Military Review

Osprey armed with rockets and bombs

48
The United States Marine Corps wants to see its MV-22 Osprey "converters" more speedy and lethal ", leads Military Parity An article published by the resource defensenews.com.


Osprey armed with rockets and bombs


"For this purpose, various types of weapons and sensors, ”writes the resource.

It is reported that "on the" Osprey "can be integrated weapons that are used on helicopters UH-1Y Venom and AH-1 Cobra", that is, guns and rocket launchers.

According to the resource, “currently, AGM-114 Hellfire and AGM-176 Griffin, laser-guided laser-guided ABM GBU-44 / B Viper Strike missiles are considered as standard weapons.

It is also noted that "in the fore part of the machine, a laser target designator has already been mounted and is being tested."

The publication reminds that "The Marine Corps uses convertibles in various regions of the world, in particular," Osprey "used to evacuate American embassies in Iraq, South Sudan and Libya."

“Equipping the Osprey with percussion weapons will require additional crew training, but marines are famous for quickly mastering any innovations,” concludes the resource.

Photos used:
Sgt. Mark Fayloga / Marine Corps
48 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. Mountain shooter
    Mountain shooter 18 May 2016 13: 34
    +3
    Yes, no one argues that it is an interesting device, and it has great capabilities, but it is more a plane with a GDP than a high-speed helicopter, which ours will "finish off" on the basis of the Alligator. IMHO, the helicopter will be cooler.
    1. Knizhnik
      Knizhnik 18 May 2016 13: 44
      +2
      Do you think such devices have development prospects, or is it a dead end branch?
      1. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
        Andrei from Chelyabinsk 18 May 2016 13: 54
        +3
        Rather, it is still a dead end branch. An interesting analysis here http://gunm.ru/parad-absurdnyx-ustarevshix-i-neeffektivnyx-vooruzhenij-ssha/
        1. Knizhnik
          Knizhnik 18 May 2016 14: 13
          +1
          Thanks for the link; until the problem with the "vortex ring" is solved, you can safely put it "under the cloth"
        2. Leto
          Leto 18 May 2016 15: 17
          +3
          Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
          An interesting analysis here http://gunm.ru/parad-absurdnyx-ustarevshix-i-neeffektivnyx-vooruzhenij-ssha/

          Nothing interesting. The task was to set in black, for which bad techniques were used. This is not analytics, but propaganda.
          True, this carbon fiberglass box shoots from a machine gun

          Any transport helicopter is shot through from the machine; aluminum is not very different in this respect from carbon.
          You will also have to refuse extra windows / windows, there is nothing to weaken the design. Let the marines watch cartoons on iPads, why should they look out the windows there.

          What do extra lumiters mean? How did the author determine which ones are superfluous and which are not? They are on both sides, how did the author determine the sufficiency of their quantity?
          if you want - we’ll put an infantry bullet in caliber 7.62 in the ass on the ramp and that's enough for you.

          On transport helicopters, weapons are usually not.
          Well, yes, it will be inconvenient to land through the ramp, dust will blow into the cabin

          This is typical for all helicopters.
          Then, in general, there was nonsense about autorotation, which is supposedly so necessary, about the lack of ejection seats, that when landing it raises a cloud of dust and nothing is visible, etc.
          It’s not serious to give such links.
          PS: I ran through the writings of this author who GOSH100 in LJ, complete darkness, a lover of shit.
          1. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
            Andrei from Chelyabinsk 18 May 2016 19: 05
            +1
            Quote: Leto
            Any transport helicopter is shot through from the machine, aluminum is not very different in this respect from carbon

            Point blank - it’s possible, but at a height I’ll put on 10 mm aluminum armor and 16 mm ceramic armor (Mi-28) By the way, some people risk asserting that this case can withstand 20 mm shells.
            Quote: Leto
            On transport helicopters, weapons are usually not.

            Because transport helicopters usually operate under the cover of combat helicopters (if you didn’t have a conversation behind). But Osprey from where to take the cover, is it on paper so painted that not a single helicopter can catch it?
            Quote: Leto
            What do extra lumiters mean? How did the author determine which ones are superfluous and which are not?

