PPRuNe Forums - View Single Post - First the VGSs and now the UASs?
View Single Post
Old 31st Mar 2019, 08:08
  #36 (permalink)  
A and C
 
Join Date: Jan 1999
Location: north of barlu
Posts: 6,207
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
I see very little to change about the way AEF/UAS is provided the debate about parachutes and head protection seems shortsighted, most people won’t get in a pushbike how without head protection so why abandon it in an aerobatic aircraft. The parachute is very much an action of last resort and had the last accident involving a Tutor panned out a little differently at least one of the crew might have escaped ( do I need to remind those who think the parachute is a bad idea that the glider pilot escaped without serious injuries)

Anyone who suggests that the Extra 300 could be used as a basic trainer clearly has never flown or maintained the aircraft, it is a fine unlimited aerobatic aircraft but it’s very unstable by nature and without this stability the student is unable to see the results of the control inputs they are making, it is very difficult to land and burns huge amounts of fuel. From a maintenance point of veiw it is fragile, if used as a military trainer the whole fleet would be grounded in weeks with cracked landing gear hoops, and weld repairs required to the mainlanding gear mounts and to the tail section around tail wheel and fin spar.

The Grob Tutor is currently the best game in town for the task it has been given, even now most ofthe airframes are only at about half life and it’s maintanence issues are well understood, some of the instrumentation is getting a bit long in the tooth and difficult to support but studies show that with an avionic upgrade costs can be reduced with more modern and reliable equipment.

The biggest cost issue is the proposal to move the Turor fleet onto the military register and so military maintenance oversight, this in my view would be a disaster in terms of cost and serviceability rates, at the moment the aircraft is maintained under EASA145 by people who have gained years of experience on the type while working with a financaly viable maintenance system. Putting the aircraft into the military maintenance system would involve giving control to a bunch of people who move on quickly, have little type experience and not the first care or idea of the financal implications of their decisions.

At the moment the RAF have the best aircraft for the task maintained as reasonable cost with good serviceability rates in short the system is working.............. as the Americans say “ If it’s not broke don’t fix it”
A and C is offline