 |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |
 |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |
 |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |
 |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |
 |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |
 |  |  | ||||||
Posts Tagged ‘2010’
Leadership and Life Skills Training Programme 2010
cedars.hku.hk LEAP FORWARD, BE A LEADER. Leadership and Life Skills Training Programme (LLS) is a one-month intensive programme organised by Counselling and Person Encrichment, Centre of Development and Resources for Students, The University of Hong Kong. The programme is designed to provide students with the life skills that are needed in the diverse society we live in today. Students will be able to explore themselves through various challenges, such as adventure camping, personal coaching, critical thinking, mental toughness, self-image, and social etiquette. Training period: 24 May – 19 June 2010
Video Rating: 0 / 5
GCF 2010 PANEL – Children’s Panel: The Building Blocks of Sustainable Competitiveness
Creativity and imagination are increasingly being recognized as critical to childhood development, which is at the foundation of developing a competitive economy – How do we develop independent innovative capabilities and how will they impact economic growth and sustainability? – How does arts education contribute toward nurturing childrens creativity and how has that impacted their sense of competence, self esteem and social responsibility?
Aflac Incorporated to Webcast 2010 Tokyo Financial Analysts Briefing
Lookin’ for Adventure – FMWRC – US Army – 100824
Image by familymwr
PHOTO CAPTION: Head over heels: Spc. Josh Wills, a 554th MP Company Soldier, practices falling backward into the water off the dock during a Warrior Adventure Quest scuba activity for U.S. Army Garrison Stuttgart Soldiers, held at the Kronau Dive Center near Heidelberg July 20. (Photo by Brittany Carlson, USAG Stuttgart, cleared for public release, not for commercial use, attribution requested).
Lookin’ for Adventure
Aug 24, 2010
By Brittany Carlson (USAG Stuttgart)
STUTTGART, Germany — It wasn’t a typical day at the office.
Instead of working at their desks, 23 Soldiers in the 554th Military Police Company went scuba diving July 20.
The trip, hosted by U.S. Army Garrison Stuttgart Family and Morale, Welfare and Recreation Outdoor Recreation, was part of the new Army program for redeploying Soldiers, called Warrior Adventure Quest.
WAQ was created two years ago to help Soldiers adjust to normal life after being in a combat zone with high-thrill activities, designed to replace the rush of being downrange. It is funded by FMWR Command, and put into action by Installation Management Command and regional FMWR recreation managers.
After several pilot programs, it’s being implemented at all U.S. installations with deploying troops. In USAG Stuttgart, it’s the first time the program has been used by an entire company; the 554th MP Company returned from a 12-month deployment to Afghanistan May 31.
Army officials hope the WAQ program will reduce high-risk and destructive behaviors associated with redeploying Soldiers that can lead to accidental death.
"They need action," said Mike Mendoza, USAG Stuttgart ODR director. "These guys come back from a deployment and their adrenaline’s up, and within a few days they’re going out drinking and driving."
"The idea behind this is to show them that there are other adrenaline rushes that are safe," he added.
To prove his point, ODR took close to 90 554th MP Co. Soldiers rock climbing, paragliding, wakeboarding, scuba diving and rafting between July 20-30.
For Mendoza, what made it all worthwhile was the fact that so many Soldiers were interested in taking other trips with ODR.
"These guys were already making inquiries about other ODR activities, such as paintballing. That’s already a positive sign," he said.
It was also rewarding "just hearing the laughter … hearing them have a good time," he added.
Mendoza and other WAQ program managers offer Soldiers a menu of activities that involve not only action, but incorporate interactive and group skills so that Soldiers can reconnect with their battle buddies.
After coming back from downrange, "people ETS [and] PCS; esprit de corps is in flux," Mendoza said.
At the Discover Scuba class, held through Seahorse Tauschschule GmbH at the Kronau Dive Center near Heidelberg, the MPs were taught to rely on each other for safety while diving in the center’s lake. They used the "buddy system" and hand signals to tell each other when to dive, and when they needed to resurface.
"I thought it was a great experience for Soldiers," said 1st Lt. Kami Irlmeier, 3rd platoon leader for the 554th MP Co. "A lot of them are really missing the camaraderie we had downrange. This is giving them the chance to get out as a company and hang out as a group."
When they weren’t diving, the Soldiers took a guided snorkeling tour around the lake with ODR employees Mark Graf and Gio Rosa, used underwater scooters and swam around the dock.
"This is exactly what I need right now," said Spc. Nick Downing, as he stretched out in a chair during lunch. "I’m just relaxed … ."
Spc. Casey Call enjoyed diving so much that he immediately started planning return trips. "I’m planning on coming back with my family," he said. "We want to get certified."
In order to keep track of Soldier feedback like this, ODR passes out a pre- and post-experience survey to each Soldier during every WAQ activity; the surveys are later sent to the Department of the Army to track feedback. Soldiers answer questions on whether or not the activity helped them feel less stressed, irritable, distant or on guard. The survey also asked them if the activity promoted unit cohesiveness and personal leadership.
For Capt. Nathan James, 554th MP Co. executive officer at the time, the questions were no-brainers.
"If it gets [Soldiers] involved, it’s a good thing," he said. "It’s a healthy outlet for stress … from coming back from downrange."
Teaching Soldiers to dive is nothing new to the Kronau Dive Center. Last year, 1,100 Soldiers from USAG Baumholder went through the WAQ program there.
"I just want to give the troops something back," said Kronau Dive Center Manager C.J. Jensen, an American retiree. "This is the best way to show [my] appreciation."
When Soldiers keep returning to dive, they develop relationships with the instructors. "Last year, Soldiers really opened up," Jensen said. "They wanted somebody, basically, to talk to.
"Once they encountered instructors and gave them their trust, this [became], for them, like a big relief," he added.
Perhaps that’s why more than 10 percent of the Baumholder Soldiers in WAQ came back to the dive center to get their scuba certification – something both Jensen and Mendoza hope will occur with Stuttgart Soldiers this year.
"The success of [WAQ] is how many of these guys come back for more," Mendoza said.
Judging from the Soldier feedback, the program is already achieving its goal.
Connect with us:
www.Facebook.com/FamilyMWR
www.Twitter.com/FamilyMWR
www.YouTube.com/FamilyMWR
Aflac Incorporated to Webcast 2010 Tokyo Financial Analysts Briefing
COLUMBUS, Ga., Sept. 3 /PRNewswire/ — Aflac Incorporated (NYSE: AFL) announced today that it will webcast its Tokyo Financial Analysts Briefing on September 13, 2010 (Tokyo time). Aflac’s management will discuss its operations in Japan. The schedule of the business meeting webcast is as follows: Tokyo time: Monday, September 13, 2010; 9:00 a.m. – 11:55 a.m. and 1:00 p.m. – 3:30 p.m. U.S. EDT …
Read more on redOrbit
A debt problem shared is a problem halved
LONDON, UNITED KINGDOM– (Marketwire – Sept. 3, 2010) – Financial solutions company Think Money ( http://www.thinkmoney.com/ ) has advised struggling borrowers to make sure they inform all relevant lenders at the first sign of problems with debt, after research by Callcredit found that almost 70% of people who find themselves struggling never contact their bank or …
Read more on Marketwire
Concierge firm winning honors
As owner, president and chief executive officer of Best Upon Request Corporate Inc., Tillie Hidalgo Lima has watched her Sycamore Township-based on-site national concierge service gain local and national attention in recent weeks.
Read more on The Cincinnati Enquirer
A debt problem shared is a problem halved
LONDON, UNITED KINGDOM–(Marketwire – 09/03/10) – Financial solutions company Think Money ( http://www.thinkmoney.com/ ) has advised struggling borrowers to make sure they inform all relevant lenders at the first sign of problems with debt, after research by Callcredit found that almost 70% of people who find themselves struggling never contact their bank or building …
Read more on Marketwire via Yahoo! Finance
Former Business Coaching Franchise Executives Identify Top Franchise Opportunity for 2010
2010 Business Coaching Franchise Buyer’s Guide
(PRWEB) January 27, 2010
Former business coaches and business coaching franchise executives Eric Dombach and Michael Cody recently announced the release of their new 77-page report, The 2010 Business Coaching Franchise Buyer’s Guide.
Subtitled “Everything You Need to Know About Buying a Business Coaching Franchise,” Dombach and Cody — who have spent the last eight years recruiting business coaches into a total of four of the world’s most prominent business coaching systems — promise that the report will be an eye-opener for anyone considering a business coaching franchise.
Dombach and Cody are no longer associated with any specific business coaching franchise system, and decided the time was right to share a candid, behind-the-scenes perspective. “Without a doubt, this is the most comprehensive compilation of information on business coaching franchises ever gathered in one place,” Cody said. “Our objective was to show readers what’s really going on when you’re in discussions with business coaching franchise executives.”
Business coaching is an exploding billion-dollar industry, with growth rates between 18%-25% each year (MarketData Report, 2009; The Economist, Sept. 2008). Dombach said that many prospective business coaches turn to franchises to take some of the pressure off establishing a system and brand of their own. “Franchising allows you to leverage other people’s time and resources and tap into an established, proven system,” Dombach said. “It’s the reason I decided to buy a franchise when I first cut my teeth as a business coach.”
In fact, Dombach was quickly catapulted to international acclaim as a business coach, earning numerous awards and building a 7-figure coaching practice from 2001 to 2005. In 2005, it sold for Million USD. From 2005-2009, Dombach consulted with and rendered professional services for four of the world’s most prominent business coaching franchise systems. Likewise, Cody is an accomplished 6-figure business coach and formerly worked as a business coaching franchise executive.
However, Dombach warned that while franchising can be an effective way for business coaches to break into the industry, there are pitfalls. “As in any business, there’s a lot of risk,” Dombach said. “Michael and I wrote The 2010 Business Coaching Franchise Buyer’s Guide in the hopes of helping folks understand what they’re getting into when they buy a business coaching franchise. We hope to eliminate some of the nasty surprises that can befall the unsuspecting consumer.”
The 2010 Business Coaching Franchise Buyer’s Guide is a unique, compelling look into the world of business coaching franchises — and a must-read for anyone considering buying a franchise as they venture into the industry.
For more information or to secure a copy, visit http://mycoachescoach.com/franchise-buyers-guide.
###
Fast Facts: Bipolar Disorder by Guy Goodwin – NEW 2010
Some recent bipolar disorder facts auctions on eBay:
Fast Facts: Bipolar Disorder by Guy Goodwin - NEW 2010 | US $22.82 End Date: Thursday Sep-09-2010 8:18:03 PDT Buy It Now for only: US $22.82 Buy it now | Add to watch list |
Bipolar Disorders (Fast Facts) By Goodwin,Sachs
 | US $7.04 End Date: Sunday Oct-03-2010 8:08:05 PDT Buy It Now for only: US $7.04 Buy it now | Add to watch list |
They Might Be Giants, kids show, Regent Theatre, Arlington MA, 23 May 2010
A few nice book staying young images I found:
They Might Be Giants, kids show, Regent Theatre, Arlington MA, 23 May 2010
Image by Chris Devers
Via the Regent Theatre’s web site:
A Special Family Show with . . .
