Why is the V-22 Osprey only sold to Japan
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 30 июн 2023
- On July 6, 2020, a V-22 Osprey aircraft destined for the Japan Ground Self-Defense Force stationed at Camp Kisarazu successfully prepared for departure from Marine Corps Air Station Iwakuni in Japan. These aircraft represent the initial batch of a total of five Ospreys that Japan had ordered in 2015, with a contract value of $332 million. Fast forward to the present, since Japan officially received its inaugural Bell Boeing V-22 Osprey, it has become the first nation other than the US to possess and operate this versatile tiltrotor aircraft. But what was the reason behind Japan's purchase of the V-22 Osprey?
Subscribe Now :
/ @military-tv 
Наука
Always loved the Osprey since I rode one into Black Mesa research facility back in 99.
Are you joking?
nope, really happened :) can ask barney he was there.@@NguyenKhanh-pc3kb
My ass is heavy
love opposing force
That is a pinnacle of aerial engineering, baby. I am glad that the Japanese purchased the best of the best.
You see these a lot around San Diego, they are amazing pieces of engineering. They do seem incredibly inefficient though lol, they leave smoke trails.
They are uniquely capable. Inefficient or not… no other prop plane can land on a garden patch. And no other helicopter can fly this fast with such heavy load.
It’s a chinook that has the range of a jet and could land on an aircraft carrier while carrying a lot of troops in that range and speed,
a real life Vertibird
Its a killer.
If my country bought that I'd think that they'd move them to the marines and airforce.
Wow 😳
The aircraft was offered to Canada to replace our fixed winged aircraft for SAR. Canada being Canada we bought a cheaper aircraft that after being selected may not ever be able to fly for it's selected role.
Why not?
Because now Japan will make it right.😊
You never answered the question of why it is ONLY sold to Japan.
Are there ASW, early warning, and tanker versions in the pipeline?
At the moment, no. There have been concepts for them. However there has been more done with a tanker capable version using a special cargo load in the bay.
Your a little behind. The Navy version of the V2 has demonstrated in flight refueling capability. It's On RUclips, refueling F18's ....But, will the Navy buy that?
@@raywhitehead730 Can it be fitted for combat? Guns and Rocket pods maybe? It will be more for troop protection then an all out assault
Many versions of the V22 Osprey were proposed. Including ASW by the manufacturer. Only one variant was made, that is the CMB V22b. It is used for delivery of cargo to Carriers. It has a longer range. I think less then 30 will be made.
Why does the ‘C2’ at 3:04 look like a C17?
The C2 looks like a mini C17 in real life
The aircraft was a Japanese C2 not the American C2
Aircraft is a Kawasaki C-2
You got the wrong C-2 picture. Amateurs
Too expensive to buy and maintain: Yes. Prone to crash? No. South Korean army once considered buying V-22 for special force operation. But they concluded that CH-47F Chinook and UH-60 Black Hawk are much cheaper and useful for operation enough.
I don't believe the 500 mph claim at all! 316, yes. 😅
Looks ridiculous to my eyes but what do I know...I would think a twin jet engined aircraft would make more sense? With directional nozzle tech like the Harrier? I would think faster sleeker and more fuel efficient? Does that design exist even? idk
No, sure doesn’t. So, a jet with two 12000lb thrust engines that can carry a Seal team and a M777 howitzer and can land and hover anywhere? Sounds like something from those Japanese kid shows in the 60s.
And I can guarantee you, any VTOL jet is the furthest thing from fuel efficient.
The Royal Navy was offered an EV-22 version of the Osprey for AEW.
****
But they chose the Leonardo AW101 Merlin Crowsnest instead.
However, the programme as been a disaster, with M.O.D. civil servants failing to keep over watch on the contractors responsible for the programme.
The plan had been to buy more Westland Agusta AW101 Merlin HC4, that would then be converted to a similar format to the Italian Navy's EH-101A Eliradar HEW-784 equipped.
