Bulldog vs. Tutor
 

Does anyone have any opinions on how the Bulldog and Grob compare to each other as aerobatic training aircraft? (having flown both I feel inclined to favour the Bulldog)

Firefly and Bulldog would be a closer comparison rather than that characterless effort from the Germans

The Tutor does not roll. Can't do aeros without roll.

Is it an aerobatic training aircraft or a training aircraft?

If the latter, grob over 'dog over chippy (no idea on firefly), even if all were new.

The Firefly doesn't roll to well either.

Das Teutor rolls pretty well, it just doesn't have any ailerons! Roll rate from a 100kt flick entry is reasonable. Hence the reason most Tutor aero sequences you'll see involve a lot of flick manoevres in the place of conventional rolling. Well, that and the fact it's pretty much the only service aircraft you can intentionally flick.

Bulldog :ok:

At least in its day... then they started sticking silly 'This airframe will fall apart if you move the control column stickers' on 'em.

Though Tutor is easier to fly them in...

I've not flown the Firefly for any great length of time but have it on good authority it's the best of that bunch.

Tutor is 'FUN' to fly, Firefly - more fun for aeros, but lacks the 'nice' kit to go on a comfortable cross country.


(.......AEF Plt).

At least the Bulldog didn't need to be flicked to roll pretty well! As did the Chipmunk - it just lacked enough power.

The only Firefly I flew was the T67A - dreadful roll rate and I'm told the Plastic Spastic isn't any better. Hence both Firefly and Das Teutor have to be abused by flicking to roll quickly. Which is a bit pointless since no other service aeroplane is cleared for such manoeuvres.

BULLDOG vs TUTOR
 

As my Prune handle implies I have lots of time on the Bulldog on the venerable Bulldog, I have also flown the Tutor for a few hours. Given that the role of both is ELEMENTARY flying training (or sadly, mainly AEF, these days) the need is for an aeroplane that manouevres well in all axis. This makes it easy to learn the basic pitching and rolling manoeuvres which foster confidence whilst manoeuvering and teach the need to monitor G and engine limits. For this the 'Dog won hands down IMHO. The Tutor and Firefly have their individual merits but as aforementioned require to be flicked to produce rapid rates of roll, a manoeuvre which is not pertinent on any operational aircraft. As an aerobatic trainer give me a (Low FI) Bulldog any time.

Was the TSR-2 better than the Tornado GR ?




.....

Is Rocky Balboa as good as Rocky 1?

My only real gripe about the Bulldog was its fuel system - ISTR it has a quasi-injection system, rather than a carb a la Chipmunk, but it still can not maintain power if continuously inverted for more than a few seconds.

The gripe about the Tutor, which I've not flown, is far more basic. It's not painted like an RAF aircraft, and looks far too much like a weekend flier's steed as a result. Why can't they have a colour scheme that is a bit more military?

I'm far too young to have ever seen the TSR 2 but to me as someone who has an interest in military hardware the Tornado always seemed like a slightly mushy compromise plane compared to the TSR 2 which looked like a real thoroughbred.

A_A the tutor needs to be white as it reflects heat and if it were painted the skin would absorb heat and warp the material it is made from. That was what i was told when i asked the same question as you.

And why isn't it on the military register? Is it legal to have military markings on a civil registered aircraft?

And it can't have a military colour scheme because the carbon fibre doesn't like absorbing too much heat - allegedly (not sure how that fits with TypHoon and GR7/9 having carbon fibre bits though!!!)

Wasn't the Bulldog 30 seconds inverted once the inverted oil system had been fitted?

The reason the Tutors are on the G- reg is because they where one of the first examples of this government's Private Finance Initiatives, the planes are not property of the RAF (or the crown) simply on long term lease (this makes them much easier to get rid of when the RAF has finished with them)

I think it is fair to say that, for all sorts of reasons, the Tutor isn't being worked nearly as hard as the Bulldog was. Nevertheless, the Dog was a solid piece of engineering and could cope with a whole spectrum of the usual abuse, and more, associated with ab-initio training. Tutor and Firefly are 'soft' by comparison and will never last as long, given the same sort of use. Nowhere near as long.

Methinks you are confusing 2 issues. DHFS helicopters are civil owned and military registered (COMR) as (now) are the King Airs. Just because they are leased does not mean they have to be on the civil register. Unfortunately being on the civil register means you have to operate them to all civilian rules, as an example you cannot fly the Tutor with miniflares fitted in your LSJ.

Back to the original question, IMHO the Tutor is just the better aircraft. Better avionics fit than the Bulldog, better climb performance with the 3 bladed prop (as long as all three blades remain attached:E ) better flick ability (and who cares that this has no military application) but less forgiving undercarriage, lower x-wind limit and a m u c h s l o w e r roll rate. Horses for courses really, but I think the Bulldog was more fun!!

Give me a lycoming engined 'munk over all three!