It is the third crash since 1991 for the Osprey, a high-tech, high-priced hybrid that has been bitterly controversial since the day it was announced some 18 years ago. Twenty-six people have died and two have been injured in the plane’s three crashes, even though the Osprey, a joint project by Boeing Aircraft and Bell Helicopter, still hasn’t gone into full production. The plane was criticized in two separate reports by the General Accounting Office, which said as recently as 1998 that the design “has not been stabilized.” Various Pentagon officials have attempted to kill off or scale down the project, most recently in 1997.
The Osprey has survived partly because the Marines say they need it: they say the craft is vital to their future efforts to move troops quickly, among other things. The Osprey also has widespread support on Capitol Hill, thanks to the manufacturers’ skill at doling out contracts to numerous congressional districts. The Marine Corps says the Osprey will cost about $41 million a copy, although congressional critics say its true cost is at least double that figure. Current plans call for delivery of 458 aircraft to the Marines and the U.S. Air Force at a total cost of $38.1 billion.
It’s unlikely that the crash will derail the program, say Hill aides and Pentagon experts. But the Marines are taking no chances. Gen. Jim Jones, the strapping poster-boy commandant of the Marine Corps, made several unexpected stops on Capitol Hill to meet with lawmakers, including Sen. John McCain. The crash was unfortunate, he told the politicians, but the aircraft is safe. The Osprey’s builder also stands by the aircraft. An accident investigation could take weeks, if not months, said Marine officials. Last week, the plane’s “black box,” or data recorder, which kept track of key information, was sent to a private lab for analysis, said McCorkle. “We should be able to read that back for the last seven to eight minutes of the flight,” said McCorkle. The results should be available in about a week, but may not provide a definitive cause for the crash.
One question is whether the prop wash from the surviving Osprey’s massive propeller blades might have kicked up enough turbulence to destabilize the doomed aircraft. The two planes were to approach the landing zone with 1,000 feet of separation and touch down 200 feet apart. A crew chief in the surviving Osprey told investigators they might have been closer, which raises the uncomfortable issue of pilot error. The pilots had thousands of hours each at the controls of various helicopters and were handpicked to fly the Osprey. In the newer plane, however, they had only about 100 flight hours each. And night-vision goggles have caused pilots to become disoriented in the past.
Top Navy and Marine officers say the Ospreys had already performed the most difficult and risky in-flight maneuver, changing from an airplane to a helicopter. It’s during this transition, when the engine blades tilt upward, that the aircraft is in its most destabilizing position. You have to be a “darn good” pilot to handle this maneuver, says one Pentagon expert. While this suggests pilot error due to disorientation, military sources weren’t ruling out the possibility of a hardware problem. The Osprey’s two previous crashes were caused by malfunctions. The 1991 crash was blamed on an incorrectly wired roll gyro. The 1992 crash was due to engine failure and a fire when lubricating oil and transmission fluid spilled into the engine during flight. Seven people were killed. Marine Commandant Jones has put a temporary halt on flight operations out of respect for the dead men and their families. But it’s almost certain the airplane will fly again soon, and while it’s back in the air, it’s a safe bet there will still be questions about the Osprey on the ground.