            Yes, very simple. You compare the Osprey with a transport helicopter, while it should be compared with a transport-combat helicopter, such as the Mi-24.
            Osprey is a pepelats, which, according to developers, is far ahead of a conventional helicopter. Thus, the positive properties of this device can be disclosed only where a conventional helicopter does not reach. There is no point in linking the actions of Osprey with helicopters, then it’s easier to send 2 helicopters instead of ospri, it will be cheaper for a price.
            Well, in the absence of cover, the car should be able to fend for itself, which Osprey is incapable of. And the question is - why is it needed then, so beautiful?
            Quote: Leto
            Further generally went nonsense about autorotation which is supposedly so necessary

            And what, she is not needed? belay
            Quote: Leto
            about the lack of ejection seats

            in the absence of the possibility of an emergency landing. I don’t understand, to admit, you are completely in this matter. Do you care about the pilots or what?
            Quote: Leto
            when landing raises a cloud of dust and nothing is visible, etc.

            And if you will be the landing commander who landed from this Osprey somewhere behind enemy lines - will you also reason?
            Quote: Leto
            It’s not serious to give such links.

            Well, object is justified. And yes, for some reason you did not bring any "frostbitten" heating system, ignored the leakage of the cabin, the features of the combat radius ...
            Quote: Leto
            I ran through the writings of this author who GOSH100 in LJ, complete darkness, a lover of shit.

            Perhaps, but in this link I consider it right.
            Of course, I’m not such an Osprey connoisseur, if you can convincingly counterargument, I’m ready to change my point of view, but for now ... for now - like that.
            1. Leto
              Leto 19 May 2016 06: 33
              0
              Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
              Point blank - it’s possible, but at a height I’ll put on 10 mm aluminum armor and 16 mm ceramic armor (Mi-28)

              So the same attack helicopter, not a transporter. The same Mi-8 / 17s book only partially, only the cockpit, the rest is the same aluminum at all 10 mm thick.
              Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
              Because transport helicopters usually operate under the cover of combat helicopters (if you didn’t have a conversation behind). But Osprey from where to take the cover, is it on paper so painted that not a single helicopter can catch it?

              This is the KMP machine, in theory, the landing should land on an undefended land, or the resistance is suppressed in advance. Osprey's task is to deliver max. the number of paratroopers and equipment to gain a foothold on the shore, and not to land under fire. Look at the ILC range of amphibious assault weapons.
              Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
              And what, she is not needed?

              Autorotation does not really help, many times when she saved her life?
              Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
              in the absence of the possibility of an emergency landing. I don’t understand, to admit, you are completely in this matter. Do you care about the pilots or what?

              There are no catapult seats on transport aircraft. Generally. Not on one. Do you think the IL-76 will somehow change its characteristics if you add an ejection seat? But they are not there ...
              Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
              And if you will be the landing commander who landed from this Osprey somewhere behind enemy lines - will you also reason?

              All helicopters during landing raise a cloud of dust, this is inevitable. Osprey is no exception.
              Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
              You did not bring any "frostbitten" heating system, you ignored the leakage of the cabin, the features of the combat radius ...

              Nonsense. Are paratroopers in IL-76 sitting on heaters when they expect landing? Of course not. Osprey has flaws, but his main advantage is speed, for the sake of it everything was started. Both Chinook and Super Stalion are good and proven machines, but they have low speed, and when landing, the speed of delivery of an assault is an important parameter.
        3. dauria
          dauria 18 May 2016 15: 34
          +3
          Rather, it is still a dead end branch.


          Then name any of the modern transport helicopters capable of doing such a trick:
          combat radius of this MTC with a payload of 18 fully equipped military personnel will be 930 km. Estimated flight profile: short take-off, flight to the target at the optimum altitude with cruising speed (480 km / h), hovering over it for 15 minutes, flying to the place of basing at cruising speed and altitude, as well as vertical landing with a standard reserve fuel balance.

          here they correctly noted, this is an AIRPLANE with GDP, in radius and speed it will always surpass a classic helicopter. Naturally, due to the deterioration of the hanging characteristics.
          And helicopters also have problems with the "ring" (in fact, it is a great rarity), and all this is not fatal for the tiltrotor and can be solved by the automatic roll control.

          A scheme with turbojet engines instead of propellers will also solve the problem of airplane or short take-off and landing and will increase radius and speed even more (although it will worsen fuel efficiency on hovering, which is actually only necessary when unloading the landing). I think it’s premature to talk about a dead end.
          1. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
            Andrei from Chelyabinsk 18 May 2016 19: 19
            +1
            Quote: dauria
            Then name any of the modern transport helicopters capable of doing such a trick:
            the combat radius of this MTC with a payload of 18 fully equipped troops will be 930 km.

