Pipistrel Ajdovšcina was established in 1987 as the first private aircraft producer in former Yugoslavia. It is hard for those of us living in a free society to imagine that before that, under the totalitarian Yugoslavian regime, private aviation was virtually non-existent and it was almost unimaginable for private individuals to make aircraft at home; alternative aviation really was alternative then. Being a private aircraft producer doesn’t seem like a particularly big deal these days, but by offering an alternative to military aviation and army-regulated sports airfields 25 years ago, Pipistrel could rightfully claim to have pioneered alternative flying in Slovenia.

The airfield where Pipistrel first began flying belonged to the army, which meant that any ultralight pilots who wanted to fly had to do so in secret. They had to wait until the regular army pilots had finished flying for the day, locked up the hangars and left, before sneaking in an hour or two of flying before darkness fell.

The name “Pipistrel” actually came about as an indirect result of the restrictions on private flying. This was because, at first, Pipistrel produced only powered hang-gliders. The fact that these triangular-shaped aircraft only flew late in the evenings prompted locals to start jokingly calling them “bats”—the Latin word for which is pipistrellus.

Pipistrel’s powered hang-gliders were the company’s first big sales success, with more than 500 sold by 1995. As successful as the hang-gliders were, Pipistrel realised it would have to diversify and offer more products to customers if it were to grow, and saw ultralights as the right direction to go.

Back then, many ultralight aircraft were not too different from hang-gliders, made mainly of tubes and fabric. Pipistrel decided it wanted to offer something different—more sophisticated—and produced an aircraft that would give glider pilots the freedom to go gliding on their own, with no need for an aero-tow or a helper at the wing tip.

Enter the Sinus

The result was the Sinus—the world’s first ever two-seat motor glider to qualify as an ultralight aircraft. It was a revolutionary design: it was the first production ultralight aircraft made of composite material and it looked like a “real’ aeroplane. Not surprisingly, this brought international recognition for Pipistrel, which received more than 100 orders for the aircraft in its first year of production.

Now fitted with an 80-hp Rotax 912 engine (the first models used the two-stroke Rotax 503), the Sinus is fast, quiet, economical and versatile; for example, it can be used for lengthy cross-country flights (up to 650 nm), gliding, pilot training, aerial photography or simple recreational flying.

In 2004, a Sinus became the first ultralight aircraft to fly around the world. Pipistrel takes pride in the fact that the only modification necessary to the record-breaking aeroplane was to have bigger fuel tanks fitted.

Developing the Virus

During the four years following the Sinus’s introduction, Pipistrel received a lot of feedback from around the world. As a result, it developed a new aircraft, based on the Sinus, which it called the Virus. The new Virus, with a shorter wing (12 metres, instead of the Sinus’s 15 metres), a nose-wheel landing gear and a strengthened airframe, was optimised more for flight training.

Following the company’s practice of constant evolution and development, it subsequently modified the design further to produce the Virus SW (short wing). The Virus SW is available in three different versions: the Virus SW 80 and Virus SW 100 featuring the Rotax 912 UL2 (80 hp) and Rotax 912 ULS (100 hp) engines respectively and now, the Virus SW with Rotax 912 iS fuel injected engine for which Pipistrel was the release manufacturer.

The 100-hp Virus SW 100 is capable of a maximum speed of 160 knots and has a 75% cruise speed of 147 knots, making it the fastest ultralight aircraft in the world. In 2007, the Virus SW won several categories in the NASA Personal Air Vehicle Challenge, including the overall Vantage Prize. In 2008, it claimed the main prize in the NASA General Aviation Challenge for a combination of its low noise, low fuel consumption and manoeuvrability, and prizes for the shortest takeoff distance and best angle of climb.

Pipistrel has now produced more than 400 Sinus/Virus aircraft of various models.

The Taurus

The evolution of the Sinus into the Virus and then the Virus SW pleased the powered-flight fraternity and progressively cemented Pipistrel’s place as a leading light aircraft manufacturer. However, many glider pilots, who had praised the Sinus’s versatility, expressed a desire for even more “glider-like” features than the Sinus and wanted an aircraft with an even better glide ratio that would be more like a “real” glider.

In 2004, Pipistrel answered their requests by producing the Taurus—a side-by-side two-seat self-launching glider, which Pipistrel describes as the aircraft that the Sinus would have been had the technology been available in 1995.

Fitted with a Rotax 503 engine and retractable propeller, the Taurus expands significantly on the Sinus’s capability as a glider and has an outstanding glide ratio of 41:1—contributed to by its side-by-side seating configuration, in which the fuselage contour actually contributes to lift.

Pipistrel has also produced an electric version of the Taurus—the Taurus Electro, which is capable of climbing to 4,000 feet after self-launching. The American magazine Popular Science named the Taurus Electro as one of the ten most important aerospace innovations of the year in 2008. In 2010, the Taurus Electro won the gold medal for innovative design at the Biennial of Industrial Design awards and, in 2011, it won the Lindbergh Prize for the best electric aircraft. The Pipistrel Taurus G4, a modified double-fuselage Taurus, (featured in a previous issue of Pacific Wings) also won the prestigious NASA Green Flight Challenge in 2011.

The Apis

Following on from the success of the two-seat Taurus, Pipistrel introduced a single-seat self-launching glider known as the Apis (Latin for Bee), which has a glide ratio of 40:1. The Apis holds 10 world records in its class.

By the end of 2011, more than 100 Taurus/Apis aircraft had been sold around the world.

The Panthera

Early in 2009, Pipistrel began developing an entirely new four-seat aircraft. Every facet of the aircraft’s design has been developed in-house by the ten-person research and development team, and six people in the prototyping department.

Built of carbon-fibre, the new aircraft—the Panthera—is a high-performance four-seat touring aircraft with retractable landing gear. From the start, Pipistrel wanted its trademark high efficiency incorporated into a comfortable and aesthetically pleasing design that also had to be robust enough for operation from grass runways. The flaps and sturdy titanium trailing-link landing gear are all electrically operated.

Even the basic configuration of the aircraft is innovative, featuring a cross between a low- and mid-mounted wing. Pipistrel says this allows for a minimal cross-section that produces as little drag as possible while still accommodating the retractable landing gear and providing a comfortable cabin for four passengers. Every Panthera will be equipped with an integrated ballistic parachute rescue system as standard.

Pipistrel says that the final aerodynamic shape is more efficient than any competing aircraft so that the Panthera will have better performance and lower fuel consumption, and produce less noise than the competition.

A notable feature of the Panthera design is its modular propulsion system. The same aircraft can be equipped with an electric, a hybrid or a regular piston engine.

The Panthera’s cabin features two front doors and a single rear door, all of which open in “gull-wing” fashion. The wide cabin is designed for comfort and, with no front side pillars, the shape of the windows provides excellent visibility. The instrument panel is all glass, with three main LCD displays (the hybrid and electric versions have an additional display for the power management systems).

The piston-engine version of the Panthera uses the 210-hp Lycoming IO-390 engine, while the electric and hybrid versions use electric engines of 150 kW (100 kW continuous). The hybrid drive is identical to the electric version but with the addition of a piston-powered generator. Both the electric and the hybrid versions allow for quiet aircraft operation in the vicinity of populated areas. The batteries in the electric version are sufficient for more than two hours of flight.

Pipistrel specifically wanted the Panthera to be a true four-seater for long-distance travelling, unlike many so-called “four-seat” aircraft from other manufacturers in the past, which have typically been unable to travel any distance when carrying four people.

Pipistrel has just begun building a new facility in Gorizia, Italy, for serial production of the Panthera. When completed, the new facility will encompass 10,000 m² of floor space. In addition to Panthera production, the new facility will also house an aircraft service and maintenance operation, and a flying school. When it is fully operational, the new complex (valued at approximately €5 million) will employ up to 200 people.

The predicted price for a new Panthera is approximately €400,000. Pipistrel expects to produce around 20 aircraft in the first year of production, and plans to increase production steadily to a rate of around 200 aircraft per year by the fifth year.

In addition to the numerous awards won by Pipistrel’s aircraft over the years, the company’s founder and general manager, Ivo Boscarol, has been recognised internationally and locally for his significant contributions to industry and aviation. Among other awards, Mr Boscarol was named the Slovenian entrepreneur of the year in 2003. He received the award of the Slovenian Chamber of Commerce in 2004, the Slovenian Design Month Award in 2008, and in 2009, he was chosen as the only Slovenian entrepreneur to represent Slovenia for the International SME Week in Brussels. In 2005, he was awarded the FAI Paul Tissandier diploma for making an outstanding contribution to the field of aviation.

The Alpha

Encouraged by the success of the Virus, Pipistrel recently developed an even simpler aircraft known as the Alpha, specifically intended for flight training. Pipistrel set itself a number of important goals with the Alpha. It had to be strong and durable, easy to fly, with benign stall characteristics, easy to service, have easy access to its cockpit, it had to have tricycle landing gear, good brakes, a ballistic parachute and dual controls, a quiet cockpit, good heating and ventilation, and approved strobes and lighting. Most importantly, the Alpha had to be affordable to buy and economical to operate.

With an 80-hp Rotax engine, it has a higher cruise speed than past generations of general aviation two-seat trainers, but sips only around 10–12 litres an hour. Thus, despite having smaller tanks than the Sinus and Virus, it still has a respectable range of around 400 nm. The Alpha also has excellent short-field performance, with a takeoff roll of only around 150 metres; without the wheel spats of its siblings, the Alpha is even more suitable for grass or dirt strips.

