Jack McCain gets a lot of things right in his recent critique of the V-22 Osprey tiltrotor. I can’t argue over the high cost and tactical shortfalls of this aircraft. Nor would I contradict a U.S. Navy pilot with regards to a tiltrotor’s limitations compared to a helicopter. One time a Marine Corps Cobra pilot tried to explain auto-rotation to me, a mere infantry officer—I never asked again.

But McCain’s gripe reads the same as it might have when the Marine Corps began fielding squadrons of Ospreys in 2006 or 2007—it’s dated. His argument is flawed in one serious way. It’s a false dichotomy to present the V-22 as a one-for-one replacement for the older CH-46.

Secondly, McCain makes no mention of a key platform that directly addresses the shortfalls he notes, the UH-1Y Venom, known as the Huey to everyone else.

McCain’s completely factual piece is disingenuous because his argument stops short of demonstrating exactly how the Marines have managed to overcome the often expensive shortcomings of an undeniably impressive aircraft.

After reading his periodic reminder, I’m left with the sense that he misses something entirely about Marines. They make it work.

For my part, the numbers McCain presents don’t lead me to conclude the Osprey is a piece of junk or that it doesn’t work. It is a fair argument to say it costs too much if you replace a $6-million CH-46 with a $100-million V-22, even adjusting for inflation. That’s not a good deal.

But, the Osprey didn’t replace the CH-46—it displaced the CH-46. The older copter made way for an entirely new type of aircraft, not another helicopter. To compare the V-22 to the CH-46 isn’t fair. The MV-22’s added costs don’t buy another medium-lift helicopter. That money pays for an advanced tiltrotor aircraft with far-and-away greater capabilities.

Have you ever seen an Osprey take off? It’s incredible. When the pilot can pull full power, it looks like a jump jet in a sci-fi film. It moves in a way that most people aren’t used to seeing. Helicopters don’t move like that. Yes, McCain, it does look cool!

But the Osprey’s fragility and susceptibility to heat are notable weaknesses. Tactics change to account for this, though. To argue that an V-22 is junk because it doesn’t loiter like a CH-46 is to assume that the V-22 is a helicopter and should loiter like one.

It’s not a helicopter. It’s a tilt-rotor aircraft. It should act accordingly.

To prevent overheating, Osprey pilots avoid helicopter mode. They quickly transition to plane mode and move around their objective. That makes them a much harder target to hit and preserves the delicate prop-box. Ground troops know this and make sure not to expose the V-22 to excessive loiter when requesting pick-up.

After decades of service, the old CH-46s had limited capability. The littoral combat zone, a main venue for future conflict, requires aircraft with longer range and greater lift than the CH-46 could offer.

Contrary to the paper specifications McCain cites, no CH-46 I have ever flown in ever carried 14 troops over a distance of 160 miles. Marines planned for 12 combat-loaded troops, max—and often planned for just eight. Admittedly, the V-22 advertises 24 troops, but planners shoot for no more than 18 combat-loaded Marines.

The V-22 might be limited to 233 miles on a single tank, but surprisingly McCain doesn’t mention that it can also refuel in flight. This effectively gives the Osprey indefinite range, provided tankers are available.

Oh yeah, and it does it all at incredible speed. The CH-46 cruised at 140 knots while the Osprey moves at 240 knots in airplane mode—and maxes out over 300 knots.