They Might Be Giants
Benefit Concerts for Boston By Foot
Sunday, May 23 at 12pm and 3pm
Both shows sold out – thank you!
They Might Be Giants will be performing two special shows especially for families. These are full band, full length performances. Both shows are to benefit Boston By Foot, the non-profit group giving guided walking tours of Boston for over 33 years. All concert goers can also use their ticket stub to get a free tour from Boston by Foot, including Boston by Little Feet tours for kids, during the upcoming season. All profits will go to BBF. http://www.bostonbyfoot.org/
They Might Be Giants Biography
HERE COMES SCIENCE!
For alternative rock legends They Might Be Giants, rave reviews from the likes of Time Magazine, Rolling Stone, The Village Voice, Pitchfork, NPR and beyond might not be that unexpected, but we’re not talking about their regular gig here. Sure, TMBG have sold millions of records, are multi-Grammy winners and have even composed a musical accompaniment for an entire issue of McSweeney’s, but these most recent accolades are for the work TMBG has created for children and–as the reviews attest–no other band swings as effortlessly from adult music to children’s fare and back again with the artistic and commercial success of They Might Be Giants.
John Flansburgh and John Linnell’s latest CD/DVD is Here Comes Science (Idlewild/Disney Sound). It’s an ultra-vivid crash course through topics that in lesser hands could easily put kids to sleep. With rock anthems and electronic goodies crafted to amuse, intrigue and deliver the 4-1-1 on evolution, solar system, photosynthesis, the scientific method and more. Following Here Comes the ABCs and Here Come the 123s, Science is geared for older kids and it introduces ideas in a way that not only inform but will stay in your head forever.
While it may seem like an odd move for a duo recognized as the progenitors of the American alternative rock movement, it really all makes perfect sense. From their earliest days with Dial-A-Song through their online music distribution, TMBG have always challenged rock’s status quo and gone out of their way to take their music to brand new audiences, and by the looks of things, they’re having a lot of fun doing it their way. The Giants use every bit of fan interactive technology by connecting with kids via regular podcasts and including a DVD of delightful animated interpretations of their songs with each Here Comes… album.
The band is constantly working on new music, new projects and touring–sometimes with 2 shows a day. Founders John Flansburgh and John Linnell, along with their long standing live combo of Dan Miller, Danny Weinkauf and Marty Beller, show no signs of swapping one successful gig (adult music) for another (children’s music). Rejoice people of Earth–there’s just that much more for us all to enjoy.
Question: You once said in an interview that TMBGs knew what you didn’t want to do with your music geared for kids: You didn’t want to tell them how to behave or write songs that are educational. But these songs are quite educational, and in fact, you have a science consultant on this record. Did you make a conscious decision to really teach something on Here Comes Science?
John Linnell: I think it’s still a record you can listen to for enjoyment, and that’s real important to us. I am perfectly comfortable with the idea of something that is pure entertainment, but I don’t think there is any need for something just purely educational from us. My sense of this record is that it is mostly fun, musical and interesting and it happens to have lyrics that talk about science.
Question: Did any Children’s books or albums make an impression on you when you were a child? Because now you’re making that impression on children.
John Flansburgh: We get that question a lot, and it’s a valid question, but speaking for myself, I feel like we have something to contribute to kid’s music because what we’re doing is actually lacking in the general culture. Generally, our stuff is not really coming out of any amazing experience with the kid’s stuff from the past. Our childhood was during the really golden era of classic pop and singles. Those songs weren’t really designed for kids, but the power of it spoke to us and a lot of other kids quite directly.
Curiously–although I see the obvious connections–we didn’t really grow up with all of the progressive kids stuff of the 70′s. We were that micro generation of glitter-rock young teens listening to Alice Cooper and David Bowie and we totally missed the boat on Sesame Street and School House Rock and Free To Be You and Me. But even being a bit too old for it, you could tell there was something cool about that stuff. Basically the cartoons of our generation were either super-violent, like Spiderman, or the really simple-minded Hanna-Barbera cartoons.
Question: Which one of you was the science student? Either or you? Neither of you?
J. Linnell: Specifically into science? I would say we were both middling students in school, but philosophically we are both, as adults, very pro-science. We like living in the post-enlightenment era in history. Are we still living in the enlightenment or is it over now, I can’t tell? Are we in the “en-darkenment” now?
J. Flansburgh: I think we’re actually in to the “gee whiz” part of science–all the scientific phenomenon that sparks your imagination. We certainly aren’t academics, but there is something remarkable about the world of science and there are ideas in science that just send your mind reeling.
J. Linnell: One the things that is exciting about it is that it makes you realize that things that are true, that can be proven, aren’t always intuitive. There is a difference between what seems to be the case and what turns out to be proven to be the case, and that’s really exciting. The world isn’t always what it seems to be and it makes everything more wonderful in a way. You have an experience of the world, walking around, and then science provides knowledge about the world that is not always anything like the experience.
The history of scientific discovery is partly revealing things that you don’t always experience directly, it’s bizarre in a way that so much of what we know is stuff we can’t always experience directly, like molecules and galaxies.
Question: Does that make it easier or harder to write about Science?
J. Linnell: Well, both. There is a point that you do reflect that you’re trying to explain something preposterous. And luckily, I think kids know the whole world is strange and preposterous, but as they get older, they get used to the idea that there are facts they just have to take someone’s word for.
Question: Considering you guys once used an answering machine to showcase your material, how amazed are you that you have all of this media at your disposal – podcasts, internet, video, etc…how has it changed the way you work?
J. Flansburgh: We enjoyed having an easy-breezy, loose reputation in terms of getting our music out to people. It was very great to be the one of the few acts in the United States who wasn’t preoccupied with getting on the radio or a cash return on our music. Of course now there is almost no end to the free stuff, and it is cool to see how much you can get in to the world, but with the most popular videos on YouTube being cats jumping into a box or people getting pushed down escalators, part of me worries that all this electronic media is just in the service of turning our culture into an endless episode of America’s Funniest Home Videos.
J. Linnell: A lot of what the technology suggests to people is the democratizing of culture and the notion of interactivity kind of caught fire online early on. What’s weird for John and I is that we were never interested in either one of those things. We actually like the idea of controlling what we are doing and we like the old fashioned idea of there being quality control on culture, that you would get the “good stuff” and there would be a way, through a critical apparatus or institutions, that would deliver the good stuff and filter out the bad stuff. It feels like the big problem nowadays is that everything should be available to everyone at all times and the result is a lot of garbage to wade through…not to sound like an 80 year old man! (laughs)
Question: With your accompanying DVD, how did the directors and animators come together? Are they the same people from Here Come the 123s? How much creative control do you give the animators with your songs?
J. Flansburgh: We are the producers on all the animated material and we select the artists we collaborate with pretty carefully. We’ve been involved in a lot of television and video projects over the years and that was very good training for these projects. There is an expression in rock video production: “Good. Fast. Cheap. Choose two” It’s a very unreasonable thing to expect everything to come together on a tight budget. Our strategy is to give the animators a relatively long lead time so they can do something that will be a good portfolio piece for them and something cool for us. And although we’re on a tight budget, we can offer a large amount of artistic freedom, and that gives us the opportunity to work with the most creative people out there.
Question: For this tour, you’re doing both “kid” and “adult” shows, sometimes 2 in one day. How is it different when you perform in front of kids versus when you perform in front of adults?
J. Flansburgh: Whatever pretensions you might have about your performance get totally re-calibrated when you’re playing for kids–playing a kid show is probably a bit closer to being a school teacher than being a rock star. There are also a lot of parents in the audience and we address them as well which kind of breaks forth the wall of "kiddie-ness."
Just to address the questions we always get: “how is it different writing a song for kids or writing for adults?” or “performing for kids and performing for adults?” Well, there is a real overlap, but there are meaningful differences too. A good song works in a way that is kind of irreducible whether or not it’s for kids or adults. If a song has a strong melody or an interesting concept, it will animate any audience, but in performance, kids have a really short attention span, so keeping things moving is important. Routinely the confetti machine gets the biggest response of the day. That will keep your ego in check.
Although in the past, “Clap your Hands” and "Alphabet of Nations" worked for adults, by and large the kid stuff stayed in the kid show just because it’s, well, for kids! (laughs). But with "Here Comes Science" a lot of the songs work good in the adult show. and that’s unusual. “Meet the Elements,” “My Brother the Ape,” “A Shooting Star is not a Star,” and “Why Does the Sun Shine” slid into the adult show without any second thoughts, and “I Am a Paleontologist” is totally rocking live.
Question: What’s next for They Might Be Giants?
J. Flansburgh: We’re working on a rock album right now, but we have so much touring interrupting our effort it’s hard to know when it will get done, so the real answer is we’re going to be spending a lot of time on a tour bus trying to figure out how to get the WiFi working!
Our children’s book collaboration with Pascal Campion, Kids Go, just came out at the end of last year on Simon & Schuster. It’s actually a very beautiful project and a fulfillment of a dream of mine. When we were approached, I wanted to do an actual picture book, which very few people get to do, and it was exciting to realize that dream. A good picture book is something that really stays with you.
They Might Be Giants, kids show, Regent Theatre, Arlington MA, 23 May 2010
Image by Chris Devers
Via the Regent Theatre’s web site:
A Special Family Show with . . .
They Might Be Giants
Benefit Concerts for Boston By Foot
Sunday, May 23 at 12pm and 3pm
Both shows sold out – thank you!
They Might Be Giants will be performing two special shows especially for families. These are full band, full length performances. Both shows are to benefit Boston By Foot, the non-profit group giving guided walking tours of Boston for over 33 years. All concert goers can also use their ticket stub to get a free tour from Boston by Foot, including Boston by Little Feet tours for kids, during the upcoming season. All profits will go to BBF. http://www.bostonbyfoot.org/
They Might Be Giants Biography
HERE COMES SCIENCE!
For alternative rock legends They Might Be Giants, rave reviews from the likes of Time Magazine, Rolling Stone, The Village Voice, Pitchfork, NPR and beyond might not be that unexpected, but we’re not talking about their regular gig here. Sure, TMBG have sold millions of records, are multi-Grammy winners and have even composed a musical accompaniment for an entire issue of McSweeney’s, but these most recent accolades are for the work TMBG has created for children and–as the reviews attest–no other band swings as effortlessly from adult music to children’s fare and back again with the artistic and commercial success of They Might Be Giants.
John Flansburgh and John Linnell’s latest CD/DVD is Here Comes Science (Idlewild/Disney Sound). It’s an ultra-vivid crash course through topics that in lesser hands could easily put kids to sleep. With rock anthems and electronic goodies crafted to amuse, intrigue and deliver the 4-1-1 on evolution, solar system, photosynthesis, the scientific method and more. Following Here Comes the ABCs and Here Come the 123s, Science is geared for older kids and it introduces ideas in a way that not only inform but will stay in your head forever.
