Osprey’s Weapons Not Ready To Shoot?
From an article in Wired by David Hambling:
The Osprey tilt-rotor is in the news again, and not in a good way. This time it’s the Government Accountability Office’s report on the Expeditionary Fire Support System (EFSS) mortar that the Osprey is supposed to carry. Bottom line:
Since the original acquisition program cost and schedule estimate was approved in 2004, costs have increased by $15.5 million and the schedule has been extended by nearly 2 years.
Being able to transport a 120mm mortar swiftly into action is part of the Osprey’s justification — but it can’t do that until the EFSS is ready. Unfortunately delays and cost overruns seems to strike everything around the Osprey, and the scale of the problem is quite breathtaking.
The latest budget documents show that for Financial Year 2006, 12 MV-22 Ospreys were purchased for $1.245 billion – that’s $103 million apiece. In, in FY 07 it was 14 for $1.427 billion (or $102 million each), but the situation improves markedly with in FY08 with 21 being bought for just $1.847 billion, so the latest batch are down to $88 million each. Bell Boeing hope that the price will drop further in future.
But those substantial prices don’t include the cost of researching and developing the Osprey. I could not locate an ‘official’ figure for this, but Lee Galliard’s very thorough study V-22: Wonder Weapon Or Widow Maker comes up with a cool $18 billion in development costs. That was in 2005: I asked Lee for an update and he says: “By now those ‘costs to date’ are well over $20 billion and climbing.” This includes the production to date.
For comparison, perhaps the nearest equivalent in term of capacity if the CH-47F Chinook. The Chinook can carry thirty-three troops or 25,000 pounds of cargo, compared to the Osprey’s 24 passengers or 15,000 lbs. The army paid $157 million for six CH-47Fs in 2007 ($26 million a piece) and $462 million for 16 in 2008 ($32 million each).
So, if we ignore inflation, money-of-year and other factors, the V-22 program would arguably have paid for something over 500 Chinooks. This would have doubled the fleet - as of May ‘06 there were estimated to be 445 Chinooks still in service.
Each MV-22 costs the equivalent of two or three Chinooks. Supporters argue that with twice the speed of the Chinook (cruising at 270 mph cruise against 135 mph for the helicopter) it’s worth the money; critics dispute this.
Seems to me the Osprey’s mission is more than just the EFSS.
January 14th, 2008 at 11:39 amMore on the EFSS here:
http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/systems/ground/efss.htm
Wait, what’s so special about this EFSS? Can’t they just throw a regular 120mm team in the back and send that into the fight?
January 14th, 2008 at 11:50 amI don’t care if they cost a fucking billion dollars a piece, they are worth it. If it keeps just one soldier from getting a papercut they are worth it.
We are the fucking best country in the world. Our troops get the best of everything. I don’t fucking care how much it costs. Protect them no matter the price so they always have the best. They deserve it. Their pay is shit for what they do. Most people in this world have no idea the good our troops due for the world. Even most Americans have no idea.
The Osprey is faster, more nimble, has a greater range, more versatility, etc. than a chopper.
But the biggest benefit is speed. We can get in, get out quickly, and penetrate deeper and faster than the Chinook and our enemies can.
That gives us an advantage over our enemies. That reduces our casualities. Don’t forget about the psycological benefits of dominance, superiority, awesomeness, power, and coolness. It scares our enemies just to watch them come in.
The more fearful the enemy is the quicker they die or surrender.
Any opponet of the Osprey is a fucking narrow minded, selfish, inconsiderate, unappreciative, mean, uncaring, America hating dimwit who does not care for the troops. A fucking coward that is. They also should get the fuck out and go live somewhere else.
Actions speak louder than words.
Nothing is too good or too expensive for our troops.
January 14th, 2008 at 6:23 pmOne more thing. Its safer than a helicopter. It has two motors that are connected. If one motor goes out the remaining motor operates both rotors.
January 14th, 2008 at 6:34 pm