But after, 2010 when George Osborne became Chancellor (Finance Minister) the Defence budget was always under threat.
An idea was put forward of using a "plug in and play" version of the Radar system, similar to the old Sea King AEW2 / ASaC7, but using the HM2 airframe and its onboard computers to do the task, rather than putting in a specialist suite of Computers.
The Royal Navy, is already calling for the replacement of this programme, running between 5 and 7 years late.
Leading to the embarrassment of the HMS Queen Elizabeth, operating in the South China Sea, without any organic AEW.
And the Russian Air Force, Fighters overflight while near the Suez Canal, with no airborne Fleet Air Arm Lockheed Martin F-35B Lightning's to meet them.
***
Its probably that both an EV-22 Osprey and a Tanker / Carrier onboard Delivery version of the Osprey, that could now be ordered for the Royal Navy Fleet Air Arm to operate from the Carriers.
Also, the USA would like to deploy a Carrier to Singapore.
But their are concerns about a Nuclear Powered vessel, stationed so close to a major population centre.
One proposal being floated is for either LHA-6 America or LHA-7 Tripoli (They have no Amphibious Well Dock so can only carry out Helicopter Assaults) to be based at Singapore, and operate a V/STOL Carriers, with 2 US Marine Corp squadrons, equipped with Lockheed Martin F-35B Lightning's (20 to 24 aircraft).
These 2 vessels would be retrofitted with Ski Jumps, similar to those used by, HMS Queen Elizabeth, HMS Prince of Wales, Italy's 550 Cavour, & L-9890 Trieste, and Spain's L-61 Juan Carlos 1.
The rest of her air group would be 2 to 4 x CSAR Helicopters 3 to 4 AEW V-22 Osprey and 3 to 4 Tanker / CoD V-22 Osprey.
***
It is expected that Japan's JS Izumo & JS Kaga will under go similar modifications. Then operate a similar air group, less 1 squadron or F-35B's.
***
Whether, South Korea's, Amphibious Carrier, Dokdo will under go modification to operate a flight (6) of F-35B's unknown.
But it would be a useful step in gaining knowledge of Fixed Wing Carrier operations, for when their future 30,000 Tonnes + carrier is delivered.
***
Whether, similar will happen to Royal Australian Navy's, LHD's L01 HMAS Adelaide & L02 HMAS Canberra is unknown.
Glad you’re on our side.
Because japan is one of few countries that can afford to buy this military asset.😄
cuz Japan is the only country capable of paying for it
Why do they keep falling out of the sky?
Because you read too much propaganda. Any American platform is, ugh…..I don’t even want to get into it. Anywho, It’s 2024. Since 2007 it’s had 12 crashes. That is………..absolutely nothing. I mean, it sucks, but that’s way below other aircraft, especially helicopters. When you factor in how many versatile roles it carries out, how many missions it does. How often it flies and how much flying American pilots have to do, not to mention terrible weather, terrain, picking up soldiers in some mountain at night in high winds, etc. that is extremely low. Like wow, that’s nothing. But as long as people are paid 2500 per segment to go on TV and scream about the next “death trap” or whatever people will always say it’s dangerous. Like they do with……every…….single piece of equipment that American makes. Let’s see here. In my about 40 years of being a military equipment fan we got…..F-15 overpriced junk (became the greatest fighter jet ever), F-16, not powerful enough to meet demands of combat (became one of the most famous and beloved jets of all time), F-18, useless and underperforming, dangerous (Navy loves it, incredibly versatile and deadly jet. Apache, they called it overly engineered and not necessary. Bradley (one of the single most planned and planted attacks on a weapon system ever and would ultimately become the single most effective ground weapons platform). F-111, a slow (yes, they literally called a Mach 2.5 jet slow) and can’t hit anything mess. Incredibly fast and deadly. Used all the way up to 2016. Patriot missile system (a shockingly overpriced system that would bankrupt us all), is to this day the most lethal anti missile, anti jet system in planet earth and everyone wants them. M-16, ceramic vests, hell i could go on and on. And of course everything Russia came out with was cutting edge and a flawless masterpiece (funny how that works huh). Oh God, and the F-35 which was proven to be a huge financed campaign by Russia and China (mostly China)) to discredit it. Ohh and the crazy thing is. The weapons systems that are flawed and crash too much, etc. are usually given a pass for some reason. The Blackhawk, oh wow, that thing has had a lot of crashes. There’s been others
Is cool what it can do but is way too expensive to maintain and complicated to maintain.
