhere in the world. They're trying to make candy out of shit. (please do not put + or -)

[Slap]

What kind of missiles are these and who will launch them?

[Oleg-Monino]

de facto you are right that they will not be launched until de jure arises.

[3danimal]

Who will launch them?
How to get close to an aircraft carrier in the ocean at a distance of a shot, who will issue target designation?
In the ocean, any order of ships without their own aircraft is a sacrifice against air wings.

[Oleg-Monino]

Now you need to think about how such a "helicopter" will be parked on an aircraft carrier?

[Avior]

How will it be like this

[Oleg-Monino]

I did not serve on the water. But destroyed the headquarters - good. All 10 cover ships, nuclear submarines? What for? fiction for idiots. "An aircraft carrier group has arrived" - so what? In fact, you need to invest. Master the budget. window dressing. From a political point of view, good. From a military point of view, far from it.

[Masaaq]

It still looks very large. On the other hand, if the capacity is greater than that of the current transport, then why not. In general, it is difficult to give a specific assessment of the effectiveness of this solution.

[voyaka uh]

Convertiplanes will replace just such an aircraft.

[Aqr009]

And why did they refuse the Bell V-280 Valor, are they more modern?

[voyaka uh]

Valor - small.
It's more of an apparatus for transferring a group of commandos.

[Avior]

The length of Osprey and C-2 Greyhaun, to which he is replacing, is the same - a little more than 17 meters.
In the folded state, the Osprey is already almost one and a half times; at the C-2, only the ends of the wings fold.

[rotmistr60]

These convertiplanes should form the basis of the transport wing of aircraft carriers of the future.

It is exclusively their problem from what angle to look into the future. A tiltrotor, so a tiltrotor. In American films, they are massively used even in the fight against aliens, although no more than half, or even a third, reaches the landing site.

[Avior]

The reason for the replacement is known - a larger cargo compartment. The Greyhound does not include the F-35 engine. Now it is logical to replace Hokai with AWACS based on Osprey for reasons of unification. Moreover, there will be a large sales market for such AWACS.

[voyaka uh]

And the load on the catapults is reduced. Throw away transporters
and AWACS aircraft from catapults - the most difficult task.
Verticals remove a lot of problems from naval aviation.
It will be possible to start building smaller aircraft carriers in general.

[Avior]

And significantly expand the functions of the UDC if necessary

[3danimal]

It will not be possible to radically reduce their size if it is necessary to provide a large number of sorties per day, for example, Queen Elizabeth, 70 thousand tons.
Of the possible advantages - you can abandon the reactors on board (you do not need a huge amount of steam or electricity for catapults).

[Avior]

It is far from always necessary to ensure the largest possible number of sorties with strike missions. But with the presence of AWACS on board, it will be possible to provide effective air defense.

[Aqr009]

Of the possible advantages - you can abandon the reactors on board (you do not need a huge amount of steam or electricity for catapults).

In Russia, they have long been abandoned, because. in the northern latitudes, steam catapults freeze, and electric catapults, on the contrary, have to be constantly warmed up.
Springboard is the future!

[voyaka uh]

"Springboard is the future" ///
----
The trampoline solves the problem of takeoff, but does not solve the problem of landing. And it is more difficult than taking off on aircraft carriers.
Verticals: F-35B + Ospey solves both problems.
Need a flat deck without any fixtures.

[3danimal]

Do you know that the picture is a 3d model?
They did not use nuclear power plants in order to be able to swim in the Black Sea. But they chose a disgusting boiler-turbine installation as a mover.
As a result, Kuznetsov with his KTU is in distress, they also drowned the floating dock, the repair is being dragged out for an indefinite time ..
The creation of an analogue of the F-35B would allow them to be placed on the UDC (like 23900), the only question is how many years it will take for the appearance of a production aircraft

The "island" is wide, in my opinion, a strange pointed nose of the take-off deck ..
Perhaps on a ship under construction it will be changed.

[3danimal]

What is the problem with "Varan" with its aircraft traditional takeoff and landing: it cannot combine these operations.
Unlike the same "Kuznetsov" and even more so "Nimitz".

[3danimal]

Moreover, there will be a large sales market for such AWACS.

I think that he (together with the F-35B) will make a revolution: then any large UDC will turn, according to its capabilities, into a full-fledged mini-aircraft carrier, capable of seeing hundreds of kilometers around (of course, with fewer flights per day than the “heavy” one).

[Avior]

that is exactly what I had in mind.