Full autos were an objective KPP. Power recovery was the threshold. Not sure what you’re talking about in regards to “prime requirement.” Autos certainly weren’t a focus in the AHTS solicitation.
-
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
TH-73
- Thread starter KWpilot58
- Start date
Full autos were an objective KPP. Power recovery was the threshold. Not sure what you’re talking about in regards to “prime requirement.” Autos certainly weren’t a focus in the AHTS solicitation.
During the solicitation and industry response period there was specific language that the capability of routine, repeated full touchdown autos was a make or break requirement. I don't know what the proper contract terminaology was, but it was a big deal in selecting the Leonardo product. I just think its interesting, as a Helo CFI/CFII that "Surprise", the 4 bladed, fully articulated rotor with relatively small chord and energy retention will overspeed rapidly when loaded and care must be demonstrated in preventing overspeed. Ha ha. And I'm curious why the IP's can't train to proficiency and why the manuever can't be taught safely to students with additional training.
Assuming the rumor is true
.
The current TH-73A Contact FTI makes reference only to potential of overspeed during power recovery (because of Nf driven overspeed upon introducing power during the flare..). There is no language around Nr overspeed caution in the power off auto portion - other than the discussion in a 180 degree turn...
I can tell you as the person leading one of the bid efforts that full touchdown autos were explicitly NOT a requirement, nor identified as a key area of concern in the solicitation.
You could have had a 407GXi. 
Kid heard it from the corpsman giving out the peanut butter shot in the clinic after a weekend at Seville Quarter who said they heard it from the SELRES instructor who was down from Atlanta for a psych eval after he told his Delta OE instructor to eat a bag of dicks…If Its a clinic rumor it must be true…Assuming the rumor is true
Last edited:
Reminds me of this (NSFW audio)
I read somewhere it was filmed in the parliament/senate/whatever room of Ukraine.
It was an instructor that’s been at the wing for more than 12 years. That FTI was written in April when there were three 73’s on the line here and one of them was down because the compressor was installed backwards. I wouldn’t be surprised if some things have changed.
Ok folks let’s squash some rumors:
1. Full autos are in the syllabus, and our instructors are doing them every day as we get closer to starting students. They are technically waived until TW-5 and CNATRA are briefed by the AHTS team on execution COAs, which should be soon. Having done a few fulls in the 73, I don’t think they are more or less difficult than the 57…just different. That said, bending/breaking a 73 is way more expensive than the 57, so there is a legit cost/benefit decision that needs to be made. I think they’ll remain.
2. While there have been a few overspeeds in the 73 (and I mean, literally just a few), most of them were either during a power recovery auto or other high AOB dynamic maneuver. Personally, I attribute these to a lot of built in TH-57 muscle memory by inexperienced 73 pilots. 73 is a great aircraft, but it’s not a 57. Leonardo came down and provided advanced energy management instruction to most AHTS members and they haven’t been an issue since.
For better or worse, this was a program that skipped the normal acquisitions and OT&E process (COTS, baby!), meaning pretty much all of that has been done on site by the AHTS team for the last few years. The program is light years ahead of where it was even a year ago, but we’re not quite at the finish line. So things may still change.
Edit: spelling
1. Full autos are in the syllabus, and our instructors are doing them every day as we get closer to starting students. They are technically waived until TW-5 and CNATRA are briefed by the AHTS team on execution COAs, which should be soon. Having done a few fulls in the 73, I don’t think they are more or less difficult than the 57…just different. That said, bending/breaking a 73 is way more expensive than the 57, so there is a legit cost/benefit decision that needs to be made. I think they’ll remain.
2. While there have been a few overspeeds in the 73 (and I mean, literally just a few), most of them were either during a power recovery auto or other high AOB dynamic maneuver. Personally, I attribute these to a lot of built in TH-57 muscle memory by inexperienced 73 pilots. 73 is a great aircraft, but it’s not a 57. Leonardo came down and provided advanced energy management instruction to most AHTS members and they haven’t been an issue since.
For better or worse, this was a program that skipped the normal acquisitions and OT&E process (COTS, baby!), meaning pretty much all of that has been done on site by the AHTS team for the last few years. The program is light years ahead of where it was even a year ago, but we’re not quite at the finish line. So things may still change.
Edit: spelling
AW forum needs a truth bomb reaction emoji for posts like this.
How is maintenance availability so far?
It’s improved quite a bit over the last few months. Not going to lie, it wasn’t great for a long time but I think those were more process/program issues vice the aircraft itself. Some days it’s actually better than the 57 side, but that’s with 20 aircraft. Hopefully as we get more deliveries the trend continues in the right direction.