Military Helicopter Technology

[wm200]

Well I see petite little Lindsey is gone thanks to BCT....

I think we all left a part of ourselves in WOCistan... it's a rough place

[Lindsey]

Well I see petite little Lindsey is gone thanks to BCT....

Hey now, I'm just short! No one said anything about petite....

[akscott60]

Dont worry, SERE will erode more of your soul, as will Bco.

 

Give it time.

[Lindsey]

Dont worry, SERE will erode more of your soul, as will Bco.

 

Give it time.

Man, B Co ain't bad. Sure it can be frustrating...but sh*t. I'm getting paid pretty damn well to do a whole lot of nothing.

[WaterRooster]

Man, B Co ain't bad. Sure it can be frustrating...but sh*t. I'm getting paid pretty damn well to do a whole lot of nothing.

Everyone says that at first. Then it wears you down slowly to the point at the end that when you walk in There you know they don't want to or can't do a damn thing right. Gotta love them!

[movingtarget21]

Come over and enjoy the fun times at honors...May 9th can't come fast enough.

[Joe_P148]

Ugh, I hate technology. If we had things my way, we'd be flying stearmans, Hueys, Kiowas, cobras and A/L hawks. Pretty sure I was born 50 years too late.

Yeah yeah that's all fine and dandy until you need to maintain a zero drift hover under gogles with dust. Don't under estimate the power of technology it is great as long as you don't abuse it. The whole point of advancedand automated aircraft is to prevent mishaps, increase capabilities and reduce pilot workload. There's nothing wrong with that.

[akscott60]

Dust landing zero illum under goggles will make you a believer in hover symbology and automation.

[cwil7280]

I agree with Joe. As much as I hate to see technology put pilots jobs in jeopardy (case and point the Bell 407 UAV called the MQ-8 Fire Scout (http://www.navaldrones.com/Fire-X.html)), technology absolutely has it's place.

 

The reason I thought it was such a cool thing to have an auto-hover capability was because of an incident that Life Flight told us about. During a flight, the pilot (their aircraft only carries one pilot, no co-pilot) had a stroke and lost his vision. They were able to safely land the aircraft in a flat area by having a crew member read the instruments to the pilot so he could land it blind. Now, what if the pilot didn't lose his vision, but rather use of his limbs, or conciseness? They now have the auto hover capability so the aircraft could be landed safely in an emergency by a crew member using that feature. Or at least put the aircraft into hover while another solution was figured out.

 

Honestly, I have 0 hours of flight time, I don't know the pros and cons and details, so please correct me if I say something incorrect, uninformed, or generally stupid. However, I know that I am fortunate enough to have the opportunity to to fly in this modern generation. At least for now a pilot can take full advantage of technology while still operating from the cockpit, rather than from a computer system on the ground. "Real" piloting with minimal technology is great, but if the improvements help save lives and keep the troops on board safe, well, it's hard to say no to that.

[skyreaper]

These systems definitely have their place; as well as UAVs. Even if only to help with pilot fatigue. As you alluded to, they could even be more beneficial than manned aircraft is certain circumstances but I also think there will always be a need for certified and rated pilots, no matter how good technology gets. Call me an optimist.

I agree.... This is literally my most depressing topic of discussion.

[Ardo09203]

 

So what do 'real' pilots do?

They fly aircraft obviously....Not saying they don't utilize technology to do it. Just saying that I don't want to do that for the rest of my life day in and day out. But that's just me. Any by "that" I mean flying an aircraft in the position of "systems manager" rather than pilot.

[Hotdogs]

The whole point of advancedand automated aircraft is to prevent mishaps, increase capabilities and reduce pilot workload. There's nothing wrong with that.

 

Doing FAC(A) with the aircraft in it's own orbit would be a god send for CRM.

[akscott60]

So yea, zero illum sling loads under NVGs....

 

Thank god for hover symbology, PHOLD and TRC.

 

Some automation keeps me from crashing a 35 million dollar helicopter with 8 people on board.

[Yamer]

Just saw this http://mobile.verticalmag.com/?origref=#!/article/53592bc2ec0691f43a00037c-agustawestland-completes-autorotation-trials-for-aw609-program

[Yamer]

I think we all left a part of ourselves in WOCistan... it's a rough place

Hooray, that excites me for next week for sure...

[Yamer]

Hey now, I'm just short! No one said anything about petite....

