Title: Falling into the sea!The US military's "Osprey" has caused trouble one after another, why has it become a "new generation of widow manufacturing machine"?
2023 is coming to an end, and the US military seems to be unable to get rid of the flames of war, and it has made waves around the world. Local conflicts, harassment of competitors, and even stealing oil in Syria and causing trouble in the Persian Gulf have not yet made up enough of this negative energy kip (bad thing points). At the end of this year, when every inch of land was at a premium, the US military just found a special "activity" -- smashing planes.
I heard that a CV-22 "Osprey" of the US military stationed in Japan crashed in the waters off Yakushima Island in Kagoshima Prefecture, and there were 8 people on board. The scene was tragic and the situation was unpredictable. This is not the first time, this year the "Osprey" seems to have become a "crash celebrity", in August alone, a crash in Australia during a Xi, resulting in the death of three Marines and the injury of five. It seems that there were also intensive accidents in Japan in September, first four "Ospreys" made an emergency landing within an hour, and then two "Ospreys" made a forced landing at a Japanese airport due to a malfunction. It's a twist and turn, and it's eye-catching.
Don't think this is the first crash of the "Osprey" this year, but no, as early as 2022, there were two crashes, resulting in a total of 9 deaths. Speaking of the "Osprey", this is a new concept aircraft that the US military is proud of, as if it has stepped out of a Hollywood blockbuster. Which big scene doesn't have its share, "Transformers", "Battle of Los Angeles", etc., as long as there is no "Osprey" or similar flying machine on the big screen, it is a broken movie.
However, movies are movies, and reality is different. After the U.S. military got the "Osprey", they found a big problem: this guy is not only expensive, but also the structure is too complex and the use environment is too harsh. Its two engines have a left-right parallel layout, and if the power output of the engines or the lift provided are not consistent, the aircraft will lose control or even flip. Although the US military tried to improve it, the effect was not obvious. Therefore, this "Osprey" has almost become the model with the highest failure rate and accident rate among the active models of the US military.
In fact, to date, there have been a total of 15 crashes of the Osprey, including four during development and testing, resulting in 30 deaths. Since its entry into service in 2007, there have been 11 crashes that have resulted in 24 deaths. And other minor accidents are endless. It's like a "new generation of widow makers", which is embarrassing.
The feelings of the US military for this aircraft can be described as both love and hate. It is really powerful, it can be used in complex terrain like ***, and it can move quickly like a fixed-wing aircraft. But the problem is also obvious, not only love to have accidents, but also quite expensive to use. What's even more troublesome is that the maintenance after each "Osprey" sortie is simply a disaster, because the structure is too complex, time-consuming, labor-intensive, and costly. The problem, however, lies in the fact that the "Osprey" is a product of the US military's military reform in Rumsfeld and a product of the US military's "high-mobility warfare" line, and the scale of its equipment is already very large, and it is not realistic to replace it directly, so we can only pinch our noses and use it first.
Especially in recent years, as the task of maintaining global hegemony by the US military has become heavier and heavier, the high maneuverability of the Osprey can be better brought into play. At the present stage, it is still able to meet the needs of the US military well. But it is undeniable that with frequent use, crashes will not decrease, after all, the frequency of crashes of this cargo has always been stable. For politicians in Washington, how can the hegemonic position be important to the life of the big soldiers?
This is not only an attack on the "Osprey" plane, but also an in-depth analysis of the plight of the US military fighters. Such a dilemma makes one wonder why an airplane would become a "new generation of widow-making machines".What is the underlying reason behind this?Perhaps the answer is not simple. This is not just an aircraft accident, but a profound reflection on the arms race, the complexities of the military industry, and international relations. Smashing planes has become a "sideline" of the US militaryOver the past year, all this has made people wonder what kind of price and fate are hidden behind the war
Yes, then again, the U.S. military's "Osprey" crashes are really frightening. This guy has actually become a "crash celebrity", and it is simply a crash that keeps crashing and does not stop. Falling down again and again, not only did the crew members become victims, but it also became a representative of the "new generation of widow manufacturing machines". How many families have been broken, how many parents have lost their children, and how many people have been grieving about it?
Don't watch the "Osprey" flying around in the movie, you can still have fun, but in reality it's not like that. After the U.S. military got the goods, it seemed that they were in big trouble. Not only is it frighteningly expensive, but its structure is simply more complex than that. The engine is side by side, and if you are not careful, the power imbalance will be played to death. How can you say that the US military can still use this goods?It's just that you don't have freedom.
It is said that the US military has gone to great lengths to improve the "Osprey," but the results have not been satisfactory. This cargo has almost become the aircraft with the highest accident rate among the active models of the US military. Accidents one after another, like an unavoidable ghost gate, how did this product become a "new generation of widow manufacturing machine"?Could it be that the US military can't see clearly the essence of this "crash celebrity"?
As far as the "Osprey," which has frequent accidents, is concerned, the US military loves and hates it. This thing is indeed powerful, as flexible as *** in complex terrain, and the speed is not inferior to that of a fixed-wing aircraft. But the problem is that the accident rate of this product is too high, and one overhaul is simply life-threatening. If the U.S. military can't replace it, it will really pinch its nose and continue to use it.
What is even more entangled is that in recent years, the tasks of the US military have become more and more arduous, and the burden of maintaining global hegemony has become heavier and heavier. At this time, the high maneuverability of the "Osprey" is particularly important, but problems also arise. Crash accidents are frequent, and the maintenance after each dispatch is simply a disaster
In this situation, the US military has no choice but to continue to use this "crash celebrity". But the problem is that as the frequency of use increases, crashes will also intensify. Isn't this pulling your neck and moving forward?It's a big deal, forget it, who let the "Osprey" be a product of Rumsfeld's military reform?
Not to mention anything else, this year alone, "Osprey" has frequently fallen to the sea and the ground, which is simply speechless. What does all this mean exactly?Could it be that for the sake of global hegemony, the US military will do whatever it takes, even sacrificing so many precious lives?You say, are the lives of the GIs in the hands of politicians?
For the Chinese, this can't help but make people think deeply. Watching the US "Osprey" crash again and again, I really can't help but feel a little ironic in my heart. Our country doesn't have the time to fix these bells and whistles, but we always feel a little embarrassed when we watch others cause accidents.
Of course, this is also a question worth pondering, what is the cost of war?For the sake of hegemony, for the sake of the so-called "high-mobility war", is it wise or stupid for the US military to use such a "crash celebrity" to achieve it?Every time an accident occurs, it is the shattering of families and the disappearance of lives. Isn't this the biggest loss for a country?
This is the reality, this is the price of war. It's not about cursing blindly, but let's think deeply, for what?How much more precious have we lost for that invisible hegemony, for that silent victory?
Looking at the news of the fall of the "osprey", perhaps we should think calmly, not only for the sake of banter, but also for a better understanding of the world and to better protect our homeland. This is not just a scene, but also a reality that happens, making us think about the nature of war and ask why so many lives are sacrificed, is it really for that invisible and heavy "hegemony"?