View Single Post
  #46  
Old March 29th 09, 05:37 AM posted to rec.aviation.military,rec.aviation.military.naval,sci.military.naval
Matt Wiser[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 17
Default Loose Bolts Ground V-22 Ospreys; Four Aircraft in Iraq Will Need Fixes

And nobody's getting the ball rolling on a V-22 replacement. Which means,
like it or not, it's the V-22 by default. The anti-Osprey crowd keeps
shreiking "No V-22s", without any suggestion of a OTS or other replacement;
being against the V-22 has taken on religious overtones in some circles.
(the New York Twits' editorial board being the leader of the pack) H-46s are
going to the desert parking lot in Arizona as fast as new Ospreys come off
the line and crews get transitioned, so the time to get a new helo to
replace the Osprey (if you can find one) is either now, or never.
"Dan" wrote in message
...
Matt Wiser wrote:
On Mar 28, 5:32 am, Arved Sandstrom wrote:
Matt Wiser wrote:
Well, given that the last new-build H-46 came off the Boeing-Vertol

line in
1971...how long would it have taken to restart production, with

production
tools likely destroyed?
"Arved Sandstrom" wrote in message
news:zc6zl.19952$PH1.12528@edtnps82...
Matt Wiser wrote:
[ SNIP ]

I don't recall any of the aviation magazines reporting that (AvWeek,
AFM, WAPJ, etc.). The last H-46s were built new in 1971. CILOP
produced the CH-46 Echo version in the 1970s. The production line
would be too dormant to restart in any event. The only other serious
consideration was the Sikorsky H-92, and it hadn't even flown yet

when
the V-22 was revived. The New York Twits is the only major newspaper
recently to call for the program's termination, but then again,
they've been so anti-military since the Reagan years....
David F. Bond, "CH-46E Replacement May be CH-46X:
Marines Believe UH-60 is Too Small," Aviation Week and Space
Technology Magazine, February 19, 1990
AHS
I honestly don't know. Still, if it took up to a couple of years that
seems to be quite acceptable.

AHS


If the H-46 had been in low-rate production since '71, maybe. But
restarting new airframes after all that time? I think not.



One problem to restarting an assembly line of such an old system is
there would have to be newer technologies included. This requires a
bunch of engineering. Add to that the government acquisition quagmire of
funding and contracts and I think you'd be hard pressed to get the line
started and the first prototypes tested in two years. I have no idea how
long it would take to produce enough airframes to restock the fleet
along with the attendant supply chain. My guess would be another couple
of years.

The way things are going I'd wager a new design from a competitor
would take at least that long.

If osprey is such a dud it needs to be terminated someone had better
get the ball rolling for its replacement. In the mean time osprey will
have to do the job since H-46 is reaching the end of its operational
life. Keeping H-46 and dropping osprey right now means trying to keep
H-46 on life support, maybe not now, but soon.

Dan, U.S. Air Force, retired