Hot new helicopter/rotorcraft news

[squorch2]

As recent as 2008, but I don't know the specifics.

 

[ChuckMK23]

How often does that happen?

I never saw a stud attrited that really enjoyed the work of learning to fly and simply didn't have the talent to master it - in own memory, the attires I saw were relieved and rather happy to finally be shifted to something that fit their talents.

Also never saw attrited student "fight it" - I'm sure there are many cases - but I never saw it.

Pease tell me that grade sheets are finally on an iPad or other "mobile first" digital technology. (with or without emoticons)

 

[Jim123]

Digital gradesheets on an iPad? <-- emoticon

Not until iPads meet whatever umptyscrunchinst 1234.5 series mandated cyber security imaginary arbitrary standard. And it will probably be some crappy windows-based tablet long before, if ever, iPads...

Pretty sure the emoticons on TIMS came included with one of the software modules in an update that was unrelated to emoticons. You have a choice of fonts, bold, italic, underlined, extended ASCII, etc.

Flash, you'd have to ask CNATRA how often they get congressionals. I think you might be shocked by the answer.

 

[IKE]

Flash, you'd have to ask CNATRA how often they get congressionals. I think you might be shocked by the answer.

I had to respond to one of those as a LTJG DIVO, because my worst aircrewman dropped his "I don't wanna fly" Page 13 and was promptly sent cranking in the Chiefs' mess.

 

[Sapper!]

In the spirit of the original post....
http://helicopterforum.verticalreference.com/topic/19679-first-lakota-class-finished-any-questions/

 

[IKE]

In the spirit of the original post....
http://helicopterforum.verticalreference.com/topic/19679-first-lakota-class-finished-any-questions/

I only read the first 10 posts or zo, but the following stood out:
- No solos
- Straight-in only power recovery autos
- Run-on landings terminate at 5 ft AGL, so they are neither run-on nor landings. Discuss. (I'm getting faklempt)

 

[Flash]

Flash, you'd have to ask CNATRA how often they get congressionals. I think you might be shocked by the answer.

Do you know if it would be high or low? Just curious, I have heard of them but never have known of one first-hand. I've seen or know of first hand other flight school shenanigans, including a court martial, but not a congressional.

 

[ChuckMK23]

I did not realize the UH-72's had collective mounted throttles.

 

[Jim123]

Do you know if it would be high or low? Just curious, I have heard of them but never have known of one first-hand...

That's what I meant by saying I think you'd be shocked - by how often it happens. For example, we had two during my first IP tour when I was at HT-8 about ten years ago. Both had attrited for bad grades (couldn't learn to be a military helicopter pilot within the time and resources allowed, would have highly likely been liabilities in operational flying, and likely involved in mishaps) but they had trouble coming to grips with that reality. That doesn't necessarily extrapolate to all training squadrons during all years, but it wasn't completely out of the ordinary either.

Servicemembers call their Congressmen for other reasons, not just failing out of flight school. I've seen it a few times in the reserves too.

 

[Gatordev]

While on my second deployment, we had a congressional because "we" were preventing one of his constituents from voting. Nevermind the fact that our ballots just couldn't reach us because we were always underway or getting gas in an unplanned location and we were still a month out from the election.

There also pretty common in San Diego due to the noisy sounds of freedom over the locals. I know I was part of a division that caused one of them and I've seen some other in email traffic.

 

[IKE]

I did not realize the UH-72's had collective mounted throttles.

Yep. I actually find it pretty convenient that I can control both engines without releasing the collective or having a copilot do it. Not sure why anyone (with fewer than 3 engines) would prefer the PCL setup.

 

[theBRAD006]

@hscs I think a medium twin would approximate what we're train to do far better than a Single VFR. Any actual helicopter would do better than a sim for those. Night form, low light, in the mountains, to a DVE zone is probably one of the hardest things we do. A tough night behind the boat is probably close behind. Even the "pretty good" R/S sims, with linked mode, do a terrible job with those. I'm not suggesting we throw HT studs into that challenging environment, but they deserve the highest level of flight training we can give them.

The TH-57A was initially bought (1968) when there were far less options in the commercial space and single engine helos existed in the fleet. Less so in the late 80s for the B/C models, but the issues were still there. That's no longer the case. Every fleet airframe in the inventory is a heavy+ twin engine helicopter with a glass cockpit (save the -53s, one more engine, one less glass cockpit, soon to be replaced).

With respect to full practice autos, I don't get it. The bottom of a full practice auto in the -57 is a modified running landing. Any theoretical effort or money for that needs to be put into finding a viable way to get DLQs for HT students. Punting TCQ to the Tailhook FRSes would be inconceivable, but they did the equivalent to HT students and replaced it with a sim.

