I remember flying the H1 with boost off.....doable but takes some muscle....
-
Please take a moment and update your account profile. If you have an updated account profile with basic information on why you are on Air Warriors it will help other people respond to your posts. How do you update your profile you ask?
Go here:
Edit Account Details and Profile
Hot new helicopter/rotorcraft news
- Thread starter Randy Daytona
- Start date
I'm so out of the loop when it comes to what's taught at Rucker these days. During my time, we flew NVG single ship, formation day, single ship low level as graded events and low level day formation as a fam at the end. No real tactics other than navigate, don't hit each other or the ground. I think they're doing more NVG stuff now and the enlisted crew members show up at some point, but should otherwise be similar.
I'd actually like to see them introduce some "tactics," but more as something to do while teaching them how to do tac admin and bring info to debrief.
I'd actually like to see them introduce some "tactics," but more as something to do while teaching them how to do tac admin and bring info to debrief.
Agusta is getting serious - is it a done deal? http://www.aviationtoday.com/rw/tra...veils-US-Navy-Trainer_87831.html#.Vzp5ZEn3aK0
I hope they pick a well powered and well mannered reasonably heavy replacement....I flew the TH1L..in Ht18 in 1972...it was a nice sized helo (10,000 lbs max gross) and reflected the real world much better than the H57. the lima had 1300hp...and was a fun aircraft to fly. it was fun then at it would be fun now....but time has passed....so its good to be young..enjoy it.
we had a total engine failure at site 8....we were coming in on a precision approach . it happened about 50-60 ft in the air...we bounced real good. lucky it didnt happen 15 seconds earlier!
best of luck! keep posting so I can keep up.
we had a total engine failure at site 8....we were coming in on a precision approach . it happened about 50-60 ft in the air...we bounced real good. lucky it didnt happen 15 seconds earlier!
best of luck! keep posting so I can keep up.
News from across the pond. https://www.flightglobal.com/news/articles/airbus-helicopters-wins-uk-rotary-mfts-deal-425597/
Airbus Helicopters wins UK rotary MFTS deal (Military Flying Training System)
The total £1.1 billion ($1.6 billion) deal, via the Babcock-Lockheed Martin Ascent joint venture which oversees MFTS, will see a total of 32 German-built twin-engined helicopters supplied by the manufacturer – 29 H135s and three larger H145s.
Airbus Helicopters wins UK rotary MFTS deal (Military Flying Training System)
The total £1.1 billion ($1.6 billion) deal, via the Babcock-Lockheed Martin Ascent joint venture which oversees MFTS, will see a total of 32 German-built twin-engined helicopters supplied by the manufacturer – 29 H135s and three larger H145s.
Stingerhawk
Member
Ask the NTPS guys again about how much they like the UH-72 (aka: EC145) as an initial helo trainer. The issue isn't just full autos which neither the EC-135 nor EC-145 can do, its the rigid rotor head. Extremely twitchy and easily overstressed due to over controlling. The UH-72 Operating manual is full of cautions and warnings about slope landings, anything involving touchdowns, and even a caution about overstressing the mast on take-off. Both 145 and 135 have the same rigid rotor head. Good helicopters, but absolutely not as an initial training helicopter as the UK will soon find out, as did the German AF, as did ......(insert EC-135/145 military customer name here). The non-standard fenestron t/r is neat but again, not good for a learning baseline.News from across the pond. https://www.flightglobal.com/news/articles/airbus-helicopters-wins-uk-rotary-mfts-deal-425597/
Airbus Helicopters wins UK rotary MFTS deal (Military Flying Training System)
The total £1.1 billion ($1.6 billion) deal, via the Babcock-Lockheed Martin Ascent joint venture which oversees MFTS, will see a total of 32 German-built twin-engined helicopters supplied by the manufacturer – 29 H135s and three larger H145s.
Stingerhawk
Member
The one thing that I don't see any discussion about for the TH-57 replacement is the IFR piece. Its a huge part of the curriculum and has been put forward as a fundamental requirement by the Navy. The Navy places high value on the Instrument training and will not differ a large percentage to simulation. Remember anyone who gets winged out of S. Whiting could easily be flying at night off a ship as an H2P within 6 months in the middle of the Indian Ocean or Med. Exceptional IFR training is the hallmark of a naval rotary wing pilot. The only aircraft in the running that seems to be taking the requirement seriously if the TH-119. The Bell 407 has a lot of system level redundancies to figure out or it woun't be anymore successful than the TH-57D program with IFR certification. After reading about the 407 and the TH-119, the same Garmin G1000H cockpit are in both VFR versions of the aircraft but cannot be made compliant to meet the FAA standards which is why the TH-119 made the change to the already IFR certified Genesys (used to be Cobham) cockpit. View form S. whiting is Bell may be the incumbent but they haven't had anything to do with S. Whiting in at least 15 years and are well behind the TH-119 in giving the Navy what its asking for.
http://defence-blog.com/news/leonar...navy-advanced-helicopter-trainer-program.html
PS-twin engine fans saying that the new helicopter should just be a twin, ask yourselves why did primary go with a single engine (T-6B) again, and how many EP's in combat multi-engine helicopters besides the AEO EP, have "give yourself a full-auto" as the final step ? Anything involving loss of a T/R for starters...... So the skills and confidence you learn at S. Whiting (and Rucker until the prohibition thanks to the UH-72) by doing full touchdown autos carries you through your entire career and in MY OPINION does a disservice to the pilots and passengers if they don't get that experience.
http://defence-blog.com/news/leonar...navy-advanced-helicopter-trainer-program.html
PS-twin engine fans saying that the new helicopter should just be a twin, ask yourselves why did primary go with a single engine (T-6B) again, and how many EP's in combat multi-engine helicopters besides the AEO EP, have "give yourself a full-auto" as the final step ? Anything involving loss of a T/R for starters...... So the skills and confidence you learn at S. Whiting (and Rucker until the prohibition thanks to the UH-72) by doing full touchdown autos carries you through your entire career and in MY OPINION does a disservice to the pilots and passengers if they don't get that experience.
Not sure where you are going with this - but believe you made a wrong turn in Albuquerque:
1) you are overstating the # of EPs needing autos - If you count TR EPs as one monolithic entity, the number of auto EPs can be counted on one hand. This is small a small number compared to the rest of the EPs, not to mention mission system troubleshooting.
2) despite what your parents may have told you, $ makes the world go round. I suspect it played a heavy role in the T6 decision and will play a similarly heavy role in the helo trainer selection.
3) 6 months from Whiting to night fleet ops? Try a year - for FRS, move times, and to make 2P is in an exped squadron. Maybe quicker in a CVW, but then you fly as a PQM with a larger pool of experienced pilots.
Last edited:
In a V-22, no. In any other MR+TR helicopter, I think so. Whether it's a teetering, high-inertia rotor or a fully articulated low-ish-inertia rotor, it's still a rotor. The H-60 is far less forgiving in an auto than the H-57, but I think the "I can do this" feeling sticks with people for a while.
It would be great to ask the LTs from HSC-12 a few years ago what they think.