The price of a new Alpha is only approximately €59,000, or around NZ$100,000.

Building new aircraft

When Pipistrel develops any new aircraft, it makes the first five prototypes in-house, designing and building every piece from scratch. This way, the company says it knows how every piece is built and how it will behave, and it has greater control over how the completed aircraft will behave in the real world. Once an aircraft has been tested, the design is “frozen” (i.e. not subject to further changes). Pipistrel then produces the complete documentation, chooses the production materials and decides what technology it will incorporate, makes the necessary production moulds, trains the workers and outsources production of certain parts to subcontractors.

The company maintains strict records of parts and personnel to ensure quality and safety standards throughout the process. At the end of any process, the workers involved have to sign an inspection sheet. At the end of the day, a quality control manager checks all the processes again and signs every inspection sheet. Modelled on a production system patented by Toyota, there are multiple other safety and quality control measures in place in a system that Pipistrel believes is unique in the aviation industry.

Once an aircraft is finished, it is flown for at least five hours by one of Pipistrel’s test pilots to ensure everything is functioning correctly before the aircraft is released to a customer.

ECOlution—the Pipistrel philosophy

The Pipistrel company describes its philosophy of “ECOlution” as one of sustainable and ecologically sound evolution that it applies to every aspect of its operation. Each one of its aircraft is designed from the outset to be as aerodynamically clean and smooth as possible. Eliminating drag and making an aircraft glide better, reduces the amount of power needed to fly. Less power needs less fuel and produces less noise, and less fuel means less CO₂.

The company’s ECOlution goes well beyond its aircraft designs and it stands to reason that environmentally-friendly aeroplanes can only come from environmentally-friendly manufacturing facilities. Pipistrel’s modern state-of-the-art facility in Ajdovšcina was designed to incorporate every rationally practical form of renewable energy. A great deal of planning went into producing a building that was intended to be completely energy self-sufficient with no emissions and no pollution.

One of the main ideas was to cover the entire roof of the building with photovoltaic solar panels. This required careful planning to orient the building’s axis and set the roof panels at the optimum angle to ensure maximum output during the sunniest months (May to September).

A challenge that had to be overcome to incorporate solar panels was the wind. Ajdovšcina is famous for a very strong local wind called the “Burja”, which can often exceed 200 km/h. Such strong winds would tear conventionally-fixed solar panels from the roof, so Pipistrel had to develop special brackets to secure them—which involved using the company’s virtual wind tunnel to test the design. All the careful designing, planning and testing paid off, and the roof of the building now houses the largest solar power plant in Slovenia.

In keeping with Pipistrel’s ECOlution philosophy, it was essential that the building had to fulfil its ecological function regardless of whether it was economically justified. This thinking defied the “norms” of construction, and challenged engineers and contractors.

The greatest challenge wasn’t the position of the building or the construction of its roof or carefully insulated walls, but assimilating and integrating the various energy systems in the building. Pipistrel needed to choose different energy sources carefully and pick the best available systems to control and manipulate the energy. This was no easy task, especially since the new building had to be linked with the heating and cooling systems within the existing older building. With more than ten independent energy systems in the two buildings, it was difficult to link them all into one centrally supervised and functional unit.

Extra care was taken to insulate the new facility against thermal losses. Both the roof and walls incorporate polyurethane “sandwich” panels with excellent insulation qualities, and the doors and windows are made of modern plastic materials.

The air-conditioning and heating systems both make use of glycol-filled pipes embedded in the concrete floor. The fluid is heated or cooled as appropriate by geo-exchange ground-source heat pumps.

Lighting is regulated according to the amount of daylight, while rooms are located within the building according to the tasks they must fulfil; for example, classrooms face south to receive maximum daylight, while storage rooms are in the centre of the building because they don’t need much natural light.

All major glass surfaces face north to prevent too much heat entering the building during the summer months, while the south-facing windows are covered with extended roofs or balconies. During the summer months, when the sun is higher in the sky, the extended roof provides shade for the windows and only lets diffuse light enter while keeping heat out. During the winter, the lower position of the sun in the sky allows direct sunlight to enter the building and provides additional heat.

The building’s ventilation uses energy recuperators, and the air from the welding workshop is cleaned with the help of de-ionisation.

All these systems are regulated by a central control system that calculates and regulates all the input and output parameters in the most efficient way possible.

The overall result is a building that is totally energy self-sufficient. Pipistrel claims that this results in savings of more than 180 tons of CO₂ and 95,000 kWh of energy each year.

Projects and collaboration

Pipistrel works with numerous other companies and agencies to advance aviation technology. One example is Pipistrel’s collaboration with the University of Nova Gorica to develop the application of organic solar cells to uneven surfaces. Organic solar cells represent a step forward in photovoltaic technology, as they are flexible and cheaper to produce than the commonly known silicon-based panels. Pipistrel’s engineers are researching and building prototype devices to demonstrate efficient ways of applying organic solar cell material to various bent and uneven surfaces and materials.

Another of Pipistrel’s cooperative efforts—this time with the University of Stuttgart’s Institute of Aircraft Design—is the development of a hydrogen fuel cell-powered aircraft, known as the Hydrogenius. The Hydrogenius, which is based on the Pipistrel Taurus, is intended to demonstrate the viability of pure hydrogen fuel cell-based propulsion in future aircraft.

Pipistrel in New Zealand—Alan and Donna Clarke

Today, Pipistrel aircraft are operating in 50 countries, and the company has a network of dealers and representatives in 35 countries around the world. The wide dealer network enables Pipistrel to offer personalised service to customers in a way that is relevant to their respective local conditions.

In New Zealand, Pipistrel’s distributors are Alan and Donna Clarke, who are based in Kerikeri. Alan has significant aviation experience; he learnt to fly in South Canterbury in the late 1960s and gained his commercial licence at the age of 19. After a period spent instructing, he began agricultural flying in North Canterbury before moving to Africa, where he flew for several years variously in Rhodesia, Mozambique and South Africa.

In 1977, Alan began flying helicopters in the USA but completed his helicopter qualifications back in New Zealand, where he met his wife, Donna. Alan continued a nomadic seasonal flying lifestyle for the next few years, including time spent flying helicopters on oil-support operations in South Africa.

In 1984, by the time the Clarkes returned to New Zealand (where Alan resumed agricultural flying), he had amassed more than 10,500 hours.

A career change saw Alan move into the world of finance. He became an authorised financial adviser and has written a book entitled Retire Richer.

Despite his success in the finance industry (which continues today), Alan’s passion for flight lured him back into aviation in 2004, when he decided to buy a new microlight aircraft. Wanting a “real” aeroplane and not a “toy”, he travelled to Australia to assess the Pipistrel Sinus and decided it more than met his requirements.

His experience with the Sinus and the Pipistrel company encouraged Alan to become a distributor for Pipistrel in New Zealand. Alan and Donna have now flown more than 400 hours in their Sinus, including several long-distance cross-country flights to the lower South Island. Alan says he has become more of a glider pilot than a powered pilot since flying the Sinus, spending much of his airtime with the engine switched off. He says he is a big fan of the Rotax 912 engine, which he describes as smooth and reliable, and he says it always starts in the air when needed.

The timing for Alan becoming a dealer for an aircraft type new to New Zealand—followed not long afterwards by a global financial crisis—did not do great things for sales initially, but recently, Alan says New Zealand sales have “come to life”, with this year’s orders already exceeding all previous years combined.

Alan suspects the increasing sales might have something to do with the growing recognition of Pipistrel’s credibility as a leading manufacturer and the many awards won by its aircraft for innovation and efficiency.

Panthera’s Pacific Wings connection

Early this year, Pipistrel ran an international competition for the design of a new livery for its first Panthera. The winning designer would be awarded a €1,000 cash prize and have his or her signature on the aircraft. That first Panthera would subsequently be displayed at air-shows around Europe wearing its winning livery.

The company wanted a design that enhanced the Panthera’s lines and unique characteristics; specifically, the brief was that it should reflect luxury, sportiness, speed, efficiency/environmental friendliness and safety.

Pipistrel received a total of 160 designs from around the world, including one from Pacific Wings’ own Anna Gaskell—the design genius responsible for our layout each month.

The quality of entries for the competition was so high that Pipistrel amended its original prize offer. At the end of preliminary judging, the company selected three designs that the judges liked so much that they decided to award the three finalists €500 each. Each of the three finalists was then asked to submit refined versions of their designs incorporating requests and suggestions from Pipistrel. The company then chose the best of those three and awarded that designer an additional €500.

The eventual winner of the competition was…our very own Anna Gaskell!

Pacific Wings would like to congratulate Anna on her outstanding design. As thrilled as we are that Anna’s design won the competition, it did not come as too much of a surprise, in view of her greatly appreciated eye for aesthetics and ability to interpret design briefs.

Anna is unquestionably the most vital link in Pacific Wings’ monthly publishing process and thus we could not be more thrilled than to see her recognised by her success in this international competition.

For Anna to have her signature attached to such a beautiful new aeroplane that will be displayed at major aviation events around Europe wearing her livery is a major achievement and something she should be very proud of—as we are of her.

Bloody well done, Anna!

Article and photography by Erik Roelofs.

“That Others May Live” is the motto of the United States Air Force combat search and rescue (CSAR) community. Pacific Wings joined the 23rd Wing at Moody AFB to learn more about modern day CSAR operations.

