Is it just me or will we look back at this simple, risk free helicopter and miss those qualities? I think we will but time will tell.
Now I know what you're thinking. What could have performed the same mission as the CH-46 but been a lower risk solution than the MV-22? How about the Boeing 360?
LOL
ReplyDeleteQ: List two things that do not exist.
A: 1) Unicorns 2) A simple, risk-free helicopter
The Boeing 360 or a derivative would suffer the same limitations of any helicopter and couldn't do what the V-22 does do.
speaking purely of the needs of the Marines and not the Special Ops Command ...
ReplyDeletethe 360 i believe could have been developed and deployed quicker....is relatively fast (much faster than the CH-46 and about as fast as the CH-53) and could probably carry more.
thats where i get the risk free from...additionally the CH-46 in comparison to the MV-22 is a maintenance baby....don't get me wrong the MV-22 is a capable airplane...i just don't know if it matches up with whats needed.
I've taken the unpopular position on a few boards that the CH-47 would've made a better replacement for the CH-46 than the V-22 (far less risk, more relevant feature set, much less expensive).
ReplyDeleteAn evolved CH-47F could have replaced both the CH-46 and CH-53, thereby saving a lot of money DOD-wide by reducing the total number of helo types in service by two.
Yes, you may lose some of the niche features of the V-22. But you gain a much more effective heavy hauler. Yes, you may lose some of the high-end CH-53 capabilities, but you reduce the number of types the Marines have to support, which lets you buy more, and/or spend that money on other priorities.
The Marines would also gain the benefit of every dollar spent by the Army and other Chinook users on continued development.