While it may seem like an odd move for a duo recognized as the progenitors of the American alternative rock movement, it really all makes perfect sense. From their earliest days with Dial-A-Song through their online music distribution, TMBG have always challenged rock’s status quo and gone out of their way to take their music to brand new audiences, and by the looks of things, they’re having a lot of fun doing it their way. The Giants use every bit of fan interactive technology by connecting with kids via regular podcasts and including a DVD of delightful animated interpretations of their songs with each Here Comes… album.
The band is constantly working on new music, new projects and touring–sometimes with 2 shows a day. Founders John Flansburgh and John Linnell, along with their long standing live combo of Dan Miller, Danny Weinkauf and Marty Beller, show no signs of swapping one successful gig (adult music) for another (children’s music). Rejoice people of Earth–there’s just that much more for us all to enjoy.
Question: You once said in an interview that TMBGs knew what you didn’t want to do with your music geared for kids: You didn’t want to tell them how to behave or write songs that are educational. But these songs are quite educational, and in fact, you have a science consultant on this record. Did you make a conscious decision to really teach something on Here Comes Science?
John Linnell: I think it’s still a record you can listen to for enjoyment, and that’s real important to us. I am perfectly comfortable with the idea of something that is pure entertainment, but I don’t think there is any need for something just purely educational from us. My sense of this record is that it is mostly fun, musical and interesting and it happens to have lyrics that talk about science.
Question: Did any Children’s books or albums make an impression on you when you were a child? Because now you’re making that impression on children.
John Flansburgh: We get that question a lot, and it’s a valid question, but speaking for myself, I feel like we have something to contribute to kid’s music because what we’re doing is actually lacking in the general culture. Generally, our stuff is not really coming out of any amazing experience with the kid’s stuff from the past. Our childhood was during the really golden era of classic pop and singles. Those songs weren’t really designed for kids, but the power of it spoke to us and a lot of other kids quite directly.
Curiously–although I see the obvious connections–we didn’t really grow up with all of the progressive kids stuff of the 70′s. We were that micro generation of glitter-rock young teens listening to Alice Cooper and David Bowie and we totally missed the boat on Sesame Street and School House Rock and Free To Be You and Me. But even being a bit too old for it, you could tell there was something cool about that stuff. Basically the cartoons of our generation were either super-violent, like Spiderman, or the really simple-minded Hanna-Barbera cartoons.
Question: Which one of you was the science student? Either or you? Neither of you?
J. Linnell: Specifically into science? I would say we were both middling students in school, but philosophically we are both, as adults, very pro-science. We like living in the post-enlightenment era in history. Are we still living in the enlightenment or is it over now, I can’t tell? Are we in the “en-darkenment” now?
J. Flansburgh: I think we’re actually in to the “gee whiz” part of science–all the scientific phenomenon that sparks your imagination. We certainly aren’t academics, but there is something remarkable about the world of science and there are ideas in science that just send your mind reeling.
J. Linnell: One the things that is exciting about it is that it makes you realize that things that are true, that can be proven, aren’t always intuitive. There is a difference between what seems to be the case and what turns out to be proven to be the case, and that’s really exciting. The world isn’t always what it seems to be and it makes everything more wonderful in a way. You have an experience of the world, walking around, and then science provides knowledge about the world that is not always anything like the experience.
The history of scientific discovery is partly revealing things that you don’t always experience directly, it’s bizarre in a way that so much of what we know is stuff we can’t always experience directly, like molecules and galaxies.
Question: Does that make it easier or harder to write about Science?
J. Linnell: Well, both. There is a point that you do reflect that you’re trying to explain something preposterous. And luckily, I think kids know the whole world is strange and preposterous, but as they get older, they get used to the idea that there are facts they just have to take someone’s word for.
Question: Considering you guys once used an answering machine to showcase your material, how amazed are you that you have all of this media at your disposal – podcasts, internet, video, etc…how has it changed the way you work?
J. Flansburgh: We enjoyed having an easy-breezy, loose reputation in terms of getting our music out to people. It was very great to be the one of the few acts in the United States who wasn’t preoccupied with getting on the radio or a cash return on our music. Of course now there is almost no end to the free stuff, and it is cool to see how much you can get in to the world, but with the most popular videos on YouTube being cats jumping into a box or people getting pushed down escalators, part of me worries that all this electronic media is just in the service of turning our culture into an endless episode of America’s Funniest Home Videos.
J. Linnell: A lot of what the technology suggests to people is the democratizing of culture and the notion of interactivity kind of caught fire online early on. What’s weird for John and I is that we were never interested in either one of those things. We actually like the idea of controlling what we are doing and we like the old fashioned idea of there being quality control on culture, that you would get the “good stuff” and there would be a way, through a critical apparatus or institutions, that would deliver the good stuff and filter out the bad stuff. It feels like the big problem nowadays is that everything should be available to everyone at all times and the result is a lot of garbage to wade through…not to sound like an 80 year old man! (laughs)
Question: With your accompanying DVD, how did the directors and animators come together? Are they the same people from Here Come the 123s? How much creative control do you give the animators with your songs?
J. Flansburgh: We are the producers on all the animated material and we select the artists we collaborate with pretty carefully. We’ve been involved in a lot of television and video projects over the years and that was very good training for these projects. There is an expression in rock video production: “Good. Fast. Cheap. Choose two” It’s a very unreasonable thing to expect everything to come together on a tight budget. Our strategy is to give the animators a relatively long lead time so they can do something that will be a good portfolio piece for them and something cool for us. And although we’re on a tight budget, we can offer a large amount of artistic freedom, and that gives us the opportunity to work with the most creative people out there.
Question: For this tour, you’re doing both “kid” and “adult” shows, sometimes 2 in one day. How is it different when you perform in front of kids versus when you perform in front of adults?
J. Flansburgh: Whatever pretensions you might have about your performance get totally re-calibrated when you’re playing for kids–playing a kid show is probably a bit closer to being a school teacher than being a rock star. There are also a lot of parents in the audience and we address them as well which kind of breaks forth the wall of "kiddie-ness."
Just to address the questions we always get: “how is it different writing a song for kids or writing for adults?” or “performing for kids and performing for adults?” Well, there is a real overlap, but there are meaningful differences too. A good song works in a way that is kind of irreducible whether or not it’s for kids or adults. If a song has a strong melody or an interesting concept, it will animate any audience, but in performance, kids have a really short attention span, so keeping things moving is important. Routinely the confetti machine gets the biggest response of the day. That will keep your ego in check.
Although in the past, “Clap your Hands” and "Alphabet of Nations" worked for adults, by and large the kid stuff stayed in the kid show just because it’s, well, for kids! (laughs). But with "Here Comes Science" a lot of the songs work good in the adult show. and that’s unusual. “Meet the Elements,” “My Brother the Ape,” “A Shooting Star is not a Star,” and “Why Does the Sun Shine” slid into the adult show without any second thoughts, and “I Am a Paleontologist” is totally rocking live.
Question: What’s next for They Might Be Giants?
J. Flansburgh: We’re working on a rock album right now, but we have so much touring interrupting our effort it’s hard to know when it will get done, so the real answer is we’re going to be spending a lot of time on a tour bus trying to figure out how to get the WiFi working!
Our children’s book collaboration with Pascal Campion, Kids Go, just came out at the end of last year on Simon & Schuster. It’s actually a very beautiful project and a fulfillment of a dream of mine. When we were approached, I wanted to do an actual picture book, which very few people get to do, and it was exciting to realize that dream. A good picture book is something that really stays with you.
Wednesday, 1 September, 2010 |
Wednesday, 1 September, 2010 |
Quite a number of complainants turn up every day at the All- Women Police Stations (AWPS) across Chennai and discover to their utter chagrin that the inspectors are not present there. This is the case in at least 22 of the 27 stations.
Read more on News Today
The role company doctors should play
It is evident that company doctors are often mistakenly perceived by companies and employees as policemen whose sole role is to check that those who report sick off work are actually at home and not malingering.
Read more on Times of Malta
Marine Week Boston, 2010: Bell-Boeing MV-22B Osprey rotors atop the starboard engine nacelle
A few nice anger management part images I found:
Marine Week Boston, 2010: Bell-Boeing MV-22B Osprey rotors atop the starboard engine nacelle
Image by Chris Devers
Pasted from Wikipedia: Bell-Boeing V-22 Osprey
• • • • •
The Bell-Boeing V-22 Osprey is a multi-mission, military, tiltrotor aircraft with both a vertical takeoff and landing (VTOL), and short takeoff and landing (STOL) capability. It is designed to combine the functionality of a conventional helicopter with the long-range, high-speed cruise performance of a turboprop aircraft.
The V-22 originated from the U.S. Department of Defense Joint-service Vertical take-off/landing Experimental (JVX) aircraft program started in 1981. It was developed jointly by the Bell Helicopter, and Boeing Helicopters team, known as Bell Boeing, which produce the aircraft.[4] The V-22 first flew in 1989, and began years of flight testing and design alterations.
The United States Marine Corps began crew training for the Osprey in 2000, and fielded it in 2007. The Osprey’s other operator, the U.S. Air Force fielded their version of the tiltrotor in 2009. Since entering service with the U.S. Marine Corps and Air Force, the Osprey has been deployed for combat operations in Iraq and Afghanistan.