The Real Deal

The rescue squadrons at Moody AFB belong to the 347th Rescue Group, which, in turn, falls under the 23rd Wing. The 23rd Wing also commands the 563rd Rescue Group at Davis Monthan AFB, Arizona, making this the largest CSAR force within the Air Force.

Since July 2010, the 347th Rescue Group has been commanded by Colonel Chad Franks. During his career, Colonel Franks has accumulated more than 3,200 flying hours in the T-37, UH-1H, UH-1N, MH-60G and HH-60G while serving with the 55th Special Operations Squadron, the 84th Flying Training Squadron and the 512th Rescue Squadron. Before taking command of the 347th Rescue Group, Colonel Franks commanded the 66th Rescue Squadron at Nellis AFB, Nevada. But Colonel Franks is more than just an experienced pilot and accomplished commander. He was directly involved in one of the most challenging combat search and rescue missions in Air Force history.

It was during Operation Allied Force, the NATO air campaign to halt Serbian aggression in Kosovo, that the unimaginable happened. At 08:38 p.m. on 27 March 1999, an F-117A Nighthawk (82-0806/HO) of the 7th Fighter Squadron was struck by a Serbian SA-3 surface-to-air missile (SAM), not far from Belgrade. Major Zelko—“Vega 31”—had just released his laser-guided weapons when the SA-3 detonated in close proximity, forcing him to eject from the crippled “stealth fighter” less than 25 miles from Belgrade, in an area teeming with Serbian military activity.

At Tusla Air Base in neighbouring Bosnia Herzegovina, the CSAR force immediately spring into action. This force consisted of two MH-53H Pave Low helicopters and a single MH-60G Pave Hawk, piloted by then Captain Franks. The helicopters had to be refuelled in the air by a MC-130P Combat Shadow before crossing into enemy territory. But to avoid alerting the Serbs of the pending rescue mission, the refuelling was conducted at very low altitude, in the dark and just three miles from the border.

The three helicopters penetrated the Serbian airspace at a mere 100 feet, assisted only by their night vision goggles (NVG), having switched off their terrain-following radars to prevent detection. After evading various towers and power lines, the formation made their way to the area where the A-10 Thunderbolt II aircraft providing “Sandy” coverage had established radio contact with the downed pilot.

With Serbian forces closing in on Major Zelko, Captain Franks landed his MH-60G within 100 yards of the pilot’s hideout. The pararescuemen or “PJs” quickly jumped out of the helicopter and secured Major Zelko, ensuring that he was, indeed, the missing F-117A pilot and not a Serbian imposter. Following the successful recovery, the two MH-53Ms and the single MH-60G made their escape while avoiding the now fully alert Serbian air defence network. For his bravery during the rescue of “Vega 31”, Captain Franks was awarded the Silver Star. Throughout his career, Colonel Franks has also seen action in Iraq and has earned numerous awards and decorations, including the Bronze Star, the Defense Meritorious Service Medal, the Meritorious Service Medal, the Air Medal and the Air Force Aerial Achievement Medal.

Saving Lives

The 23rd Wing is the largest CSAR unit in the United States Air Force and oversees units located at three airbases across the United States. The 347th Rescue Group is located at Moody AFB with its HH-60G helicopters, HC-130P aircraft and pararescuemen. But the 23rd Wing also oversees the 563rd Rescue Group at Davis-Monthan AFB, Arizona, and both the 58th Rescue Squadron and 66th Rescue Squadron at Nellis AFB, Nevada.

The 347th Rescue Group’s mission is CSAR but it also performs a peacetime rescue role. The rescue squadrons of the Air Force have not only been saving lives in Iraq and Afghanistan but also much closer to home. Directly after Hurricane Katrina struck Louisiana, Mississippi and Alabama, the 347th deployed 15 HH-60G Pave Hawk helicopters to the area, rescuing 211 people within the first 24 hours of operations.

“Our people are out saving lives every day,” says Colonel Franks. “Our main focus is our combat mission but we also perform humanitarian and peacetime rescue missions, and we will respond to any type of disaster. During the last few years, we have responded to several peacetime missions. At Nellis AFB, [the 66th RQS] often performed rescue missions in the national parks, where climbers were hurt and we were the only rescue assets available. All of our combat rescue skills apply to such peacetime missions.”

When asked if the CSAR mission had changed in the absence of aerial threats in Iraq and Afghanistan, Colonel Franks said that in Iraq and Afghanistan, they fly casevac (casualty evacuation) as well as CSAR missions and that the two are quite different. “But there are still situations where aircraft go down,” he says. “In these cases, the recovery of airmen can still be very difficult and involve coordinating many different assets—especially when facing an enemy that is so persistent in trying to inflict casualties among our personnel.” Colonel Franks said there had been instances where, while providing casevac, aircraft would go down, and they would have to roll right into a CSAR mission, coordinate overhead assets and rescue downed aviators. “I would say that the mission has not changed, but perhaps the threat has.”

According to Colonel Franks, flying the HH-60G in Iraq was a challenging experience and very different from flying during “Allied Force”. He said the biggest challenge was the environment—particularly the heat and the dust. “When operating at altitude in Iraq, the heat directly affects the performance of the helicopter. It affects the load you can carry and the power you have available. Brownouts—being blinded by dust when landing or taking off—are also very dangerous. When training for Iraq and Afghanistan, we spend a lot of time training for brownouts, which are probably worst in Afghanistan. I think the guys today are much better at brownout landings than we were back in the day. Now, the training is constant here at Moody. Every time they go out with the HH-60, they practise landings at a ‘sandpit’ that was specifically constructed to train for brownout landings. Our pilots have come a long way in dealing with these.”

Jolly Greens

Ever since the Korean War, the US Air Force has been using helicopters to rescue downed airmen from behind enemy lines. However, it was not until the war in Vietnam that the Air Force finally received dedicated CSAR aircraft and helicopters. The arrival of the HH-3E Jolly Green Giant, with its aerial refuelling capability, armour and defensive weapons, finally allowed rescue squadrons to penetrate deep into North Vietnam to rescue American aircrews. However, this was not without a cost and many Jolly Green crews paid the ultimate price during their attempts to recover their fellow countrymen.

The Jolly Green heritage is very apparent when one walks into the squadron building of the 41st Rescue Squadron (RQS). The walls contain descriptions of many of the CSAR missions conducted over Korea, Vietnam, Panama, Iraq and former Yugoslavia. The Green Giant portrayed on the squadron patch has been the iconic image of the Air Force CSAR community since Vietnam. It was originally designed by the Green Giant company in 1928 to market their green peas. A 55-foot tall statue of the Green Giant still exists in Blue Earth, Minnesota.

Today, the Jolly Green legacy is still strong within the 41st RQS, which operates Sikorsky HH-60G Pave Hawks. The Air Force received its first Pave Hawk helicopters in 1981, after cancellation of the original Sikorsky HH-60D Night Hawk. Although the Pave Hawk is based on the UH-60A Black Hawk, it is an entirely different helicopter with very different capabilities. It has extensive computerised navigation systems, HAVE QUICK secure communication equipment, an automatic flight control system and colour weather radar. With a cockpit adapted for NVG, a FLIR pod under the nose and anti-icing systems for both engine and rotor blades, the Pave Hawk is not only fully night capable but can also operate in the most adverse weather conditions.

Captain William “Bill” Gugelman of the 41st RQS says that in Afghanistan, they fly CSAR operations both in daytime and at night, but that a lot of their medical or casevac missions are flown during the day. “It all depends on how critically injured someone is and how quickly we need to get there. If they are not injured badly then we wait for the most opportune time—which might be after the weather clears—to give us the greatest chance of getting them out safely.”

The most noticeable difference between the Pave Hawk and the original Black Hawk is the large in-flight refuelling boom. Without aerial refuelling, the HH-60G has an endurance of approximately two hours. When fitted with auxiliary fuel tanks at the rear of the cabin, this can be increased to about four and a half hours. However, when using aerial refuelling, the Pave Hawk’s endurance is only limited by pilot fatigue. Under normal circumstances, pilots are limited to a flying duty of 12 hours but this can be extended when required.

The HH-60G has a crew of four: a pilot and a co-pilot, a flight engineer and an aerial gunner. For self-protection, the Pave Hawk is fitted with an APR-39A(V)1 radar warning receiver, an ALQ-144A infra-red jammer and an M130 dispensing system for both chaff and flares. The HH-60G is also far from toothless, as it can be fitted with either GUA-17/A 7.62 mm miniguns or GAU-21 .50-calibre heavy machine-guns. With these weapons, the Pave Hawk is capable of unleashing devastating cover fire during rescue operations.

All these modifications have added weight to the Pave Hawk, which provides an additional challenge to its pilot when operating in hot and high environments such as Afghanistan. In Afghanistan, the mountainous terrain and associated weather provide numerous challenges. “There is a lot to keep in mind when mountain flying and wind is a huge factor,” says Capt. Gegelman. “In Afghanistan, there are plenty of mountains a helicopter cannot climb over. That really forces you to think about where you are flying, and always consider the updrafts and downdrafts. The heat and altitude affect the performance of the helicopter and we reconfigure the aircraft to different mission requirements. For example, we might take off with less fuel and refuel in the air, or reduce the number of crew members or equipment onboard.”

