US Military News, Reports, Data, etc.

A

Atomicfrog

Major
Registered Member
ougoah said:
Well supposedly one of the main challenges of establishing communication with HGV or MaRV is getting around the ionised air. Chinese method to get around this is with relay HALE drones. Available information is built on speculation though. Drones and satellites perform targeting and communication data.

How does another ship act as spotter and relay both targeting information and guidance? Considering the US would no doubt sink any and all vessels acting in this role even if they pretend to be "civilian". In protecting her carrier fleets from Iranian ASBMs, I'm pretty sure they'd issue some warnings to stay away or be sunk.
Click to expand...
Well if the missiles have radar sensors, they will choose their own targets, just need to be in range of the sensors in the terminal phase. Initial guidance can be done by spotting and satelittes to have the position of the fleet. They will need to be in great number to saturate air defences but who knows, that type of top attack are an unknown quality presently.

US carrier fleet have quite an array of systems against missiles threat. Any country that do an attack like that will be in a world of pain soon after it.
 
Last edited:
A

Atomicfrog

Major
Registered Member
Maikeru said:
Do we have statistics showing whether V22 is more likely to crash than similar sized helicopters?
Click to expand...
For MH-60 is about 1.2 Class A mishap rate for every 100,000 hours and MV-22 has a Class A mishap rate of about 3.27 per 100,000 flight hours.

They talked about grounding the fleet of MH-60 for 1 per 100000hours...

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!



They are promoting the safe service record of MV-22 at 3.27... some put it at 3.16 depending of the year, but it's still better than Harrier.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
 
Maikeru

Maikeru

Captain
Registered Member
Atomicfrog said:
For MH-60 is about 1.2 Class A mishap rate for every 100,000 hours and MV-22 has a Class A mishap rate of about 3.27 per 100,000 flight hours.

They talked about grounding the fleet of MH-60 for 1 per 100000hours...

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!



They are promoting the safe service record of MV-22 at 3.27... some put it at 3.16 depending of the year, but it's still better than Harrier.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
Click to expand...
We can ignore the muppet Cappy for these purposes. More than 3 times the accident rate of H60 is...concerning. Wonder if Japan is regretting its purchase?
 
A

Atomicfrog

Major
Registered Member
Maikeru said:
We can ignore the muppet Cappy for these purposes. More than 3 times the accident rate of H60 is...concerning. Wonder if Japan is regretting its purchase?
Click to expand...
It's still a complex plane rising the risk of failure. Don't know why Japan have bough some beside pleasing the US. But with the production stopping in 2026, they will have problems down the line to maintain that fleet. Another tiltrotor will replace mh-60, we will see if they have been able to sort out problems.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
 
Last edited:
G

gelgoog

Lieutenant General
Registered Member
Atomicfrog said:
They are promoting the safe service record of MV-22 at 3.27... some put it at 3.16 depending of the year, but it's still better than Harrier.
Click to expand...
The Harrier does not transport troops and the pilot has an ejection seat. Also there is a reason why the Harrier isn't in service anymore.

Current tiltrotor designs are overly complicated. The idea has merit but they need to change the basic design.

The configuration has high potential for use in the Pacific theater of operations. Because of the large distances the higher range and cruise speed of tiltrotors make them highly desirable. But with this accident rate and these costs to run them they won't be replacing helicopters that is for sure.
 
A

Atomicfrog

Major
Registered Member
gelgoog said:
The Harrier does not transport troops and the pilot has an ejection seat. Also there is a reason why the Harrier isn't in service anymore.

Current tiltrotor designs are overly complicated. The idea has merit but they need to change the basic design.

The configuration has high potential for use in the Pacific theater of operations. Because of the large distances the higher range and cruise speed of tiltrotors make them highly desirable. But with this accident rate and these costs to run them they won't be replacing helicopters that is for sure.
Click to expand...
Well the carrier comparison it's because they compare the MV-22 mishap ratio to it in most article...and say it's not too bad, go figure... lol !
 
S

supersnoop

Major
Registered Member
Atomicfrog said:
It's still a complex plane rising the risk of failure. Don't know why Japan have bough some beside pleasing the US. But with the production stopping in 2026, they will have problems down the line to maintain that fleet. Another tiltrotor will replace mh-60, we will see if they have been able to sort out problems.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
Click to expand...
Remember when they said the Sea King in Canada was a deathtrap?
That was 8 deaths over 40 years, and just the 2 in the last 10 that gave it that reputation.
The Osprey killed dozens just in pre-operational testing...
That thing has a brutal record without a doubt.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top