Bell 609 Crew Licencing
Thread Starter
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Room 249
Age: 39
Posts: 141
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Bell 609 Crew Licencing
Hi all
Neither Rumours or news, I know:
I went to Farnborough for the first time yesterday, and watching the Bell 609 display got me thinking (always dangerous). Are the pilots licenced as aeroplane or helo crew?
Not that it matters, of course - I'm probably not going to be allowed near it any time soon.
As an aside, for any who went, favourite displays? Thought the C-27J was superb, the pilots know exactly what the thing can do! Blades and current Red Arrows were stonking as usual and the Vulcan was, of course, pretty special.
Geeky post over.
cf
Neither Rumours or news, I know:
I went to Farnborough for the first time yesterday, and watching the Bell 609 display got me thinking (always dangerous). Are the pilots licenced as aeroplane or helo crew?
Not that it matters, of course - I'm probably not going to be allowed near it any time soon.
As an aside, for any who went, favourite displays? Thought the C-27J was superb, the pilots know exactly what the thing can do! Blades and current Red Arrows were stonking as usual and the Vulcan was, of course, pretty special.
Geeky post over.
cf
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: the land of redemption
Age: 53
Posts: 250
Likes: 0
Received 8 Likes
on
1 Post
Talking with some Agusta's ground instructor here in Italy I've been told constructor's intention to create ad-hoc licence instead of extending one existing rotorcraft or airplane licence with a powered lift ad-on; student pilots would be able to gain their P.L. licence by attending a ground course and a simulator course with some alleviations if they already have a helo or plane licence in force.
That's Life!!
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Out of the sand pit, carving a path through our jungle.
Age: 72
Posts: 396
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Speaking with Bell when I was over in the 90s, their idea for the powered lift licence was to have ATPL/CPL in either cat (rotary or plank), and a PPL in the other cat. The Bell course, ground and air, would lead to the issue of the powered lift licence with the FAA; basically the JAA were in agreement with that line of thought.
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Variable
Posts: 118
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I was speaking to a V22 pilot yesterday who went from flight school to the Osprey. He first did some rotary wing flying and multi-engine fixed wing and his impression was that the Osprey feels more like operating a ME turbo-prop than a helicopter. It can be trimmed hands off in the hover due to fly-by-wire so the traditional helicopter skills are not needed as much. Only 10% of the typical mission needs helicopter type skills.
I am still inclined to think that a helicopter background is going to be safer than fixed wing if they start using it for SAR or extended hover work. May not be relevant for the 609 but I know who I would prefer in the front seat if I was pax. Easier to teach a helicopter pilot to fly at 250 knots than to teach a plank driver to hover or approach with VRS in mind.
Any V22 pilots want to enlighten us?
I am still inclined to think that a helicopter background is going to be safer than fixed wing if they start using it for SAR or extended hover work. May not be relevant for the 609 but I know who I would prefer in the front seat if I was pax. Easier to teach a helicopter pilot to fly at 250 knots than to teach a plank driver to hover or approach with VRS in mind.
Any V22 pilots want to enlighten us?
That's Life!!
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Out of the sand pit, carving a path through our jungle.
Age: 72
Posts: 396
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Only 10% of the typical mission needs helicopter type skills.
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Australia
Posts: 97
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Vtol 609
Hi guys,
CASA (Australia) changed the ATPL(H) syllabus a few years ago and included some fixed wing systems in the course. For example pressurization. The anticipation is that the 609 will require a ATPL(H) to fly it due to the critical landing phase when the transformation occurs (vortex ring state etc).
In the cruise a helicopter/ fixed wing is the same (except flapback and the TAS I guess). Anyway its been assessed that the knowledge of a helicopter pilot is more important.
Having flown twin turbine helicopters for 12 years and recently (2006) transfered to twin engine turbine fixed wing, helicopters are a much more demanding airframe to fly and manage. I also hold both ATPL(H) and (A) now and have flown out to oil rigs. I believe with the cost of oil increasing oil companies will be drilling in deeper and deeper water. This means further out to sea. With the increase in automation the rigs will need less and less personel. The 609 is perfect for this scenario. The V22 might be reborn in a civilian version which doesn't have the folding wings etc. The aircraft will be lighter, and less complicated making them attractive and affordable (with the high oil price) to companies. Give the V22 ten years of service and have all of the mods and STI's completed the safety record will improve. Oil Union's will accept the aircraft and the days of the Chinook in the north sea will be reborn with the modern version.
