Loose Bolts Ground V-22 Ospreys; Four Aircraft in Iraq Will NeedFixes

Inside the Navy

Loose Bolts Ground V-22 Ospreys; Four Aircraft in Iraq Will Need Fixes

March 24, 2009 --

Naval Air Systems Command this week ordered the temporary grounding of
84 Navy and Air Force V-22 Osprey tiltrotors after an inspection of
one of 12 V-22s in Iraq revealed that loose bolts were causing damage
to components in the aircraft's rotor assembly, according to a NAVAIR
spokesman.
The March 22 grounding was a “precautionary measure” after all four
bolts in the rotor assembly were found loose in one of the V-22s in
Iraq on March 21, said the spokesman, Mike Welding. Since then, 52
aircraft have cleared their inspections, although four aircraft in
Iraq required repairs, he said.
“Loose bolts were discovered while the aircraft was on the ground and
did not cause an in-flight incident,” Welding told Inside the Navy.
“The grounding bulletin spells out new inspection procedures on
certain components in the prop rotor assembly. All aircraft that
passed the inspection will immediately return to normal flight status.
Any aircraft found with loose bolts will receive replacement parts and
be returned to flight.”
The grounding affected 84 aircraft -- 73 Marine Corps MV-22s and 11
Air Force CV-22s. At press time, 43 MV-22s and nine CV-22s had been
cleared, although Air Force Special Operations Command spokeswoman
Capt. Laura Ropelis said the Air Force expected that all 11 CV-22s
would be cleared by the end of today without any problems.
All four of the aircraft that did not pass inspection were among the
12 currently serving in Iraq. Welding declined to speculate on a
cause, saying the investigation is ongoing.
Two of those aircraft have been repaired and cleared, including the
initial aircraft. Welding was unsure of the status of the other two.
Eleven of the 12 aircraft had been inspected at press time.
The inspection takes about two hours, and the fix takes about two
days, Welding said.
The problem came to light when pilots assigned to the squadron noted
“some unusual noises and vibrations when shutting down their aircraft
following a routine flight,” Welding said.
“Subsequently, the problem was discovered by squadron mechanics when
they detected the cause of the noise and vibration,” he added.
“Squadron mechanics had discovered four bolts had separated from the
stationary swash plate trunnion,” causing some damage to nearby
components.
Although the other aircraft had some loose bolts, the problem was not
as severe, Welding said.
The grounding was done mainly for safety reasons as damage was very
minor, according to Welding. Although he said it would be difficult to
speculate exactly what would have happened if the problem had worsened
significantly, control of the rotor could have been compromised.
With the new precautions in place, there is no risk of that now,
Welding said.
“We believe that is not going to happen, especially with the new
enhanced procedures we will have in place,” he said. “[The procedures]
will certainly provide us with enough early detection.”

On Mar 25, 9:21*am, mike wrote:
Inside the Navy

Loose Bolts Ground V-22 Ospreys; Four Aircraft in Iraq Will Need Fixes

March 24, 2009 --

Naval Air Systems Command this week ordered the temporary grounding of
84 Navy and Air Force V-22 Osprey tiltrotors after an inspection of
one of 12 V-22s in Iraq revealed that loose bolts were causing damage
to components in the aircraft's rotor assembly, according to a NAVAIR
spokesman.
The March 22 grounding was a “precautionary measure” after all four
bolts in the rotor assembly were found loose in one of the V-22s in
Iraq on March 21, said the spokesman, Mike Welding. Since then, 52
aircraft have cleared their inspections, although four aircraft in
Iraq required repairs, he said.
“Loose bolts were discovered while the aircraft was on the ground and
did not cause an in-flight incident,” Welding told Inside the Navy.
“The grounding bulletin spells out new inspection procedures on
certain components in the prop rotor assembly. All aircraft that
passed the inspection will immediately return to normal flight status.
Any aircraft found with loose bolts will receive replacement parts and
be returned to flight.”
The grounding affected 84 aircraft -- 73 Marine Corps MV-22s and 11
Air Force CV-22s. At press time, 43 MV-22s and nine CV-22s had been
cleared, although Air Force Special Operations Command spokeswoman
Capt. Laura Ropelis said the Air Force expected that all 11 CV-22s
would be cleared by the end of today without any problems.
All four of the aircraft that did not pass inspection were among the
12 currently serving in Iraq. Welding declined to speculate on a
cause, saying the investigation is ongoing.
Two of those aircraft have been repaired and cleared, including the
initial aircraft. Welding was unsure of the status of the other two.
Eleven of the 12 aircraft had been inspected at press time.
The inspection takes about two hours, and the fix takes about two
days, Welding said.
The problem came to light when pilots assigned to the squadron noted
“some unusual noises and vibrations when shutting down their aircraft
following a routine flight,” Welding said.
“Subsequently, the problem was discovered by squadron mechanics when
they detected the cause of the noise and vibration,” he added.
“Squadron mechanics had discovered four bolts had separated from the
stationary swash plate trunnion,” causing some damage to nearby
components.
Although the other aircraft had some loose bolts, the problem was not
as severe, Welding said.
The grounding was done mainly for safety reasons as damage was very
minor, according to Welding. Although he said it would be difficult to
speculate exactly what would have happened if the problem had worsened
significantly, control of the rotor could have been compromised.
With the new precautions in place, there is no risk of that now,
Welding said.
“We believe that is not going to happen, especially with the new
enhanced procedures we will have in place,” he said. “[The procedures]
will certainly provide us with enough early detection.”