Contents
• 1 Development
•• 1.1 Early development
•• 1.2 Flight testing and design changes
•• 1.3 Controversy
•• 1.4 Recent development
• 2 Design
• 3 Operational history
•• 3.1 US Marine Corps
•• 3.2 US Air Force
•• 3.3 Potential operators
• 4 Variants
• 5 Operators
• 6 Notable accidents
• 7 Specifications (MV-22B)
• 8 Notable appearances in media
• 9 See also
• 10 References
• 11 External links
Development
Early development
The failure of the Iran hostage rescue mission in 1980 demonstrated to the United States military a need[5] for "a new type of aircraft, that could not only take off and land vertically but also could carry combat troops, and do so at speed."[6] The U.S. Department of Defense began the Joint-service Vertical take-off/landing Experimental (JVX) aircraft program in 1981, under U.S. Army leadership. Later the U.S. Navy/Marine Corps took the lead.[7][8] The JVX combined requirements from the Marine Corps, Air Force, Army and Navy.[9][10] A request for proposals (RFP) was issued in December 1982 for JVX preliminary design work. Interest in the program was expressed by Aérospatiale, Bell Helicopter, Boeing Vertol, Grumman, Lockheed, and Westland. The DoD pushed for contractors to form teams. Bell partnered with Boeing Vertol. The Bell Boeing team submitted a proposal for a enlarged version of the Bell XV-15 prototype on 17 February 1983. This was the only proposal received and a preliminary design contract was awarded on 26 April 1983.[11][12]
The JVX aircraft was designated V-22 Osprey on 15 January 1985; by March that same year the first six prototypes were being produced, and Boeing Vertol was expanded to deal with the project workload.[13][14] Work has been split evenly between Bell and Boeing. Bell Helicopter manufactures and integrates the wing, nacelles, rotors, drive system, tail surfaces, and aft ramp, as well as integrates the Rolls-Royce engines and performs final assembly. Boeing Helicopters manufactures and integrates the fuselage, cockpit, avionics, and flight controls.[4][15] The USMC variant of the Osprey received the MV-22 designation and the Air Force variant received CV-22; reversed from normal procedure to prevent Marine Ospreys from having a conflicting designation with aircraft carriers (CV).[16] Full-scale development of the V-22 tilt-rotor aircraft began in 1986.[2] On 3 May 1986 the Bell-Boeing partnership was awarded a .714 billion contract for V-22 aircraft by the Navy, thus at this point the project had acquisition plans with all four arms of the U.S. military.[17]
The first V-22 was rolled out with significant media attention in May 1988.[18][19] However the project suffered several political blows. Firstly in the same year, the Army left the program, citing a need to focus its budget on more immediate aviation programs.[20] The project also faced considerable dialogue in the Senate, surviving two votes that both could have resulted in cancellation.[21][22] Despite the Senate’s decision, the Department of Defense instructed the Navy not to spend more money on the Osprey.[23] At the same time, the Bush administration sought the cancellation of the project.[23]
Flight testing and design changes
The first of six MV-22 prototypes first flew on 19 March 1989 in the helicopter mode,[24] and on 14 September 1989 as a fixed-wing plane.[25] The third and fourth prototypes successfully completed the Osprey’s first Sea Trials on the USS Wasp in December 1990.[26] However, the fourth and fifth prototypes crashed in 1991-92.[27] Flight tests were resumed in August 1993 after changes were incorporated in the prototypes.[2] From October 1992 until April 1993, Bell and Boeing redesigned the V-22 to reduce empty weight, simplify manufacture and reduce production costs. This redesigned version became the B-model.[28]
Flight testing of four full-scale development V-22s began in early 1997 when the first pre-production V-22 was delivered to the Naval Air Warfare Test Center, Naval Air Station Patuxent River, Maryland. The first EMD flight took place on 5 February 1997. The first of four low rate initial production aircraft, ordered on 28 April 1997, was delivered on 27 May 1999. Osprey number 10 completed the program’s second Sea Trials, this time from the USS Saipan in January 1999.[2] During external load testing in April 1999, Boeing used a V-22 to lift and transport the M777 howitzer.[29] In 2000, Boeing announced that the V-22 would be fitted with a nose-mounted GAU-19 Gatling gun,[30] but the GAU-19 gun was later canceled.[31]
In 2000, there were two further fatal crashes, killing a total of 19 Marines, and the production was again halted while the cause of these crashes was investigated and various parts were redesigned.[32] The V-22 completed its final operational evaluation in June 2005. The evaluation was deemed successful; events included long range deployments, high altitude, desert and shipboard operations. The problems identified in various accidents had been addressed.[33]
Controversy
The V-22′s development process has been long and controversial, partly due to its large cost increases.[34] When the development budget, first planned for .5 billion in 1986, increased to a projected billion in 1988, then-Defense Secretary Dick Cheney tried to zero out its funding. He was eventually overruled by Congress.[32] As of 2008, billion have been spent on the Osprey program and another .2 billion will be required to complete planned production numbers by the end of the program.[2]
The V-22 squadron’s former commander at Marine Corps Air Station New River, Lt. Colonel Odin Lieberman, was relieved of duty in 2001 after allegations that he instructed his unit that they needed to falsify maintenance records to make the plane appear more reliable.[2][35] Three officers were later implicated in the falsification scandal.[34]
The aircraft is incapable of autorotation, and is therefore unable to land safely in helicopter mode if both engines fail. A director of the Pentagon’s testing office in 2005 said that if the Osprey loses power while flying like a helicopter below 1,600 feet (490 m), emergency landings "are not likely to be survivable". But Captain Justin (Moon) McKinney, a V-22 pilot, says that this will not be a problem, "We can turn it into a plane and glide it down, just like a C-130".[31] A complete loss of power would require the failure of both engines, as a drive shaft connects the nacelles through the wing; one engine can power both proprotors.[36] While vortex ring state (VRS) contributed to a deadly V-22 accident, the aircraft is less susceptible to the condition than conventional helicopters and recovers more quickly.[5] The Marines now train new pilots in the recognition of and recovery from VRS and have instituted operational envelope limits and instrumentation to help pilots avoid VRS conditions.[32][37]
It was planned in 2000 to equip all V-22s with a nose-mounted Gatling gun, to provide "the V-22 with a strong defensive firepower capability to greatly increase the aircraft’s survivability in hostile actions."[30] The nose gun project was canceled however, leading to criticism by retired Marine Corps Commandant General James L. Jones, who is not satisfied with the current V-22 armament.[31] A belly-mounted turret was later installed on some of the first V-22s sent to the War in Afghanistan in 2009.[38]
With the first combat deployment of the MV-22 in October 2007, Time Magazine ran an article condemning the aircraft as unsafe, overpriced, and completely inadequate.[31] The Marine Corps, however, responded with the assertion that much of the article’s data were dated, obsolete, inaccurate, and reflected expectations that ran too high for any new field of aircraft.[39]
Recent development
On 28 September 2005, the Pentagon formally approved full-rate production for the V-22.[40] The plan is to boost production from 11 a year to between 24 and 48 a year by 2012. Of the 458 total planned, 360 are for the Marine Corps, 48 for the Navy, and 50 for the Air Force at an average cost of 0 million per aircraft, including development costs.[2] The V-22 had an incremental flyaway cost of million per aircraft in 2007,[3] but the Navy hopes to shave about million off that cost after a five-year production contract starts in 2008.[41]
The Bell-Boeing Joint Project Office in Amarillo, Texas will design a new integrated avionics processor to resolve electronics obsolescence issues and add new network capabilities.[42]
Design
The Osprey is the world’s first production tiltrotor aircraft, with one three-bladed proprotor, turboprop engine, and transmission nacelle mounted on each wingtip. It is classified as a powered lift aircraft by the Federal Aviation Administration.[43] For takeoff and landing, it typically operates as a helicopter with the nacelles vertical (rotors horizontal). Once airborne, the nacelles rotate forward 90° in as little as 12 seconds for horizontal flight, converting the V-22 to a more fuel-efficient, higher-speed turboprop airplane. STOL rolling-takeoff and landing capability is achieved by having the nacelles tilted forward up to 45°. For compact storage and transport, the V-22′s wing rotates to align, front-to-back, with the fuselage. The proprotors can also fold in a sequence taking 90 seconds.[44]
Most Osprey missions will use fixed wing flight 75 percent or more of the time, reducing wear and tear on the aircraft and reducing operational costs.[45] This fixed wing flight is higher than typical helicopter missions allowing longer range line-of-sight communications and so improved command and control.[2] Boeing has stated the V-22 design loses 10% of its vertical lift over a Tiltwing design when operating in helicopter mode because of airflow resistance due to the wings, but that the Tiltrotor design has better short takeoff and landing performance.[46]
The V-22 is equipped with a glass cockpit, which incorporates four Multi-function displays (MFDs) and one shared Central Display Unit (CDU), allowing the pilots to display a variety of images including: digimaps centered or decentered on current position, FLIR imagery, primary flight instruments, navigation (TACAN, VOR, ILS, GPS, INS), and system status. The flight director panel of the Cockpit Management System (CMS) allows for fully-coupled (aka: autopilot) functions which will take the aircraft from forward flight into a 50-foot hover with no pilot interaction other than programming the system.[47] The glass cockpit of the canceled CH-46X was derived from the V-22.[48]
The V-22 is a fly-by-wire aircraft with triple-redundant flight control systems.[49] With the nacelles pointing straight up in conversion mode at 90° the flight computers command the aircraft to fly like a helicopter, with cyclic forces being applied to a conventional swashplate at the rotor hub. With the nacelles in airplane mode (0°) the flaperons, rudder, and elevator fly the aircraft like an airplane. This is a gradual transition and occurs over the rotation range of the nacelles. The lower the nacelles, the greater effect of the airplane-mode control surfaces.[50] The nacelles can rotate past vertical to 97.5° for rearward flight.[51][52]
The Osprey can be armed with one M240 7.62x51mm NATO (.308 in caliber) or M2 .50 in caliber (12.7 mm) machine gun on the loading ramp, that can be fired rearward when the ramp is lowered. A GAU-19 three-barrel .50 in gatling gun mounted below the V-22′s nose has also been studied for future upgrade.[31][53] BAE Systems developed a remotely operated turreted weapons system for the V-22,[54] which was installed on half of the first V-22s deployed to Afghanistan in 2009.[38] The 7.62 mm belly gun turret is remotely operated by a gunner inside the aircraft, who acquires targets with a separate pod using color television and forward looking infrared imagery.
