Bulldog v. Grob
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: UK
Posts: 1,608
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Nobody's mentioned the rubbish crosswind limit which prevents flying on days which would have been fine in the Dog, especially when you are on a large North/South runway with a Westerly prevailing wind in between Durham and York. D'oh. Plus far more days lost due to low cloud bae.
Woz - a good post indeed! Recently visited my old UAS by air (PA 28). Happily VFR on top with my IMC rating, then a bit of a weed-schneeble to get in. All the pretty plastic planes were sitting on the ground.....
Remember the days of climbing up through winter stratus into an azure sky with a ruler-straight horizon perfect for teaching attitude flying? Not in das Teutor you won't...
Agree about the flick roll comments - why should you expect to perform a type of manoeuvre in the plastic Teutor which is - and has been - banned throughout the RAF for the last 30 years at least? It needs a roll rate appropriate to a military trainer, not a toy glider.
Remember the days of climbing up through winter stratus into an azure sky with a ruler-straight horizon perfect for teaching attitude flying? Not in das Teutor you won't...
Agree about the flick roll comments - why should you expect to perform a type of manoeuvre in the plastic Teutor which is - and has been - banned throughout the RAF for the last 30 years at least? It needs a roll rate appropriate to a military trainer, not a toy glider.
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Not... far... enough... along....
Posts: 20
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Glad no-one's shot my arguement down so far! 
Most of my original UAS training many many moons ago was done sitting on top of a 2k-3k layer of 8/8 SC with everything perfectly smooth, gorgeous and wonderful, with a top horizon and more than enough space to do all my aeros; regardless of how much height I needed to "plummet like a brick" into!
Back in the good old days of PIFGs, they even let some of us do that sort of thing on our own. Wonder why that went away; have UAS studes suddenly become less competent? I think I could still handle 2000' with no turns under a RAS. Not that it matters, as an old Bulldog stude I can't even fly the damned thing; seems that with having to justify every hour to the beancounters I can just sit and feel all those years of training slide out my ears before my next posting.... 2.5 years between instructional sorties? Can't be good!
As far as flicking goes, the Tutor seems to have a lot of things that are good qualities, but sod all use. Yes, it can flick; but technically none of us are allowed to practice or teach it. Yes, it can pull +6G, but I'm ******ed if I've ever HAD to- fun, but not much instructional benefit. Yes, it has DGPS, but that's only really useful for doing self-positioned simulated ILS doodahs; and with the amount of IF the studes get nowadays, I'd be very surprised if they have enough hours left to do many of them with PARs and SRAs to perfect first!
I could forgive the Tutor a lot of its sins if they had the sense to give it, oooh, let's say 260hp? But they didn't, so I won't.
[ 30 November 2001: Message edited by: Woz ]
Most of my original UAS training many many moons ago was done sitting on top of a 2k-3k layer of 8/8 SC with everything perfectly smooth, gorgeous and wonderful, with a top horizon and more than enough space to do all my aeros; regardless of how much height I needed to "plummet like a brick" into!
Back in the good old days of PIFGs, they even let some of us do that sort of thing on our own. Wonder why that went away; have UAS studes suddenly become less competent? I think I could still handle 2000' with no turns under a RAS. Not that it matters, as an old Bulldog stude I can't even fly the damned thing; seems that with having to justify every hour to the beancounters I can just sit and feel all those years of training slide out my ears before my next posting.... 2.5 years between instructional sorties? Can't be good!
As far as flicking goes, the Tutor seems to have a lot of things that are good qualities, but sod all use. Yes, it can flick; but technically none of us are allowed to practice or teach it. Yes, it can pull +6G, but I'm ******ed if I've ever HAD to- fun, but not much instructional benefit. Yes, it has DGPS, but that's only really useful for doing self-positioned simulated ILS doodahs; and with the amount of IF the studes get nowadays, I'd be very surprised if they have enough hours left to do many of them with PARs and SRAs to perfect first!
