As I said earlier, the Blackhawk is "tried and true" airframe design. There is a lot less to go wrong (if that is possible with a helicopter) in the Blackhawk's design. It really is too early to tell what the Osprey's future and real capabilities are. For us military types...remember the York fighting vehicle and the M113 armored transport.

The M247 Sergeant York DIVAD (Division Air Defense) was a self-propelled anti-aircraft weapon intended to replace the M163 Vulcan Air Defense System and provide air defense capabilities on the field alongside the M1 Abrams and M2 Bradley fighting vehicles. While roughly patterned after an existing Soviet system, multiple system and design flaws and technology issues prevented the vehicle from ever being more than a prototype.

The M113, first introduced in 1960, fielded in 1962 in Vietnam. The vehicle named the Gavin Armored Personnel Carrier was originally developed and manufactured by FMC of San Jose, California to fulfill the requirement to be an "Airborne Armored Multi-Purpose Vehicle Family" (AAM-PVF) of all-purpose, all-terrain armored fighting vehicles as outlined by General James M. Gavin who was the Army's Chief of Research & Development in the late '50s.

Yet it remains in front-line service and production in the 21st century, and the M113 was recently declared the best in a television comparison of "top 10" armored personnel carriers and infantry fighting vehicles. Approximately 80,000 units of all types have been produced worldwide making it the most widely used armored fighting vehicle of all time.

It is possible that the Osprey will shake loose of its early stigma of failures and weaknesses and become a well recognized part of the military hardware in the world.

__________________