Most combat rescue missions in Afghanistan are very dangerous and demand a high degree of airmanship from the entire HH-60G crew. It requires both of the pilots, the flight engineer and the gunner to manoeuvre the Pave Hawk through the hostile mountainous landscape, avoiding steep cliffs and maintaining control in the unstable and turbulent air while executing hovering manoeuvres with pinpoint accuracy. And all this while taking fire from Taliban fighters armed with machineguns and RPGs.

On 27 June 2010, Captain Thaddeus Ronnau of the 41st RQS faced exactly these circumstances while operating from Bagram Airfield in Afghanistan. In a sequence of eight non-stop rescue missions, Captain Ronnau and his Pave Hawk crew rescued 13 American and coalition forces while facing extremely challenging circumstances. In one case, he had to perform a one-wheel hover landing in very difficult terrain while being shot at by Taliban fighters. For his heroism and extraordinary skill, Captain Ronnau was awarded the Distinguished Flying Cross with Valour.

Guardian Angels

The 38th RQS is the only rescue squadron at Moody that has no aircraft or pilots and occupies no parking spots on the vast flight line. As a Guardian Angel squadron, the 38th RQS is a very special kind of unit. The Guardian Angel is a human and equipment-based weapon system that forms the vital link between the aerial extraction and the rescue activities on the ground. Called PJs (short for pararescue jumpers), these are the people who seek out, identify and rescue downed aircrew or apply their combat medical skills to save severely injured soldiers and civilians. But regarding PJs as combat medics is a gross understatement of their capabilities.

The Air Force pararescue training takes two years and is brutal from start to finish, with a dropout rate of 90%. The training begins with the indoctrination course at Lackland AFB, Texas. Designed to select the best students, this nine-week course combines medical, diving and pararescue theory with weapon qualifications and extreme physical training. The handful of students who manage to graduate from the indoctrination course are then ready to attend the Army Airborne School, Air Force Combat Diver School, Air Force Survival School and the Army Military Free Fall Parachutist School. This extensive physical and academic training transforms these students into capable combat divers, expert high altitude–low opening (HALO) parachutists and extreme survival specialists.

Approximately a year after starting their indoctrination course, the students report to Kirtland AFB, New Mexico, where they will spend another year undergoing specialised EMT-pararescue training and attend the Recovery Specialist Course. Besides emergency medical technician training, the students are also taught field surgery, pharmacology and combat trauma management, and gain hands-on experience with the Tucson Fire Department and local hospitals. After two gruelling years, the students finally receive their much-coveted maroon berets and consider themselves part of an elite group of Air Force pararescuemen. To illustrate how special that maroon beret really is, consider that the Army’s Special Forces or Green Berets number more than 10,000 and there are approximately 1,000 Navy SEALs. However, there are only 300 Air Force pararescuemen.

Although often associated with helicopter operations, the pararescuemen actually predate the use of helicopters in military service. The PJs originate from the US Forest Service “smokejumpers”—the fire-fighters who parachute into remote areas to combat wildfires. Captain Leo P. Martin became the first Army paramedic to be trained by the US Forest Service in 1940. During WWII, PJs would jump from C-47s to rescue allied aircrew that had been forced to bail out over China or Burma. After WWII, the PJs became an integral part of the helicopter crews of the Air Rescue Service. This remained unchanged until the 38th RQS became the first Guardian Angel Squadron in the Air Force on 7 May 2001. By forming their own squadron, the PJs of the 38th RQS can operate completely independently of the helicopter squadrons they were previously associated with. This allows the Air Force to deploy the Guardian Angel squadrons with greater flexibility, operating not only from helicopters and fixed wing aircraft but also ships and vehicles. The Air Force is currently developing the Guardian Angel air-droppable rescue vehicle (GAARV), a light truck that can be parachuted into combat zones to recover wounded personnel and rendezvous with a HC-130 at a pick-up zone.

Staff Sergeant George Reed explains how he became a PJ with the 38th RQS: “When I was in high school, I really wanted to join the military and become a Navy SEAL. But then I heard about pararescue, where you get paid to jump out of planes, fly helicopters and save lives. I first went through the indoctrination course, where at least 75% of the guys washed out. It is a pretty heinous course. Then came all the airborne, free fall and diving training before you started with the medical portion. Although most washed out during the first indoctrination course, we did have guys dropping out during the other courses as well.”

“As PJs, we are nationally qualified rescue paramedics, and we do both civilian and military rescue but the latter is our main mission of course. The basic mission is the same, though: our primary goal is to find and stabilise patients, and get them to a hospital as soon as possible. We carry enough supplies to treat a patient for up to 48 hours without a medevac.  Our training is very close to the real thing so when I first went to Afghanistan, it was not very different. But even in Afghanistan, it is usually a case of sitting around, waiting for a call, then going out and finding our patients and getting them to a hospital. As pararescuemen, we are combatants, although we mostly carry our weapons to protect our team and patients. But when we do make enemy contact, we know exactly what to do,” said SSgt Reed, tapping his desert-camouflaged M4A1 rifle.

Combat Kings

The Lockheed HC-130P Combat Kings of the 71st RQS are not hard to miss as they are, by far, the largest aircraft at Moody AFB. From a distance, the HC-130P can be easily mistaken for its cargo-hauling cousin, the C-130E Hercules. But the FLIR pod underneath the nose and the large refuelling pods under each wing are giveaways that the Combat King does far more than transporting goods. The HC-130P is a versatile CSAR aircraft that has the ability to refuel the HH-60G Pave Hawk helicopters and act as an airborne command and control platform during rescue operations. The Combat King also airdrops PJs and rescue equipment into hostile areas, or lands at remote strips to evacuate wounded personnel and civilians.

When the HC-130P first entered service in 1964, it looked nothing like the C-130E Hercules on which it was based. Fitted with a large bump on the fuselage and a bulky, angular nose, the original Combat King was a most peculiar looking aircraft. The strange nose was part of the Fulton Surface to Air Recovery System (STARS), which was predominantly used by the Special Operations community to retrieve personnel from behind enemy lines. The operative would let up a balloon with a long wire and attach himself to this wire while awaiting the arrival of the HC-130P. The strange nose on the Combat King was designed to carry a large, V-shaped fork which was used to snatch a wire dangling from the balloon and lift the attached operative into the air, allowing the aircrew to to pull the person into the aircraft via the open ramp. The large radome just behind the cockpit housed the AN/ARD-17 Cook Aerial Tracking antenna, which was originally designed to track re-entering satellites but was also used to track the radio beacons of downed airmen during the Vietnam War.

The HC-130N, which entered service a few years later, was the result of a follow-up order for more Combat King aircraft but without the Fulton STARS equipment. The Air Force Special Operations Command (AFSOC) retired the Fulton system in 1996, after which all HC-130Ps were retrofitted with the more familiar Hercules nose. Advances in GPS technology, real-time data links and digital communication have made the AN/ARD-17 system redundant and the large radome started to disappear from the Combat King fleet.

Throughout its service life, the Combat King has received regular updates to keep it in frontline service. These have included GPS equipment, AN/ALE-47 chaff and flare dispensers, AN/AAR-47 missile plume detection systems, the aforementioned AN/AAQ-22 FLIR, an AN/APN-241 tactical transport radar, cockpit modifications to support the use of NVG, and the latest secure radios. Despite this modern technology, the Combat King’s cockpit still comprises mostly analogue gauges, with the exception of a large MFD. Flying the HC-130P is a very much hands-on affair, especially when refuelling helicopters. Although the experienced aircrews of the 71st RQS make refuelling seem easy, it requires a great amount of skill and concentration to maintain control of the HC-130P at low altitude and low airspeeds, often ploughing through turbulent air while ensuring the aircraft remains above stall speed at all times.

One of the 71st RQS Combat King pilots, Captain Pena, explained how he became an HC-130P pilot: “I have been with the 71st RQS for more than three years now. During basic flight training, I opted for the C-130 track and went to Corpus Christi in Texas. There, we trained with the US Navy to fly the T-44 (Beechcraft King Air). While at Corpus Christi, each C-130 class was divided into different tracks for different Hercules types and I was selected for one of the very few rescue slots. I then went to Little Rock AFB in Arkansas for the Air Force C-130 School House before going to the 58th SOW at Kirtland AFB, where they taught us everything about the HC-130P Combat King.”

The workload is not just on the shoulders of the aircraft’s two pilots, but is also shared by the two flight engineers. In large tanker aircraft such as the KC-135R and KC-10A, the boom operator is the vital link between the tanker and the receiving aircraft. During refuelling operations aboard the HC-130P, the flight engineer assumes a similar role. Sitting on the lowered ramp, often in very cold conditions, the flight engineer uses coloured lights to signal to the receiving aircraft while continuously monitoring the refuelling operation. When not refuelling, the flight engineers continue to provide additional eyes and ears for the aircraft commander as they continuously inspect the HC-130P, keeping an eye out for anything out of the ordinary, such as oil leaks.

In April 2010, the HC-130Ps of the 71st RQS returned to Afghanistan for the first time in five years. Although equipped for helicopter refuelling, the Combat Kings also operate independently from the HH-60G Pave Hawks. While on aero-medical evacuation alert, the HC-130P can be airborne within 30 minutes. With its ability to use unprepared airfields, the HC-130P is able to rendezvous with the units in the field and quickly evacuate the wounded to medical centres at Camp Bastion and Herat. During these missions, the Combat King also carries a compliment of PJs who can provide immediate medical care once the HC-130P has reached the wounded personnel or civilians. The HC-130P has the advantage of speed and size, and can carry far more wounded and reach medical centres much faster than traditional rescue helicopters. These factors can be the difference between life and death, especially in such a remote country as Afghanistan.