I could forgive the Tutor a lot of its sins if they had the sense to give it, oooh, let's say 260hp? But they didn't, so I won't.
[ 30 November 2001: Message edited by: Woz ]
Yes - the PIFG was often regarded as a better yardstick to progress than the PFB. When I was a UAS QFI, I instructed one of my students on a radio navigation exercise above 8/8 and then sent her off solo to do the same thing. Which she did, culminating in a PAR approach to land. She reckoned that it gave her immense reassurance to know that someone trusted her - and even more confidence in her own abilities!
The plastic plane is a day VFR toy - not a military trainer!
[ 30 November 2001: Message edited by: BEagle ]
The plastic plane is a day VFR toy - not a military trainer!
[ 30 November 2001: Message edited by: BEagle ]
Pilot Officer PPRuNe
Join Date: Jan 1999
Location: UK
Posts: 396
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I would like to point out that the views of Woz are his own and have nothing to do with me or the Sqn I fly with.
Woz, your question depends on when you get those computer bits sorted (and if you drop me in the sh*t on here!!!!).
Tonks
[ 30 November 2001: Message edited by: Tonkenna ]
Woz, your question depends on when you get those computer bits sorted (and if you drop me in the sh*t on here!!!!).
Tonks
[ 30 November 2001: Message edited by: Tonkenna ]
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Not... far... enough... along....
Posts: 20
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Will make sure I keep you firmly out of the **** !! In fact, I might try to avoid mentioning your name, just in case.....!
Yes, of course, my views are entirely my own, and any shred of comic bitterness running through them is purely due to the fact I'm blatantly being groomed for rebranching to admin sec.
Maybe if I start screwing up some admin jobs, you'll all give up and start flying me all the time instead?
*yes, my tongue is planted firmly in cheek*
Yes, of course, my views are entirely my own, and any shred of comic bitterness running through them is purely due to the fact I'm blatantly being groomed for rebranching to admin sec.
Maybe if I start screwing up some admin jobs, you'll all give up and start flying me all the time instead?
*yes, my tongue is planted firmly in cheek*
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: commonwealth hq
Posts: 20
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Boys, count your blessings that you have any kind of mildly aerobatic aircraft to chuck about whenever you feel like it. I spent many happy hours in the 'dog back in the early 90's (well, except for my bloody uncomfortable helmet, but at least it stopped the Boss from hitting me to hard!!), and now I am having to suffer the indignity of a Piper Cadet. Compared to the 'dog, what a pile of old ****! Can't do anything remotely interesting in it (legally) and the nac kit is no better than the stuff they fitted our 'dogs with before I left (and I still don't know how to use the bloody stuff).
Can't make any informed comment on the Grob, but I know our old engineers miss the 'dog. Also, why does anybody want a Firefly? That's what they teach the bloody Army in, and if they were supposed to fly they wouldn't all have been given helicopters!!!!
Now that I have uncomfortable headphones to wear, I miss my helmet as my new instructor has a fearsome left hook!!!
Happy flying guys.
Can't make any informed comment on the Grob, but I know our old engineers miss the 'dog. Also, why does anybody want a Firefly? That's what they teach the bloody Army in, and if they were supposed to fly they wouldn't all have been given helicopters!!!!
Now that I have uncomfortable headphones to wear, I miss my helmet as my new instructor has a fearsome left hook!!!
Happy flying guys.
Join Date: Feb 2001
Posts: 5
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well, at least one contributor has now given you the solution to 2 of your problems - IFR certification and ANO Rule 5 minimum height. Just ignore the rules and flight safety, go "weed-schneebling" instead!
If that's a pop at me, then get stuffed! With a UK IMC Rating you can legally fly below 3000ft and 140KIAS under VFR if you have at least 1500m flight visibility and remain clear of cloud and in sight of the surface. Plus you can fly as low as you need provided that you observe Rule 5!. If you can remain clear of people, vehicles, vessels and structures, you may therefore fly below 500 ft. Knowledge of the rules is needed, however.
