U.S. promises consultation with Japan before Osprey flight resumption

Would be better to not promise anything if there is a question they might be delayed for political reasons.

U.S. promises consultation with Japan before Osprey flight resumption

Promise? It happens 2016 in Japan and again in 2023, future who knows?

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/dec/14/us-osprey-mv22-fleet-grounded-japan-okinawa-aircraft-crash-military

The Osprey has never been a complete success. I wonder if maybe we could use the controversies surrounding its development and deployment to improve the way huge military projects are conducted?

Consultation ? Yeah right, of course the US will stop flying Osprey's if Japan objects.

Promise consultation:

US: "Hey we have started flying the Osprey's again from last week"

Japan: "Uh we kind of noticed"

US: "Have a great day"

Beautiful and awesome aircraft only it just could stop crashing!!

Japan has 8 operational Ospreys of its own.

These would have been useful in providing relief after the recent earthquake.

Beautiful and awesome aircraft only it just could stop crashing!!

Compared to so many other aircraft, it doesnt. Just the fact that it has, gets blown out of proportion and regurgitated constantly.

It doesn't look safe! I value my life too much to step into one. Why two propellers when helicopters have only one? I might step into one with one propeller.

It doesn't look safe! I value my life too much to step into one. Why two propellers when helicopters have only one? I might step into one with one propeller.

Be nice for people to actually understand what they are commenting about first. Guess you havent seen too may military helicopters and dont know what you are talking about.

US: Osprey fly tomorrow.

Japan: Right on boss.

I’ve been on basically every rotary aircraft there is, (in Forward AOR’s) would love to get on one of these. They were too busy working to let Schmuckatelli’s on at the time

Communication is the key.

Perhaps the Japanese Osprey mechanics and engineers can share some technical advice to the US Forces on how to maintain, service and keep these craft very safe.

PseudonymouseToday 11:15 am JST

Would be better to not promise anything if there is a question they might be delayed for political reasons.

Having an opinion is one thing

however attempting to lecure us on what would be better is totally inappropriate as your not qualified or eligible to do so.

I will comment on anything I want, thank you. You don't offer anything that is particularly well reasoned.

I guess this means the camera guy at the Kakazutaka Observatory tower will go back to work.

Easy, let all you Aeronautical Engineers redesign it and get it fixed.

Problem solved.

@obladi What do you mean the Osprey has never been a complete success. If you are a "ENGINEER" and I don't mean sanitation "Engineer" your comment is MOOT!!!! Once an aircraft receives its certification by the US authorities and there are man, the aircraft is considered "SAFE" to fly. On the first flight it is considered a "SUCCESSFUL FLIGHT" it takes years before an aircraft is flown because of the rigorous it goes through before its first flight. If you can think of how a bird in a nest waiting to fly the compare that to an aircraft waiting to fly it doesn't just get up and fly there are comparison with take off and landing. Watch a bird fly and watch a plane on take off and landing you will see the comparison IF YOU KNOW what you are looking for its not hard to not notice. Man was not meant to fly therefore we try to change the dynamics of flight of course we are going to have some problems and that why we investigate and look at data and black boxes to examine what the system as a whole or the subsystems was doing during the time of the failure, again from the nest to fight or from the hangar to flight the same comparison is as close as it gets. I know, I do this every day! BEsides read nonsense, as you wrote "**I wonder if maybe we could use the controversies surrounding its development and deployment to improve the way huge military projects are conducted" **with that said my advice keep your day job or night job. Technical engineers think very analytically and logically. Not to boast I am speaking from experience and being in the know.

@Stephen Chin Since you know little I will give you more insight there are three configurations of the Osprey depending on its intended use, we designed one for search-and-rescue, medium-range assault or long-range special operations. When you get up every morning do you look out side to ask yourself if something looks safe or not? If your answer is no then that means you don't value your life as much as you wrote in your post. You asked yourself why does the Osprey have two propellers when a helicopter has only one. LMFAO some people ask some of the dumbest questions. Then you said "I might step into one with one propeller". Ok let me ask you this? Would you rather have one eye or two eyes? Your logic tells me you would rather have one eye because it seems safe, but my logic tells me it doesn't look right. In my case I would rather have two eyes because if ONE FAILS!!! I still have at least one good eye to continue seeing. Its the same you have a left brain and a right brain LOL I think!! Now I can tell you this being that I was part of the design team on this aircraft I take your comment personal. FOR THE OSPREY in the event of an engine failure, the Osprey can run on only one engine. In this case, power from the remaining engine is distributed to the two rotors through an interconnecting drive shaft. If you know anything about REDUNDANCY then you will understand.

If I can make it more simpler for you to understand how the Osprey flies, what you must know is the airplane wings create lift by deflecting air downward, benefiting from the equal and opposite reaction that results. Since you mentioned "HELICOPTERS" Helicopters do the same thing with blades, which are rotating wing shapes like the airfoils of an airplane wing. Helicopter blades are thinner and narrower than airplane wings because they have to rotate faster. The rotating wings are mounted on a central shaft. When the shaft is spun, lift is created. When the Osprey is ready for take off, its rotors are in a vertical position. With the rotors mounted on the wings, it looks like a SO CALLED UNSAFE two-bladed helicopter. When the Osprey is in helicopter mode (on takeoff, landing and when hovering), the rotors generate lift.

I will leave it at that because it gets to technical for you. When we designed this aircraft from concept the thought was to design a aircraft that could fly long ranges at high speeds and carry heavy cargo, take off, and hover and land like a helicopter. We also knew and wanted the plane to have the flexibility to handle different types of military missions and combat operations, and have civilian and commercial uses. THERE YOU HAVE IT!!! I hope you got educated!!!!!!!!!!!

It doesn't look safe! I value my life too much to step into one. Why two propellers when helicopters have only one? I might step into one with one propeller.

No more US flying garbage over Japan...

"...what you must know is the airplane wings create lift by deflecting air downward, benefiting from the equal and opposite reaction that results."

This statement is absolutely false.