In fact, Indonesia almost bought the V-22 Osprey that was offered by the United States government a few years ago. And became Indonesia as the second V-22 Osprey user in the world outside the United States after Japan . But at that time the Indonesian government refused it because of the high cost of maintenance and spare parts. In fact, Indonesia is more interested in the CH-43 Chinook, although until now there has been no agreement on this
Imagine if we let u speak for 5 mins straight and we'd tally the times we'll hear your fave filler "in fact"
@@mattrader4910 that's my Google translate not me
I'm not good in English
"CH-43 Chinook"(sic)
CH-47 Chinook
Aircraft maintenance and spare parts can be expensive for a number of reasons, including:
Labor costs
Labor rates can range from $100-$300 per hour.
Parts costs
Depending on the component, parts can cost tens to hundreds of thousands of dollars. Engines are generally considered the most expensive part of an aircraft.
Engineering costs
It takes a lot of resources to engineer, develop, and test parts to get an aircraft certified by the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA).
Liability costs
Manufacturers of aircraft parts can be held responsible for large amounts of liability if their products fail.
Aircraft age and utilization
Older aircraft and those used more frequently require more frequent checks, repairs, and component replacements.
Aircraft type and complexity
More sophisticated and technologically advanced aircraft may require specialized tools, expertise, and parts.
Supply chain issues
Supply chain problems have affected both aircraft OEMs and the aftermarket during the recovery from COVID-19.
This has been a terrible journey with Boing!
Killing many people!
👍👍🍻🍻
I assume to battle Godzilla.
Just did, crash, again. Dead Marines.
The max speed is nowhere near 565. It is barely 400 mph. Not sure where you got your stats.
Incorrect. The max speed is closer to 600 mph. That’s what the engines can produce, and that’s what the airframe can sustain. However, the manufacturer recommends keeping the speed much slower to guarantee the service life of the airframe.
@@BasicBobby Not sure where you got your numbers but every site I've looked at says top speed is no more than 363 mph. Can you give me a link to a site that says otherwise?
Boeing says 270 knots, 500 km/h, 310mph at sea-level
Because nobody else buys them.
I am from Bangladesh. And your RUclips channel is my favourite RUclips channel. I am waiting for your reply...😢❤❤🇧🇩🇧🇩🇧🇩🇧🇩
But broke Bangladesh cannot afford expensive American military shit .. but keep dreaming who am I to say no
South korea too
Лартака сток бунданка рок 👍 фияркута бонза бугазотка тутка сияние бухта
I did not think the Japanese were this stupid! But every culture places different values on human life. Some subcultures place little value on human life like USMC! I tend to think Marines have great value but that’s just me. Riding on the V22 should be only voluntary. Let the Russian roulette lovers have some fun.
Computer narration sucks.
Гуфиниякта гадраст
Terrible design. Rotors too small to autorotate, wings to small to glide. Engine stops it crashes. Bad plan for a vehicle that by definition is going to be shot at.
it's because they're nerds and they think it looks like the VTOL craft from neon genesis evangelion
Гардрикта мугазот боракта каскрот ияхта гуфраниякта гудракт
Крагунана бракта дриктоскт кубланкт гизания гранкта каринакт габланкта графинкта
Feliz que esse canal ultrapassou o número de inscritos do canal que só sabe fazer propaganda de vídeo game e que só fala besteiras que não acrescenta nada ao público entusiasta.
Каркустка страктакта барзактория бакраска бурструкт фиграния фидачкот.