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: NW England
Posts: 20
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I wonder why people feel it necessary to knock an airctraft so often that actually is fully certified IFR, but for certain silly reasons is not permitted in the books.
couldnt be anything to do with the fact that its german and plastic? I will agree with those who say that NDB is a useful tool, but so is TAC to ILS, TAC and all other instrument approaches. Seriously, count how many NDB beacons still exist round the country (many are inactive).
With reference to flicks, I agree to a certain extent that there is little point in training flicks considering no other RAF aircraft is capable (or permitted), however, look at the fundamental reasons Aeros are taught in the EFT sylabus in the first place. I know for a fact handling a flick manoever can increase confidence in the aircraft, and can also teach extra finesse for handling more advanced aerobatics.
Landing in the Grob can be hard, but it enforces a very imporant technique - being over the threshold AT THE THRESHOLD SPEED with the throttle closed. It takes a little extra finesse, but as soon as you master it you can grease landings wherever you fancy!
couldnt be anything to do with the fact that its german and plastic? I will agree with those who say that NDB is a useful tool, but so is TAC to ILS, TAC and all other instrument approaches. Seriously, count how many NDB beacons still exist round the country (many are inactive).
With reference to flicks, I agree to a certain extent that there is little point in training flicks considering no other RAF aircraft is capable (or permitted), however, look at the fundamental reasons Aeros are taught in the EFT sylabus in the first place. I know for a fact handling a flick manoever can increase confidence in the aircraft, and can also teach extra finesse for handling more advanced aerobatics.
Landing in the Grob can be hard, but it enforces a very imporant technique - being over the threshold AT THE THRESHOLD SPEED with the throttle closed. It takes a little extra finesse, but as soon as you master it you can grease landings wherever you fancy!
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Darn Sarf
Posts: 130
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Yeah, that's all pretty cool, but can anyone tell me why the Civvy aircraft (Firefly, Grob) can only fly 500' MSD??? I know the Civvy rules etc etc, but I fly a Civvy - owned Mil aircraft (fixed wing) that can go down to 100' MSD (on certain routes). Surely someone somewhere must be able to give some sort of dispensation because as mentioned earlier in this thread, there is a LOT of difference between 250' and 500', especially when you're only doing 120 kts. I also find it saddening that when I was on the Air Cadet Gliders, we flew at a temporary operating base and we were the only Mil registered aircraft flying out of there!!!!! 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: The 4th Quark Galaxy
Posts: 162
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It's called a 'G' registration and Rule 5 of the ANO. The daftest thing is now simulating an engine failure after take off at 800' in order to go-around at 500'......ah the joy of ex navigators sitting around in the Belgrano wondering what lovely rules the CAA can introduce in order to stop us flying 
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Not... far... enough... along....
Posts: 20
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
People find it necessary to knock the aircraft because it's probably not the best choice for the job.
I'd be interested to hear these "silly" reasons that the Grob isn't IFR ready; as far as I knew, there is actually something to do with power to instruments and being able to isolate the generator; hence the possible addition of an extra switch or a something somewhere? Haven't heard an official line, but that seems to be what we believe up here.
TAC to ILS etc are all very useful and very relevant for the future, but it's not in the UAS EFT syllabus. You certainly can't do proper TACAN nav in the Tutor, can you? Again, another thing that people get very excited about the Tutor having that's actually sod all use because we're either not allowed to demo it or it doesn't feature in the syllabus.
Aeros improving confidence and edge-of-envelope handling is obviously very very important, and you're right that flick moves require a big wodge of finesse to pull off with any degree of accuracy. However, again, UAS QFIs aren't allowed to teach them, demonstrate them, practice them, or do them at all!! Again, another thing which would be good, IF HQ EFT had worked it into the syllabus.
