Announcement

Collapse

Terms of Use Agreement

1. You agree, through your use of these public Forums, not to post any material which is unlawful, libelous, defamatory, obscene, vulgar, sexually orientated, abusive, hateful, harassing, threatening, harmful, invasive of privacy or publicity rights, inflammatory or otherwise objectionable. You also agree not to post any copyrighted material unless the copyright is owned by you. You further agree not to use these public Forums for advertising or other commercial enterprise purposes. Any questions directed to, or concerning the administration of this website, will be sent to admin@popasmoke.com and not posted to the public Forums.

2. All postings express the views of the author, and neither the administrators nor POPASMOKE will be held responsible for the content of any postings submitted by the Members or anyone else. The administrators of these Forums reserve the right to remove, edit, move or close any postings for any reason. Members who make postings on the Forums which are not in accordance with the Terms of Use Agreement, risk having their posting privileges withdrawn.
See more
See less

Question for the "22' supporters

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • johnyr46
    started a topic Question for the "22' supporters

    Question for the "22' supporters

    What a/c in the Marine Corps inventory will take the place of the 46 in the following situations.

    1: Emergency Medevac when the casualties can't be transported to a secure area for p/u by the 22?

    2: If we get involved in jungle warfare or anywhere else that wheeled or tracked vehicles can't be used, who will resupply troops in need of food and/or ammo, medevac etc.

    3: If the 22 will be used in an emergency, how will they protect themselves if they have to hover or sit in a hot zone while loading or unloading troops, cargo, medevacs etc.

    5: As I understand it, because of cost, the "22" is not to be used in these situations. How much is a marine's life worth.

    6: The C 130 seems to be able to accomplish most of what the 22 can do. No verticle t"o or landing but can do short field t/o and landings and can haul a bunch more than the "22".

    I understand the 46 needs to be replaced. What I don't understand is why our Marine Corps has put all of its eggs in what I deem to be a boondoggle of epic proportions. Even the Army decided the helicopter was better than this. Hell the Air Force, I'm sure loves it because they love expensive toys.

    IMO our marine Corps would be much better of keeping more helicopter squadrons albeit with new, better helicopters.

    Keep a few squadrons of the "22" to save face and do what they're capable of.

    I see this boondoggle as a danger to our marines in the field, not because of their flight record, but because of what they Can't do for our marines in the field. I hat it that we'll end up depending on the Army to handle our life and death issues. I remember going into zones in Viet Nam that Army medevac a/c deemed to dangerous. I don't remember our pilots in HMM 161, 68/69, refusing to try in life and death situations.

  • Joe Reed
    replied
    Re: Question for the "22' supporters

    Ray,
    I have done both and either can be accomplished with the right Marine doing he training! Running out of Nr and altitude at the same time is a skill "acquired" from a talented HAC. We snuffies taught lotsa guys to change engines, just took longer to accomplish! LOL!

    Leave a comment:


  • Ray Norton
    replied
    Re: Question for the "22' supporters

    Regarding doing a buttonhook in a '46: As a pilot I happen to believe executing a buttonhook is a lot easier than changing an engine in the field. I have done the first and observed the second.

    Leave a comment:


  • 1chuck
    replied
    Re: Question for the "22' supporters

    The problem as I see it is that the Corps is being asked to do things that should never have been it's mission. We are or at least were assualt troops to assualt and hold for the army to take over we are now being asked to assualt and hold w/o any hope of the army every helping. Wrong mission for wrong troops. get back to assualt preferably ocean born assualt. We are Marines not Army for pete sake

    Leave a comment:


  • Joe Reed
    replied
    Re: Question for the "22' supporters

    "The huey can not do a button-hook, no way." Wrong...not sure about the
    "N, y & Z" modles but the "good" stick jocks in did them in 66/67....only problem ...it was a tad hard on the C C's skives when the old "salts" were teaching it to the NEWB's
    Samie same with the CH-46 H2Ps learning buttonhok approaches and NIGHT CARRIER QUALS!!! WOW!! I figured if I lived through those the "real" ones would be easy.....I was almost right!!! I have a lot of stick time in the left seat, but never got to land on a carrier...Always thought I could....

    Leave a comment:


  • hma1369
    replied
    Re: Question for the "22' supporters

    Individual Action Air Medals awarded to MV-22B crew from VMM-264:
    http://www.marines.mil/unit/hqmc/Pag...mmonaward.aspx

    Leave a comment:


  • BartClu
    replied
    Re: Question for the "22' supporters

    Originally posted by John Ace Hunt View Post
    The 46 does NOT need to be replaced. It can do more than any huey can wether anyone likes it or not. The huey can not do a button-hook, no way. The 46 can, did, and with the right Pilot, can do it again. But, its to old, and needs replaced. With what? They have nothing that can out do the 46 even now, and they are still shuting them down. Yep, the new boy can out fly it, as its fast. I do believe thats all it has going for it. I'll be the 1st one day, to say, 'I told you so', Yep, I told you so. Semper Fi, and READY-APP.
    "The huey can not do a button-hook, no way." Wrong...not sure about the
    "N, y & Z" modles but the "good" stick jocks in did them in 66/67....only problem ...it was a tad hard on the C C's skives when the old "salts" were teaching it to the NEWB's