Thought's?
CASA (Australia) changed the ATPL(H) syllabus a few years ago and included some fixed wing systems in the course. For example pressurization. The anticipation is that the 609 will require a ATPL(H) to fly it due to the critical landing phase when the transformation occurs (vortex ring state etc).
In the cruise a helicopter/ fixed wing is the same (except flapback and the TAS I guess). Anyway its been assessed that the knowledge of a helicopter pilot is more important.
Having flown twin turbine helicopters for 12 years and recently (2006) transfered to twin engine turbine fixed wing, helicopters are a much more demanding airframe to fly and manage. I also hold both ATPL(H) and (A) now and have flown out to oil rigs. I believe with the cost of oil increasing oil companies will be drilling in deeper and deeper water. This means further out to sea. With the increase in automation the rigs will need less and less personel. The 609 is perfect for this scenario. The V22 might be reborn in a civilian version which doesn't have the folding wings etc. The aircraft will be lighter, and less complicated making them attractive and affordable (with the high oil price) to companies. Give the V22 ten years of service and have all of the mods and STI's completed the safety record will improve. Oil Union's will accept the aircraft and the days of the Chinook in the north sea will be reborn with the modern version.
Thought's?
Who cares. Tilt-Rotors are gay anyway... Faster future flying "helicopters" will push them out of the market.
And remember the comparison file report that Nick Lappos posted here for a while ago, whell according to the report current helicopters on the market wipped the tilt-rotors ass in most areas
And remember the comparison file report that Nick Lappos posted here for a while ago, whell according to the report current helicopters on the market wipped the tilt-rotors ass in most areas
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Below Escape Velocity
Posts: 416
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
While it may have changed a bit, in 2004, the helicopter curriculum for new accession Marine Corps aviators in the tiltrotor (V-22) track included a reduced ground and flight syllabus.
Where helicopter track included 93.0 hours of ground training, tiltrotor included 58.5. Omitted items were the portions of the curriculum dedicated to instrument navigation and VFR navigation. Since those topics are duplicated in the multi-engine fixed-wing curriculum, that's where the tiltrotor track students pick that up.
Flight syllabus was similarly shortened from helicopter only for tiltrotor. 39.0 hours in the simulator for helicopter track vs. 10.4 for tiltrotor track. Again, the instrument navigation syllabus was omitted and picked up in the fixed-wing curriculum.
In the aircraft, 108.9 vs 59.0 dual.
Solo 4.7 vs 1.0.
Areas that were NOT omitted included such helicopter items as basic instruments, low-level navigation, formation, and tactics. This was still pretty much the program in late 2005. When all is said and done, the tiltrotor students end up with about 30% more training in total before they get their wings than straight helicopter or multi-engine fixed students. Subsequent training for the V-22 I imagine probably takes the better part of a year (as do most fleet naval aircraft, more or less), but don't know.
From what I'd heard, Shawn is correct, a powered-lift category would apply to V-22 or 609 (not that there will be a commercial type rating in the V-22 anytime soon). What's in the test standards and so forth... no idea, though I would imagine some amalgam of helicopter and fixed-wing would be a good starting point.
Where helicopter track included 93.0 hours of ground training, tiltrotor included 58.5. Omitted items were the portions of the curriculum dedicated to instrument navigation and VFR navigation. Since those topics are duplicated in the multi-engine fixed-wing curriculum, that's where the tiltrotor track students pick that up.
Flight syllabus was similarly shortened from helicopter only for tiltrotor. 39.0 hours in the simulator for helicopter track vs. 10.4 for tiltrotor track. Again, the instrument navigation syllabus was omitted and picked up in the fixed-wing curriculum.
In the aircraft, 108.9 vs 59.0 dual.
Solo 4.7 vs 1.0.
Areas that were NOT omitted included such helicopter items as basic instruments, low-level navigation, formation, and tactics. This was still pretty much the program in late 2005. When all is said and done, the tiltrotor students end up with about 30% more training in total before they get their wings than straight helicopter or multi-engine fixed students. Subsequent training for the V-22 I imagine probably takes the better part of a year (as do most fleet naval aircraft, more or less), but don't know.
From what I'd heard, Shawn is correct, a powered-lift category would apply to V-22 or 609 (not that there will be a commercial type rating in the V-22 anytime soon). What's in the test standards and so forth... no idea, though I would imagine some amalgam of helicopter and fixed-wing would be a good starting point.