U.S. Naval Air Systems Command is working on upgrades to increase the maximum speed from 250 knots (460 km/h; 290 mph) to 270 knots (500 km/h; 310 mph), increase helicopter mode altitude limit from 10,000 feet (3,000 m) to 12,000 feet (3,700 m) or 14,000 feet (4,300 m), and increase lift performance.[55]
Operational history
US Marine Corps
Marine Corps crew training on the Osprey has been conducted by VMMT-204 since March 2000. On 3 June 2005, the Marine Corps helicopter squadron Marine Medium Helicopter 263 (HMM-263), stood down to begin the process of transitioning to the MV-22 Osprey.[56] On 8 December 2005, Lieutenant General Amos, commander of the II MEF, accepted the delivery of the first fleet of MV-22s, delivered to HMM-263. The unit reactivated on 3 March 2006 as the first MV-22 squadron and was redesignated VMM-263. On 31 August 2006, VMM-162 (the former HMM-162) followed suit. On 23 March 2007, HMM-266 became Marine Medium Tiltrotor Squadron 266 (VMM-266) at Marine Corps Air Station New River, North Carolina.[57]
The Osprey has been replacing existing CH-46 Sea Knight squadrons.[58] The MV-22 reached initial operational capability (IOC) with the U.S. Marine Corps on 13 June 2007.[1] On 10 July 2007 an MV-22 Osprey landed aboard the Royal Navy aircraft carrier, HMS Illustrious in the Atlantic Ocean. This marked the first time a V-22 had landed on any non-U.S. vessel.[59]
On 13 April 2007, the U.S. Marine Corps announced that it would be sending ten V-22 aircraft to Iraq, the Osprey’s first combat deployment. Marine Corps Commandant, General James Conway, indicated that over 150 Marines would accompany the Osprey set for September deployment to Al-Asad Airfield.[60][61] On 17 September 2007, ten MV-22Bs of VMM-263 left for Iraq aboard the USS Wasp. The decision to use a ship rather than use the Osprey’s self-deployment capability was made because of concerns over icing during the North Atlantic portion of the trip, lack of available KC-130s for mid-air refueling, and the availability of the USS Wasp.[62]
The Osprey has provided support in Iraq, racking up some 2,000 flight hours over three months with a mission capable availability rate of 68.1% as of late-January 2008.[63] They are primarily used in Iraq’s western Anbar province for routine cargo and troop movements, and also for riskier "aero-scout" missions. General David Petraeus, the top U.S. military commander in Iraq, used one to fly around Iraq on Christmas Day 2007 to visit troops.[64] Then-presidential candidate Barack Obama also flew in Ospreys during his high profile 2008 tour of Iraq.[65]
The only major problem has been obtaining the necessary spare parts to maintain the aircraft.[66] The V-22 had flown 3,000 sorties totaling 5,200 hours in Iraq as of July 2008.[67] USMC leadership expect to deploy MV-22s to Afghanistan in 2009.[66][68] General George J. Trautman, III praised the increased range of the V-22 over the legacy helicopters in Iraq and said that "it turned his battle space from the size of Texas into the size of Rhode Island."[69]
Naval Air Systems Command has devised a temporary fix for sailors to place portable heat shields under Osprey engines to prevent damage to the decks of some of the Navy’s smaller amphibious ships, but they determined that a long term solution to the problem would require these decks be redesigned with heat resistant deck coatings, passive thermal barriers and changes in ship structure in order to operate V-22s and F-35Bs.[70]
A Government Accountability Office study reported that by January 2009 the Marines had 12 MV-22s operating in Iraq and they managed to successfully complete all assigned missions. The same report found that the V-22 deployments had mission capable rates averaging 57% to 68% and an overall full mission capable rate of only 6%. It also stated that the aircraft had shown weakness in situational awareness, maintenance, shipboard operations and the ability to transport troops and external cargo.[71] That study also concluded that the "deployments confirmed that the V-22’s enhanced speed and range enable personnel and internal cargo to be transported faster and farther than is possible with the legacy helicopters it is replacing".[71]
The MV-22 saw its first offensive combat mission, Operation Cobra’s Anger on 4 December 2009. Ospreys assisted in inserting 1,000 Marines and 150 Afghan troops into the Now Zad Valley of Helmand Province in southern Afghanistan to disrupt communication and supply lines of the Taliban.[38] In January 2010 the MV-22 Osprey is being sent to Haiti as part of Operation Unified Response relief efforts after the earthquake there. This will be the first use the Marine V-22 in a humanitarian mission.[72]
US Air Force
The Air Force’s first operational CV-22 Osprey was delivered to the 58th Special Operations Wing (58th SOW) at Kirtland Air Force Base, New Mexico on 20 March 2006. This and subsequent aircraft will become part of the 58th SOW’s fleet of aircraft used for training pilots and crew members for special operations use.[73] On 16 November 2006, the Air Force officially accepted the CV-22 in a ceremony conducted at Hurlburt Field, Florida.[74]
The US Air Force’s first operational deployment of the Osprey sent four CV-22s to Mali in November 2008 in support of Exercise Flintlock. The CV-22s flew nonstop from Hurlburt Field, Florida with in-flight refueling.[5] AFSOC declared that the 8th Special Operations Squadron reached Initial Operational Capability on 16 March 2009, with six of its planned nine CV-22s operational.[75]
In June 2009, CV-22s of the 8th Special Operations Squadron delivered 43,000 pounds (20,000 kg) of humanitarian supplies to remote villages in Honduras that were not accessible by conventional vehicles.[76] In November 2009, the 8th SO Squadron and its six CV-22s returned from a three-month deployment in Iraq.[77]
The first possible combat loss of an Osprey occurred on 9 April, 2010, as a CV-22 went down near Qalat, Zabul Province, Afghanistan, killing four.[78][79]
Potential operators
In 1999 the V-22 was studied for use in the United Kingdom’s Royal Navy,[80] it has been raised several times as a candidate for the role of Maritime Airborne Surveillance and Control (MASC).[81]
Israel had shown interest in the purchase of MV-22s, but no order was placed.[82][83] Flightglobal reported in late 2009 that Israel has decided to wait for the CH-53K instead.[84]
The V-22 Osprey is a candidate for the Norwegian All Weather Search and Rescue Helicopter (NAWSARH) that is planned to replace the Westland Sea King Mk.43B of the Royal Norwegian Air Force in 2015.[85] The other candidates for the NAWSARH contract of 10-12 helicopters are AgustaWestland AW101 Merlin, Eurocopter EC225, NHIndustries NH90 and Sikorsky S-92.[86]
Bell Boeing has made an unsolicited offer of the V-22 for US Army medical evacuation needs.[87] However the Joint Personnel Recovery Agency issued a report that said that a common helicopter design would be needed for both combat recovery and medical evacuation and that the V-22 would not be suitable for recovery missions because of the difficulty of hoist operations and lack of self-defense capabilities.[88]
The US Navy remains a potential user of the V-22, but its role and mission with the Navy remains unclear. The latest proposal is to replace the C-2 Greyhound with the V-22 in the fleet logistics role. The V-22 would have the advantage of being able to land on and support non-carriers with rapid delivery of supplies and people between the ships of a taskforce or to ships on patrol beyond helicopter range.[89] Loren B. Thompson of the Lexington Institute has suggested V-22s for use in combat search and rescue and Marine One VIP transport, which also need replacement aircraft.[90]
Variants
• V-22A
•• Pre-production full-scale development aircraft used for flight testing. These are unofficially considered A-variants after 1993 redesign.[91]
• HV-22
•• The U.S. Navy considered an HV-22 to provide combat search and rescue, delivery and retrieval of special warfare teams along with fleet logistic support transport. However, it chose the MH-60S for this role in 1992.[92]
• SV-22
•• The proposed anti-submarine warfare Navy variant. The Navy studied the SV-22 in the 1980s to replace S-3 and SH-2 aircraft.[93]
• MV-22B
•• Basic U.S. Marine Corps transport; original requirement for 552 (now 360). The Marine Corps is the lead service in the development of the V-22 Osprey. The Marine Corps variant, the MV-22B, is an assault transport for troops, equipment and supplies, capable of operating from ships or from expeditionary airfields ashore. It is replacing the Marine Corps’ CH-46E[57] and CH-53D.[94]
• CV-22B
•• Air Force variant for the U.S. Special Operations Command (USSOCOM). It will conduct long-range, special operations missions, and is equipped with extra fuel tanks and terrain-following radar.[95][96]
Operators
•• 8th Special Operations Squadron (8 SOS) at Hurlburt Field, Florida
•• 71st Special Operations Squadron (71 SOS) at Kirtland Air Force Base, New Mexico
•• 20th Special Operations Squadron (20 SOS) at Cannon Air Force Base, New Mexico
•• VMM-161
•• VMM-162
•• VMM-261
•• VMM-263
•• VMM-264
•• VMM-266
•• VMM-365
•• VMMT-204 – Training squadron
•• VMX-22 – Marine Tiltrotor Operational Test and Evaluation Squadron
Notable accidents
Main article: Accidents and incidents involving the V-22 Osprey
From 1991 to 2000 there were four significant crashes, and a total of 30 fatalities, during testing.[32] Since becoming operational in 2007, the V-22 has had one possible combat loss due to an unknown cause, no losses due to accidents, and seven other notable, but minor, incidents.
• On 11 June 1991, a mis-wired flight control system led to two minor injuries when the left nacelle struck the ground while the aircraft was hovering 15 feet (4.6 m) in the air, causing it to bounce and catch fire.[97]
• On 20 July 1992, a leaking gearbox led to a fire in the right nacelle, causing the aircraft to drop into the Potomac River in front of an audience of Congressmen and other government officials at Quantico, killing all seven on board and grounding the aircraft for 11 months.[98]
• On 8 April 2000, a V-22 loaded with Marines to simulate a rescue, attempted to land at Marana Northwest Regional Airport in Arizona, stalled when its right rotor entered vortex ring state, rolled over, crashed, and exploded, killing all 19 on board.[37]
• On 11 December 2000, after a catastrophic hydraulic leak and subsequent software instrument failure, a V-22 fell 1,600 feet (490 m) into a forest in Jacksonville, North Carolina, killing all four aboard. This caused the Marine Corps to ground their fleet of eight V-22s, the second grounding that year.[99][100]
Specifications (MV-22B)
Data from Boeing Integrated Defense Systems,[101] Naval Air Systems Command,[102] US Air Force CV-22 fact sheet,[95] Norton,[103] and Bell[104]
General characteristics
• Crew: Four (pilot, copilot and two flight engineers)
• Capacity: 24 troops (seated), 32 troops (floor loaded) or up to 15,000 lb (6,800 kg) of cargo (dual hook)
• Length: 57 ft 4 in (17.5 m)
• Rotor diameter: 38 ft 0 in (11.6 m)
• Wingspan: 45 ft 10 in (14 m)
• Width with rotors: 84 ft 7 in (25.8 m)
• Height: 22 ft 1 in/6.73 m; overall with nacelles vertical (17 ft 11 in/5.5 m; at top of tailfins)
• Disc area: 2,268 ft² (212 m²)
• Wing area: 301.4 ft² (28 m²)
• Empty weight: 33,140 lb (15,032 kg)
• Loaded weight: 47,500 lb (21,500 kg)
• Max takeoff weight: 60,500 lb (27,400 kg)
• Powerplant: 2× Rolls-Royce Allison T406/AE 1107C-Liberty turboshafts, 6,150 hp (4,590 kW) each
Performance
• Maximum speed: 250 knots (460 km/h, 290 mph) at sea level / 305 kn (565 km/h; 351 mph) at 15,000 ft (4,600 m)[105]
• Cruise speed: 241 knots (277 mph, 446 km/h) at sea level
• Range: 879 nmi (1,011 mi, 1,627 km)
• Combat radius: 370 nmi (426 mi, 685 km)
• Ferry range: 1,940 nmi (with auxiliary internal fuel tanks)
• Service ceiling: 26,000 ft (7,925 m)
• Rate of climb: 2,320 ft/min (11.8 m/s)
• Disc loading: 20.9 lb/ft² at 47,500 lb GW (102.23 kg/m²)
• Power/mass: 0.259 hp/lb (427 W/kg)
Armament
• 1× M240 machine gun on ramp, optional
Notable appearances in media
Main article: Aircraft in fiction#V-22 Osprey
See also
• Elizabeth A. Okoreeh-Baah, USMC – first female to pilot a V-22 Osprey
Related development
• Bell XV-15[106]
• Bell/Agusta BA609
• Bell Boeing Quad TiltRotor
Comparable aircraft
Related lists
• List of military aircraft of the United States
• List of VTOL aircraft
References
Bibliography
• Markman, Steve and Bill Holder. "Bell/Boeing V-22 Osprey Tilt-Engine VTOL Transport (U.S.A.)". Straight Up: A History of Vertical Flight. Schiffer Publishing, 2000. ISBN 0-7643-1204-9.
