Helicopter Cockpits
Thread Starter
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: US
Posts: 8
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Helicopter Cockpits
Here's an open ended question for everyone:
With all of the new advanced cockpits that are now becoming available on helicopters today, which one is the best and why?
Hello Bubba
With all of the new advanced cockpits that are now becoming available on helicopters today, which one is the best and why?
Hello Bubba
EC-225 followed by EC-155/145/135 (same displays give or take); no doubt about it! 
Purveyor of Egg Liqueur to Lucifer
Twice the distance from the middle to the end.
The EC range? From what I am hearing, ergonomics can't be much of a factor in the judging!
SS
The old Sikorsky S-58/58T and Wessex without a doubt.
Big ol' open window for a door....and completely isolated from the lower cabin riff-raff. A seat made for kings....plenty of room for your lunch bucket.
Big ol' open window for a door....and completely isolated from the lower cabin riff-raff. A seat made for kings....plenty of room for your lunch bucket.
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: In the Haven of Peace
Age: 79
Posts: 600
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Ah SASless, a man after my own heart. The other good thing about the 58T of course, is that with twist grip throttles manual governor workload is negligible.
Ah yes.....and no FMS to muck about with....steam fed gauges....no digital displays to confuse you.....basic SAS with no yaw channel ever.....biggest thing to remember was to change the bog roll on the rotor brake handle so you did not wind up with a completely pink shirt.
A Real Man's machine.
A Real Man's machine.
Gee, how quickly you two forget the wonderful (lack of) visibility and 5 foot high cyclic, and truckie's arm when flying up North: but it certainly had character 
SS, you've obviously never sat in an EC-155 then (or are very distant from the 95th percentile!)
F43, I guess I ought to be 61man now, and next year.......!
SASless, yeah; mucking about with an FMS is a real pain (can't be that difficult: they were designed for fixed wing pilots!
)
F43, I guess I ought to be 61man now, and next year.......!
SASless, yeah; mucking about with an FMS is a real pain
(can't be that difficult: they were designed for fixed wing pilots! )
(really must get to bed - amazing how addictive this is when you've not had a working 'puter for over a week...)
Anyone who thinks the EC135 is up there in the "best cockpits" league clearly hasn't had the chance to compare with something like the MD902. As a company instructor has been known to opine, "the pilot definitely wasn't in the office the week Eurocopter put the 135 cockpit together". Lovely screens and all that, but look where the controls for adjusting the BarAlt/ DH are to be found. Roof panel? Should've gone out with Sea Kings and other 60s antiques. That SHED BUS switch is beautifully positioned for Coriolis disorientation. Nice twist-grips, shame about the spring-loading/narrow arc-of-travel/ captions every time it goes through neutral. FADEC switches - why? Double AHHRS (sp? - it is late...) is lovely - if you're the sort of pilot who reads a newspaper SPIFR instead of watching the dials - but an autopilot only an engineer could love ("what's it doing now?").
Decent cockpit? - Like I said, give me a 902, but preferably one built to last (with an IIDS screen that doesn't self-destruct and windows that don't depart autonomously).
Anyone who thinks the EC135 is up there in the "best cockpits" league clearly hasn't had the chance to compare with something like the MD902. As a company instructor has been known to opine, "the pilot definitely wasn't in the office the week Eurocopter put the 135 cockpit together". Lovely screens and all that, but look where the controls for adjusting the BarAlt/ DH are to be found. Roof panel? Should've gone out with Sea Kings and other 60s antiques. That SHED BUS switch is beautifully positioned for Coriolis disorientation. Nice twist-grips, shame about the spring-loading/narrow arc-of-travel/ captions every time it goes through neutral. FADEC switches - why? Double AHHRS (sp? - it is late...) is lovely - if you're the sort of pilot who reads a newspaper SPIFR instead of watching the dials - but an autopilot only an engineer could love ("what's it doing now?").
Decent cockpit? - Like I said, give me a 902, but preferably one built to last (with an IIDS screen that doesn't self-destruct and windows that don't depart autonomously).
212man....in light of your newly acquired skills as a real helicopter pilot...(translated....Flying Igor's Ironworks products)...you are probably becoming aware of what real class is. Being allowed to walk to work...look down on others from a heightened perpective....having the gray-matter exercise along with mere button punching. Getting to ride in a really nice machine....granted you do need to pack a lunch along with you as it takes all day to get across town in the thing but it is a nice ride.
T and B, (et al) I concede that not having flown the 135 I was basing my assumption that having the same avionics fit as the 155 it would be equally good. Obviously, from what you say, the Germans have a slightly different view on ergonmics to ECF! I was under the impression that essentially the autopilot is the same (albeit taylored to the different flight characteristics) and therefore any talk of "what's it doing now" may be symptomatic of other things.
SASles, yeah it's great; why fly in a 160 kt aircraft with virtually no vibration, suberb ergonomics, space to put all your documents and flight bags, workload reducing features beyond reproach (FADEC, EFIS FMS etc) when you can fly a 115 kt aircraft with much higher vibration levels, an RMI and two OBS', shotgun ergonomics, N2 controlled by a second crew member and it hasn't even got space to put your bag (or packed lunch in your case) ?
Mind you, the hosties are a marked improvement!
SASles, yeah it's great; why fly in a 160 kt aircraft with virtually no vibration, suberb ergonomics, space to put all your documents and flight bags, workload reducing features beyond reproach (FADEC, EFIS FMS etc) when you can fly a 115 kt aircraft with much higher vibration levels, an RMI and two OBS', shotgun ergonomics, N2 controlled by a second crew member and it hasn't even got space to put your bag (or packed lunch in your case) ?
Mind you, the hosties are a marked improvement!
It all come around to "macho-ness" 212Man.....and I am sorry...the 61 requires a man's touch....the 155 needs someone that can punch buttons. There are some who pride themselves upon making those two OBS's look like a computer controls them....when in fact...it is flesh and blood.....and brains doing it. That is the mark of being a pilot....and sets one a part from the systems operators. Plus the slick legged skirt wearers in the back is a plus too I guess. My experience was along the lines of having the OX or someone of his ilk back there to look at.
SASless, well there are some manouevres I have done in the 155 that the only button being pressed was the force trim release (plus the 'huge smile' button )
In fact it is a misnoma to think that modern aircraft do it all for you; it's the usual garbage in, garbage out deal. I've seen pilots try to fly a hold with all the modes engaged (except FMS/NAV), but misinterpret the information and disapear up their own backsides (albeit very accurately with minimal height or airspeed loss.) Modern technology does not 'a good pilot make', it makes 'good pilot better' (or better able to do the jobe.)
Oddly enough, I have never gauged an aircraft by how macho it made me feel; perhaps there's a topic for further debate! I'd have thought the best controls were those that responded to a 'woman's touch' too, not some beefy gorilla stirring the big sticks around!
)In fact it is a misnoma to think that modern aircraft do it all for you; it's the usual garbage in, garbage out deal. I've seen pilots try to fly a hold with all the modes engaged (except FMS/NAV), but misinterpret the information and disapear up their own backsides (albeit very accurately with minimal height or airspeed loss.) Modern technology does not 'a good pilot make', it makes 'good pilot better' (or better able to do the jobe.)
Oddly enough, I have never gauged an aircraft by how macho it made me feel; perhaps there's a topic for further debate! I'd have thought the best controls were those that responded to a 'woman's touch' too, not some beefy gorilla stirring the big sticks around!
Ah...212man....much to work with in your post....but Heliport would have me in the wood shed if I took advantage of the opening.