• 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

USN Solving the HT dilemma - extend life of TH-57 - move 30% of syllabus to sims

busdriver

Active Member
None
#31
Pretty sure USAF does their helo training at Rucker with Contract IPs. Paging @busdriver
When I went through, the AF used an Army contract for the first portion (contact phase in AF speak) of the training and active duty IPs for remotes, low level, and formation. When we transitioned to the TH-1H (which are owned by the AF) those contractors moved to an AF contract but still did something similar.

I have no idea if they're still doing that.

We do have civilian contractors teaching in simulators.
 

RobLyman

- hawk Pilot
pilot
None
#32
Yes, the green aircraft here (I'm actually at Ft. Rucker now) are Army. The TH-67s are still here, but most training is being done in the LUH. These aircraft are cracking. Not because of hard landings or mast moment issues. They just weren't built for the demanding primary training environment. Talk here is that they cost 3 Xs the estimated cost to operate. Not 3 Xs the TH-67, but 3 Xs what they thought the UH-72 would cost. Ouch!

I will say they make an EXCELLENT instrument trainer. In the upgraded aircraft you can do LPV, LP, RNAV/VNAV, RNAV, and of course ground based navigation and approaches.

The Air Force is still training out here in the UH/TH-1.

Ft. Rucker has a LOT of civilian instructors in a lot of roles. Both military and civilian teach IERW, advanced airframe and MTP courses. The instrument examiner course is entirely civilian instructor lead. I am not familiar with the mix of instructors in all aspects of training here, but if anyone has specific questions, shoot. I'll be here another 3 weeks and can find answers.

FWIW, I'm glad to see they FINALLY moved the Comanche to a spot inside the museum instead of the warehouse building next door.
 

FrankTheTank

Professional Pot Stirrer
pilot
#33
Yes, the green aircraft here (I'm actually at Ft. Rucker now) are Army. The TH-67s are still here, but most training is being done in the LUH. These aircraft are cracking. Not because of hard landings or mast moment issues. They just weren't built for the demanding primary training environment. Talk here is that they cost 3 Xs the estimated cost to operate. Not 3 Xs the TH-67, but 3 Xs what they thought the UH-72 would cost. Ouch!

I will say they make an EXCELLENT instrument trainer. In the upgraded aircraft you can do LPV, LP, RNAV/VNAV, RNAV, and of course ground based navigation and approaches.

The Air Force is still training out here in the UH/TH-1.

Ft. Rucker has a LOT of civilian instructors in a lot of roles. Both military and civilian teach IERW, advanced airframe and MTP courses. The instrument examiner course is entirely civilian instructor lead. I am not familiar with the mix of instructors in all aspects of training here, but if anyone has specific questions, shoot. I'll be here another 3 weeks and can find answers.

FWIW, I'm glad to see they FINALLY moved the Comanche to a spot inside the museum instead of the warehouse building next door.
Unrelated... But how did you fair from the Hurricane? You're basically on the St Johns. Gena said lots of boats all over in front of your place but nothing about your place itself..
 

sevenhelmet

Uh oh...
pilot
#34
More like a very selective choice of words, pretty sure the USAF has contracted out their version of IFS and that is it.



They seem to just exist to advocate for whoever is paying them, they have long been advocates for the JSF but were paid to do it.
...Like most who advocate that platform. I'm not going to go down that road here. But IFS is contracted with the Navy as well, so CNATRA certainly isn't the "odd man out". I'm not sure how valuable it is in terms of either screening students or preparing them to fly a higher performance aircraft in Primary, but that's also another discussion.

Pretty sure USAF does their helo training at Rucker with Contract IPs. Paging @busdriver
The quote specified FIXED wing training.

Again, paging Dr. Credibility here...
 

ChuckMK23

Former H-46 Driver
pilot
#36
So between the Army UH-72 trainers costing 3x forecast, and Navy TH-57's ageing out the Headwork Gold Star Award may go to the Air Force for using upgraded/refurbished TH-1H Huey II's with all glass cockpits as the winning most successful option for a training aircraft.

Wonder if Big Army will see the light with their Choice of the Lakota as a trainer and partner with Navy to adopt a single new light helo trainer.

But maybe that's too logical.
 
#38
A buddy I know who flies Air Ambulance out west just had their -109 taken away and replaced with a 407 (I think that's what it is) because any time they needed parts from Leonardo..."Eh, we getcha the parts soon, eh?" The company had had enough.
My company does air ambulance with A109s on the west coast. We do have trouble getting parts from Leonardo, however its from our company not paying the bills on time. Our competitor had a Part 145 shop to service their A109s and A119s. We often got parts from them instead of directly from Leonardo in Philadelphia or Italy. Our company tried to fix the relationship by offering a bank account, to maintain a $1 million from which they could draw from. They declined.
 

RobLyman

- hawk Pilot
pilot
None
#39
Unrelated... But how did you fair from the Hurricane? You're basically on the St Johns. Gena said lots of boats all over in front of your place but nothing about your place itself..
My place was fine, except the little topiary I replanted 6 months ago. It bit the dust. The dock across the street is gone and at least a dozen boats damaged or destroyed. Family went to in-laws for a few days. We were VERY lucky.
 

RobLyman

- hawk Pilot
pilot
None
#40
Wonder if Big Army will see the light with their Choice of the Lakota as a trainer and partner with Navy to adopt a single new light helo trainer.

But maybe that's too logical.
Wonder no longer. Big Army has this thing about admitting mistakes and moving on. We'll continue to spend money on the Lakota in IERW and miss the boat on 60V procurement and a /G capability in the 60M
 

Flash

SEVAL/ECMO
None
Super Moderator
Contributor
#41
...Like most who advocate that platform. I'm not going to go down that road here. But IFS is contracted with the Navy as well, so CNATRA certainly isn't the "odd man out". I'm not sure how valuable it is in terms of either screening students or preparing them to fly a higher performance aircraft in Primary, but that's also another discussion...
Most of them aren't 'think tanks' or 'Institutes' that are 'experts' in their field that imply they are unbiased to the wider public, unlike PR shops or obviously paid endorsers. As for advocacy, there are a few less biased folks out there who have good reviews of the aircraft, you just have to look for them.
 

ChuckMK23

Former H-46 Driver
pilot
#42
FYI the budgeted TH-57 (B, C, and C-NVG) cost per flight hour for FY'18 is over $1200 per hour (includes fuel, maintenance, everything)
 

DanMa1156

Land of the Milk and Honey.
pilot
Contributor
#43
FYI the budgeted TH-57 (B, C, and C-NVG) cost per flight hour for FY'18 is over $1200 per hour (includes fuel, maintenance, everything)
Where are you getting this stat from? And you're suggesting that the cost is $1200+ per hour, vice being over by that much per hour right?
 
Top