• Norton, Bill. Bell Boeing V-22 Osprey, Tiltrotor Tactical Transport. Midland Publishing, 2004. ISBN 1-85780-165-2.
External links
Wikimedia Commons has media related to: V-22 Osprey
• Official Boeing V-22 site
• Official Bell V-22 site
• V-22 Osprey web, and www.history.navy.mil/planes/v-22.html
• CV-22 fact sheet on USAF site
• www.globalsecurity.org/military/systems/aircraft/v-22.htm
• www.airforce-technology.com/projects/osprey/
• Onward and Upward
• "Flight of the Osprey", US Navy video of V-22 operations
Marine Week Boston, 2010: Bell-Boeing MV-22B Osprey tilt-rotor aircraft kicking up a cloud of smoke from the engines before taking off from Boston Common
Image by Chris Devers
Pasted from Wikipedia: Bell-Boeing V-22 Osprey
• • • • •
The Bell-Boeing V-22 Osprey is a multi-mission, military, tiltrotor aircraft with both a vertical takeoff and landing (VTOL), and short takeoff and landing (STOL) capability. It is designed to combine the functionality of a conventional helicopter with the long-range, high-speed cruise performance of a turboprop aircraft.
The V-22 originated from the U.S. Department of Defense Joint-service Vertical take-off/landing Experimental (JVX) aircraft program started in 1981. It was developed jointly by the Bell Helicopter, and Boeing Helicopters team, known as Bell Boeing, which produce the aircraft.[4] The V-22 first flew in 1989, and began years of flight testing and design alterations.
The United States Marine Corps began crew training for the Osprey in 2000, and fielded it in 2007. The Osprey’s other operator, the U.S. Air Force fielded their version of the tiltrotor in 2009. Since entering service with the U.S. Marine Corps and Air Force, the Osprey has been deployed for combat operations in Iraq and Afghanistan.
Contents
• 1 Development
•• 1.1 Early development
•• 1.2 Flight testing and design changes
•• 1.3 Controversy
•• 1.4 Recent development
• 2 Design
• 3 Operational history
•• 3.1 US Marine Corps
•• 3.2 US Air Force
•• 3.3 Potential operators
• 4 Variants
• 5 Operators
• 6 Notable accidents
• 7 Specifications (MV-22B)
• 8 Notable appearances in media
• 9 See also
• 10 References
• 11 External links
Development
Early development
The failure of the Iran hostage rescue mission in 1980 demonstrated to the United States military a need[5] for "a new type of aircraft, that could not only take off and land vertically but also could carry combat troops, and do so at speed."[6] The U.S. Department of Defense began the Joint-service Vertical take-off/landing Experimental (JVX) aircraft program in 1981, under U.S. Army leadership. Later the U.S. Navy/Marine Corps took the lead.[7][8] The JVX combined requirements from the Marine Corps, Air Force, Army and Navy.[9][10] A request for proposals (RFP) was issued in December 1982 for JVX preliminary design work. Interest in the program was expressed by Aérospatiale, Bell Helicopter, Boeing Vertol, Grumman, Lockheed, and Westland. The DoD pushed for contractors to form teams. Bell partnered with Boeing Vertol. The Bell Boeing team submitted a proposal for a enlarged version of the Bell XV-15 prototype on 17 February 1983. This was the only proposal received and a preliminary design contract was awarded on 26 April 1983.[11][12]
The JVX aircraft was designated V-22 Osprey on 15 January 1985; by March that same year the first six prototypes were being produced, and Boeing Vertol was expanded to deal with the project workload.[13][14] Work has been split evenly between Bell and Boeing. Bell Helicopter manufactures and integrates the wing, nacelles, rotors, drive system, tail surfaces, and aft ramp, as well as integrates the Rolls-Royce engines and performs final assembly. Boeing Helicopters manufactures and integrates the fuselage, cockpit, avionics, and flight controls.[4][15] The USMC variant of the Osprey received the MV-22 designation and the Air Force variant received CV-22; reversed from normal procedure to prevent Marine Ospreys from having a conflicting designation with aircraft carriers (CV).[16] Full-scale development of the V-22 tilt-rotor aircraft began in 1986.[2] On 3 May 1986 the Bell-Boeing partnership was awarded a .714 billion contract for V-22 aircraft by the Navy, thus at this point the project had acquisition plans with all four arms of the U.S. military.[17]
The first V-22 was rolled out with significant media attention in May 1988.[18][19] However the project suffered several political blows. Firstly in the same year, the Army left the program, citing a need to focus its budget on more immediate aviation programs.[20] The project also faced considerable dialogue in the Senate, surviving two votes that both could have resulted in cancellation.[21][22] Despite the Senate’s decision, the Department of Defense instructed the Navy not to spend more money on the Osprey.[23] At the same time, the Bush administration sought the cancellation of the project.[23]
Flight testing and design changes
The first of six MV-22 prototypes first flew on 19 March 1989 in the helicopter mode,[24] and on 14 September 1989 as a fixed-wing plane.[25] The third and fourth prototypes successfully completed the Osprey’s first Sea Trials on the USS Wasp in December 1990.[26] However, the fourth and fifth prototypes crashed in 1991-92.[27] Flight tests were resumed in August 1993 after changes were incorporated in the prototypes.[2] From October 1992 until April 1993, Bell and Boeing redesigned the V-22 to reduce empty weight, simplify manufacture and reduce production costs. This redesigned version became the B-model.[28]
Flight testing of four full-scale development V-22s began in early 1997 when the first pre-production V-22 was delivered to the Naval Air Warfare Test Center, Naval Air Station Patuxent River, Maryland. The first EMD flight took place on 5 February 1997. The first of four low rate initial production aircraft, ordered on 28 April 1997, was delivered on 27 May 1999. Osprey number 10 completed the program’s second Sea Trials, this time from the USS Saipan in January 1999.[2] During external load testing in April 1999, Boeing used a V-22 to lift and transport the M777 howitzer.[29] In 2000, Boeing announced that the V-22 would be fitted with a nose-mounted GAU-19 Gatling gun,[30] but the GAU-19 gun was later canceled.[31]
In 2000, there were two further fatal crashes, killing a total of 19 Marines, and the production was again halted while the cause of these crashes was investigated and various parts were redesigned.[32] The V-22 completed its final operational evaluation in June 2005. The evaluation was deemed successful; events included long range deployments, high altitude, desert and shipboard operations. The problems identified in various accidents had been addressed.[33]
Controversy
The V-22′s development process has been long and controversial, partly due to its large cost increases.[34] When the development budget, first planned for .5 billion in 1986, increased to a projected billion in 1988, then-Defense Secretary Dick Cheney tried to zero out its funding. He was eventually overruled by Congress.[32] As of 2008, billion have been spent on the Osprey program and another .2 billion will be required to complete planned production numbers by the end of the program.[2]
The V-22 squadron’s former commander at Marine Corps Air Station New River, Lt. Colonel Odin Lieberman, was relieved of duty in 2001 after allegations that he instructed his unit that they needed to falsify maintenance records to make the plane appear more reliable.[2][35] Three officers were later implicated in the falsification scandal.[34]
The aircraft is incapable of autorotation, and is therefore unable to land safely in helicopter mode if both engines fail. A director of the Pentagon’s testing office in 2005 said that if the Osprey loses power while flying like a helicopter below 1,600 feet (490 m), emergency landings "are not likely to be survivable". But Captain Justin (Moon) McKinney, a V-22 pilot, says that this will not be a problem, "We can turn it into a plane and glide it down, just like a C-130".[31] A complete loss of power would require the failure of both engines, as a drive shaft connects the nacelles through the wing; one engine can power both proprotors.[36] While vortex ring state (VRS) contributed to a deadly V-22 accident, the aircraft is less susceptible to the condition than conventional helicopters and recovers more quickly.[5] The Marines now train new pilots in the recognition of and recovery from VRS and have instituted operational envelope limits and instrumentation to help pilots avoid VRS conditions.[32][37]
It was planned in 2000 to equip all V-22s with a nose-mounted Gatling gun, to provide "the V-22 with a strong defensive firepower capability to greatly increase the aircraft’s survivability in hostile actions."[30] The nose gun project was canceled however, leading to criticism by retired Marine Corps Commandant General James L. Jones, who is not satisfied with the current V-22 armament.[31] A belly-mounted turret was later installed on some of the first V-22s sent to the War in Afghanistan in 2009.[38]
With the first combat deployment of the MV-22 in October 2007, Time Magazine ran an article condemning the aircraft as unsafe, overpriced, and completely inadequate.[31] The Marine Corps, however, responded with the assertion that much of the article’s data were dated, obsolete, inaccurate, and reflected expectations that ran too high for any new field of aircraft.[39]
Recent development
On 28 September 2005, the Pentagon formally approved full-rate production for the V-22.[40] The plan is to boost production from 11 a year to between 24 and 48 a year by 2012. Of the 458 total planned, 360 are for the Marine Corps, 48 for the Navy, and 50 for the Air Force at an average cost of 0 million per aircraft, including development costs.[2] The V-22 had an incremental flyaway cost of million per aircraft in 2007,[3] but the Navy hopes to shave about million off that cost after a five-year production contract starts in 2008.[41]
The Bell-Boeing Joint Project Office in Amarillo, Texas will design a new integrated avionics processor to resolve electronics obsolescence issues and add new network capabilities.[42]
Design
The Osprey is the world’s first production tiltrotor aircraft, with one three-bladed proprotor, turboprop engine, and transmission nacelle mounted on each wingtip. It is classified as a powered lift aircraft by the Federal Aviation Administration.[43] For takeoff and landing, it typically operates as a helicopter with the nacelles vertical (rotors horizontal). Once airborne, the nacelles rotate forward 90° in as little as 12 seconds for horizontal flight, converting the V-22 to a more fuel-efficient, higher-speed turboprop airplane. STOL rolling-takeoff and landing capability is achieved by having the nacelles tilted forward up to 45°. For compact storage and transport, the V-22′s wing rotates to align, front-to-back, with the fuselage. The proprotors can also fold in a sequence taking 90 seconds.[44]
Most Osprey missions will use fixed wing flight 75 percent or more of the time, reducing wear and tear on the aircraft and reducing operational costs.[45] This fixed wing flight is higher than typical helicopter missions allowing longer range line-of-sight communications and so improved command and control.[2] Boeing has stated the V-22 design loses 10% of its vertical lift over a Tiltwing design when operating in helicopter mode because of airflow resistance due to the wings, but that the Tiltrotor design has better short takeoff and landing performance.[46]
The V-22 is equipped with a glass cockpit, which incorporates four Multi-function displays (MFDs) and one shared Central Display Unit (CDU), allowing the pilots to display a variety of images including: digimaps centered or decentered on current position, FLIR imagery, primary flight instruments, navigation (TACAN, VOR, ILS, GPS, INS), and system status. The flight director panel of the Cockpit Management System (CMS) allows for fully-coupled (aka: autopilot) functions which will take the aircraft from forward flight into a 50-foot hover with no pilot interaction other than programming the system.[47] The glass cockpit of the canceled CH-46X was derived from the V-22.[48]
The V-22 is a fly-by-wire aircraft with triple-redundant flight control systems.[49] With the nacelles pointing straight up in conversion mode at 90° the flight computers command the aircraft to fly like a helicopter, with cyclic forces being applied to a conventional swashplate at the rotor hub. With the nacelles in airplane mode (0°) the flaperons, rudder, and elevator fly the aircraft like an airplane. This is a gradual transition and occurs over the rotation range of the nacelles. The lower the nacelles, the greater effect of the airplane-mode control surfaces.[50] The nacelles can rotate past vertical to 97.5° for rearward flight.[51][52]
The Osprey can be armed with one M240 7.62x51mm NATO (.308 in caliber) or M2 .50 in caliber (12.7 mm) machine gun on the loading ramp, that can be fired rearward when the ramp is lowered. A GAU-19 three-barrel .50 in gatling gun mounted below the V-22′s nose has also been studied for future upgrade.[31][53] BAE Systems developed a remotely operated turreted weapons system for the V-22,[54] which was installed on half of the first V-22s deployed to Afghanistan in 2009.[38] The 7.62 mm belly gun turret is remotely operated by a gunner inside the aircraft, who acquires targets with a separate pod using color television and forward looking infrared imagery.