Having an aircraft which enforces good landing technique is all fair and well, but when learning in the 'dog I had a QFI who certainly enforced good landing techniques; I didn't need the threat that the aircraft would try and kill me if I did it wrong, I had the threat that my instructor would instead! The Tutor's landing performance affects the confidence of a lot of students in a bad way. Better an aircraft that's very easy to land so that they build confidence, then teach them the ideal way to do it, than an aircraft which requires an ideal performance each time or you face making a mess of it!
The Tutor has a lot of faults which stop us from teaching EFT as well as we could, and a lot of kit and/or abilities which are all fine and well but no use if the techniques required are forbidden or not featured in EFT.
I'd be interested to hear these "silly" reasons that the Grob isn't IFR ready; as far as I knew, there is actually something to do with power to instruments and being able to isolate the generator; hence the possible addition of an extra switch or a something somewhere? Haven't heard an official line, but that seems to be what we believe up here.
TAC to ILS etc are all very useful and very relevant for the future, but it's not in the UAS EFT syllabus. You certainly can't do proper TACAN nav in the Tutor, can you? Again, another thing that people get very excited about the Tutor having that's actually sod all use because we're either not allowed to demo it or it doesn't feature in the syllabus.
Aeros improving confidence and edge-of-envelope handling is obviously very very important, and you're right that flick moves require a big wodge of finesse to pull off with any degree of accuracy. However, again, UAS QFIs aren't allowed to teach them, demonstrate them, practice them, or do them at all!! Again, another thing which would be good, IF HQ EFT had worked it into the syllabus.
Having an aircraft which enforces good landing technique is all fair and well, but when learning in the 'dog I had a QFI who certainly enforced good landing techniques; I didn't need the threat that the aircraft would try and kill me if I did it wrong, I had the threat that my instructor would instead! The Tutor's landing performance affects the confidence of a lot of students in a bad way. Better an aircraft that's very easy to land so that they build confidence, then teach them the ideal way to do it, than an aircraft which requires an ideal performance each time or you face making a mess of it!
The Tutor has a lot of faults which stop us from teaching EFT as well as we could, and a lot of kit and/or abilities which are all fine and well but no use if the techniques required are forbidden or not featured in EFT.
Pilot Officer PPRuNe
Join Date: Jan 1999
Location: UK
Posts: 396
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Recover,
I don't think ex-navigators at the CAA had anything to do with the 500' MSD and the EFATO problem. Alas it was much closer to home
Tonks
[ 03 December 2001: Message edited by: Tonkenna ]
I don't think ex-navigators at the CAA had anything to do with the 500' MSD and the EFATO problem. Alas it was much closer to home
Tonks
[ 03 December 2001: Message edited by: Tonkenna ]
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Not... far... enough... along....
Posts: 20
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Is this another one? No EFATOs below 500'? How about PFLs to the field that go a bit awry, are they going to raise our go-around height too.....?
Why don't they just take all the Tutors back? They obviously don't want us to actually be able to do anything in them
Why don't they just take all the Tutors back? They obviously don't want us to actually be able to do anything in them
Chaps - you're missing the root cause. Your plastic planes are not on the military register, hence all the problems. Solution? The MoD should buy them outright and operate their military training aircraft in a military manner to train for military needs.
If we can't even afford to buy some little plastic planes, then it really is time to turn out the lights.......
[ 03 December 2001: Message edited by: BEagle ]
If we can't even afford to buy some little plastic planes, then it really is time to turn out the lights.......
[ 03 December 2001: Message edited by: BEagle ]
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Not... far... enough... along....
Posts: 20
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Doesn't really fill you with confidence when you're flying an aircraft technically belonging to the Royal Bank of Scotland.
How long before I find myself wandering up to a Hawk/Tucano/Squirrel/whatever with a sponsor's logo on the side......?
How long before I find myself wandering up to a Hawk/Tucano/Squirrel/whatever with a sponsor's logo on the side......?
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Not... far... enough... along....
Posts: 20
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Sorry Olly, I don't follow; what's being done at the moment? The solution to the IFR problem, or the sponsor's logos........??
What's stopping you doing landaways?
What's stopping you doing landaways?