• 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

Griz882

Griz882

Frightening children with the Griz-O-Copter!
pilot
Contributor
FlyNavy03 said:
What's the right aircraft? Bell no longer supports the 206 and a 407 GXi costs around $5 Million.
Click to expand...
I have enough Robinson time to not be a super fan of the helicopter. I will note that the company has not fixed the mast bumping issue, they have simply changed the basic training to routine to better teach students how to avoid it. While I agree with your earlier note that the teetering cyclic is easy enough to learn, it isn’t very comfortable for an instructor. For example, a short pilot has the stick pulled way down and the instructor has to have his hand up around his chest to be within safe “oh crap” reach. I get that Robinson’s are very popular world wide for many uses, but never as a military training helicopter - I think the primary reason is the extremely low weight (the same thing that makes them less expensive) is not a positive thing for military students.

My recommendations (as if anyone cared🤣), in order, would be the Enstrom 480B, MD 530F, the Leonardo AW09, or the TH-73.
 
  • Like
Reactions: IKE
FlyNavy03

FlyNavy03

Just when I thought I was out,they pull me back in
pilot
Griz882 said:
For example, a short pilot has the stick pulled way down and the instructor has to have his hand up around his chest to be within safe “oh crap” reach.
Click to expand...
I'm having a hard time picturing that. If the short pilot can reach a traditional cyclic, which is fixed in place, why would they have to pull the t-cyclic all the way down? Are you flying while standing up?
Also, you're treating the R66 and R44 like they're interchangeable. That's a bit like me using my 206 time to judge what flying a 407 is like. There are similarities, but they're still very different aircraft.
I've known a lot of private pilots who have said they'll never get in another R44 if they can avoid it, but they have no problem with the R66.
For instance, while they updated the training doctrine for the R44 to address mast bumping, they completely redesigned the empennage of the R66.
verticalmag.com

Robinson reveals redesigned empennage for R66 Turbine helicopter

Robinson Helicopter Company has introduced a new empennage for the R66 Turbine helicopter intended to reduce the likelihood of mast bumping, one of the most vexing causes of fatal crashes in the model.
verticalmag.com verticalmag.com
 
Last edited:
Griz882

Griz882

Frightening children with the Griz-O-Copter!
pilot
Contributor
FlyNavy03 said:

I'm having a hard time picturing that. If the short pilot can reach a traditional cyclic, which is fixed in place, why would they have to pull the t-cyclic all the way down? Are you flying while standing up?
Click to expand...
Sorry, I can’t explain the anthropomorphics, I’ve just seen it. Maybe the student just liked riding “stick low?” But, as I noted, that really isn’t the issue, the helicopter is too light in my worthless opinion.
 
FlyNavy03

FlyNavy03

Just when I thought I was out,they pull me back in
pilot
I don't envy the folks that have to make those decisions. I agree that the best solution is to have two helicopters - one for primary training and one for intermediate, but like I said, I don't think that's an option. Everything else definitely has its compromises. That being said, it wouldn't surprise me if COPT-R starts using R66s in the not-too-distant future so maybe I'll have a lot more data to work with next year.
 
Lawman

Lawman

Well-Known Member
None
FlyNavy03 said:
I don't envy the folks that have to make those decisions. I agree that the best solution is to have two helicopters - one for primary training and one for intermediate, but like I said, I don't think that's an option. Everything else definitely has its compromises. That being said, it wouldn't surprise me if COPT-R starts using R66s in the not-too-distant future so maybe I'll have a lot more data to work with next year.
Click to expand...
There is an immediate solution to this, and they’re sitting in the bone yard and foreign air forces that would sell them back.

Nobody will let us execute that solution.
 
Lawman

Lawman

Well-Known Member
None
Griz882 said:
Are you thinking KWs?
Click to expand...
Somebody brought it up in the room, and you’d have thought somebody shit in the middle of the table. Like full stop the Army is not buying another helicopter so 530F with an instrument suite is out. But we want not the Lakota to do this… ok well that’s not a lot of options. I think somehow single engine and tactics aren’t allowed to live together in somebody important’s head.