            Good. But only if you first name any modern military vehicle capable of producing high-quality expresso, latte and cappuccino laughing
            Is there really no such thing? It's strange ... but my wife bought a coffee maker - she can do it all! :) So my coffee maker is much cooler than any Osprey there :)))
            Now let's get serious. Please tell me, for what such needs do we need transport for 18 people, capable of flying 930 km? Where do we use it? In the rear? So helicopters with refueling are cheaper, and by planes - faster. Behind Enemy Lines? Are you seriously risking sending an assembly for several hundred kilometers whose screws on the radar glow with a Christmas tree? An apparatus on which there is no weapon, and which is able to die from the first 7,62 that will fly into it?
            Magic tricks are wonderful and appropriate in a circus. And in war, the creation of technology should be planned from the tasks that this technology solves. And I do not see any tasks that would justify the existence of smallpox. And what 930 km can do at the "optimal" altitude (where the pilots, along with the landing party, will clang their teeth from the cold) - I repeat, my coffee machine makes excellent coffee. Which does not make it a successful military vehicle, because there are no combat missions that could be solved by making a cup of fragrant "expresso"
        4. godofwar6699
          godofwar6699 18 May 2016 18: 42
          +1
          great future
      2. The comment was deleted.
      3. samoletil18
        samoletil18 18 May 2016 13: 57
        0
        It is also a very expensive branch.
      4. drunkram
        drunkram 18 May 2016 14: 11
        -1
        specifically in turboprop design this is a dead end
      5. godofwar6699
        godofwar6699 18 May 2016 18: 36
        +2
        Bell V-280 Valor is the third generation of modern convertiplanes. A new concept for tiltrotor is being developed by Bell.
      6. godofwar6699
        godofwar6699 18 May 2016 18: 47
        0
        yes a great future
    2. marlin1203
      marlin1203 18 May 2016 14: 05
      +1
      Those. do you want to make an attack bomber out of this unarmored transport pelvis? belay In a good way! .. laughing
      1. ism_ek
        ism_ek 18 May 2016 14: 39
        +1
        Quote: marlin1203
        Those. do you want to make an attack bomber out of this unarmored transport pelvis? Good luck!..

        Well, they have an attack aircraft based on "Hercules"
        1. Leto
          Leto 18 May 2016 15: 20
          0
          Quote: ism_ek
          Well, they have an attack aircraft based on "Hercules"

          The AC-130 is not a ground attack aircraft, it is just an infantry support aircraft, with a rather narrow profile.
          1. ism_ek
            ism_ek 18 May 2016 18: 42
            0
            Quote: Leto
            The AC-130 is not an attack aircraft, just an infantry support aircraft,

            Stormtrooper - combat aircraft (airplane or helicopter), related to attack aircraft and intended for direct support of ground forces over the battlefield, as well as for targeted destruction of land and sea targets.
  2. Andrey K
    Andrey K 18 May 2016 13: 35
    +6
    Osprey is armed with missiles and bombs ...
    Already interesting, along the way: the announcement of a new helicopter, which was trumpeted to the entire "civilized" world, was covered with a basin laughing
    We decided to upgrade Osprey, instead of the promised Bell V-280 Valor, so it’s cheaper laughing



    I supplement after the appearance of a minus hi
    Colleagues, pros and cons do not bother me much laughing
    The question is different, if someone does not agree with my comment - express your point of view hi
    If I am mistaken, I will take note, if I am right, we will discuss hi
    Why are these "rats", surreptitiously cons request
    1. cap
      cap 18 May 2016 13: 55
      0
      Quote: Andrey K
      Supplement after the appearance of minus hi
      Colleagues, the pros and cons do not really bother me laughing
      The question is different, if someone does not agree with my comment - express your point of view hi
      If I am mistaken, I will take note, if I am right, we will discuss hi
      Why are these "ratish", surreptitious cons of request


      They are so shy. They appear on the site after discussion and minus. I graze constantly.
      These are they quiet people. laughing

      ratrat
    2. voyaka uh
      voyaka uh 18 May 2016 14: 51
      0
      These are cars of a different class. Osprey can take 22 marines and
      big load. Bell V-280 Valor for 14 paratroopers, with much less
      carrying capacity. Therefore, it was rejected.
      1. Andrey K
        Andrey K 18 May 2016 20: 29
        +5
        Quote: voyaka uh
        These are cars of a different class. Osprey can take 22 marines and
        big load. Bell V-280 Valor for 14 paratroopers, with much less
        carrying capacity. Therefore, it was rejected.

