U.S. Navy apparently begins Osprey deployment in western Japan

*U.S. Navy apparently begins Osprey deployment …*

*The U.S. Navy has apparently begun deploying …*

Apparently.

ImagIne every article so freely using “apparently.”

”Ishiba apparently eyes utility bill subsidies”

@Asiaman7

As long when there's another Osprey crash, hopefully they don't use "apparently"

“The Iwakuni local government in Yamaguchi Prefecture confirmed two Ospreys” — apparently.

they can do anything if they want to,Japan have no right to oppose them or stop.

Future updates: US servicemen apparently assaulted local women, according to this alleged clip which purportedly shows them doing so while seemingly yelling "your body, my choice!".

U.S. Navy apparently begins Osprey deployment in western Japan

 There are two types of Ospreys in the U.S. forces: MV-22 and CV-22. MV-22's are Marine specifications and CV-22's are Air Force.

The U.S. Navy and the U.S. Marine Corps are mutually independent services, and so there should be no confusion between the two. The Marines are stationed in Japan in sheer violation of the Japan-U.S. Security Treaty.

Ospreys, tilt-rotor aircraft that are capable of taking off and landing like helicopters and cruising like planes, have a history of accidents both in Japan and abroad.

So why are they inflicting more of these deathtraps on us?

Good.

BerteWooster

its simple.

because they CAN and WANT.

you,me or even jpn gov can do NOTHING about it.

BOSS and SERVANT relationship.

“Apparently” means: let’s keep people of Japan in the loop. Don’t tell them the Japanese government has to spend hundreds of billions of yen purchasing Usa made weapons, as imposed by Washington, instead of using the same funds to tackle more important social issues, like the demographic problems or raising prices for households. Any risk of military accident involving the Osprey, which already took effect in the past, has to remain ‘apparent’.

Fos

101% correct

More accidents waiting to happen.

There are two types of Ospreys in the U.S. forces: MV-22 and CV-22. MV-22's are Marine specifications and CV-22's are Air Force.

No. There are three distinct variants. The most numerous are the Marine Corps MV-22. The Air Force version, the CV-22 is the same airframe and dynamics as the Marine version but it has special communications and navigation equipment for its role in Special Operations.

The Navy's CMV-22 is mostly identical to the Marines MV-22 but it has considerably more fuel giving it longer legs than the other two (plus in flight refueling), different interior lighting and some additional features for her role delivering passengers and freight to aircraft carriers.

So why are they inflicting more of these deathtraps on us?

The old C-2A Greyhounds are worn out and being retired. The CMV-22 is its replacement fleet wide.

Quill shafts have already been replaced and the Navy is putting revised gearboxes in theirs, a mod that will certainly roll through all the models.

Maybe the locals can spend their stimulus checks on construction hats. Safety first and helping the local economy.

Desert Tortoise

Thank you for the correction. But you haven't said anything about my assertion that U.S. Marines, with their version of Ospreys, are illegally stationed in Japan.

Desert,have you ever flew in flying Coffin

dobre vam zajebavaToday  08:56 am JST

because they CAN and WANT.

you,me or even jpn gov can do NOTHING about it.

BOSS and SERVANT relationship.

Fact check:

After the December 2016 crash off Okinawa, the Japanese government requested the suspension of MV-22 flight operations. The U.S. temporarily grounded the Osprey fleet in Japan and worked closely with Japanese authorities to investigate the incident and implement safety measures before resuming flights.

Going back to 2012 the Japanese govt and USFJ negotiated deployment terms of the Ospreys resulting in flight path limitations overheavily populated areas, limitations on night flights and low altitude training exercises over certain areas.

Cooperation between the US and JPN has balanced local concerns and operational readiness.

voiceofokinawaToday  11:03 am JST

But you haven't said anything about my assertion that U.S. Marines, with their version of Ospreys, are illegally stationed in Japan.

Please give up this old tired argument. It's nitpicking on the definition of the USMC and you should go file a lawsuit if you want. What practical difference would it make to anyone if the US Army, Navy amd Air Force were "legal" and the Marines "not legal"?

The Secretary of the Navy oversees both the U.S. Navy and the U.S. Marine Corps in administrative matters, such as budgeting, training, and logistics. The Commandant of the Marine Corps reports directly to the Secretary of the Navy on these matters.

I guess you should have carried out a one-man protest against the USMC rebuilding Sendai Airport in 2011.

OssanAmerica

Cooperation between the US and JPN has balanced local concerns and operational readiness.

Your attempts to praise the efforts of the Washington are commendable, although incorrect. 

U.S. kept flying Ospreys in Japan despite calls to suspend operations in the wake of a crash near the southwestern island of Yakushima, less than a year ago. Last December Tokyo government expressed concerns that flights were being carried out without sufficient explanation about safety, after repeated requests from Japan. 

