Currently i think it cost current $80million a copy vs Stallion's $25million++. Can the USMC really afford to this in numbers? This high cost of Osprey reminds me of the A-12 Fiasco....well at least the Osprey prototypes are produced as compared to Avenger only on drawing board.Perharps export sales might drive the cost / unit down. Heh, i wonder how TAG for these Osprey would be like?

I agree. The OSPREY is a bird well suited for special operations. And thats it. It will never be a trustworthy workhorse. It's time for the the US to develop new joint medium and heavy helicopters. Until then the CH 46 should be replaced with the CH 53 little by little. The OSPREY is not only expensive but not matured too. And it has not enough lift capability. Without new helicopters the US will loose ground to Eurocopter new medium utility helicopter (we call it NH 90). It is a little bigger than the UH 60 and made out of composite materials.

Tilt rotars have a lot of potential, they could take over a lot of helicopter rolls. If they were properly developed the europeans could be left far behind.

Fully agreed on usage of Osprey with SOCOM. Hell, they might even make a gunship out of it for support.

The US has birds like the Sikorsky H-92 to counter the NH-90 but I think both fail to offer the flexibility and performance that a CH-53E PAVE LOW or as some call it CH-53X. The Mairne Corps woud also be better served by limiting it Helicoptters to three models UH-1, AH-1 and CH-53. When the UH-1Y and AH-1Z come on line the commonality of parts between them (over 80%) would make the logistics even simplier. The problem is the outside of a replacment for the CH-46 in the Marne Corps there are no big buys coming up for helicotper replacment in the US military making it tough going for helo makers.

CH-53X isn't the answer for a med weight transport. She is a heavyweight, takes up too much deck space and cost too much to operate. Right now the 53E cost more per flight hour than C-130s. I like the Osprey. It will pan out. Look at the problems we had trying to get the 46 to fly. If not the Osprey, then we have to dump OMFTS. Then H-92 would be my choice. But lets wait and see who HMX-1 picks as the PSH.

But the V-22 as the same size footprint as the CH-53 is a bigger maintenance problem yet has less lift capability the the CH-53E. In fact because of its layout the V-22 presents more difficulties in flight deck operations such as refueling than the CH-53. A lot of the high cost of CH-53E maintenance is related to the age of the helicopter and this could be solved by the purchase of new or rebuilding of exisiting airframes at less cost than the V-22. A PAVE LOW Ch-53E/K/X would be an excellent assault platform because of the avionics.navigation, armor and firepower it could pack while still carrying a decent troop or cargo load. I feel the V-22 technology is still years away from being combat ready and that the aircraft is il suited for flight deck ops. Also because of its flight characteristic I would hate to have to set up and run an LZ that was handling the V-22. In addition, I only have video and pictures to judge by , it looks like V-22 downwash is worse that even a CH-53 or CH-47 which creates all its own problems. When the V-22 matures it wil be an excellent bird for SOCOM but not the Marine Corps, particularly at what it costs.

Too late...the Marine Corps is already offering Osprey slots to SNAs...it's here to stay.

Never say never.

a company called Piasecki has done some interesting work incorporating wings on the fuselage of helicopters. It adds lift, payload, range and speed. The primary technical challenge is integrating the wing control surfaces to the helicopter controls. It's cheaper than an Osprey, here's a link: http://www.geocities.com/tacticalstudiesgroup/piaseckivtdp.htm http://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread44780/pg1 http://www.air-attack.com/page.php?pid=21