• 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

New helo trainer at Rucker?

ChuckMK23

Former H-46 Driver
pilot
It seems the Air Force guy I was talking to probably didn't know better. I asked about it just last week and he told be they had already bought it (Baylander). Given the modifications that were required to make Baylander able to land an Osprey, it makes sense that it is probably a different vessel. If what I heard was correct, even with the deck capable of physically landing a V-22, the certification process to make it legally able to count as a DLQ platform is still a long way from finished.
AF CV-22 folks seem to be busy getting DLQ's on Navy platforms...

 

phrogdriver

More humble than you would understand
pilot
Super Moderator
I'm curious about what people think about the fleet applicability of a twin vs. the learnability of a single...plus the fact that no one will ever pay to do full autos in a twin.
 

ChuckMK23

Former H-46 Driver
pilot
I'm curious about what people think about the fleet applicability of a twin vs. the learnability of a single...plus the fact that no one will ever pay to do full autos in a twin.
If the H135 ends up as the selected airframe I think you will see full autos removed from the FAM syllabus or simply moved to the sim if the fidelity is there. I don’t think the contract award will live and die on full auto capability but Single pilot IFR in US national airspace is probably something the contract will live and die on - IMHO.
 

Gatordev

Well-Known Member
pilot
Site Admin
Contributor
I'm curious about what people think about the fleet applicability of a twin vs. the learnability of a single...plus the fact that no one will ever pay to do full autos in a twin.
Relative to the various T700 (fleet) EPs you can encounter, the twin at the TRACOM would almost be the same as a single. Startup is as simple as flipping two extra switches (okay, 4 if you count the fuel pumps). The EPs mostly boil down to 2, a FADEC Fail, which results in a running landing, and an engine failure, which is way easier than a FADEC failure and also results in a running landing. That seems simpler than having to deal with the various failure modes of the T700.

That said, I can totally see going the single route for program cost.
 
Top