Helicopter FlightSims
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Kentucky
Posts: 83
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Bell 206B III Annuciators
Thanks for all the previous info, the new cockpit is nearing completion!
I have a couple of other questions about the annuciators.
1) On the red warning lights (engine out and battery hot) is it black letters on the red light, or red letters on a black background.
2) On the amber cautions lights, same thing, is it black letters/amber letters?
When I get this thing done, I'm going to post it up on HoverControl.com.
You can check out an early version picture at:
http://www.hovercontrol.net/web_page...ST_Cockpit.gif
I have a couple of other questions about the annuciators.
1) On the red warning lights (engine out and battery hot) is it black letters on the red light, or red letters on a black background.
2) On the amber cautions lights, same thing, is it black letters/amber letters?
When I get this thing done, I'm going to post it up on HoverControl.com.
You can check out an early version picture at:
http://www.hovercontrol.net/web_page...ST_Cockpit.gif
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Kentucky
Posts: 83
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
B206B III Annuciator Behavior on startup.
Could you tell me the behavior of the annuciator lights (I'm simulating their behavior) on startup?
For example: The Low Rotor remains off unless you try to raise the collective while N2 rpm is below 90%.
2nd question: Are you refered to as "Jetranger {callsign}" or "Bell {callsign} by ATC"?
For example:
You: Los Angeles tower, Jetranger N001ST inbound on the Industrial over the radar dome.
ATC: Jetranger N001ST, report mid-field abeam.
Thanks,
Patrick
For example: The Low Rotor remains off unless you try to raise the collective while N2 rpm is below 90%.
2nd question: Are you refered to as "Jetranger {callsign}" or "Bell {callsign} by ATC"?
For example:
You: Los Angeles tower, Jetranger N001ST inbound on the Industrial over the radar dome.
ATC: Jetranger N001ST, report mid-field abeam.
Thanks,
Patrick
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Kentucky
Posts: 83
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
How does ATC refer to a Bell 206B Jetranger?
When you call a Jetranger, do you say, "Jetranger N001ST" or "Bell N001ST".
Obviously, I'm refering to a non-commercial flight.
Thanks for your help.
Patrick
Obviously, I'm refering to a non-commercial flight.
Thanks for your help.
Patrick
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Fort Worth ARTCC ZFW
Posts: 1,155
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Howdy;
In the US, it would be Helicopter, copter, Bell or Jet Ranger. All would be correct. Oh yes, there is also just using the N number...
regards
Scott H. Voigt
NATCA Southwest Region
Safety and Technology Chairman
In the US, it would be Helicopter, copter, Bell or Jet Ranger. All would be correct. Oh yes, there is also just using the N number...
regards
Scott H. Voigt
NATCA Southwest Region
Safety and Technology Chairman
Patrick asked:
Let's take the second question first. No, Patrick, only pretentious S-76 pilots feel the need to announce to everyone on the frequency that they are "SIKORSKY! Seven-Six-Uniform-Tango." The rest of us simply make do with "Helicopter So-and-So." Here in the U.S., nobody cares what particular make/model helo you're flying.
As far as the 206 annunciator panel, the "Low Rotor" light will be ON anytime the rotor is below 90% NR, no matter where you position the collective. However, if you do raise the collective while the "Low Rotor" light is on, you'll now hear the low rotor HORN blow.
During start-up in a 206B, you should be seeing the "Eng Out," "Low Rotor," and "Trans Press" caution lights on.
Could you tell me the behavior of the annuciator lights (I'm simulating their behavior) on startup?
For example: The Low Rotor remains off unless you try to raise the collective while N2 rpm is below 90%.
2nd question: Are you refered to as "Jetranger {callsign}" or "Bell {callsign} by ATC"?
For example: The Low Rotor remains off unless you try to raise the collective while N2 rpm is below 90%.
2nd question: Are you refered to as "Jetranger {callsign}" or "Bell {callsign} by ATC"?
As far as the 206 annunciator panel, the "Low Rotor" light will be ON anytime the rotor is below 90% NR, no matter where you position the collective. However, if you do raise the collective while the "Low Rotor" light is on, you'll now hear the low rotor HORN blow.
During start-up in a 206B, you should be seeing the "Eng Out," "Low Rotor," and "Trans Press" caution lights on.
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: EU
Posts: 413
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I can't find the actual change. I'm basing that on the fact that whilst I was at the college (1999) we were not allowed to use aircraft types (eg. "jetranger ST") but by the time I did my radar validation (a year later) we were.
Come to think of it, it could just be that I had duff instructors.
EDIT: In fact, Spitoon - you're quite correct; I've since found the right page in the book and that phraseology has been okay in the UK since 1996! Second option must be true after all.....
