• 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

ChuckMK23 said:
Gentex updating HGU-56/P

www.facebook.com

26 reactions | Evolving with the mission. Hear from Marcus Gengler, Segment Director for Rotary Wing Applications at Gentex, on new enhancements to the HGU-56/P helmet that continue our commitment to advancing aircrew safety and performance. #Gentex

Evolving with the mission. Hear from Marcus Gengler, Segment Director for Rotary Wing Applications at Gentex, on new enhancements to the HGU-56/P helmet that continue our commitment to advancing...
www.facebook.com www.facebook.com
Click to expand...
Great…. Said no one ever…

Hey you guys get noise canceling tech and hear through function so I can actually use these without having to mod the shit out of them? No? Great job guys…
 
Last edited:
ChuckMK23 said:
I predict Leonardo is simply waiting for the landscape to shake out a bit. But my guess is the requirements would make the Thrasher too complex for what Army envisions on an ab initio training aircraft. Which is why the 505 has gotten so much juice. Remember that even when UH-1 and TH-67 were in service for primary training, old heads were clamoring for the TH-55.
Click to expand...
Same partnership that successfully delivered MH-139 to AF...

theaviationist.com

Boeing and Leonardo Join Forces to Offer AW119T Helicopter to U.S. Army

Boeing and Leonardo will pursue together the U.S. Army's Flight School Next contractor-owned, contractor-operated (COCO) contract. Boeing and Leonardo
theaviationist.com theaviationist.com
 
Gatordev said:
I'm not sure how LEP is an innovation. There's a reason why you don't leave it on the helmet all the time.

Otherwise it's interesting to see they've basically put all of the Ops Core family systems on the helmet.
Click to expand...
And not sure I am a fan of the side lights. As the saying goes, “a working lip light is a dead lip light”.
 
Griz882 said:
I agree, the 505 is the solid choice for the army…far superior to the Robby.
Click to expand...
Having been a Navy IP for over 10 years, and a 505 IP for Bell, I can say that I love the 505...for the mission it was designed for, which is letting retired hedge-fund managers fly back and forth to their ranches in comfort and safety. That being said, I question its effectiveness as a primary helo trainer. Not counting optional equipment, there are literally 6 switches and zero circuit breakers in the cockpit. It also has a binary throttle - fly or idle with nothing in between. The only EPs that you can simulate in the aircraft are hydraulic failure - which is such a non-issue that at Bell we would routinely do hover landings with boost off - and engine failure. It's an extremely automated aircraft. The start sequence requires two switches - battery and engine switch. You don't even need to worry about the throttle position (in most cases) since it doesn't care if the aircraft is in idle or fly during the start - the ECU will take care of you. In other words, all the things that make it a fantastic private-use aircraft also make it a less-than-ideal trainer.

The 407 would be an amazing trainer but at 5x the cost it's a tough sell. The Navy students are about to start training in the R66 with COPT-R so I'll be able to make a much better assessment of that bird in a few months.
 
FlyNavy03 said:
The 407 would be an amazing trainer but at 5x the cost it's a tough sell. The Navy students are about to start training in the R66 with COPT-R so I'll be able to make a much better assessment of that bird in a few months.
Click to expand...
You make valuable points here and I don’t entirely disagree. That said, if we are in a race to do the “cheapest” thing then sure, go to the Robby. It is fantastically cheap, but after gaining about 25 hours in both the R44 and turbine model, I’m not convinced it is a good training platform for military pilots (but just fine for tour operators). I also recognize that options are limited to variants of the Bell 505, Airbus 130, AW-119, MD-500, R-66, Airbus H125, and the Enstrom 480 as these are the only single engine, “low cost” helicopters out there. The Airbus rotors turn the “wrong way” so I’d guess they are out.
 
hscs said:
And not sure I am a fan of the side lights. As the saying goes, “a working lip light is a dead lip light”.
Click to expand...

I would always hear that from the Marines. I understand why you're saying that and where you're coming from operationally. As a self-declared lip-light cripple, I still find the statement amusing given the absolutely ridiculous NVG lighting mod on the Bravo. I could see them on final a .25 mile through the shitty LSO windows, but it wasn't their lip lights I was seeing, it was the map lights. It was all we had, so I was less concerned about my lip light if it meant I didn't smack the water on a VBSS approach.

I never saw anything official published about lip light signatures (probably because that would have been too valuable a piece of information for a SWTI to actually provide), but I was always curious how much was actually done by MAWTS or NAWDC.

ChuckMK23 said:
The flex boom and liner/pads though look interesting - especially that nape adjustment!
Click to expand...

All part of the Ops-Core FAST (and COMTACs) design.
 
Griz882 said:
You make valuable points here and I don’t entirely disagree. That said, if we are in a race to do the “cheapest” thing then sure, go to the Robby. It is fantastically cheap, but after gaining about 25 hours in both the R44 and turbine model, I’m not convinced it is a good training platform for military pilots (but just fine for tour operators). I also recognize that options are limited to variants of the Bell 505, Airbus 130, AW-119, MD-500, R-66, Airbus H125, and the Enstrom 480 as these are the only single engine, “low cost” helicopters out there. The Airbus rotors turn the “wrong way” so I’d guess they are out.
Click to expand...

And MD hasn't made new helicopters in over a year now. Enstrom isn't IFR and isn't in process of cert.

If you can't afford a 407, the 119 is only slightly cheaper and costs a lot more to maintain.

This is 505 v. Robinson....IF they decide to go through with this. Neither one of those aircraft should be your first and only aircraft before stepping into a 64 or 47.
 
phrogdriver said:
Enstrom isn't IFR and isn't in process of cert.
Click to expand...
Good point. I thought the idea was a “primary” helicopter to get through the first 40 hours or so with the more complex stuff done in something like the Lakota. What can I say, I’m confused. Maybe we should be discussing who has the most powerful Senator?
 
I'm sure the new Army syllabus will look just like this!! Think of the cost savings from eliminating specialized flight equipment and even shoulder harnesses!

 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top