True story lol

[BM1]

Anything that gets me home safe, and is another tool to use I am in favor of. There are alot of aviators who never made it home who would have with this technology (Operation Eagle Claw comes to mind). While we are at it, only hard core fighters use muskets! I would have felt much more like a "real" sailor in Afghanistan if my CROWS m240b and MATV was replaced by a bolt action m1903 rifle and a jeep!

 

I desperately want to be a pilot, but I also want to be a retired pilot alive and well sipping margaritas on some nice little island one day too.

[apacheguy]

Ugh, I hate technology. If we had things my way, we'd be flying stearmans, Hueys, Kiowas, cobras and A/L hawks. Pretty sure I was born 50 years too late.

Having flown most of those, I strongly prefer having tech. Not only does it lessen the workload which makes for a safer flight, it greatly increases capabilities. I can't even imagine how we went to war before FLIR or NVGs.

[Joe_P148]

I get that people like old school systems. The new systems aren't a threat they are there to help you do your job.

 

Automation has it's own issues when it comes to human factors and our interface in the cockpit is going to continue to evolve.

 

Manned aircraft in both CAS and Transport will never completely disappear. So don't get depressed because the technology is advancing, adapt and go with it! Embrace the fact the Army is going to spend 3 times what they need to to ensure you have the tools you need to complete your mission.

[I3uller]

Man, B Co ain't bad. Sure it can be frustrating...but sh*t. I'm getting paid pretty damn well to do a whole lot of nothing.

You might be...it's not all rainbows and kittens for everyone here at B co.

[Velocity173]

I'm not saying we need to go back to the stone ages and fly with a sectional and a compass either. I'm just saying there's technology that helps you do your job and there's over reliance on technology where it can be dangerous. When using the later, basic flying skills will erode. This has happened on several occasions and has been in the spot light recently with the Asiana accident.

 

Also, we all hate to see accidents, but there are plenty that aren't a result of lack of technology but lack of basic airmanship. Plenty of IIMC accidents (military & civilian) where the pilot was instrument rated, had a completely airworthy aircraft but they were incapable of flying on instruments. We shouldn't ever get to the point where we need a computer to take over for lack of BI skills.

[SBuzzkill]

I'd love to have an autopilot!

[akscott60]

I'd love to have an autopilot!

 

 

I know what you mean. I am proud I flew the Kiowa, and the fact that it gave you great SA from its nav system, but didnt fly itself in any way.

Now that I moved to arguably the most automated Army aircraft, I enjoy the help. Crusing while coupled to the flight director allows me to do other things. Shooting an approach to a dark LZ under no illum coupled to the FD allows me to be safer.

Of course, I handfly it quite a bit, and can turn off every bit of automation.

 

I dont feel that the pilot is getting replaced in the Chinook anytime soon.

[d10]

Automation will have to get much better before I trust it for zero illum dust landings but preferring to hand fly long cross country legs is just ridiculous. I'm happy to have an aircraft that will fly hands off if I want it to or 100% hands on if that's what I prefer.

[michael.scheller]

Okay, There is some disinformation here. I taught the H60M NETT and have about 700 hours instructing in it.

 

The Mike can do coupled hovering (stationary or moving). The Mike can fly coupled FMS routes. The Mike can fly an ILS down to 50 radar altitude and level off. The Mike can execute a go-around to acquire a 70 KIAS 750 fpm rate of climb.

 

The Mike will NOT start at a hover fly the route and come back to a hover at a point on the route. However the pilot make establish coupled hover, engage go-around, select an altitude to level off, engage the FMS route, adjust altitude and airspeeds en route and once approaching a destination slow, using the Flight Director to less than 60 KIAS. Once below 60 KIAS the pilot may engage coupled hover mode again. In the hover mode, the Mike will not navigate to a specific hover point.

 

A lot to be said for technology. A lot to be said for steam gauges. Most pilots, in an aircraft that they are comfortable with, when thrust into their glass cockpit and all of the "bells and whistles" will sense an immediate lack of spatial orientation and situational awareness and equate that initial feeling with an idea that the aircraft "sucks them" into the cockpit. This is true, initially. But, I can tell you that once you've developed comfort in a good high tech cockpit, your SA goes way up and you spend way less time with your head in the cockpit than you did before.

 

Boring is good. Complacency is bad.