New RNZAF training helicopter

[daver_777]

Hi all

No doubt some of you know that the RNZAF has selected the A109 as its new AB initio training helicopter (to replace the mighty sioux). I was wondering how many of you think a light twin with full IFR capability would make a suitable training platform for someone who has no helicopter time whatsoever?. Seems the brass high up reckon it wont be a problem and that it will essentially "fly itself":suspect:

I would particularly like to hear from those who have experience with the 109 or its variants how easy it is to jump into and fly, bearing in mind what i mentioned above about having no helicopter time.

Cheers

Daver_777

[Shawn Coyle]

One of the first things that the instructors need to know is how the AFCS and autopilot work.
If they start with the AFCS in ATT mode, then as the student learns to hover go to SAS mode and possibly everything off after the student masters SAS only, they'll probably find that learning the basics of control are slightly easier.
I'd be concerned though for learning other absolute fundamentals like autorotations, tail rotor failures, and the like.
I certainly wouldn't do touchdown autorotations in an A109!
There are bound to be other gotchas out there.
(If anyone wants to PM me, I'd be happy to send them a scenario to learn how to use an AFCS / Autopilot in nearly any machine so fitted.)

[Halfwayback]

It is a bit of a conundrum because the Sioux was not only used as a trainer but was also on the inventory as an operational machine.

I spent two years flying the RNZAF Sioux, both training pilots at the AFT stage and in support of the New Zealand Army, and it was an excellent training machine even if a bit slow for operational use.

I haven't flown the 109 yet so I'm not qualified to comment more than to say it is proven in the field but it seems to be a quantum leap for the ab initio pilot.

HWB

[rivnut]

I might be a 'stick in the mud' and old fashioned helo instructor but I believe that for ab-initio helo training should be in a simple single engine helo where the thrills of helicopter dynamics can be trully experienced unencumbered with all the bells and whistles that the 109 has to offer. The A109 makes for a good intermediary (advanced) trainer prior to progressing to larger similar helos. Oh I fly and instruct on the A109E & S.

[John Eacott]

Halfwayback would also remember the doomsayers when the RN proposed to introduce the Gazelle as basic trainer (1969?), replacing the Hiller 12E and the Whirlwind 7 ;) It was also considered beyond the capability of the average stude, and would Never Work :rolleyes:

We have a very experienced pilot here in Melbourne, who did his helicopter licence all the way through on a 109C, courtesy of his employer. The only issue was CASA required that he carry out the autorotation part of the syllabus, for which they put him in a JetRanger.

I suspect that we don't always give enough credit to the current generation who have grown up with computers, and would find a glass cockpit a natural state of affairs. The rest of the 109E would follow on as system management replaces pure stick handling skills.

[eagle 86]

Ergo we could train fast jet pilots ab initio on a Hornet? Surely for a Defence Force it is a matter of economics - is it more economic to have something cheaper to purchase/operate like a Squirrel for the first 20 hours or so of "flight grading" and then move onto a 109 type or is the " straight through" route on the more advanced machinery more fiscally responsible?
My experience of the Mil is that aviation training waxes and wanes on the personal wim of the responsible staff officers of the time - witness over the years the RAAF model - CT4/Macchi - all Macchi - all PC9 - flight grading on CT4/PC9 - flight grading on what ever the little French thing is called/primary CT4/ advanced PC9 - around and around!
In my time, the old UH-1B was the best basic trainer - cheap/simple/rugged - could demonstrate all the classic aerody phenomena - had a real internal/external/winch capability - with a bit of QHI dexterity with throttle settings could be made to behave very realistically with limited power - QHI could save the day very late in proceedings.
GAGS
E86

[Heli-kiwi]

I understand that the RNZAF will be retaining a few UH1Hs, It is possible that ab intio could be performed on these (still) very good machines. A defence force the size of NZs is going to feel the extra running costs for sure and a considerable increase in operating budget will be needed for both the NH90 and the A109. Knowing the Airforce they will have all these keen young pilots sitting around struggling to get 5 hours a month :hmm:

[If all else fails]

The initial press release suggested a simulator would be included as part of the 109LUH acquisition. Perhaps this will be where the autorotational and other emergency training will be done? There seems little doubt that ab-initio training on a light twin will be inefficient but there must be a cost benefit point at which operating an additional (3rd) fleet of helos makes it viable. Regardless if their plan does not work surely the easiest and cheapest part to fix later is the '30 odd' hours of single engine time for the basics rather than the LUH capability and NH90 lead-in? If the sim is up to it this could be visionary.

[Evil Twin]

Why not just sub contract out initial training into the civillian sector?

Everybody wins, public money is not wasted in effect of controls etc. being taught in an expensive twin engineed helo, military wins in having only to top up and role train post intial training, public wins as taxpayers money isn't being squandered un-necessarily and civil sector wins by having a further training pool to tap into. As long as training is overseen and policed by a suitable military officer to guarantee quality of delivery, where's the downside?

Mind you Helen Clark and her band of merry idiot's never have gone for the sensible option. :uhoh:


ET

[griffothefog]

I'm flabbergasted by this post and it's concept:uhoh: Why don't they just stick a chip up the poor ba***rd's arses that's compatible with the type they are flying.... That will set them up for life:E

[topendtorque]

there must be a cost benefit point at which operating an additional (3rd) fleet of helos makes it viable


Haa

Yes, it will be found when the poor blighters have both their fist and last fright together.

The concept of learning mastery in the flying envelopes is much more complicated than looking at and learning any new 'glass' concept. Especially when pupes are loaded with outside interferences.

Jack of all trades and master of none they'll be.

Maybe the mighty RNZAF could find a local service provider to teach ab-initio in an uncluttered environment, they do have flying schools over there don't they?

Getting experience in an expensive way is definately no gaurantee of acquiring skill for the unexpected. ( a fact which our venerable melbourne star failed to mention with his example):{

Man, the whole concept is so corny (not) that I'd rather be watching -'Seinfeld.'

[heema]

hi,the 109e with the FADC is a safe hile plus the TRG mode I the for the up an isue if they spend good time on ground TRG shoudn't be a problem

[helopat]

Good discussion so far...anyone care to try to decode that last post?

[Bladecrack]

Yeah sure,

the FADC is a safe hile plus the TRG mode I the for the up an isue if they spend good time on ground

= in ones humble opinion, the Agusta 109 with all its electronic gizmos and extensive safety features is a most excellant choice as an ab-initio trainer, and if the lucky young blighters who get to train on it do their homework first, they shall have a jolly splendid time...:}

[The Nr Fairy]

As the man said, "Good discussion so far...anyone care to try to decode that last post by Bladecrack" !