When asked about his experiences in Afghanistan, Captain Pena said the greatest challenge for him was working with the forward controllers and dealing with the volume of traffic. “There are so many aircraft flying around there and we only have very basic radar coverage. The terrain is also challenging but only during low-level operations. The mountains and the heat do not affect us as much as the helicopters, as we usually fly at higher altitudes. In Afghanistan, we not only refuelled the HH-60Gs but also other helicopters like Marine Corps CH-53 Sea Stallions and Army Special Operations MH-47 Chinooks. But I mainly flew medevac missions carrying the wounded from LZs or airstrips after they had been extracted from the field by the Pave Hawks. From there, we flew them to our hospitals, which we could do much faster than the helicopters. We always had a medical team in the back, consisting of PJs and an Army nurse, and they provided medical care during the flight. We also did long-range medical transfers if specialised hospital facilities were needed but not available locally.”

Sandy Hogs

Named after the P-47 Thunderbolt, the Fairchild Republic A-10 Thunderbolt II is more commonly referred to as the Warthog or just simply Hog. First flown in 1972, the A-10A was designed to provide close air support (CAS) for ground troops and destroy enemy tanks while surviving in a high threat environment. The Warthog was envisioned to operate over the rolling hills of central Germany, attempting to stop waves of Soviet T-72 main battle tanks pouring through the Fulda Gap at the moment the Cold War turned hot.

Equipped with a 30-mm GAU-8/A Avenger Gatling cannon, the A-10A could slice through Soviet armour like a can opener. Its large wings provide the A-10A not only with great agility but also allow it to carry a large number of different weapons. To allow the aircraft and pilot to survive, the cockpit is protected by titanium armour and the aircraft is fitted with triple redundant flight control systems. Even with the hydraulic systems knocked out, the A-10 remains flyable. The aircraft has been fitted with a forward rotating landing gear so that the pilot can still lower and lock the landing gear using nothing but gravity and wind resistance. Also, the main gear protrudes from the wings when retracted, which minimises damage during belly landings. The engine placement and tail section were deliberately designed to minimize the infra-red signature, making it more difficult for shoulder-launched missiles to hit the aircraft. All these measures resulted in an incredibly tough aircraft that was designed to fly home with just a single engine, a single tail and half a wing missing.

Following its highly successful combat debut during Operation Desert Storm, the A-10A remained a largely analogue and unsophisticated aircraft, despite other fighter aircraft becoming increasingly digitised with GPS-guided JDAM and laser-guided Paveway precision ordnance, large colourful MFDs, information-sharing over data link and helm-mounted targeting systems. Having recognised the Warthog’s potential, and the fact that no replacement aircraft was in sight, the Air Force commissioned the Precision Engagement update in 2005. Under the Precision Engagement programme, the Warthog became a fully digitised aircraft and was redesignated as A-10C.

The A-10C received full colour MFDs, the capability to deliver GPS and laser-guided precision weapons, an improved fire control system and electronic countermeasures, and support for the Situational Awareness Data Link. Additionally, the A-10C is also fitted with a helmet-mounted integrated targeting (HMIT) system, enabling the pilot to target enemy vehicles and troops just by looking at them. To ensure that the A-10C remains serviceable, the Air Force has also contracted Boeing to build 242 new wing sets. Despite these many changes, the only externally visible difference is the appearance of a small T-shaped antenna behind the cockpit. But to the pilots, the A-10C is a major leap forward, making an already great aircraft extraordinarily capable.

The A-10C not only provides close air support but also plays a vital role during CSAR operations, as Captain Tom Harney of the 75th Fighter Squadron explained: “CSAR is something we take a great deal of pride in and requires skills we practice fairly often. It is one of the most difficult and complex missions we do. Our CSAR qualifications are expressed as Sandy 1–4. You will start out as a Sandy 4 initially, as a wingman in whatever squadron you join. When you have learned to lead another jet around and become a flight lead, you can become a Sandy 3. By the time you become an IP (instructor pilot), it is usually around the time you become a Sandy 2 or Sandy 1.” At the time of writing, Capt Harney was a Sandy 3, in charge of RESCORT (rescue escort). This involved him being the lead of two A-10s that escorted the helicopters. “We usually fly a racetrack pattern around the helicopters and, while doing so, Sandy 4 provides mutual support for me and reminds us of how much fuel we have left and those sorts of things.

“The job of Sandy 1 and 2 is to go out and find the survivor. Sandy 1 maintains radio contact with the guy on the ground while Sandy 2 coordinates all supporting assets, calls in air strikes and provides mutual support for his flight lead. Sandy 2 is probably the most difficult upgrade to achieve because you must have a good understanding of all the assets and their exact capabilities, what enemy targets need suppression, and when it is safe to bring the helicopters in because, obviously, they are most vulnerable part of the CSAR task force. Meanwhile, you have to keep track of things like timing and fuel consumption while trying to avoid getting shot down yourself.”

Captain Harney, who previously flew the A-10A before transitioning onto the new A-10C, describes the recent upgrade as “incredible.” He says, “The new moving map display—and especially the data link—gives us so much more capability. Initially, there are a lot more systems and electronics to deal with, but once you get used to it, it really improves your situational awareness. In the A model, you would spend a lot of time trying to coordinate between two aircraft, especially when pointing out targets at night. But now, I can assign a point of interest to my wingman and it is immediately highlighted on his moving map display. During a CSAR mission, I can just point out the survivor on the ground to the rest of our formation without any radio communications. In Afghanistan, it really helps us to integrate with our forces on the ground, who can use the data link to assign points of interest to us.”

Changing the Guard

Although the HC-130P has served the Air Force well, this 48-year-old veteran is older than most pilots flying it. Impeccably maintained by the 71st Aircraft Maintenance Unit (AMU), the Combat Kings of the 71st RQS still soldier on in Afghanistan, where the relentless dust is taking its toll. The dust in Afghanistan has been described by aircraft mechanics as particularly sharp, angular and extremely damaging to engines and other moving parts. The Afghan dust is causing a real headache for the maintenance crews, causing more wear and tear in the already aging aircraft.

After many years of service, retirement is near for the HC-130P. On 29 September 2011, the 58th Special Operations Wing (SOW) at Kirtland AFB, New Mexico, took delivery of the first new HC-130J Combat King II. Based on the KC-130J tanker in service with the Marine Corps, the HC-130J is fitted not only with a modern glass cockpit but also sports the latest navigation, communications, threat detection and countermeasure systems. Like the current HC-130P, the new Combat King II will also be fitted with FLIR systems and refuelling pods. A new feature is the boom refuelling receptacle, allowing the HC-130J to be refuelled in the air by KC-135R and KC-10A tankers. As the HC-130J is a completely different aircraft from its predecessor, the 58th SOW will provide an eight-month qualification programme for the new Combat King II. In the coming years, the HC-130J will start making its way to the 71st RQS at Moody AFB to allow the aging HC-130P to retire.

Although a much more recent acquisition than the HC-130P, the HH-60G Pave Hawk has been serving the Air Force for nearly 30 years. The first helicopters entered service in 1982 and, in August 2011, two Pave Hawks from the 512th RQS at Kirtland AFB reached 10,000 flight hours, with two more following shortly thereafter. The HH-60G has been in action over Panama, Kuwait, Iraq, Mozambique, former Yugoslavia and Afghanistan, and its service life has been extended beyond the original 8,000 hours.

The Air Force started looking for a replacement of the HH-60G as early as 1999. This evolved into the controversial CSAR-X competition, which Boeing won with its HH-47, a highly modified version of the CH-47 Chinook based on the successful US Army Special Operations version, the MH-47G. Although this would have avoided the cost of developing an entirely new type, the decision was contested and the CSAR-X programme was subsequently cancelled by then Defence Secretary Robert Gates. As a result, the Air Force was left with a hefty bill for the CSAR-X competition—and no replacement helicopters.

In order to keep the Pave Hawk fleet flying, the Air Force was allowed to initiate the HH-60G Operational Loss Replacement programme, which will provide the Air Force with at least 11 newly manufactured Pave Hawks. Recently redesignated from HH-60M to HH-60U, these new Pave Hawks are based on the UH-60M Black Hawk and have more powerful engines, a glass cockpit, a redesigned FLIR mount on the nose and the distinctive looking Upturned Exhaust System. The first three HH-60U helicopters were delivered to the Air Force on 7 September 2011 and will replace Pave Hawks helicopters lost to attrition.

In August 2011, the Air Force stated that under the HH-60 recapitalisation programme, or HH-60 Recap, it would seek to replace an estimated 112 HH-60G Pave Hawks and anticipates that the new rescue helicopter “will be an existing production helicopter with modifications using existing mature technology with only limited integration of existing subsystems as required”. This would make the Sikorsky HH-60U a likely candidate but may also allow Boeing to re-table its HH-47 or MH-47G offering.

Acknowledgements

The article would not have been possible without the tremendous support of the United States Air Force, the 23rd Wing and the 347th Rescue Group. The author would especially like to thank Colonel Franks, Captains Gugelman (41st RQS), Pena (71st RQS), Harney and Gibson (75th FS), and SSgt Reed (38th RQS). Extraordinary thanks to 1st Lt Garrison, TSgt Griffin and A1C Wiseman of the Public Affairs team and the 71st AMU getting King 15 airborne again.

