Piece of Osprey wreckage given to U.S. after crash off Japan

The US military cannot entirely suspend Osprey operations for a casual reason. They are vital to many operational missions such as resupply of Naval vessels and remote training sites. Statistically, the Osprey is a safe aircraft.

Ospreys have a history of mishaps, including fatal crashes.

All aircraft with more than a few years of flying have a history of mishaps and fatal crashes. Facts to compare to other aircraft, preferably similar types of aircraft, would actually be nice. Compare the Osprey to a Harrier (AV-8 and variants) ... except a Harrier is a fighter, not a transport.

V-22 Osprey 3.16 accidents per 100,000 flight hours.

AV-8B Harrier 11.44 accidents per 100,000 flight hours.

F/A-18 Hornet. 3 accidents per 100,000 flight hours.

B-52 "BUFF" 4.06 accidents per 100,000 flight hours. A B-52 is a very safe aircraft.

B-58 Hustlers 21% of the entire fleet were lost in flight. It was operational less than 10 yrs, but during that time, set a number of international records (Bleriot Trophy, the Thompson Trophy, the Mackay Trophy, the Bendix Trophy, and the Harmon Trophy.) I have a different perspective on Hustlers. Dad was a B-58 pilot. He said it was an "unforgiving aircraft", but if you followed the rules, you'd not get into bad situations. He also knew that if war broke out, it was a 1-way mission.

Marine Corps’ MV-22 Osprey has a lower mishap rate per 100,000 flight hours than the Harrier, Super Hornet, F-35B, or CH-53E Super Stallion.

Perspective is important. So is comparing accident rates for aircraft used in similar environments. An aircraft that sits in a US desert, protected from salt water most of the lifetime, will have completely different failures than an aircraft that spends 1/3rd of it's time on a ship deployed to the ocean.