        I will not argue with you, you probably know what you are saying.
        Only now they have one class - a convertiplane, that is, an aircraft capable of vertical takeoff and landing (as helicopters do) and a long high-speed horizontal flight, which is typical for ordinary aircraft. It’s not me who wrote it, it’s public information.
        The Bell V-280 Valor is a follow-up to the Bell V-22 Osprey, which is thirty years old. We decided to reduce the cost of its production a little, to reduce weight and so on and so forth. They called it a prototype of the third generation, and so on the mock-ups and projections they have so far stalled. Nobody rejected it, just once again the budget has been mastered, but there is no result request
    3. Leto
      Leto 18 May 2016 15: 23
      0
      Quote: Andrey K
      the announcement of a new helicopter, which was trumpeted to the entire "civilized" world, was covered with a basin

      What kind of helicopter are you talking about? CH-53K King Stallion?
      1. Andrey K
        Andrey K 18 May 2016 20: 43
        +5
        Quote: Leto
        What kind of helicopter are you talking about? CH-53K King Stallion?

        You propose to equip the heavy helicopter CH-53K, an analog of our Mi-26, with shock weapons laughing
        What did you conclude that this thought could visit someone request
        1. Leto
          Leto 19 May 2016 05: 53
          0
          Quote: Andrey K
          What did you conclude that this thought could visit someone

          Explain which helicopter in question? They just recently presented King Stallion, there were a lot of articles, there seemed to be no more.
  3. tatarin_ru
    tatarin_ru 18 May 2016 13: 40
    +1
    Money money money.
    They want, want and want.
    But why?
    Because they give., Give, give.
  4. Monos
    Monos 18 May 2016 13: 50
    +7
    A ridiculous freak this Osprey. No protection, no weapons, no flight safety, no payload, no mobility. And nothing can be done about it.

    Who cares: proof - http://gunm.ru/parad-absurdnyx-ustarevshix-i-neeffektivnyx-vooruzhenij-ssha/
    1. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
      Andrei from Chelyabinsk 18 May 2016 13: 56
      0
      Quote: Monos
      Who cares: proof

      laughing drinks We laid out the same proof almost simultaneously
      1. ohtandur
        ohtandur 18 May 2016 15: 54
        +1
        read, laughed. however, the article announces a technology parade. 10s, 9s, 8s are mentioned casually and sparingly. 7th - Osprey is normal. where are the others? belay sad crying
      2. Monos
        Monos 18 May 2016 17: 49
        +4
        Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
        Quote: Monos
        Who cares: proof

        laughing drinks We laid out the same proof almost simultaneously


        fellow PROPER is a thoughtful guy. Its always interesting to read. drinks
    2. _Alexei_
      _Alexei_ 18 May 2016 14: 25
      0
      thanks for the wunderwafel link in one word
  5. _Alexei_
    _Alexei_ 18 May 2016 13: 52
    0
    I wonder what will happen if one engine fails
    1. V.ic
      V.ic 18 May 2016 14: 00
      +4
      Quote: _Alexey_
      what will happen if one engine fails

      Something has not been observed so far aircraft with failed engines drifting in midair. Landed anyway.
      1. Luka Mudischev
        Luka Mudischev 18 May 2016 14: 04
        +1
        In principle, multi-engine aircraft are designed to fly even on one engine if the others fail. I don’t know how konvertoplanov, maybe some compensation for the drift of keels is included?
        Single-engine propeller planes somehow fly ...
        1. Vladimirets
          Vladimirets 18 May 2016 14: 52
          +2
          Quote: Luka Mudishchev
          In principle, multi-engine aircraft are designed to fly even on one engine if the others fail. I don’t know how konvertoplanov, maybe some compensation for the drift of keels is included?
          Single-engine propeller planes somehow fly ...