U.S. Naval Air Systems Command is working on upgrades to increase the maximum speed from 250 knots (460 km/h; 290 mph) to 270 knots (500 km/h; 310 mph), increase helicopter mode altitude limit from 10,000 feet (3,000 m) to 12,000 feet (3,700 m) or 14,000 feet (4,300 m), and increase lift performance.[55]
Operational history
US Marine Corps
Marine Corps crew training on the Osprey has been conducted by VMMT-204 since March 2000. On 3 June 2005, the Marine Corps helicopter squadron Marine Medium Helicopter 263 (HMM-263), stood down to begin the process of transitioning to the MV-22 Osprey.[56] On 8 December 2005, Lieutenant General Amos, commander of the II MEF, accepted the delivery of the first fleet of MV-22s, delivered to HMM-263. The unit reactivated on 3 March 2006 as the first MV-22 squadron and was redesignated VMM-263. On 31 August 2006, VMM-162 (the former HMM-162) followed suit. On 23 March 2007, HMM-266 became Marine Medium Tiltrotor Squadron 266 (VMM-266) at Marine Corps Air Station New River, North Carolina.[57]
The Osprey has been replacing existing CH-46 Sea Knight squadrons.[58] The MV-22 reached initial operational capability (IOC) with the U.S. Marine Corps on 13 June 2007.[1] On 10 July 2007 an MV-22 Osprey landed aboard the Royal Navy aircraft carrier, HMS Illustrious in the Atlantic Ocean. This marked the first time a V-22 had landed on any non-U.S. vessel.[59]
On 13 April 2007, the U.S. Marine Corps announced that it would be sending ten V-22 aircraft to Iraq, the Osprey’s first combat deployment. Marine Corps Commandant, General James Conway, indicated that over 150 Marines would accompany the Osprey set for September deployment to Al-Asad Airfield.[60][61] On 17 September 2007, ten MV-22Bs of VMM-263 left for Iraq aboard the USS Wasp. The decision to use a ship rather than use the Osprey’s self-deployment capability was made because of concerns over icing during the North Atlantic portion of the trip, lack of available KC-130s for mid-air refueling, and the availability of the USS Wasp.[62]
The Osprey has provided support in Iraq, racking up some 2,000 flight hours over three months with a mission capable availability rate of 68.1% as of late-January 2008.[63] They are primarily used in Iraq’s western Anbar province for routine cargo and troop movements, and also for riskier "aero-scout" missions. General David Petraeus, the top U.S. military commander in Iraq, used one to fly around Iraq on Christmas Day 2007 to visit troops.[64] Then-presidential candidate Barack Obama also flew in Ospreys during his high profile 2008 tour of Iraq.[65]
The only major problem has been obtaining the necessary spare parts to maintain the aircraft.[66] The V-22 had flown 3,000 sorties totaling 5,200 hours in Iraq as of July 2008.[67] USMC leadership expect to deploy MV-22s to Afghanistan in 2009.[66][68] General George J. Trautman, III praised the increased range of the V-22 over the legacy helicopters in Iraq and said that "it turned his battle space from the size of Texas into the size of Rhode Island."[69]
Naval Air Systems Command has devised a temporary fix for sailors to place portable heat shields under Osprey engines to prevent damage to the decks of some of the Navy’s smaller amphibious ships, but they determined that a long term solution to the problem would require these decks be redesigned with heat resistant deck coatings, passive thermal barriers and changes in ship structure in order to operate V-22s and F-35Bs.[70]
A Government Accountability Office study reported that by January 2009 the Marines had 12 MV-22s operating in Iraq and they managed to successfully complete all assigned missions. The same report found that the V-22 deployments had mission capable rates averaging 57% to 68% and an overall full mission capable rate of only 6%. It also stated that the aircraft had shown weakness in situational awareness, maintenance, shipboard operations and the ability to transport troops and external cargo.[71] That study also concluded that the "deployments confirmed that the V-22’s enhanced speed and range enable personnel and internal cargo to be transported faster and farther than is possible with the legacy helicopters it is replacing".[71]
The MV-22 saw its first offensive combat mission, Operation Cobra’s Anger on 4 December 2009. Ospreys assisted in inserting 1,000 Marines and 150 Afghan troops into the Now Zad Valley of Helmand Province in southern Afghanistan to disrupt communication and supply lines of the Taliban.[38] In January 2010 the MV-22 Osprey is being sent to Haiti as part of Operation Unified Response relief efforts after the earthquake there. This will be the first use the Marine V-22 in a humanitarian mission.[72]
US Air Force
The Air Force’s first operational CV-22 Osprey was delivered to the 58th Special Operations Wing (58th SOW) at Kirtland Air Force Base, New Mexico on 20 March 2006. This and subsequent aircraft will become part of the 58th SOW’s fleet of aircraft used for training pilots and crew members for special operations use.[73] On 16 November 2006, the Air Force officially accepted the CV-22 in a ceremony conducted at Hurlburt Field, Florida.[74]
The US Air Force’s first operational deployment of the Osprey sent four CV-22s to Mali in November 2008 in support of Exercise Flintlock. The CV-22s flew nonstop from Hurlburt Field, Florida with in-flight refueling.[5] AFSOC declared that the 8th Special Operations Squadron reached Initial Operational Capability on 16 March 2009, with six of its planned nine CV-22s operational.[75]
In June 2009, CV-22s of the 8th Special Operations Squadron delivered 43,000 pounds (20,000 kg) of humanitarian supplies to remote villages in Honduras that were not accessible by conventional vehicles.[76] In November 2009, the 8th SO Squadron and its six CV-22s returned from a three-month deployment in Iraq.[77]
The first possible combat loss of an Osprey occurred on 9 April, 2010, as a CV-22 went down near Qalat, Zabul Province, Afghanistan, killing four.[78][79]
Potential operators
In 1999 the V-22 was studied for use in the United Kingdom’s Royal Navy,[80] it has been raised several times as a candidate for the role of Maritime Airborne Surveillance and Control (MASC).[81]
Israel had shown interest in the purchase of MV-22s, but no order was placed.[82][83] Flightglobal reported in late 2009 that Israel has decided to wait for the CH-53K instead.[84]
The V-22 Osprey is a candidate for the Norwegian All Weather Search and Rescue Helicopter (NAWSARH) that is planned to replace the Westland Sea King Mk.43B of the Royal Norwegian Air Force in 2015.[85] The other candidates for the NAWSARH contract of 10-12 helicopters are AgustaWestland AW101 Merlin, Eurocopter EC225, NHIndustries NH90 and Sikorsky S-92.[86]
Bell Boeing has made an unsolicited offer of the V-22 for US Army medical evacuation needs.[87] However the Joint Personnel Recovery Agency issued a report that said that a common helicopter design would be needed for both combat recovery and medical evacuation and that the V-22 would not be suitable for recovery missions because of the difficulty of hoist operations and lack of self-defense capabilities.[88]
The US Navy remains a potential user of the V-22, but its role and mission with the Navy remains unclear. The latest proposal is to replace the C-2 Greyhound with the V-22 in the fleet logistics role. The V-22 would have the advantage of being able to land on and support non-carriers with rapid delivery of supplies and people between the ships of a taskforce or to ships on patrol beyond helicopter range.[89] Loren B. Thompson of the Lexington Institute has suggested V-22s for use in combat search and rescue and Marine One VIP transport, which also need replacement aircraft.[90]
Variants
• V-22A
•• Pre-production full-scale development aircraft used for flight testing. These are unofficially considered A-variants after 1993 redesign.[91]
• HV-22
•• The U.S. Navy considered an HV-22 to provide combat search and rescue, delivery and retrieval of special warfare teams along with fleet logistic support transport. However, it chose the MH-60S for this role in 1992.[92]
• SV-22
•• The proposed anti-submarine warfare Navy variant. The Navy studied the SV-22 in the 1980s to replace S-3 and SH-2 aircraft.[93]
• MV-22B
•• Basic U.S. Marine Corps transport; original requirement for 552 (now 360). The Marine Corps is the lead service in the development of the V-22 Osprey. The Marine Corps variant, the MV-22B, is an assault transport for troops, equipment and supplies, capable of operating from ships or from expeditionary airfields ashore. It is replacing the Marine Corps’ CH-46E[57] and CH-53D.[94]
• CV-22B
•• Air Force variant for the U.S. Special Operations Command (USSOCOM). It will conduct long-range, special operations missions, and is equipped with extra fuel tanks and terrain-following radar.[95][96]
Operators
•• 8th Special Operations Squadron (8 SOS) at Hurlburt Field, Florida
•• 71st Special Operations Squadron (71 SOS) at Kirtland Air Force Base, New Mexico
•• 20th Special Operations Squadron (20 SOS) at Cannon Air Force Base, New Mexico
•• VMM-161
•• VMM-162
•• VMM-261
•• VMM-263
•• VMM-264
•• VMM-266
•• VMM-365
•• VMMT-204 – Training squadron
•• VMX-22 – Marine Tiltrotor Operational Test and Evaluation Squadron
Notable accidents
Main article: Accidents and incidents involving the V-22 Osprey
From 1991 to 2000 there were four significant crashes, and a total of 30 fatalities, during testing.[32] Since becoming operational in 2007, the V-22 has had one possible combat loss due to an unknown cause, no losses due to accidents, and seven other notable, but minor, incidents.
