I wonder if some of the mods for the CMV-22B would be carried over to a PV-22B or SV-22B that could operate from more than just the big decks to protect the battle group. I'm really tempted to model such based on art work from when the V-22 was new and on some testing since then.
Maybe you can shed some light on this, but why did the DoD choose to abandon all sense of continuity when designating all of the Osprey variants?
USMC variant, replacing the CH-46 and serving in a medium lift role between the UH-1 and CH-53. Role? Pick up Marines and put them down. Designation? CV-22, UV-22? Nope.
MV-22B.
Why?! Because it's so capable I guess. You don't just carry Marines. You can also carry boxes...of things...theoretically you could carry...bananas, I guess. Ugh, whatever. Multi-role it is.
Moving on, USAF variant. Replacing the MH-53 (rebuilt HH-53), serving alongside the HH-60 and HC-130. Proud follow on to a long line of Jolly Green aircraft: HH-43, HH-3, HH-53. Designation? HV-22. No, that's out because someone wrote that on a napkin and slipped it to a Navy officer at a working lunch back in the '90s. Instead we're going with
CV-22B. C. For "Cargo". Which the CV-22 will never carry in USAF service. Because it was bought for inserting special operations teams and rescuing downed airmen. But some of those special operators may bring extra ammunitions or a radio with them, so we'll just think of that as "cargo". Fine. Whatever.
USN is back and now they want something to replace the C-2. A
cargo hauler. That's straightforward, at least. Great, we'll just use...what's that? Taken you say? Fine, we'll use a miscellaneous designator since it will likely perform multiple roles, too. What's that now? That's taken too? Well crap. We could use UV-22, but I want something that reflects the decades of multiple personality disorder that has characterized Navy designations. A follow on to the proud legacy of the PBY Catalina, SBD Dauntless, and F/A-18 Hornet.
CMV-22B. Because what could be more confusing than just combining the only two designations in use?
I'm no fan of McNamara, but I think another aircraft designation/rationalization is called for.
Cheers,
Logan