When talking about New Plymouth-based Ice Aviation, the iceberg analogy is an impossible one to resist—particularly as Ice Aviation is named largely in honour of the grand frozen expanses and icy seas of Antarctica. In exactly the same way that 90% of an iceberg remains hidden beneath the surface, Ice Aviation’s single (immaculate) hangar, sole (equally immaculate) Robinson R22 and sole full-time instructor are only the visible tip of a much greater whole. The huge combination of experience, knowledge and skill of the company’s owner, Jim Finlayson, forms the unseen foundation and heart of Ice Aviation—and is what makes it a very special company.

Accordingly, one cannot even begin to describe Ice Aviation without first describing the background of its owner, Jim Finlayson, MBE.

Originally from Hamilton, Jim Finlayson graduated from Whangarei Boys’ High School before moving to the lower South Island in the 1970s. It was while living in that beautiful part of the country—working as a guide in Milford in the summer and a skifield instructor in winter—that Jim first developed a fascination with aviation. The numerous helicopters that operated in the Fiordland area at the time captivated Jim and, after a first flight in a helicopter with none other than Bill Black, Jim knew there really was no other option for him but to join the ranks of the rotary-winged.

Quite sensibly, Jim elected to have the New Zealand public pay for his flying training and he joined the RNZAF in 1982. After graduating, he flew fast jets for two years—initially Strikemasters for a year, followed by a year on Skyhawks.

While some young men might have seen this as the pinnacle of a military aviation career, Jim saw things differently and, in 1986, he transferred to helicopters. Leaving the high-speed sophistication and thrills of a Skyhawk cockpit behind, he moved to the far opposite end of the aviation spectrum to train in the antiquated (it was antiquated even way back in 1986) piston-engined Bell Sioux before progressing to the UH-1H Iroquois.

The one-time mountain guide and ski instructor had achieved his goal of becoming a helicopter pilot—with the added bonus of also having enjoyed two years of military fast jet experience.

Readers will be pleased to know that the tax dollars they spent on teaching Jim Finlayson to fly were actually a valuable investment—one he has since repaid many times over by his 21 years of distinguished service. By choice, Jim spent most of those years flying Iroquois, including a lot of time based at Wigram, from where he flew countless search and rescue (SAR) missions around the country.

These days, civilian operators carry out the bulk of New Zealand’s SAR flying. However, during the time Jim flew Iroquois, it was predominantly an RNZAF responsibility. As a result, Jim accumulated a great deal of valuable SAR experience, much of it in the rugged mountainous terrain and capricious weather of New Zealand’s South Island.

In addition to the SAR work on land, Jim and his RNZAF colleagues flew countless SAR missions at sea—often far out to sea, and frequently in dreadful weather. Having flown their single-engined Iroquois far from land in archetypal “’twas a dark and stormy night” conditions—howling winds, pouring rain, limited visibility and freezing cold—they then had the additional challenges inherent in winching victims from between the forests of deadly masts that crowd the decks of ships.

It doesn’t take much imagination to realise just how stressful it must be to hover over a wildly pitching deck, 30 miles from land, in the near dark, having to match the rise and fall of a stormy swell while simultaneously avoiding thrashing ships’ masts while one of your colleagues—or an injured victim—dangles from a slender winch cable beneath you.

And this is how military personnel around the world repay their taxpayer-funded “free flying lessons”. When other people’s lives are at stake, military crews put their own lives on the line—relying on their training and discipline to get the job done safely.

Although he flew Iroquois operationally for most of his RNZAF service, Jim also spent time as an instructor—both on the fixed-wing CT4 Airtrainers, and the Sioux and Iroquois helicopters. He also undertook the usual assortment of desk jobs and staff courses, but always returned to his first love…flying helicopters.

During his RNZAF service, Jim undertook several overseas deployments, including three tours to Antarctica, where he flew Iroquois on scientific support missions for the New Zealand Antarctic programme. It was the fascination of the icy continent he developed during those three tours that eventually gave rise to the name Ice Aviation.

In addition to his overseas flying deployments, Jim also spent a year on the ground at the height of hostilities in Bosnia and Croatia, where he earned himself an MBE. Like many service personnel, Jim is reluctant to blow his own trumpet, but as far as Pacific Wings was able to establish, the MBE had something to do with an uncomfortably dangerous activity involving extracting injured people from a mine-damaged vehicle in a minefield. Having no aeroplanes, helicopters or air-launched weapons to rely on at such a time must have been somewhat unnerving for an air force pilot.

Jim describes the rest of his year in Bosnia and Croatia as “noisy” (shells and explosions) and “character building” (avoiding bullets), and says it involved a great deal of luck in avoiding serious harm.

Time for a change

Eventually, in 2003, after a number of command and staff appointments, with no likelihood of a return to flying helicopters in the Air Force, Jim made the decision to leave the Air Force and began accumulating civilian flying qualifications. He already had his commercial licences for both helicopters and aeroplanes, but wanted to become an instructor in both. Beginning with aeroplanes, this one-time A4 Skyhawk pilot and Air Force instructor had to “learn” to fly a Cessna 172 and accumulate the hours necessary to meet the legal requirements for civilian instructor qualifications.

Jim soon achieved his civilian (fixed-wing) instructor rating flying C-172s with the Wellington Aero Club at Wellington and Paraparaumu.

His next goal was a helicopter instructor rating. In the same way that he had “started again” in fixed-wing aircraft, Jim began afresh in helicopters and traded his erstwhile 4-ton, 1,400-shp turbine Iroquois for a tiny 630-kg, 125-hp piston-engined Robinson R22. He soon mastered the Robbie and quickly achieved a helicopter instructor rating.

Far from perceiving the return to basics in both aeroplanes and helicopters as backwards steps, Jim embraced every learning opportunity they presented. As much as he had always admired the mighty Iroquois and loved the time he spent flying it, he immediately enjoyed flying the miniature R22, which he describes as a great little helicopter in its intended role.

When he had left the Air Force, Jim remained on the books as an “active reserve”. Having left the permanent Air Force in order to continue flying, Jim was called back to RNZAF service—in a flying role—based at Ohakea for several months; ironic, indeed, that it was only after he had left the Air Force that he was able to keep flying for the Air Force!

By the time he had finally completed his Air Force flying, Jim also had all the civilian qualifications he needed. More importantly, thanks to his Air Force experience, he had a logbook full of valuable flying hours—the majority of which were in challenging circumstances and in the most extreme environments around the world, from steamy tropical jungles to the endless frozen expanses of Antarctica.

With his combination of military SAR experience and his civil qualifications, Jim had no difficulty securing a job flying a BK117 in Tasmania. The work involved a combination of police and SAR work under a combined police/ambulance contract. The company also operated a Squirrel, an R44 and an R22, and Jim was able to instruct in all three types as well as flying the BK117.

Jim enjoyed an interesting and enjoyable year in Tasmania, which he describes as a spectacular and wild place, much of it like the southwest of New Zealand’s South Island.

Jim’s next job was in the Solomon Islands flying Bell 212s for Heavylift on a contract that took over from the recently departed Iroquois of the RNZAF’s No. 3 Sqn.

After the Solomons, it was on to Indonesia, briefly, where he flew Bell 412s for Helicopters New Zealand (HNZ) conducting longlining operations in the jungle. From Indonesia, it was on to Myanmar and a contract supporting offshore oil and gas exploration there.

Having moved back to New Zealand with his wife and established themselves in his wife’s hometown of New Plymouth, Jim flew Bell 212s and 412s for HNZ in New Zealand during his six-week breaks (the Myanmar contract involved six weeks on and six weeks off).

It was also during his six-weekly visits home that Jim decided to establish a business teaching people to fly in New Zealand. With a leased R22, he set up shop and began flight training. After a year, the business was working well enough for Jim to justify purchasing his own R22.

In a fortunate coincidence, not long after Jim bought his own R22, a nice modern hangar became available at New Plymouth Airport, allowing Ice Aviation to house its own helicopter in its own hangar.

At the time, Jim identified that there was really nobody else providing helicopter training in Taranaki; people wanting to learn to fly helicopters went to either Wanganui or Hamilton. Others had previously offered helicopter training in New Plymouth, according to Jim, but without any great success. However, since Jim began operating, another operator—based at Urenui—has also begun doing a bit of training.

Jim was in now in the fortunate position of owning both his helicopter and hangar, and he had no other full-time staff to pay. With Jim’s own costs at a minimum, his students are the beneficiaries, as Ice Aviation was (and remains) able to make flight training as affordable as realistically possible. As a result, Jim had plenty of flight training bookings whenever he was back in New Zealand.

Nevertheless, despite a steady training schedule, Jim kept up his contract flying in order to build an even stronger foundation for Ice Aviation.

After his work in Myanmar ended, Jim moved to Darwin, where he began flying EC135s for HNZ (Australia). The work involved operating two EC135s as part of an Australian Aerospace contract for the Australian Defence Department (ADF). Because Australia’s new Tiger helicopters were delayed, Australian Aerospace supplied the two EC135s (and associated engineering support) to assist ADF pilots to transition from the elderly Kiowa (Bell 206) to the Tiger.

Over the course of the contract, the EC135s were kept incredibly busy. Over a period of two years, the two machines accumulated more than 3,600 flying hours, of which Jim flew nearly 1,000 hours—mainly instructing. He is highly complimentary of the EC135, which he describes as “absolutely fantastic to fly!”

