Hot new helicopter/rotorcraft news

[FlyNavy03]

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?

Are we talking about an intro to helicopters (COPT-R), or a complete Advanced Helicopter Training System (HTs)? The HT battle is already lost. We are 100% committed to the AW-119s for the foreseeable future, for better or worse. We can't put that Genie back in the bottle. That's an incredibly expensive aircraft to keep in the air, which means that cost becomes a huge factor if we're going to have something like a primary helicopter. By the way, no one is suggesting at all that we go with the R-44. That's not even on the table. The Army IFT is all R-66s.

 

[phrogdriver]

We’re talking about the Army

The trainer they’re potentially selecting would be for their entire syllabus.

 

[ChuckMK23]

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.

The UH-72 Lakota will be removed from training role entirely. Army is seeking a single training aircraft for their entire syllabus. The choice of aircraft will have consequences for decades.

 

[PhrogPhlyer]

Imagining the new student on day one in the helo as he/she peruses the panel.
The future brings information overload to the initial phase of training.

TH-57A


TH-57C


aw-119

 

[Flash]

Are we talking about an intro to helicopters (COPT-R), or a complete Advanced Helicopter Training System (HTs)? The HT battle is already lost. We are 100% committed to the AW-119s for the foreseeable future, for better or worse. We can't put that Genie back in the bottle. That's an incredibly expensive aircraft to keep in the air, which means that cost becomes a huge factor if we're going to have something like a primary helicopter.

Was it really a 'loss' though? While it might be 'expensive' in the long run it may be a useful investment. I've seen many cost saving measures in training end up 'costing' us way too much in the end, with the Navy still rebuilding SWO training when they cut SWOS and went to CD's with a few mishaps and deaths to follow along with the USAF cutting T-1 advanced pilot training with a few aircraft already 'bent' by new pilots still learning how to fly big aircraft in the 'fleet'.

By the way, no one is suggesting at all that we go with the R-44. That's not even on the table. The Army IFT is all R-66s.

Kinda seems what the Army is at least considering.

 

[taxi1]

The future brings information overload to the initial phase of training.

Side story...in T2s we had a discussion on whether the aircraft was up or down for day VFR student solo if the attitude gyro wasn't working. Everyone agreed that the aircraft was still up so...

...I got in the habit on the safe for solo checkflight of covering the attitude gyro over with tape. Holy cow, what a shitshow of flying it was! Great training though.

 

[ChuckMK23]

Side story...in T2s we had a discussion on whether the aircraft was up or down for day VFR student solo if the attitude gyro wasn't working. Everyone agreed that the aircraft was still up so...

...I got in the habit on the safe for solo checkflight of covering the attitude gyro over with tape. Holy cow, what a shitshow of flying it was! Great training though.

Flying any jet without an AI seems like suicide

 

[taxi1]

Flying any jet without an AI seems like suicide

I got the idea from having flown OCS flights, and letting the students fly on the way back. The attitude indicator, after a bunch of upright and inverted spins, was fubar until it had a chance to sleep it off. I knew then that the students were all VFR attitude indicator cripples.

 

[Lawman]

Imagining the new student on day one in the helo as he/she peruses the panel.
The future brings information overload to the initial phase of training.

TH-57AView attachment 43726


TH-57C
View attachment 43727

aw-119
View attachment 43728

Are you suggesting that the first one is the “easy transition?”

The generation being trained grew up with flat screen palm held technology as a way of life. MPDs from day 1 are not the problem.

 

[Gatordev]

Maybe it's the angle of the photo, but that -119 cyclic looks terribly uncomfortable. Any -73 pilots want to chime in on if it's better than it looks? That's definitely a different cyclic than the HEMS version I sat in at a friend's base.

 

[Meyerkord]

Am I blind or does that AW-119 not have a backup altimeter and attitude indicator? Or is it that small center digital screen?

 

[ChuckMK23]

Am I blind or does that AW-119 not have a backup altimeter and attitude indicator? Or is it that small center digital screen?

Center G5 looking all in one pfd. I don’t know if it is in fact a G5, but sure looks like it. And would be a perfectly appropriate choice. The core avionics are Genesys.

 

[ChuckMK23]

TH-57A

Late era TH-57B. Electric attitude indicator, digital Torque, digital TOT - both with recording. Bell 206B3 core airframe.

 

[Lawman]

Maybe it's the angle of the photo, but that -119 cyclic looks terribly uncomfortable. Any -73 pilots want to chime in on if it's better than it looks? That's definitely a different cyclic than the HEMS version I sat in at a friend's base.

Same design as the 149.

It’s not bad, and with the fact that most of these aircraft are being designed to fly with assisted modes vs the simple force trim of the past it works fine. Plus digital knee boards should negate the necessity for a massive thigh bound mission packet.

It is a little more to try and climb in without kicking or anything.

 

[FlyNavy03]

Was it really a 'loss' though? While it might be 'expensive' in the long run it may be a useful investment.

I wasn't referring to the initial cost. I was referring to the fact that the AW-119 has had an availability rate of about 20%. Doesn't matter how capable a training aircraft is if it's sitting in the hangar.