Truth is U.S. Air Force does whatever they want in Japan without control from the sovereign country (Japan) therefore Boss and servant definition is correct

Helicopters have a higher accident rate than fixed-wing aircraft. The hybrid Osprey is still a helicopter, and as such is going to have that same drawback.

In the last month alone we have seen Japanese government placing two orders for military equipment from US for almost $500 millions, another $2 billions was sold to Taiwan and $4,9 billions to South Korea.

The US administration is turning the Asian content into a dangerous powder keg (despite what we are seeing in the Middle East), and the residents of Japan are getting just a pittance of what they should receive from the government, because Washington is imposing huge orders of weapons to please the American arms manufacturers. Diplomacy is totally kidnapped by the military-industrial complex. Just a reminder that the 5 biggest modern armament manufacturers are all from US and financial markets in Wall Street are sky rocketing, on all time high. That's a fact, more than any press release on the Osprey drills.

Question; Ospreys are apparently safe and do not randomly crash, the japanese PEOPLE apparently can do nought about that. Japanese residents apparently are the servants of the U.S. I say categorically no they are not. During US governorship they were forced to drive on the rhs of the road. as soon was the gov was done with, they reverted to lhs driving and manufacturing righties (wow some incredible cars). History tells the future.

Desert,have you ever flew in flying Coffin

Boeing-Vertol produced 624 of my beloved CH-46 Seaknight and 303 were lost to combat or non-combat mishaps. One more was abandoned in Afghanistan. I also flew the civilian model, the BV-107 (and some Kawasaki built copies the KV-107). Over the years a couple of them tried to kill me.

FosToday  11:53 am JST

U.S. kept flying Ospreys in Japan despite calls to suspend operations in the wake of a crash near the southwestern island of Yakushima, less than a year ago. 

Fact check:

On November 29, 2023, a U.S. Air Force CV-22 Osprey from the 353rd Special Operations Wing at Yokota Air Base crashed near Yakushima, Japan, during a joint military exercise. Tragically, all eight crew members aboard lost their lives. The investigation found that the accident was caused by a catastrophic failure of the left-hand prop rotor gearbox, which led to an unrecoverable asymmetric lift condition. Contributing factors included inadequate risk and crew resource management, along with delayed decision-making, which prolonged the sequence leading to the crash​

This incident led to the temporary grounding of both US and Japanese Osprey fleets as part of ongoing safety review.

OssanAmerica

On November 29, 2023...

We know that story. I was referring to what happened after, in the first week of December 2023, based on the chronology of news stories by Japanese agencies, which you can find online. The US administration does not feel the need to explain much of their military activities on Japanese soil to the local authorities, let alone the public. But the Japanese tax payers have still to fork out a lot of money for the random US made Patriot missiles orders or subsonic sea-skimming aerial targets, which I find nonsensical.

Apparently.

Sounds like there is more evidence for this actual deployment than a fictional one Tokyo and others were complaining about just last week.

Hardly newsworthy. But I guess it's clickbait for some.

OssanAmerica,

The U.S. Marine Corps is attached to the Department of the Navy in the Pentagon for convenience' sake (that is, for historical and administrative reasons) just like the U.S. Coast Guard is attached to the Department of Homeland Security. Military-wise, today7s U.S. Marine Corps is a different service completely independent of the Navy with its own chain of command, different rank names; the top of the Marine Corps can be chairperson of the U.S. Joint Chiefs of Staff at the Pentagon, forestalling a Navy admiral. They may work with the Navy very closely at sea when invading enemy land: but once on land, their style of fighting is no different from that of the Army infantrymen.  

Are today's U.S. Marines part of and subsidiary to the Navy, as you say?

-their style of fighting is no different from that of the Army infantrymen. 

Eh? Totally wrong. We are animals. Killers. First to go in and last leave.

We love gorilla warfare. Take it to the enemy and show no mercy.

Marine Corps and Navy special operations forces: Raiders, Force RECON and SEAL teams. First, the Marine Corps has two primary special operations forces: the Marine Raiders and the Force RECON units. As part of the Special Operations Command, the Marine Raiders run small lethal teams to eliminate targets.

Have MARSOC or RECON squads coming at you. Your done. Until the last man standing.

Get it? Lethal & Deadly. No so silent. That is for SEALS.

Rah!

Not Army. Tactics nothing like Army.

voiceofokinawaToday  05:31 pm JST

OssanAmerica,

The U.S. Marine Corps is attached to the Department of the Navy in the Pentagon for convenience' sake (that is, for historical and administrative reasons) 

The USMC was originally created during the American Revolution in 1775, after which it was disbanded. But it was re-established in 1798 as part of the Department of he Navy. To this day the USMC falls under the Secretary of the Navy.