Гугразия мордокрет гудрафолт ияска
Waste of money. A modern misssile that cost 20 grand could blow one out of the sky.
It's more on cargo and troop transport. It has its own role.
That can be said of any flying aircraft
That's akin to saying a landing craft is a waste of money when you can give the infantry a raft and some paddles for landing operations.
Wrong.
I would want it with the VARS refueling pod to extend the range of the F-35B.
$$$. Its expensive to buy And very expensive to maintain. It gives little advantage compared to cost.
double the range and speed of any other helicopter medium lift helicopter...
Фриянка кульбароса букта стика рубикон лояска кафритакустка бундароса кухкаруска
Дранкта гулизгат кадраскта гублана лугарот бензикта кугланкта лигазот трикдрастка
cause they are not,afraid of crashing
fool the Osprey is as safe if not safer than any other military rotorcraft.
Not true.
RIP to all the Marines who died flying on this POS.
Because no one want to buy that unreliable trash 😅
fool the Osprey is as safe if not safer than any other military rotorcraft.
lol anyone who knows physics knows this is no bird, it is a flying coffin. Any of the 2 engines fail and the craft is uncontrollable…
Flying coffin ⚰️
fool the Osprey is as safe if not safer than any other military rotorcraft.
because nobody else wants that death trap
Right. Everybody is content to fly the H-60 Crashhawk.
fool the Osprey is as safe if not safer than any other military rotorcraft.
Because no one else wants to buy this expensive and unreliable aircraft. How many accidents have happened and how many lives have lost? Now us has v280, seems more reliable and they need to get rid of these old osprey. The best way is to sell them to someone. Japan has no choice because it is the colony of US in Asia.
fool the Osprey is as safe if not safer than any other military rotorcraft. The V-280 will perform a completely different role.
in the Last 10 years more people have died in the C-130 than the Osprey. The Osprey also has a better crash record than the CH-53 and CH-46.
@@n3v3rforgott3n9aged like milk
@@chibiemo100 ? no you are a fool. The record is still; FAR better than all of those aircraft I mentioned.
The Japanese will build their own with much higher quality.
I hope they will. 😪
No body wants to buy it. Japan has no choice to say no. It's pilot needs special training unrelated to any other aircraft. Unqualified pilots and technicians are causing incidents.
you are a fool... Japan isn't forced into anything.
The Osprey is also just as safe and any other rotorcraft the military uses.
Why is the V-22 Osprey only sold to Japan?
To create more Japanese Widow
fool the Osprey is as safe if not safer than any other military rotorcraft.
@@n3v3rforgott3n9 The aircraft had four crashes and 30 deaths during its initial development. Since entering operational service in 2007 there have been an additional ten crashes and 24 deaths. Two of these ten were on combat operations where the cause was uncertain. The others were due to pilot error or technical problems --- GOOGLE
go, fly it!
@@hdlim8753 The blackhawk had 20+ crashes in the first 6 years of service... The Osprey has only had 1 crash due to mechanical failure since entering service in 2007. More people have dies in C-130 crashes in the last 10 years than in the Osprey and we operate more Ospreys. Maybe you should do some real research instead of only looking for information to support your bias. The Osprey has a better safety record than the CH-46 and CH-53 and around the same as the Blackhawk.
Let's examine the crash numbers from the last 10 years.
The Army operates about 2,100 UH-60's including the national guard and special operations:
>The current Army Acquisition Objective, or AAO, for its UH-60 Black Hawk fleet currently sits at 2,135 aircraft.
The Navy has about 550, and the Air Force has about 100. Lets call it a total fleet of about 2,800.
There are about 450 V-22's across all variants. Roughly 6.25 times smaller of an overall fleet so the 60's would have to crash 6.25 times more often to make the rate equal. Over the last 10 years, here's how the two airframes compare for accidents:
V-22: 7 crashes
H-60 : 51 crashes
For the 60 to crash less it would have had to keep their number below ~44
The Osprey is objectively a safe aircraft.