PDA

View Full Version : V-22 Osprey Mk2


ORAC
3rd May 2024, 05:51
https://www.defensenews.com/air/2024/05/01/v-22-osprey-could-see-second-life-with-new-drive-system-wings-in-2050s/

V-22 Osprey could see second life, with new drive system, wings in 2050s

The V-22 program office is studying the future of the tiltrotor aircraft, weighing both a technology refresh as well as whether it could rip off the wings and nacelles to add decades of additional life to the airframes.

U.S. Marine Corps Col. Brian Taylor, the joint program manager for the aircraft, told an audience at the Modern Day Marine conference in Washington that the U.S. military is the only one flying a tiltrotor because it’s a complicated plane with a complicated drive system.

That said, Osprey operators continue to find “the mission sets the V-22 are getting into is absolutely unlimited” because the plane is so robust and flexible.

The program office is eyeing a V-22 Cockpit Technology Replacement, or VeCToR, upgrade effort that will begin research and development in 2026 and would be fielded from 2032 to 2042. That effort aims to bring more off-the-shelf technology to the screens, keyboards, computers and radars in the cockpit, for example.

The office is also in the early stages of studying a Renewed V-22 Aircraft Modernization Program, or ReVAMP, effort that would consider how to keep the fuselage for decades beyond what would otherwise be the end of the plane’s effective life in the early 2060s.

Research and development for the ReVAMP effort would formally begin in 2036, according to his briefing slides, and installations would take place in 2042 to 2050.

“If we had to do V-22 all over again, what would that look like? And really focusing on keeping the fuselage, and maybe you replace the wing and the nacelle, maybe you don’t,” he said during his presentation.

“Something we’re learning about the fuselage is that it is actually kind of life-unlimited, that there’s enough margin in it. And so if we put a new wing and a nacelle on there, we’re probably good for another 40 years,” he added. “So that is a study that’s ongoing, but it’s [all about] how you take this platform and make it available to the services” into the 2070s.

Taylor said the effort is in its infancy and that his office is soliciting ideas and input from industry to shape the effort.

Asked if a V-22 fuselage with new wings and drive system would continue carrying out transport missions or take on other work, Taylor said: “I don’t know, and that’s the fun part.”

Taylor added that the office is considering an optionally unmanned version while it looks at how to make the plane more reliable, maintainable, affordable and safe……

Taylor said the idea was that the program office would work with industry to engineer a plan to extend V-22 fuselages for the next chapter of their service lives. That plan would then go to the Marine Corps, Navy and Air Force so they can decide if they want to spend their money on this life-extension plan or if technology is changing such that they’d rather pursue something entirely new to meet their mission needs.

“I’m a little bit biased; I would love to see the V-22 stay in service for the next 100 years. But if there’s a better thing that we need to pivot to, then that’s really kind of up to the services,” Taylor said.

On the VeCToR cockpit effort, Taylor said the program office is struggling to support displays that were developed in the 1980s.

“We are kind of at the tipping point where we are spending enough on just maintaining what we have, that it’s time to do something different,” he said. “Honestly, it was a keyboard that pushed me over the edge, the astonishing bill to keep the keyboard on the aircraft. It’s 26 letters, 10 numbers, maybe a couple other buttons, but it seems like there’s a smarter way to do this stuff.”…..

ORAC
3rd May 2024, 06:00
This seems a “Trigger’s broom” sort of thing, designed to make it look like an upgrade while, in actuality, it’s really a new programme.

There have been many aircraft re-engineering programmes over th3 years - from DC-3 through F-15 and now B-52, some of those also included some wing strengthening/redesign, not sure an6 went this far.

But when the idea is that is sensible because of the life of the fuselage - and you then go on to talk about stretching it, updating and changing the cockpit and then rewriting the software to an open architecture, how much of the original would be left apart from the logbook?

Otterotor
3rd May 2024, 06:47
https://aviationweek.com/defense-space/aircraft-propulsion/v-22-office-looks-long-term-upgrades-amid-near-term-fixes
Ott

Everyone’s V-22s are flying again—and may do so past 2060 - Defense One (https://www.defenseone.com/policy/2024/05/everyones-v-22s-are-flying-againand-may-do-so-past-2060/396242/)
Ott

Lonewolf_50
3rd May 2024, 13:10
As regards the competition for dollars between programs:
Won't this SLEP trip all over the V-280 Valor if the "we can make the Valor fit on a ship" scheme gets more traction?

On the other hand, if the funding is under the "rework" budget and not "new program money" budget, that may be how they are planning to keep the money for this initiative safe from other hands. This worked so well for the SH-60B/F to the SH-60R re-manufacture: wait, no it didn't. :p

tdracer
3rd May 2024, 17:34
“Something we’re learning about the fuselage is that it is actually kind of life-unlimited, that there’s enough margin in it. And so if we put a new wing and a nacelle on there, we’re probably good for another 40 years,” he added. “So that is a study that’s ongoing, but it’s [all about] how you take this platform and make it available to the services” into the 2070s.

Translation: "We made it too heavy"...

Lonewolf_50
3rd May 2024, 18:05
Translation: "We made it too heavy"... Not necessarily. Boeing's robust safety margins have allowed the Chinook to last a long time. :cool: There's also the ballistic tolerance / expected operational environment issue unique to military ops.
You can go ahead and say that they made the Blackhawk too heavy too, but that system is both mature and reasonably long-lived.

tdracer
3rd May 2024, 18:39
Not necessarily. Boeing's robust safety margins have allowed the Chinook to last a long time. :cool: There's also the ballistic tolerance / expected operational environment issue unique to military ops.
You can go ahead and say that they made the Blackhawk too heavy too, but that system is both mature and reasonably long-lived.
Lasting a long time is fine, but where is the value in designing a fuselage that'll last a hundred years when the wings will only last 25? And as for ballistic tolerance, I'd be more worried about the wing than the fuselage...
The fuselage is not where the big expense on something like a V-22. It's questionable that a 're-winged, re-engined, re-systemed' V-22 would be any cheaper or cost effective that just building a new aircraft - which has the added advantage of being to address any shortcomings of the existing fuselage (such as volume).

ORAC
4th May 2024, 13:30
Ah, but you seem to have missed the bit where he also said:

Taylor said the idea was that the program office would work with industry to engineer a plan to extend V-22 fuselages for the next chapter of their service lives….

Commando Cody
7th May 2024, 07:16
As regards the competition for dollars between programs:
Won't this SLEP trip all over the V-280 Valor if the "we can make the Valor fit on a ship" scheme gets more traction?

On the other hand, if the funding is under the "rework" budget and not "new program money" budget, that may be how they are planning to keep the money for this initiative safe from other hands. This worked so well for the SH-60B/F to the SH-60R re-manufacture: wait, no it didn't. :p


V-22 is a larger aircraft meant for a different mission. Valor off a DDG would be more of a threat to the "H-60s forever" crowd.