While the USMC is considered a separate branch from the Navy, it's operations, logistics and support are closely intertwined for obvious reasons. Nearly all Marines in various countries are part of or connected to their navies. During WWII, the Imperial Japanese Navy Land Forces (Marines) were part of the Imperial Navy.

As the presence of the US Army, US Navy and US Air Force on Japanese soil are considered legal, it is a moot point to be arguing that the USMC are "not legal". In fact, without the presence of the USMC in Japan the JGSDF would have had a much harder time establishing their Amphibious Rapid Deployment Brigade.

So please, give up this old tired pointless argument.

Grounding, recycling, a big area as garbage storage, that's still all fine. But would anyone with a few brain cells above zero ever consider to use those flying coffins for transportation of cargo and personnel to a nuclear-powered aircraft carrier?

The U S never learns from its mistakes, no matter how many are injured or die.

OssanAmerica,

So, you think the U.S. Marine Corps is still part of, and subsidiary to, the U.S. Navy. How could then the top of Marine Corps forestall a Navy admiral to become the chair of the U.S. Joint Chiefs of Staff?

Are today's U.S. Marines part of and subsidiary to the Navy, as you say?

Very much so. The Navy trains Marine Corps pilots and they are designated as "Naval Aviators". I had both Navy and Marine Corps pilots as instructors in Navy flight school. There is no Marine Flight School. Marine Corps aircraft are developed, procured and sustained by program offices residing within Naval Air Systems Command. Their weapons are developed and tested at places like Naval Air Warfare Center China Lake. If you look at the Marine Corps Expeditionary Force 21 doctrine they are rapidly transitioning from a land force to a naval force, using small ships and tilt rotors to land on small islands and set up anti ship missiles to engage enemy warships in coordination with sea based naval forces. Marine Corps F/A-18 and now F-35C squadrons augment aircraft carrier air wings.

If you go back in history to the age of sail, Marines were employed fighting in the rigging with swords, trying to board the enemy warship when combat was nearly hull to hull and the ships often tangled rigging during the fight. The Marines would be up there with swords and muskets trying to kill enemy crew members and board the enemy ship. They were also employed in raiding parties on enemy ports, hit and run attacks.

Grounding, recycling, a big area as garbage storage, that's still all fine. But would anyone with a few brain cells above zero ever consider to use those flying coffins for transportation of cargo and personnel to a nuclear-powered aircraft carrier?

I have personally flow helicopters with worse mishap rates and landed them on nuclear aircraft carriers. I have loaded them up with ammo many times in that same "dangerous" helicopter. The carriers have no air wing ammo on board in port. We would meet them with an ammo ship and spend 12-14 hours of non stop flying to unload them before they docked, and we would meet them off the coast and load them up when they departed. Tens of thousands of tons of ordnance of all kinds and we'd move it with two helicopters flying all day and sometimes into the evening. Long before the V-22 my trusty old CH-46, aka the Phrog, was often called a death trap and you can find old newspaper articles from the 1980s asking, like they do today regarding the V-22, if the old Phrog was too dangerous and should be retired. The CH-46 then, like the V-22 had far from the worst mishap rate (even back then the CH-53E and even some flavors of the H-60 had higher mishap rates) but the public perception was otherwise. As a pilot I knew the aircraft's limitations and never pushed it. I got the mission done without taking any risks, and am here to talk about it :)

Desert Tortoiese & OssanAmerica,

The U.S. armed forces consist of six service branches: the Army, Marine Corps, Navy, Air Force, Space Force, and Coast Guard, according to Wikipedia. The description in Wikipedia is convincing because of its trustful notation.

Desert Tortoise and OssanAmerica, however, deny that outright, contending that the Marine Corps is subsumed under the Navy. So, according to them, there are 5, not 6, service branches in the U.S. armed forces. Are they right?

The U S never learns from its mistakes, no matter how many are injured or die.

Tell that to ISIS. 

https://www.youtube.com/shorts/5Nq4ZZDPsZA

The US Military is the most adaptive military force in the world. A-symmetrical.

Period.  

Second the U.K. 

Third the French. 

Fourth Poland. 

All can adapt war tactics on land air and sea in a microsecond.

voiceofokinawaToday  07:24 am JST

OssanAmerica,

So, you think the U.S. Marine Corps is still part of, and subsidiary to, the U.S. Navy. How could then the top of Marine Corps forestall a Navy admiral to become the chair of the U.S. Joint Chiefs of Staff?

Sorry, but nobody else cares.

OssanAmeica,

Nobody cares? If the Marine Corps were not the Navy, they couldn't be stationed in Japan because the Japan-U.S. Security Treaty says only the U.S. Army, Navy and Air Force are granted to use land and facilities in Japan (cf. the Japanese version of the treaty).

The surrender flag has been raised.

Sorry, but nobody else cares.