According to Jim, everything about the EC135s works very well. He said it really was a perfect machine for the ADF contract, having around 75% commonality with the Tiger’s systems and operating procedures. He describes the EC135 as the perfect machine to set new Tiger pilots up for advanced multi-engine, glass cockpit IFR flying. “While I loved flying the Huey, and I still love the Bell 212 and 412, the EC135 is brilliant; it’s just a magical helicopter!”

At the end of the ADF contract, Jim returned home to New Plymouth, but has commuted back and forth to Australia for HNZ Australia for a number of short-term contracts flying EC135s and EC145s. Most recently, these have involved flying EC145s from Karratha in Western Australia conducting marine pilot transfers to and from ore ships.

Whenever Jim is back in New Plymouth, his R22 is always busy training a number of regular students. Nevertheless, Jim says despite its relatively regular work, the single R22 doesn’t make enough money to be economic as a sole income source. Eventually, he would like to expand but he has no desire to over-extend himself. He says his greatest motivation for the business is his passion for aviation and the desire to put something back into the industry that he has got so much out of.

It was pleasing to hear such an experienced pilot talk about retaining his passion for the basics of flight. He says a few of his colleagues who fly turbine multi-engine IFR helicopters question his sanity and ask him why he flies an R22 if he doesn’t have to. “I always love going flying in the R22,” he says. “I enjoy flying the EC135 and 145 and Bell 412 these days, but flying the R22 is really good fun; I love it.”

It is particularly pleasing to see people like Jim dedicated to providing quality training in an industry commonly dominated by inexperienced novices. The situation of having newly-qualified instructors teaching barely less qualified students to fly has long been recognised—and accepted—as unavoidable in the aviation industry, and it affects fixed-wing and helicopter training equally.

Career aviators like Jim Finlayson and a few others like him are outstandingly valuable exceptions to aviation’s unfortunate conundrum of having “new kids teaching slightly less new kids” to fly. Their irreplaceable experience makes them worth their weight in diamond-crusted gold bars to the industry.

There is no better way to learn the basics than from someone with a wealth of real-world experience behind them. From a student’s perspective, it is extremely reassuring to learn from unflappable veterans who really understand what is going on, have great affinity for their aircraft and who have “been there, done that”. In particular, it is reassuring to be flying with someone who you know wants to be there teaching you and isn’t just along for the ride to accumulate the flying hours needed for a “real job”.

Ideally, as his business expands, Jim would love to take a new instructor under his wing (blade?) and pass on his hard-won knowledge and experience.

Jim’s military background is evident from his strict adherence to procedures. Self-discipline and professionalism in a single-pilot cockpit are the qualities that keep pilots alive. Jim not only practises the same high standards that were instilled in him during his 21 years’ RNZAF service, but also, since leaving the Air Force, he has continued his flight training and education to the extent that he now holds some qualifications that are not even available in New Zealand.

Today, Jim holds the following New Zealand licences and ratings: an A-category helicopter instructor rating, ATPL (helicopter), CPL (aeroplane), instrument rating and B-category instructor rating (aeroplane), a single-pilot multi-engine instrument rating (aeroplane) and a new Zealand Flight Examiner rating—meaning he can test and approve licences in New Zealand. In addition, he holds all of the equivalent licences and ratings in Australia—and he also holds two Masters degrees: an MBA in business administration and a Master of Philosophy.

With his joint Australian/New Zealand flying qualifications, Jim can test and approve pilots from either country in either country. This is a particularly valuable asset for Ice Aviation, which can offer Australian pilots the opportunity to fly an R22 for A$450 (including GST) an hour. For Australian pilots, this price is significantly lower than they would pay at home and Jim expects quite a few Aussies will take advantage of the opportunity to fly in New Zealand.

Jim believes New Zealand’s unique training environment—particularly in places like Taranaki—is even more valuable for Australian pilots than the low cost of helicopter hire. Australian pilots training on the East Coast of Australia can get a licence almost without ever seeing a cloud or making a genuine “weather decision”, so New Zealand offers valuable learning opportunities for them.

As well as his “regular” qualifications, Jim also holds an internationally approved CRM (crew resource management) instructor’s rating—something that doesn’t even exist in New Zealand. Jim feels so strongly about the importance of CRM in all levels of flying that he has travelled to the UK twice at his own expense in order to gain a CRM instructor’s qualification.

He feels New Zealand and Australia are behind the times in this regard. While New Zealand has gone down the path of threat and error management (TEM) and now includes it as a component of flight testing, he says TEM is merely a part of CRM training, which is mandatory in many other countries for even the most basic licences.

While airlines like Air New Zealand have their own in-house CRM instructors, there is no formal CRM instructors’ qualification available under either the New Zealand or Australian rules.

His CRM training was not the only time Jim travelled internationally at his own expense to further his aviation education. When he first started Ice Aviation, Jim elected to go to California to undertake the Robinson safety course at the Robinson factory instead of doing it in New Zealand. He has no criticism of the Robinson course in New Zealand, but says the extra expense of doing it at the factory was worthwhile. At the factory, course participants get to see examples of damaged helicopters and components, and understand the background to them. He said he found it valuable to learn from the worldwide central “source” of Robinson helicopter knowledge and that he picked up lots of important little things he would not have done otherwise.

Now, when he talks to pilots contemplating buying their own Robinson helicopters, Jim strongly recommends they do the same thing. Considering the price of new helicopters, he considers the relatively small additional expense to be an investment rather than a cost.

Yet another big private training expense for Jim was when he first began flying EC135s. Keen to learn as much as possible about the new helicopter before flying it in the real world, he travelled to the UK in order to get comprehensive training on a top-end EC135 simulator.

Simulation is an aspect of flight training about which Jim is particularly passionate. He struggles to comprehend the New Zealand regulator’s attitude to simulation and its reluctance to embrace it. While overseas civil aviation authorities recognise the value of high quality simulators for training and increased safety, New Zealand still requires a great deal of—potentially dangerous—training to be done in real aircraft. Internationally, pilots are able to qualify for “zero flight time” type ratings in airline operations. The same level of simulation is available for all flying—including helicopters. However, New Zealand insists on forcing pilots to “bash the circuit” ad nauseum, burning up precious aviation fuel, pumping unnecessary carbon emissions into the air, and risking aircraft and aircrews in practising non-normal procedures.

In addition to eliminating all of those negatives, simulation offers pilots the opportunity to practise things they could never practice in real aircraft and to experience catastrophic failures that could cost hundreds of thousands (even millions) of dollars if they were to occur in a real aircraft. For example, a pilot training in an EC135 simulator, can “see” “feel” and “hear” what it is like to cook both engines (US$350,000 each in the real world) or to fail both engines in flight and fly the aircraft all the way to a landing—neither of which one would practise in a real aircraft.

So for now, if New Zealand helicopter companies want their pilots to gain all the benefits of simulators, they must spend millions of dollars in sending them overseas. When the pilots return, the companies still have to spend more money wearing out aircraft and burning fuel, and risking airframes and aircrews practising drills in flight.

Ideally, simulation is a field in which Jim would like Ice Aviation to be involved; he sees enormous value even for basic VFR flying in a simulator. For now, though, the single R22 certainly doesn’t justify a $16 million full-motion simulator for advanced multi-engine turbine helicopters—especially in the current regulatory environment.

Going beyond what most people expect of a flight-training organisation, Jim wants to build a local “community” and a sense of comradeship in Taranaki of like-minded passionate aviators who are keen to expand their aviation education and maintain their flying fitness.

During my visit to Ice Aviation, I flew with Graham, a local pilot in Taranaki who now owns and flies an R44 privately. Jim conducts Graham’s BFRs and often flies with him and offers advice on things like maintenance and cross-country flying. It was immediately obvious that Graham had absorbed much of Jim’s fastidious professionalism and discipline. From the outset, flying with Graham in his immaculately maintained R44 was a joy because his attention to detail and adherence to procedures were immediately apparent.

After the flight, I asked Graham what he felt he had gained from flying with Jim. I was gratified to hear that he talked mainly about attitude, self-discipline and safety. Although he mentioned good flying skills, it was obvious he understood these were a natural consequence of the attitude and discipline. In particular, Graham said he valued Jim’s ongoing friendship and the opportunity to get together regularly to talk flying and keep learning.

This desire to keep learning and training is a big part of what makes Jim Finlayson tick and is what lies at the heart of the Ice Aviation “iceberg”. Having spoken to a couple of Jim’s students, it is also a big part of the appeal of flying with Jim. Despite his extensive experience, his students say he has a wonderfully reassuring manner without making them feel intimidated by his flying background.

Jim is adamant that all pilots should continually strive to improve their skills, regardless of what level they are at—an attitude that comes from his Air Force background, where every flight in a pilot’s career is viewed as a learning exercise that is debriefed in detail to extract any possible ‘lesson’ from it. “Never settle for doing the same things every day, thinking that that is what ‘experience’ is all about.”

Students learning to fly at Ice Aviation can expect a uniquely personalised experience in an environment where they will continually be encouraged to be the best they can. They will not do their learning online or by correspondence, or be part of any huge “courses”. Ground school courses are conducted either one-on-one or in a facilitated personalised small group setting amongst similarly keen students.

Jim gets lots of enquiries every day from people who think they might want to fly helicopters. He doesn’t want there to be any unpleasant economic surprises in store for them later on and says that anyone who gives a fixed price “estimate” based on the minimum legal time requirements for a PPL is misleading people.