    2. The comment was deleted.
    3. samoletil18
      samoletil18 18 May 2016 14: 05
      +1
      Quote: _Alexey_
      I wonder what will happen if one engine fails

      Accuse Russia. And after that they will pull on one engine, like an airplane or autorotation, like a helicopter.
    4. Leto
      Leto 18 May 2016 15: 26
      +5
      Quote: _Alexey_
      I wonder what will happen if one engine fails

      He has a wing shaft connecting two engines, in case of failure of one engine, one engine will rotate two rotors.
  6. Luka Mudischev
    Luka Mudischev 18 May 2016 13: 56
    +3
    Beautiful car, it was high time to arm it.
    1. samoletil18
      samoletil18 18 May 2016 13: 59
      +1
      And pilots there with a rainbow flag.
    2. godofwar6699
      godofwar6699 18 May 2016 18: 53
      -1
      tested a couple of years ago hi
  7. Alexey RA
    Alexey RA 18 May 2016 14: 07
    +5
    And 30 years have not passed. But even in the DOS toy LHX at the end of the 80s, a V-22 Osprey flew, armed with Hellfires and a 25-mm cannon. smile

    Pomnitsa, I played it ... on the XT-shke with a monochrome monitor. laughing
  8. Verdun
    Verdun 18 May 2016 14: 08
    0
    Quote: Knizhnik
    Do you think such devices have development prospects, or is it a dead end branch?

    A long development period and a significant percentage of accidents speak in favor of the second. Moreover, the development of convertiplanes has been ongoing for a long time and the first prototypes appeared almost before helicopters. Constructive complexity does not allow to create a sufficiently reliable and affordable design at the level of today's technologies.
    Senator John McCain:

    The V-22 looks great ... when it’s not idle to repair
    Although, it is quite possible that according to the results of the Osprey operation, a certain experience will be accumulated that will make it possible to change the situation for the better. But there are no obvious prerequisites for such conclusions.
  9. black
    black 18 May 2016 14: 09
    +3
    Question. How will the installation of weapons affect the flight performance of the product? I've never once been a flyer, but I understand that the tiltrotor was not designed for additional suspension. Are we sculpting anyhow?
    1. Leto
      Leto 18 May 2016 14: 26
      +2
      Quote: black
      Question. How will the installation of weapons affect the flight performance of the product? I've never once been a flyer, but I understand that the tiltrotor was not designed for additional suspension. Are we sculpting anyhow?

      Think for yourself whether the ammunition suspension for a device capable of carrying 6 tons on an external suspension can have a special effect?
      1. black
        black 18 May 2016 14: 41
        0
        And the return when the aircraft gun? And the effect on aerodynamic performance? It will be necessary to see.
        1. Leto
          Leto 18 May 2016 15: 30
          +1
          Quote: black
          And the return when the aircraft gun? And the effect on aerodynamic performance? It will be necessary to see.

          What is there to watch? What special impact do you have on the aircraft? Not take off?
          1. black
            black 18 May 2016 16: 00
            +1
            You are a very interesting conversationalist. Answer questions with a question. There is no technical argument. Do not be shy, I mastered the course of sopromat. I remember one more thing. At the same time, please enlighten what relation you have to aviation.
            1. Leto
              Leto 19 May 2016 05: 59
              0
              Quote: black
              You are a very interesting conversationalist

              Thank you.
              Quote: black
              Answer questions with a question.

              Because your questions to which I understand you expect answers are not quite clear what you specifically wanted to know.
              Osprey can lift about 6 tons on the external sling, and carry about 4,5 tons in the cargo hold. An arms suspension whose mass will not exceed even a ton, two can affect only the mass of cargo transported besides this. Therefore, your question about the ability of Osprey to do this is not clear. What could stop him?
  10. EvilLion
    EvilLion 18 May 2016 14: 22
    0
    Well, that’s it, they will now be able to do it, although it’s not clear how it will differ in the combat effectiveness of the locally armed An-12.
  11. 33 Watcher
    33 Watcher 18 May 2016 14: 43
    +3
    Well, why not? The attack aircraft certainly will not work out of it, but as a helicopter to support its own landing, it’s quite ...
  12. pavelty
    pavelty 18 May 2016 14: 53
    +3
    The thing is certainly interesting, but I looked at the statistics of air accidents ...
  13. voyaka uh
    voyaka uh 18 May 2016 14: 54
    +2
    The most important thing to mount on the Osprey is
    this is a suspended pylon block of active laser protection against MANPADS and explosive missiles.
    It is quite massive, but Osprey will pull it.
    1. Verdun
      Verdun 18 May 2016 18: 21
      +1
      It is quite massive, but Osprey will pull it.
      Most Osprey losses are non-combat, due to malfunctions, accidents, and piloting errors. Maybe it's better to sprinkle holy water?
  14. Hellbringer
    Hellbringer 18 May 2016 16: 43
    +1
    Let's see what happens.
    It is possible to upgrade, break in and release a dopped model.