Come to think of it, it could just be that I had duff instructors.
EDIT: In fact, Spitoon - you're quite correct; I've since found the right page in the book and that phraseology has been okay in the UK since 1996! Second option must be true after all.....
Senis Semper Fidelis
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: Lancashire U K
Posts: 1,288
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Anouncing yourself to the ATC, it varies from Pilot to Pilot, some will say Jetranger Golf Yankee Sierra, or some would say Helicopter Golf Yankee Sierra, or when questioned by ATC I have heard some give the model number , I dont think there is any set down title anouncement, as long as the ATC girl/boy know what they are looking for!
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: 18 Degrees North
Posts: 699
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
where I have I been ?
I thought I had flown round the UK a lot, obviously when you pass your details when asked for them you say your type e.g "Bell 206 5 miles south of leicester etc etc"
but on the very first call you give full call sign and all subsequent contacts when addressed by ATC in the abbreviated format, you say " Helicopter Golf echo romeo" dont you?
someone who says every call "Jetranger Golf echo romeo" would be considered by me to be at the very least a tw*t, and I dont mean twit.
I have never heard anyone do this, I was taught, have taught everyone else to say "helicopter"
have i been missing something ?
sounds like a case of little man syndrome if you need to say that kind of thing. hey mr Vfrpilotpb, where have you heard all this ? or have I misunderstood you?
I thought I had flown round the UK a lot, obviously when you pass your details when asked for them you say your type e.g "Bell 206 5 miles south of leicester etc etc"
but on the very first call you give full call sign and all subsequent contacts when addressed by ATC in the abbreviated format, you say " Helicopter Golf echo romeo" dont you?
someone who says every call "Jetranger Golf echo romeo" would be considered by me to be at the very least a tw*t, and I dont mean twit.
I have never heard anyone do this, I was taught, have taught everyone else to say "helicopter"
have i been missing something ?
sounds like a case of little man syndrome if you need to say that kind of thing. hey mr Vfrpilotpb, where have you heard all this ? or have I misunderstood you?
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Sunrise, Fl. U.S.A.
Posts: 467
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
CF,
True, however depending on where one is, freq congestion may prevent it.
Where I am it will be helicopter for all xmissions in the blind, such as at an uncontrolled field.
With a tower or departure/approach I'll use helicopter thrice, when first contacting the facility, when contacting them to request a freq chnge, and for the acknowledgement to their response thereof.
Between those times it's usually just the last three, such as 4VH.
True, however depending on where one is, freq congestion may prevent it.
Where I am it will be helicopter for all xmissions in the blind, such as at an uncontrolled field.
With a tower or departure/approach I'll use helicopter thrice, when first contacting the facility, when contacting them to request a freq chnge, and for the acknowledgement to their response thereof.
Between those times it's usually just the last three, such as 4VH.
1261
When you were at the College, there was no question of "duff instructors" or of you not being "allowed" to use such callsigns. That type of callsign was - and is - included in the relevant classroom work and one or two examples were included in the practical exercises. However, most trainees (evidently including you), at that stage, are not astute enough to latch on to that type of callsign that the pilot has initiated and "revert to type" and just use the registration. You would also have been referred to the relevant reference in MATS Part 1.
When you were at the College, there was no question of "duff instructors" or of you not being "allowed" to use such callsigns. That type of callsign was - and is - included in the relevant classroom work and one or two examples were included in the practical exercises. However, most trainees (evidently including you), at that stage, are not astute enough to latch on to that type of callsign that the pilot has initiated and "revert to type" and just use the registration. You would also have been referred to the relevant reference in MATS Part 1.
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: EU
Posts: 413
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Evidently yes, I was not astute enough.....
Alas, MATS Part 1 references were pretty thin on the ground when I was at college.
I didn't mean that to be a personal slur on instructors at the college - hence the smiley face. But if the cap fits, wear it.
Alas, MATS Part 1 references were pretty thin on the ground when I was at college.
I didn't mean that to be a personal slur on instructors at the college - hence the smiley face. But if the cap fits, wear it.
