Jump to content

New Fixed Wing Trainer Gorb G120TP


Recommended Posts

It appears the new fixed wing trainer for transitioning Army rotary-wing aviators and the Army's initial-entry fixed-wing students will be the Grob G120TP in the near future.

 

Turbo prop, glass cockpit, and fully aerobatic (stressed to +6/-4g). Max speed 235kts, range 580nm, max endurance 6hrs and a max altitude of 25,000 feet.

 

Training will still be held at the Dothan Regional Airport. Impressive trainer as the Army takes its training program into the 21st century with the UH-72A as well. A great time to be a future Army aviator whether it's fixed or rotary wing.

 

A total of 6 aircraft at this time will be utilized. The aircraft are owned by CAE, and will be flown by CAE instructors. Operational date planned for June 2016.

 

The German manufacturer could put hard points on the wings for ordnance delivery but I don't think the Army needs that option.

 

http://www.ainonline.com/aviation-news/defense/2015-06-17/grob-train-us-army-fixed-wing-aircrew

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UETkMIfNGqg

 

http://grob-aircraft.com/index.php/media.html

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Serious question...why is the U.S. Military relying on foreign equipment for their trainers? Are there no American companies that can produce up to date/modern equipment? It just seems strange that we're spending a rapidly shrinking budget on equipment from foreign companies when Boeing, Lockheed Martin, Bell, etc. should be our primary contractors.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Serious question...why is the U.S. Military relying on foreign equipment for their trainers? Are there no American companies that can produce up to date/modern equipment? It just seems strange that we're spending a rapidly shrinking budget on equipment from foreign companies when Boeing, Lockheed Martin, Bell, etc. should be our primary contractors.

We don't rely on foreign companies for FW trainers. In the FW course they fly American C182, BE58, and BE20s. The little Czech Zlin they currently have was just a couple hops for unusual attitude training. I suppose this new Grob will replace that and the 182s.

 

We've had TH-67s for over 20 yrs. The Army felt the need to replace them with a twin with glass since that's what all the students are going to. Budget cuts hit the Army hard, they already had an obligation to buy a bunch of LUHs. Logical decision was to transfer them to OZR.

 

No different than a lot of EMS companies choosing H135 / 145 helicopters for their mission. Just not a good small twin helo built by an American company that meets the needs of EMS right now.

Edited by Velocity173
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Fair enough

In a perfect world, the Army would've made some announcement for a new trainer like they did with the TH-67. Then you have a competition between contractors. The recent budget cuts didn't allow this. The Army really made a descision on saving money since they were already into the LUH for over 300 copies.

 

I suspect when the Navy replaces their TH-57s they'll go with a cheaper SE turbine such as the 407GX or the AW119. To me that's the most logical choice for an initial trainer. Costs half as much as an LUH and you can do touchdown autos. Plus, if they don't put autopilots in them, the students might actually get some hands on IMC, unlike the case with the LUH.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I suspect when the Navy replaces their TH-57s they'll go with a cheaper SE turbine such as the 407GX or the AW119. To me that's the most logical choice for an initial trainer. Costs half as much as an LUH and you can do touchdown autos. Plus, if they don't put autopilots in them, the students might actually get some hands on IMC, unlike the case with the LUH.

I was at Bell Piney Flats, TN last week and saw a new B-407GX in orange and white paint looking like it had just left the flight line in Pennsacola. The employee showing us around said the aircraft had been demonstrated to Navy as a primary trainer. Just saying.......

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I was at Bell Piney Flats, TN last week and saw a new B-407GX in orange and white paint looking like it had just left the flight line in Pennsacola. The employee showing us around said the aircraft had been demonstrated to Navy as a primary trainer. Just saying.......

Yeah there's some heavy politicking going on by both Bell and Agusta to try and get the Navy's business. I flew a AW119 demonstrator last year painted up in Navy / Marine training colors. All glass, plenty of room and plenty power (1,000 HP). I pulled max continuous and got 152 KIAS. Sucker was fast!

Edited by Velocity173
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The T-6B is far too much airplane for a lead in trainer for Army F/W pilots. It's all tactical jet flight characteristics, but with the response of a turbo prop.

 

Given the Army is all turbines now, the grob is probably a good choice for a potential C-12 pilot. Plus, it takes two airframes (C-182 and Zlin), and replaced them with one common type. Those 182s were beat, and that's when I went to the course in 09'.

 

When I take command at West Point next spring my first order of business is to get s contract for all the pilots to make annual trips to FSI Dothan for recurrent unusual attitude/ spin training in those nice, new Grobs:)

 

Mike-

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The rest of the military uses the T6B for primary flight training (unless they got like 40 hours in IFS). I just think that Grob is a lot cheaper, and with no ejection system, less sh*t for Army guys to deal with.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Although, one would've thought that over the long haul it would've been more cost efficient to branch off the same contract for the T-6s the Army already has in two locations, and the maintenance support. Now they're acquiring a completely new design that hasn't been in U.S. Service before. I foresee some technical speed bumps like the motor glider the AF bought ( Slingsby Firefly, found out they had horrible stall/spin characteristics, then mothballed the entire fleet after two years. Yes, we're that kind of stupid.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Although, one would've thought that over the long haul it would've been more cost efficient to branch off the same contract for the T-6s the Army already has in two locations, and the maintenance support. Now they're acquiring a completely new design that hasn't been in U.S. Service before. I foresee some technical speed bumps like the motor glider the AF bought ( Slingsby Firefly, found out they had horrible stall/spin characteristics, then mothballed the entire fleet after two years. Yes, we're that kind of stupid.

Well I'm glad the money we're "saving" by getting rid of the Kiowa is at least going towards great and extremely crucial things...

 

...

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well at least the Army is buying new aircraft to replace the ones at DHN that are ragged out. Im sure the Grobs will get used well in training.

 

I'm just wondering about the utility of having 4 T-6s at Redstone. It's not like that place is hopping with activity these days. 4 T-6s for chase duties???

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...