I'm way late to this but I saw the thread via LinkedIn.

HTs losing the boat had nothing to do with the aircraft or sims. It had everything to do with the boat. The mighty Baylander was in need of a $1M+ overhaul and CNATRA didn't want to pay for it, especially with sequestration looming. If the hookers had a special boat instead of fleet CVNs, I think they would have punted when their boat broke too. Or at least have seriously considered it.

 

[SynixMan]

I'm way late to this but I saw the thread via LinkedIn.

HTs losing the boat had nothing to do with the aircraft or sims. It had everything to do with the boat. The mighty Baylander was in need of a $1M+ overhaul and CNATRA didn't want to pay for it, especially with sequestration looming. If the hookers had a special boat instead of fleet CVNs, I think they would have punted when their boat broke too. Or at least have seriously considered it.

You're missing my point. I don't care about IX-514 the hull. What I want for the future of Navy helicopter pilots is the best possible training in the world, including a chance to see a boat. I've asked the question and been told the FRSes aren't reporting a diminished product, so the Navy saved some coin when the bay lander went away.

There's a JHSV parked at NAS Pensacola occasionally. I'm sure it's busy, but can it scrape a day here or there for DLQs? We sortie an entire nuclear aircraft carrier for a week+ to give VT students CQ because it's valuable training.

My larger point was that I hope the TH-57 replacement and rebooted syllabus takes a hard look at what's changed for Navy/USMC/USCG helos in 30 years and starts producing a more refined product ready for the new challenges of the fleet, even if it costs more. That's not an endictment of the people working there, they do everything and more with what they're given to produce the best they can. My fear is that they'll look to it as a place to shave time and money from training to get roughly same product.

 

[jtmedli]

My fear is that they'll look to it as a place to shave time and money from training to get roughly same product.

In this day and age, it wouldn't surprise me if they tried to move a significant amount of it to the sim despite the fact that we all know it's not the same quality of training no matter what you do in there.

 

[theBRAD006]

You're missing my point. I don't care about IX-514 the hull. What I want for the future of Navy helicopter pilots is the best possible training in the world, including a chance to see a boat. I've asked the question and been told the FRSes aren't reporting a diminished product, so the Navy saved some coin when the bay lander went away.

There's a JHSV parked at NAS Pensacola occasionally. I'm sure it's busy, but can it scrape a day here or there for DLQs? We sortie an entire nuclear aircraft carrier for a week+ to give VT students CQ because it's valuable training.

I was one of the last IPs to be trained for the boat - and then it went away two weeks after I qualed. Having gone through that syllabus I would agree with the FRSs' assessment that those few day bounces in P-cola Bay didn't add much if anything to the products leaving South Field. I certainly wasn't relying upon my "experience" behind the Baylander when I went to the boat in the FRS. I enjoyed the Baylander as a stud and as an IUT, but really, it was just a cool photo op.

As someone who currently dabbles in Fleet Schedules, the carriers do not leave port just for VT CQ. It's always paired with FRS CQ or other ship requirements. The VTs plan around the carrier's sked. The main difference between HT and VT DLQ/CQ is that the VT CQ is a make or break flight for the VT SNAs. If they can't pass, they don't wing as a hooker. They're done flying unless they can find a home in a different advanced pipeline. I've never heard of an HT stud failing to get winged for struggling at the boat. Come to think of it, I've never heard of an HT stud struggling at the boat.

As for the JHSV that is sometimes there, that sometimes isn't even a USN asset - it's pre-com. And they're going through their own testing and shakedowns too, so no, their schedule would not really support a day in the bay for the kiddos. As for getting a regularly scheduled DDG or something, DLQs would have to move out of the bay. Would you really want to test the mighty single engine Sea Ranger out in the Gulf? Or the JP-5 trained, ship's company engineering folks hot re-fueling the aircraft with no high-pressure shut-off/safety? No thanks.

My larger point was that I hope the TH-57 replacement and rebooted syllabus takes a hard look at what's changed for Navy/USMC/USCG helos in 30 years and starts producing a more refined product ready for the new challenges of the fleet, even if it costs more. That's not an endictment of the people working there, they do everything and more with what they're given to produce the best they can. My fear is that they'll look to it as a place to shave time and money from training to get roughly same product.

Concur. But what new fleet challenges are there to be learned before the FRS? There is a reason that the HT syllabus hasn't changed much over the last few decades - it works and continues to work. The three services have distilled a pretty solid syllabus that makes a basic helicopter pilot who has been exposed to almost all helicopter employment methods and who is ready to learn his service's specific aircraft, employment, and tactics. The purpose of HTs is not to make a fleet co-pilot - that's the FRS's job.