Guest
Posts: n/a
2 sheds, you're very touchy!
it's a long time since I was at the college of knowledge but i remember a distinct variation in the quality of instructors - one or two were excellent and some were very definitely duff. open your eyes - can you honestly say that this isn't the case now? it happens in all walks of life - i'd be surprised if the college is any different.
and given the amount of stuff that a trainee has to take in during their time at the college, one or two examples in practical exercises is not a lot of exposure to something. you expect trainees to latch on to things (if they're astute enough) - i always thought that that was where the instructors could make a difference.
no smiley from me - if you're not prepared to accept that there are weaknesses in something, you're never going to improve it. is the college and its output perfect?
it's a long time since I was at the college of knowledge but i remember a distinct variation in the quality of instructors - one or two were excellent and some were very definitely duff. open your eyes - can you honestly say that this isn't the case now? it happens in all walks of life - i'd be surprised if the college is any different.
and given the amount of stuff that a trainee has to take in during their time at the college, one or two examples in practical exercises is not a lot of exposure to something. you expect trainees to latch on to things (if they're astute enough) - i always thought that that was where the instructors could make a difference.
no smiley from me - if you're not prepared to accept that there are weaknesses in something, you're never going to improve it. is the college and its output perfect?
Chaps
Sorry if I appeared to be touchy! But to suggest in this particular context that "duff instructors" could be blamed, I thought was inappropriate, shall we say. 1261, thank you for your clarification.
One could blame insufficient exposure to different callsigns in the design of simulator exercises perhaps or insufficient attention by the trainee to the detail in the MATS Part 1. However, all trainees have that document in their possession, though I believe that it is no longer a personal "for life" issue, which I think is a retrograde step.
I do not think that inclusion of every type of callsign in exercises would necessarily be useful. That would mean an over-emphasis on that aspect, almost certainly to the detriment of the ATC techniques being practised and would also have to include military styles of callsigns along with their respective varying abbreviation criteria. Unfortunately, the first time that trainee ATCOs are currently exposed to practical RTF training is concurrent with the first Rating (Aerodrome) training.
When both the flying training was done more thoroughly and an RTF licence was required to operate the aircraft radio equipment, this area was necessarily addressed in more detail. I think that it would be far more appropriate if a specific RTF licence were required - as, indeed, it was at one time - before the issue of a Student ATCO licence.
However, as you might be aware, the structure of the training courses is changing w.e.f. 2004 and the first rating course will be preceded by a generic "Introductory" Course. This will necessarily include basic, non rating-specific RTF training and this will present a prime opportunity for aspects such as this to be addressed in more detail.
2 S
Sorry if I appeared to be touchy! But to suggest in this particular context that "duff instructors" could be blamed, I thought was inappropriate, shall we say. 1261, thank you for your clarification.
One could blame insufficient exposure to different callsigns in the design of simulator exercises perhaps or insufficient attention by the trainee to the detail in the MATS Part 1. However, all trainees have that document in their possession, though I believe that it is no longer a personal "for life" issue, which I think is a retrograde step.
I do not think that inclusion of every type of callsign in exercises would necessarily be useful. That would mean an over-emphasis on that aspect, almost certainly to the detriment of the ATC techniques being practised and would also have to include military styles of callsigns along with their respective varying abbreviation criteria. Unfortunately, the first time that trainee ATCOs are currently exposed to practical RTF training is concurrent with the first Rating (Aerodrome) training.
When both the flying training was done more thoroughly and an RTF licence was required to operate the aircraft radio equipment, this area was necessarily addressed in more detail. I think that it would be far more appropriate if a specific RTF licence were required - as, indeed, it was at one time - before the issue of a Student ATCO licence.
However, as you might be aware, the structure of the training courses is changing w.e.f. 2004 and the first rating course will be preceded by a generic "Introductory" Course. This will necessarily include basic, non rating-specific RTF training and this will present a prime opportunity for aspects such as this to be addressed in more detail.
2 S
niknak
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 2,335
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Patrick,
To get back to your original point, in the UK, the vast majority of units will not differentiate between aircraft types in that respect.
Some may refer to a helicopter as "helicopter N100ST", but thereafter it's just plain old abbreviated N'0ST".
I've never seen the point in prefixing an aircraft's registration with it's type, if there's any ambiguity, make them use full callsign and that will hopefully solve any difficulty.
I am pleased to read what 2 sheds has written, too many atco's come out of the college's spouting MATS part 1 verbatum combined with their own instructors slant on what's in or out, and it sounds bloody awful.
R/T should be precise and concise, nothing more, nothing less.
To get back to your original point, in the UK, the vast majority of units will not differentiate between aircraft types in that respect.
Some may refer to a helicopter as "helicopter N100ST", but thereafter it's just plain old abbreviated N'0ST".
I've never seen the point in prefixing an aircraft's registration with it's type, if there's any ambiguity, make them use full callsign and that will hopefully solve any difficulty.
I am pleased to read what 2 sheds has written, too many atco's come out of the college's spouting MATS part 1 verbatum combined with their own instructors slant on what's in or out, and it sounds bloody awful.
R/T should be precise and concise, nothing more, nothing less.