Part of this problem is Flight School Next has to solve for the existing problem(s) but also be future proof, and in the end we’re trying to adopt a single model that can train across existing MDS and that weird tilty thing that nothing at Novosel is prepared for. It’s not just the flying stuff either. DOTD has not looked at any of the expansion of things like academics for aero theory etc that will be necessary. That’s all a problem for the next guy.

The easy button on that is the first 10 guys were supposed to go to the V-22 course and a couple even stay and instruct in a Marine unit, but HRC just will not let us identify 10 special people for special treatment.
 
ChuckMK23

ChuckMK23

5 bullets veteran!
pilot
2000+ KWs produced right? You could cherry pick the best of them in the boneyard and target 500 to be refurbished and overhauled. That seems to me like a fairly low risk solution.

Look what the Air Force is doing with 50 plus-year-old refurbished and modernized H-1's.

How is the Air Force program not a shining example of cost-effective success?

83961_1399521064.jpg
 
Randy Daytona

Randy Daytona

Cold War Relic
pilot
Super Moderator
PhrogPhlyer said:
I think that's the point many of us old salts are pointing out.
I remember going from the TH-57 to the TH-1L.
It seemed like a huge step at the time, and was a great confidence builder.
It also allowed one's ability to transition to other aircraft to be observed in a pure training environment.
So... T-28 to TH-57 to TH-1 before fleet transition into the CH-46.
Solid observed growth as an aviator, prior to reaching your fleet/tactical aircraft.

As an aside, I will never forget my "solo" in the TH-1L (2 students = solo).
The Iranian student with me, after the preflight and buckling in, he said on the IC...'You go ahead and fly, I'll just sit here and smoke cigarettes.'
Which is exactly what and all he did. Except for when he took the controls for 5 minutes returning to Whiting from Maxwell.
He flew us into inadvertent IMC with a lowering overcast ceiling.
I had to take the controls, call ATC and get an approach into Whiting.
In some ways, I guess I really was solo!
Click to expand...
Time to train would be way too long. We have to get aviators to the fleet faster, and if that means no more fixed wing primary, so be it.
ChuckMK23 said:
2000+ KWs produced right? You could cherry pick the best of them in the boneyard and target 500 to be refurbished and overhauled. That seems to me like a fairly low risk solution.

Look what the Air Force is doing with 50 plus-year-old refurbished and modernized H-1's.

How is the Air Force program not a shining example of cost-effective success?

View attachment 42726
Click to expand...
No. A single trainer, even if it requires more flights - but not API, fixed wing primary, initial rotary, intermediate rotary - too much time, too much money. More TH-73’s, 407GXI’s or A-Stars - but definitely 1 stop shopping.
 
ChuckMK23

ChuckMK23

5 bullets veteran!
pilot
Randy Daytona said:
Time to train would be way too long. We have to get aviators to the fleet faster, and if that means no more fixed wing primary, so be it.

No. A single trainer, even if it requires more flights - but not API, fixed wing primary, initial rotary, intermediate rotary - too much time, too much money. More TH-73’s, 407GXI’s or A-Stars - but definitely 1 stop shopping.
Click to expand...
That seems to support (in my mind, at least) the idea of a single, joint service helicopter training program a la UK Defense Helicopter Flying School.

Defence_helicopter_flying_school_badge.png
 
ChuckMK23

ChuckMK23

5 bullets veteran!
pilot
"The U.S. Army set a five-month deadline starting from June 3 for companies to submit bids to replace the Airbus UH-72 Lakota as the primary trainer for helicopter pilots. The solicitation for the Flight Training Next program calls for proposals formatted as white papers under a fast-track..."

Screenshot_20250605-075941.png
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top