• On 11 June 1991, a mis-wired flight control system led to two minor injuries when the left nacelle struck the ground while the aircraft was hovering 15 feet (4.6 m) in the air, causing it to bounce and catch fire.[97]
• On 20 July 1992, a leaking gearbox led to a fire in the right nacelle, causing the aircraft to drop into the Potomac River in front of an audience of Congressmen and other government officials at Quantico, killing all seven on board and grounding the aircraft for 11 months.[98]
• On 8 April 2000, a V-22 loaded with Marines to simulate a rescue, attempted to land at Marana Northwest Regional Airport in Arizona, stalled when its right rotor entered vortex ring state, rolled over, crashed, and exploded, killing all 19 on board.[37]
• On 11 December 2000, after a catastrophic hydraulic leak and subsequent software instrument failure, a V-22 fell 1,600 feet (490 m) into a forest in Jacksonville, North Carolina, killing all four aboard. This caused the Marine Corps to ground their fleet of eight V-22s, the second grounding that year.[99][100]
Specifications (MV-22B)
Data from Boeing Integrated Defense Systems,[101] Naval Air Systems Command,[102] US Air Force CV-22 fact sheet,[95] Norton,[103] and Bell[104]
General characteristics
• Crew: Four (pilot, copilot and two flight engineers)
• Capacity: 24 troops (seated), 32 troops (floor loaded) or up to 15,000 lb (6,800 kg) of cargo (dual hook)
• Length: 57 ft 4 in (17.5 m)
• Rotor diameter: 38 ft 0 in (11.6 m)
• Wingspan: 45 ft 10 in (14 m)
• Width with rotors: 84 ft 7 in (25.8 m)
• Height: 22 ft 1 in/6.73 m; overall with nacelles vertical (17 ft 11 in/5.5 m; at top of tailfins)
• Disc area: 2,268 ft² (212 m²)
• Wing area: 301.4 ft² (28 m²)
• Empty weight: 33,140 lb (15,032 kg)
• Loaded weight: 47,500 lb (21,500 kg)
• Max takeoff weight: 60,500 lb (27,400 kg)
• Powerplant: 2× Rolls-Royce Allison T406/AE 1107C-Liberty turboshafts, 6,150 hp (4,590 kW) each
Performance
• Maximum speed: 250 knots (460 km/h, 290 mph) at sea level / 305 kn (565 km/h; 351 mph) at 15,000 ft (4,600 m)[105]
• Cruise speed: 241 knots (277 mph, 446 km/h) at sea level
• Range: 879 nmi (1,011 mi, 1,627 km)
• Combat radius: 370 nmi (426 mi, 685 km)
• Ferry range: 1,940 nmi (with auxiliary internal fuel tanks)
• Service ceiling: 26,000 ft (7,925 m)
• Rate of climb: 2,320 ft/min (11.8 m/s)
• Disc loading: 20.9 lb/ft² at 47,500 lb GW (102.23 kg/m²)
• Power/mass: 0.259 hp/lb (427 W/kg)
Armament
• 1× M240 machine gun on ramp, optional
Notable appearances in media
Main article: Aircraft in fiction#V-22 Osprey
See also
• Elizabeth A. Okoreeh-Baah, USMC – first female to pilot a V-22 Osprey
Related development
• Bell XV-15[106]
• Bell/Agusta BA609
• Bell Boeing Quad TiltRotor
Comparable aircraft
Related lists
• List of military aircraft of the United States
• List of VTOL aircraft
References
Bibliography
• Markman, Steve and Bill Holder. "Bell/Boeing V-22 Osprey Tilt-Engine VTOL Transport (U.S.A.)". Straight Up: A History of Vertical Flight. Schiffer Publishing, 2000. ISBN 0-7643-1204-9.
• Norton, Bill. Bell Boeing V-22 Osprey, Tiltrotor Tactical Transport. Midland Publishing, 2004. ISBN 1-85780-165-2.
External links
Wikimedia Commons has media related to: V-22 Osprey
• Official Boeing V-22 site
• Official Bell V-22 site
• V-22 Osprey web, and www.history.navy.mil/planes/v-22.html
• CV-22 fact sheet on USAF site
• www.globalsecurity.org/military/systems/aircraft/v-22.htm
• www.airforce-technology.com/projects/osprey/
• Onward and Upward
• "Flight of the Osprey", US Navy video of V-22 operations
2009MAY191108
Image by bootload
Black Saturday +day104
The first 100 days
It’s been over 100 days since Black Saturday.
The Official Inquiries are now starting. People are looking for answers. It’s meant to be winter and the rains are failing again. I read an article on the ABC on failure of radio systems and couldn’t help think we are missing the point. This is a complex problem. It’s not going to go away soon. It can’t be fixed with simple solutions.
So I tried to convey this in the article to a local in St. Andrews but time and a crashing system conspired against me. People are now looking for quick answers that might have averted loss of life. The core of the answer lies at how we manage and relate to the land. A good starting point to read "Radio systems failed on Black Saturday" then proceed to The Aftermath written by scientist Dr. Kevin Tolhurst a Fire ecologist at Melbourne University.
The following is a response to a comment by JC in the article, "Radio systems failed on Black Saturday" from St. Andrews.
Radio systems failed on Black Saturday
"… As a resident of St Andrews, an area hit but seldon mentioned in the wider media, this is but only one of many major failures that are coming to light …"
I’ll agree with the number of mentions of St.Andrews in the media. I’ve been monitoring the news since Black Saturday and I can count the articles on one hand:
"It was a hell": journalist Hughes tells of miraculous escape
- www.flickr.com/photos/bootload/3268049625
"How we cheated flames of death", Gary Hughes, The Australian, eyewitness from St. Andrews.
- www.flickr.com/photos/bootload/3267819103/
"Dodging a bullet: comedian’s story of Black Saturday"
- www.flickr.com/photos/bootload/3349583381/
"Bushfire victim appeals for return of stolen goods"
(ABC News, unattributed)
- www.flickr.com/photos/bootload/3524967634/
This is not surprising though. The fire swept through the entire range starting west up through Humevale to Kinglake West where my Dad survived through Pheasant Creek, Middle Kinglake at the same time hitting Strathewen, St Andrews and Kinglake.
I knew my mates in Strathewen had copped it simply by the lack of coverage. [0] There was simply nobody to talk to. Those that did either had no means or desire to tell their story. The ABC does better. You can find the references to St. Andrews at www.abc.net.au/news/tag/st-andrews-3761/
"… How are those implementing their "Stay and Defend Policy" with inadequate CFA and Radio warnings supposed to implement fully, and how are the emergency services to do their job to the full if their communications equipt dont talk to each other? Listening to the revelations during the web stream of the hearings to date has been shattering. Losing very close friends and colleagues hits hard enough without the additional anger that is now being created around basic level failures. Utterly shameful. …"
The last major fire to go through the St.Andrews area to memory, was the ’62 fires. Far from the memory of most except the oldest of locals. This fire also took houses.[1] [2]
What have we learnt since?
We can have the best technical kit, the best trained CFA members but this will avoid the loss of life we experienced on Black Saturday. What is needed is a total rethink on the way we manage the land. The theoretical framework is there. Kevin Tolhurst, a Fire ecologist based at University of Melbourne, Creswick Campus wrote about the aftermath of the 1939 fires [3] nailed the kind of change in land management that is required. He wrote:
"… Melbourne has two major problems. One is the urban interface, and the other is the water catchment. Melbourne has a significant rural-urban interface, where we see places like Kinglake, St Andrews, the Dandenongs, Pakenham. People like the natural environment, so they want to live close to it, but they are living an urban existence. They are not dependent on that bush, and they don’t fully understand it. I think in ’39 the people living and working in the bush knew much more about their environment and what they were dealing with. Okay, they didn’t have scale and they didn’t have communication, but at least they understood the bush. We really need to do to understand the bush. Appreciating it is not enough. The worst case scenario for these people is loss of property and loss of life. …" [4]
I reflected on this theme back in 2007. On Feburary 16th the 24th anniversary that marked the passing of a school mate and some people I knew in the Panton Hill CFA during Ash Wednesday. [5] This is part of what I wrote:
"… Bush fires are part of life here, a constant threat. If you live around the area long enough there is no way you escape it. I grew up with them as a 4 year old, drawing black pictures in kinder for months after (so my mum tells me). So in the summer it never really leaves your mind, will a fire start this year? …"
What will be "Utterly shameful" is if the same mistakes are repeated again.
Reference
[0] The lack of news reporting of Strathewen can be seen here ~ www.flickr.com/photos/bootload/tags/strathewen
[1] DSE, Fire and other Emergencies, "Major Bushfires in Victoria",
[Accessed Tuesday May 19, 2009]
www.dse.vic.gov.au/DSE/nrenfoe.nsf/LinkView/E20ACF3A4A127…
[2] I’m not sure about lives. It was reported 32 people lost their lives in the "Dandenongs, The Basin, Christmas Hills, Kinglake, St Andrews, Hurstbridge, Warrandyte and Mitcham".
[3] "ABC", "Black Friday, 1939: The Aftermath Kevin Tolhurst, Fire ecologist based at University of Melbourne, Creswick Campus"
www.flickr.com/photos/bootload/3524967622
[4] ABC, "The Aftermath: The Scientists, Dr. Kevin Tolhurst"
[Accessed Tuesday May 19, 2009]
www.abc.net.au/blackfriday/aftermath/ktolhurst.htm
[5] "2007FEB161323", "The flag flies half mast today, the 24th Anniversary of their passing away on Ash Wednesday, 16th February, 1983 in the hills not far from where I now live."
www.flickr.com/photos/bootload/391658960
next >>>
WBI’s David Yamada on MSNBC, July 23, 2010
David Yamada interviews MSNBC host Contessa Brewer about New York State’s efforts to pass the Healthy Workplace Bill into law
Video Rating: 5 / 5
Dr. Gary Namie, Director of the Workplace Bullying Institute, is interviewed on CNN American Morning. Aired 7/12/2004. Be sure to check out our website: workplacebullying.org The Workplace Bullying Institute provides Help for individuals, research, public education, consulting for employers, and legislative advocacy.
Video Rating: 5 / 5
23rd European College of Neuropsychopharmacology Congress to be held 28 Aug – 1 Sep 2010 in Amsterdam
23rd European College of Neuropsychopharmacology Congress to be held 28 Aug – 1 Sep 2010 in Amsterdam
Mental disorders, such as depression, anxiety disorders, addiction and schizophrenia are the core challenge of most health care systems around the world. In the EU alone, each year 27% of the total adult population – this corresponds to 83 Million citizens – suffer from mental disorders. Depression alone affects almost 20 million ranking in the EU as the most disabling disorder of all diseases.
Read more on News-Medical-Net
Getting brighter
Sue Ferus-Mancuso of Shelby Township wanted to do something in memory of her son, and to help bipolar disorder research.
Read more on Macomb Daily