http://www.conservatives.com/tile.do?def=news.story.page&obj_id=131435
> In Afghanistan, British troops are playing the leading role in one of
> the toughest parts - Helmand province.
>
> We will continue to press the Government to do everything it can to
> ensure our troops have sufficient support, including helicopter lift
> capacity.

Afghanistan is really tough for helicopters, considering distance and
altitude parameters.

Wouldn't the V-22 be a better match?

-HJC

In article >,
(Henry J Cobb) wrote:
> Afghanistan is really tough for helicopters, considering distance and
> altitude parameters.
>
> Wouldn't the V-22 be a better match?

Well, it isn't exactly available for service in volume. And to perform
at its best it needs runways, which are not exactly in huge supply in
Afghanistan.

---
John Dallman, , HTML mail is treated as probable spam.

John Dallman wrote:
> In article >,
> (Henry J Cobb) wrote:
>>Afghanistan is really tough for helicopters, considering distance and
>>altitude parameters.
>>
>>Wouldn't the V-22 be a better match?
>
> Well, it isn't exactly available for service in volume. And to perform
> at its best it needs runways, which are not exactly in huge supply in
> Afghanistan.

The V-22 only needs a runway at the start of its mission, and can fly
from the existing bases to any point in Afghanistan faster and with
fewer airbone refuelings than any helicopter would require.

-HJC

In article >,
(Henry J Cobb) wrote:

> The V-22 only needs a runway at the start of its mission, and can fly
> from the existing bases to any point in Afghanistan faster and with
> fewer airbone refuelings than any helicopter would require.

You're assuming it doesn't need a runway at the far end because all its
heavy shipping will be in one direction? That's only a "mostly", rather
than an "always".

It still isn't available in volume any time shortly. And Tony Blair's
current foreign policy is sufficiently widely unpopular here that "Let's
give the Americans lots of money for slightly dodgy aircraft we can't
get for ten years" probably isn't a message that would improve Cameron's
popularity.

---
John Dallman, , HTML mail is treated as probable spam.

"John Dallman" > wrote in message
...
> In article >,
> (Henry J Cobb) wrote:
>
>> The V-22 only needs a runway at the start of its mission, and can fly
>> from the existing bases to any point in Afghanistan faster and with
>> fewer airbone refuelings than any helicopter would require.
>
> You're assuming it doesn't need a runway at the far end because all its
> heavy shipping will be in one direction? That's only a "mostly", rather
> than an "always".
>
> It still isn't available in volume any time shortly. And Tony Blair's
> current foreign policy is sufficiently widely unpopular here that "Let's
> give the Americans lots of money for slightly dodgy aircraft we can't
> get for ten years" probably isn't a message that would improve Cameron's
> popularity.
>
> ---
> John Dallman, , HTML mail is treated as probable spam.

I think the assumption would be at the other end the A/C is significantly
lighter because of all the fuel it has burned to get there. Which means, if
it can land, it should be able to leave with the same load. Now, if they
load it up outbound with more (to take advantage of the reduced fuel load)
or if they gas it up, it might not make it out of a higher location.

It would be interesting seeing the V-22 in Afghanistan. It certainly should
be able to fly high in airplane mode (25,000 feet), but landing would be a
problem. It has high loading of its props in heli mode so presumably the
thin air at High Alt would make it more difficult to land as a normal heli,
or at least make it take light payloads.

It is being tested right now in Gunnison CO:

http://www.denverpost.com/news/ci_4263955

Which is apparently 2,340 meters ASL

The average altitude in Afghanistan in the Hindu Kush is 4,500 meters with
mountains rising to over 6,100 meters.

Wow, just read this on Everestnews.com:

http://www.everestnews.com/stories2005/everestcopter05232005.htm

Didn't know a helicopter had actually landed on top of Everest. Now, that
is the way I would go if I were getting to the top of Everest (8,850
meters)....

I guess the V-22 could fly over Everest, but I really doubt if it could
land, even empty.

Blair Maynard wrote:
> I think the assumption would be at the other end the A/C is significantly
> lighter because of all the fuel it has burned to get there. Which means, if
> it can land, it should be able to leave with the same load. Now, if they
> load it up outbound with more (to take advantage of the reduced fuel load)
> or if they gas it up, it might not make it out of a higher location.
>
> It would be interesting seeing the V-22 in Afghanistan. It certainly should
> be able to fly high in airplane mode (25,000 feet), but landing would be a
> problem. It has high loading of its props in heli mode so presumably the
> thin air at High Alt would make it more difficult to land as a normal heli,
> or at least make it take light payloads.

It is also a very short takeoff and landing aircraft.

-HJC