    Leave a comment:


  • 1chuck
    replied
    Re: Question for the "22' supporters

    Question for the 22 people. The other night I was waching either the military channel or discovery and they had this BS about all the things the 22 can do and showed a training exersize where when they picked up the troops they were rescuing the rear ramp was only partially down. Having been a grunt for a long time with a pack on my back and full load that would have been the last thing I wanted to see. Will the rear ramp not go all the way like the 46 and 53/? Also the narrator kept calling it the seahawk what was that all about

    Leave a comment:


  • Wild Snide
    replied
    Re: Question for the "22' supporters

    Originally posted by Dale A Riley View Post
    Sounds like they got the bugs out, but maybe not enough buck$ in.
    http://www.npr.org/2011/10/24/141589693/the-osprey-good-reviews-but-a-costly-program
    Lool at the organization who published the article, NPR, Nuf' said

    Leave a comment:


  • Dale A Riley
    replied
    Re: Question for the "22' supporters

    Sounds like they got the bugs out, but maybe not enough buck$ in.
    http://www.npr.org/2011/10/24/141589693/the-osprey-good-reviews-but-a-costly-program

    Leave a comment:


  • Guest's Avatar
    Guest replied
    Re: Question for the "22' supporters

    I agree with you as well RetiredMarine. I will express my opinion when the 46 is despertely needed, and they don't have any, especially when the 22 is grounded. I believe as you do. It was just money in boeings pocket. Semper Fi, and READY-APP.

    Leave a comment:


  • RetiredMarine
    replied
    Re: Question for the "22' supporters

    I totally agree, I was with the CH-46 for most of my 22 years in the Corps and a better AC I never seen. True the AF and componets are old and need to be replaced and even some stronger maybe externally mounted engines would be good. But a better AC can't be found. Half of the money put into R&D for the V-22 would have been more than enough to get the line started back up for the CH-46 and it is a proven AC, unlike the V-22 which is still tring to prove it self.

    Leave a comment:


  • Guest's Avatar
    Guest replied
    Re: Question for the "22' supporters

    The 46 does NOT need to be replaced. It can do more than any huey can wether anyone likes it or not. The huey can not do a button-hook, no way. The 46 can, did, and with the right Pilot, can do it again. But, its to old, and needs replaced. With what? They have nothing that can out do the 46 even now, and they are still shuting them down. Yep, the new boy can out fly it, as its fast. I do believe thats all it has going for it. I'll be the 1st one day, to say, 'I told you so', Yep, I told you so. Semper Fi, and READY-APP.

    Leave a comment:


  • Guest's Avatar
    Guest replied
    Re: Question for the "22' supporters

    johnyr46, the 53 cost to much to be used a lot in 'Nam. Its bad planning to base all our next wars on flat sand like afghan. Many of the places we may be fighting in next have the same terrain as 'Nam. But believe they know that. The huey is not a save all Bird. Be good if it was. Think its all bad planning. Semper Fi, and READY-APP.

    Leave a comment:


  • hma1369
    replied
    Re: Question for the "22' supporters

    Originally posted by johnyr46 View Post
    Is the Corps putting more of these super Hueys in service? Are they forming more squadrons of Hueys?
    HMLA-367 and HMLA-369 have already traded in their N models for the Ys. The West Coast HMLAs (169, 267, 469) transition first followed by the East Coast (567, 467, 167, then 269), then HMLA-773 in the Reserves. HML/A-269 will be the last active squadron to transition (FY 2013).

    If the 53 is capable of doing what the 46 has been doing, why were they used so little vs the 46 in VN? They and the 47 are both great heavy lift airframes but they just won't fit in the same places where we need the meddium lift platform.
    The 53 A/Ds were heavy-lift vs the medium-lift 46s. Now the Ds are classed as medium-lift. The CH-53E is the current heavy-lifter.

    Everything I've read says the 47 and 53 can do what the MV22 can do only slower with less range.

    In our current wars the 22 can do medevacs where ground vehicles can get the wounded to a safe area. The fact is the 22 cannot in anyway protect itself.
    Some MV-22s are being equipped with the GAU-17 turret system with a 7.62mm minigun. There's talk of mounting a .50 cal on the ramp.

    Does the Corps believe we will never need the jungle capabilities again?
    While the main areas of current operations are Afghanistan, the Persian Gulf and the Indian Ocean, which have little or no jungles, the 31st MEU (WestPac) operates throughout the Southeast Asia region.

    Personally I would not want to crew an a/c that was put in harms way and couldn't protect itself. That old .50 cal sure made me feel better when we were taking fire in a hot zone. I would feel pretty helpless in a 22 knowing that I was like a duck on a pond while sitting on the ground even with the belly gun they are experimenting with.

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X