"Although he said it would be difficult to speculate exactly what
would have happened if the problem had worsened significantly,
control of the rotor could have been compromised. With the new
precautions in place, there is no risk of that now,"

Compromising control of the rotor sounds like a fatal crash to me. I
have seen military blogs that say that all of the production must be
finished and accepted before the first major accident can occur.
Wishing or making sure?

"Jack Linthicum" wrote in message
...

Compromising control of the rotor sounds like a fatal crash to me. I
have seen military blogs that say that all of the production must be
finished and accepted before the first major accident can occur.
Wishing or making sure?

This is the type of stuff that happens with any new aircraft. We "learn
by doing". With something as complex and as "different" as the Osprey, we
will probably see a significant list of these issues. And yes, some of them
will probably cause accidents before the learning is all over.

Vaughn

"Vincent Brannigan" wrote in message
...
vaughn wrote:
"Jack Linthicum" wrote in message
...

Compromising control of the rotor sounds like a fatal crash to me. I
have seen military blogs that say that all of the production must be
finished and accepted before the first major accident can occur.
Wishing or making sure?

This is the type of stuff that happens with any new aircraft. We
"learn by doing". With something as complex and as "different" as the
Osprey, we will probably see a significant list of these issues. And
yes, some of them will probably cause accidents before the learning is
all over.

Vaughn




"new" ? any idea how long this sucker has been teething?

First flight was 19 March 1989

20 years ago !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


Keep making excuses for the turkey

Vince


by the time the V-22 is perfected anti-gravity flight systems will be
online.

First flight is one thing: actual operational use is another matter
altogether. Sometimes things are discovered with some Fleet use. Problems
are noticed, diagnosed, and fixed, often in the field. By your reasoning,
the B-29 shouldn't have been fielded as it had so many problems. But those
issues were fixed, and the plane served well.
"Vincent Brannigan" wrote in message
...
vaughn wrote:
"Jack Linthicum" wrote in message

...

Compromising control of the rotor sounds like a fatal crash to me. I
have seen military blogs that say that all of the production must be
finished and accepted before the first major accident can occur.
Wishing or making sure?

This is the type of stuff that happens with any new aircraft. We
"learn
by doing". With something as complex and as "different" as the Osprey,
we
will probably see a significant list of these issues. And yes, some of
them
will probably cause accidents before the learning is all over.

Vaughn




"new" ? any idea how long this sucker has been teething?

First flight was 19 March 1989

20 years ago !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


Keep making excuses for the turkey

Vince

"Matt Wiser" wrote in message
...
First flight is one thing: actual operational use is another matter
altogether. Sometimes things are discovered with some Fleet use. Problems
are noticed, diagnosed, and fixed, often in the field. By your reasoning,
the B-29 shouldn't have been fielded as it had so many problems. But those
issues were fixed, and the plane served well.

it didn't take 20+ years to perfect the B-29.
the V-22 has had it's chance.how many more decades will you give it?

As long as it takes. The USMC has a habit of getting its way on procurement,
so either get on board or get out of the way. Not to mention that it's been
a number of years since the last crash (the one that had 19 Marines killed),
and the aircraft has been tested, evaled, and tested again. If you've got an
alternative aircraft to replace the H-46, let's hear it. If not, follow the
above advice.
"Raymond O'Hara" wrote in message
...

"Matt Wiser" wrote in message
...
First flight is one thing: actual operational use is another matter
altogether. Sometimes things are discovered with some Fleet use.
Problems
are noticed, diagnosed, and fixed, often in the field. By your
reasoning,
the B-29 shouldn't have been fielded as it had so many problems. But
those
issues were fixed, and the plane served well.

it didn't take 20+ years to perfect the B-29.
the V-22 has had it's chance.how many more decades will you give it?

"Matt Wiser" wrote in message
...
As long as it takes. The USMC has a habit of getting its way on
procurement,
so either get on board or get out of the way. Not to mention that it's
been
a number of years since the last crash (the one that had 19 Marines
killed),
and the aircraft has been tested, evaled, and tested again. If you've got
an
alternative aircraft to replace the H-46, let's hear it. If not, follow
the
above advice.



there comes a point when it's obvious the thing doesn't work as advertised.
the V-22 passed that 5 years ago.
the B-29 had no more than normal teething troubles and was soon enough
sorted out.

Then explain its record in Iraq and Afghanistan so far. No combat losses or
crashes in-country. Like I said, if you have an alternative platform to
replace the H-46s, let's hear it. Otherwise, either get on board or get out
of the way.
"Raymond O'Hara" wrote in message
...

"Matt Wiser" wrote in message
...
As long as it takes. The USMC has a habit of getting its way on
procurement,
so either get on board or get out of the way. Not to mention that it's
been
a number of years since the last crash (the one that had 19 Marines
killed),
and the aircraft has been tested, evaled, and tested again. If you've
got
an
alternative aircraft to replace the H-46, let's hear it. If not, follow
the
above advice.



there comes a point when it's obvious the thing doesn't work as
advertised.
the V-22 passed that 5 years ago.
the B-29 had no more than normal teething troubles and was soon enough
sorted out.

Matt Wiser wrote:
Then explain its record in Iraq and Afghanistan so far. No combat losses or
crashes in-country. Like I said, if you have an alternative platform to
replace the H-46s, let's hear it. Otherwise, either get on board or get out
of the way.

doing what kind of operations at what kind of tempo..

last we heard (SMN) it was doing the mail runs.. and running through
their engines at a high rate of knots...

As for alternatives.. any number of proper helicopters... Things that
can carry the same cargo with a third of the power requirements.. And
can fly quite easily with a slung load... (If the V-22 fly with a slung
load you'd be better off using helicopters... they're only any good if
you can fly with internal cargo only.. and even then it gets a bit
cramped....