V-22 Osprey Testing for Tanker Role

"ttyymmnn" (ttyymmnn) 09/06/2013 at 09:12 • Filed to: Planelopnik

1

11

You can't fill up your fighter jet from a V-22 Osprey just yet, but that may change.

The military-industrial tag team of Boeing and Bell Helicopter Textron said Thursday that an !!!error: Indecipherable SUB-paragraph formatting!!! , kitted out with a prototype aerial refueling system, has completed an initial test to show its potential as a !!!error: Indecipherable SUB-paragraph formatting!!! .

In the skies over north Texas sometime last month, the test-savvy V-22 teased a pair of F/A-18 Hornets (one a C model, the other a D) by unspooling a hose with a refueling drogue and then retracting it after proving that the drogue could hold stable. Or perhaps it was the Hornets that were playing coy — they were flying just behind and to the side of the Osprey.

It'll be in upcoming test flights for the Bell Boeing V-22 program that an aircraft will actually get into the fuel-receiving position directly behind the V-22, not to mention eventually hooking up to the refueling drogue.

via !!!error: Indecipherable SUB-paragraph formatting!!!

Formula4speed > ttyymmnn 09/06/2013 at 09:13

8

Arch Duke Maxyenko, Shit Talk Extraordinaire > ttyymmnn 09/06/2013 at 09:14

0

Seems like a good use for them, but aren't they still a bit unsafe and difficult to fly?

PelicanHazard > Arch Duke Maxyenko, Shit Talk Extraordinaire 09/06/2013 at 09:16

0

The safety issue happens with a quick descent in helicopter mode. In plane mode they're fine.

Arch Duke Maxyenko, Shit Talk Extraordinaire > PelicanHazard 09/06/2013 at 09:23

0

Cool, so, just don't quick descent then.

corvairsomeday2 > Arch Duke Maxyenko, Shit Talk Extraordinaire 09/06/2013 at 09:37

0

Roger that, good plan.

Enginerrrrrrrrr > ttyymmnn 09/06/2013 at 10:31

1

Cool...but why?

I know the KC-135's are old, but they are being replaced by the KC-46 now.

The only reason I can see this being useful is maybe at sea where it is too far out to have a KC-46, or maybe for an invasion-scenario where the fighters need to stay up without coming down to refuel...

It's still hard to see why this would be more useful than the KC-46.

ttyymmnn > Enginerrrrrrrrr 09/06/2013 at 10:33

0

Options, I guess. Boeing needs to keep selling Ospreys, and if they can show greater capability it might be easier to sell more. But that's just a guess.

Enginerrrrrrrrr > ttyymmnn 09/06/2013 at 10:51

0

Yeah that makes sense. The Osprey is supposed to have a wide variety of capabilities anyways.

I just want to hear their plan for why they are doing this since this is a break from the norm of modern warfare.

Tell us your secrets, Boeing!

ttyymmnn > Enginerrrrrrrrr 09/06/2013 at 10:53

0

From the c|net article:

Adding the aerial refueling capability would be another, well, feather in the Osprey's cap. It'd also be another way to signal the Pentagon's bookkeepers that, hey, this aircraft is a keeper.

Jayhawk Jake > Arch Duke Maxyenko, Shit Talk Extraordinaire 09/06/2013 at 12:11

0

They aren't 'unsafe'. No current US produced airplane is 'unsafe'. In early development it had some severe growing pains, but that's what happens when you try something radically different.

I'm sure it's more challenging to fly than a conventional airplane or helicopter, but I don't think that's a bad thing. It's challenging because it's different, but with proper training and experience that's not a factor.

Jayhawk Jake > Enginerrrrrrrrr 09/06/2013 at 12:14

0

I would have guessed it would be used to fill helicopters, but they tested it with fighters.

Realistically though, it gives you more options for refueling. Right now your refueling options for Naval aircraft is very limited, with an Osprey you could fly a refueling mission from a ship carrying more fuel than a fighter with a fuel drogue, or fly a refueling mission from a base that otherwise wouldn't have access to a tanker.