When they ask Jim what it will cost, he never tries to “soften the blow” by talking legal minimum flight times, and he makes sure to mention all the add-ons like expensive exams, medicals and flight tests. He will tell you to budget on at least 60–70 hours flying for a PPL and possibly more.

Jim does not believe in students taking massive loans for helicopter training. He says that in his experience—both in New Zealand and Australia—the people who are able and prepared to pay for their training without borrowing are more motivated and are the most likely to be committed and see things through.

So don’t be fooled by what appears to be an apparently “small” operation. Ice Aviation isn’t just one hangar and a single R22. The invisible bulk and heart of this company is the intangible culmination of 30 years’ experience of flying in jungles, over frozen mountains, glaciers, dark and stormy seas, in hundreds of different cockpits with hundreds of different students; and sitting in hundreds of different classrooms with hundreds of different instructors and teachers.

At Ice Aviation, just like the tip of an Antarctic iceberg, what you see is not what you get—it is only a tiny percentage.

Just over a month and a half after the first production Boeing 787 “Dreamliner” was delivered to the aircraft’s launch customer—Japan’s ANA—Boeing, in association with Air New Zealand, brought one of its Dreamliner test aircraft to New Zealand as part of a brief tour that also included Australia. The visiting aircraft, ZA001 (N787BA), has flown the highest number of hours of any of Boeing’s 787 test fleet; in just over 500 flights, it has amassed around 1,300 hours of the fleet’s total of just over 5,400 hours.

ZA001’s arrival in Auckland on 12 November came less than two years after it became the first 787 to fly—a historic event that took place on December 15 2009. Its arrival in New Zealand, after a non-stop flight direct from Seattle, marked the 787’s first public appearance in the southern hemisphere, so it was not surprising that Aucklanders turned out in their thousands to witness the aircraft’s arrival.

Air New Zealand played a willing and helpful host to literally thousands of invited visitors keen to see the new aircraft first hand. Groups of 100 guests at a time took turns poring over the Dreamliner at Air New Zealand’s engineering facility during the two days the aircraft was made available to visitors.

Because ZA001 is still fully involved in the 787 test programme, its interior was filled with instruments, ballast tanks and test equipment rather than a standard airline configuration. While its interior might not have been a luxury showpiece, this did not deter guests from peering, prodding, poking, touching, looking and admiring every other aspect of this beautiful airliner.

Accompanying the Dreamliner to this part of the world was Boeing’s 787 programme’s vice president and chief project engineer, Michael Sinnet. Like a proud father introducing a newborn child, Mr Sinnet appeared to relish his host’s role as he introduced his carbon-fibre “child” to the throngs of visitors.

Also present to meet and greet visitors passing through the aircraft was Air New Zealand’s chief pilot, Captain David Morgan. Captain Morgan was aboard the Dreamliner during its journey from Seattle and flew it during the takeoff from Seattle and upon arrival at Auckland where he also landed the aircraft.

I asked Captain Morgan—who regularly flies Air New Zealand’s Boeing 777s—how the 787 compared to the triple-seven. From a “hands-on” flying perspective, he said the 787 was “absolutely identical” in terms of “feel” and control response to the 777. He was quick to point out that he considers this to be an excellent achievement on Boeing’s part, because of the fact that the 777 is such a beautiful aircraft to fly.

Despite some obvious visible differences in cockpit layouts between the 787 and its older brother 777, Captain Morgan was full of praise for the way everything had been integrated so seamlessly in the 787 that he had been able to slot naturally into the pilot’s seat (albeit alongside two Boeing test pilots) without having yet completed a 787 training programme. Strong commonality between types in a fleet is a significant asset to airlines, as it reduces the time required to undergo conversion training. As everyone in the industry knows, time really is money—lots of money—as far as airline training is concerned.

Captain Morgan’s enthusiasm for the new aircraft was not limited to his opinion as a pilot. As a senior manager within Air New Zealand, he appreciates fully that the 787’s fuel-efficiency and reduced maintenance requirements (expected to require around 30% less maintenance than current airliners) will have a big impact on Air New Zealand’s bottom line as soon as the aircraft can be brought into service.

When announcing the Dreamliner’s visit, Air New Zealand’s CEO, Rob Fyfe, also stressed the 787’s fuel efficiency—up to 20% better than existing types—and its ability to carry up to 50% more cargo than other airliners of comparative size. “We’re looking forward to seeing the 787 in our skies for the first time,” he said.

ZA001 is a 787-8. Air New Zealand has ordered the larger 787-9 variant, which will have a greater range capability and seating capacity than the 787-8.

As has been reported often throughout the 787’s development process, the Dreamliner is the world’s first (predominantly) composite airliner. Its carbon-fibre construction confers a number of significant advantages on the Dreamliner, including:

• its carbon-fibre structure is stiffer and has a higher strength-to-weight ratio than aluminium and permits a greater cabin pressure differential. The 787 will operate with a cabin altitude of 6,000 feet—compared to 8,000 feet typically in current airliners. Two thousand feet might not seem like much, but during a typical long distance flight, the increased partial pressure of oxygen at 6,000 feet has a major beneficial effect on physical wellbeing.
• Not only does the carbon-fibre permit a greater pressure differential and thus lower cabin altitude, but also, the fact that carbon-fibre does not corrode allows a more naturally humid cabin atmosphere to be maintained. This also benefits the aircraft’s occupants by preventing the unpleasant dehydration typically experienced in dry, air-conditioned cabins during long airline flights at altitude.
• The strength of the structure allows for significantly larger windows that will confer a more “open” feel to the cabin and a greater sensation of flight for passengers; it will reduce the feeling of being “cooped up in a tube” during long flights.

It is not just the Dreamliner’s composite design (around 80% composite by volume and 50% by weight) that is revolutionary. Boeing took a number of brave steps by introducing several new technologies simultaneously in its design. One of the biggest “step changes” in the 787 is the proliferation of electrical systems to replace “conventional” hydraulic or pneumatic systems. For example, the 787 uses electrical power to: operate its brakes (otherwise, universally hydraulically powered in other types); operate its air conditioning systems (conventional airliners use engine bleed-air); and provide wing de-icing (conventionally done with engine bleed air).

Electrical generation is beefed up significantly to cope with the additional loads involved—made possible by lighter, higher powered electrical generators. In addition, new, more advanced batteries provide better storage than older systems; the 787 is even capable of braking from a V₁ rejected takeoff using battery power alone.

Amongst the many technological “goodies” introduced with the 787 are head-up displays (HUD) for the pilots as standard equipment. Consideration is being given to the possibility of integrating forward looking infrared into the HUD in future, which would give pilots the ability to “see” through clouds.

There will be two engine options for Dreamliner operators; either the Rolls Royce Trent 1000 or the General Electric GEnx. Both are new technology engines that contribute significantly to the overall fuel-efficiency improvements expected of the 787, as well as producing around 20% fewer emissions than existing engines; Air New Zealand has ordered Rolls Royce engines for its 787s.

While non-enthusiasts might have difficulty telling many modern airliners apart, the Dreamliner will be instantly recognisable by its smoothly contoured nose and the distinctive “chevrons” at the rear of its giant engine cowlings (Boeing’s new 747-8 also features similar cowlings). This Boeing cowling design has proved effective in reducing engine noise.

The combination of its nose contour, aggressive looking engine cowlings and truly beautiful wings make the Dreamliner look like the new-technology aeroplane it is. The addition of its beautiful blue Boeing livery turned ZA001—certainly in this viewer’s eyes—into an aeronautical work of art; it was a joy to finally see the real aircraft in the flesh.

Having visited Boeing’s Asian suppliers, read scores of articles and books about the 787 and seen dozens of artist’s renditions of the aircraft in countless liveries and configurations, it was pretty special to be able to finally touch the real thing. Although admittedly not for the same reasons, I definitely share the desires of Rob Fyfe and Captain David Morgan for the 787 to enter Air New Zealand’s fleet; in my case, I simply can’t wait to see Dreamliners become common sights Downunder.

Training tomorrow’s warriors is what the 23rd Flying Training Squadron at Fort Rucker, Alabama, is all about. Pacific Wings joined the squadron to see how the US Air Force trains its future helicopter pilots using the UH-1H Iroquois and TH-1H Huey II.

The early days

The inception of military helicopter pilot training can be traced back to January 1944, when the US Army Air Forces (USAAF) initiated its helicopter training programme at Freeman Field near Seymour, Indiana. By June 1944, the helicopter training school received its first Sikorsky R-4 helicopters—the first mass-produced helicopter and the very first helicopter in service with the USAAF.

Following the establishment of the United States Air Force (USAF) in 1947, it was agreed that the Air Force would continue to provide helicopter training for both Air Force and Army pilots through the USAF Helicopter School. By this time, the R-4 had already been replaced by the Bell 47 or H-13 Sioux. In the early 1950s, the US Army opened its own helicopter flight training school at Fort Sill, Oklahoma, and, in 1956, the Air Force ceased training Army helicopter pilots altogether. During this time, the H-13 remained the basic training helicopter, supplemented by the Sikorsky H-19 Chickasaw and the Piasecki H-21 Shawnee.

In the 1960s, these helicopters were replaced by the Bell UH-1F, the Kaman H-43 and the Sikorsky CH-3C, representing the helicopters used by the USAF for special operations, firefighting and aerial rescue. As a cost-cutting measure, the Air Force started to investigate the possibility of outsourcing its Specialised Undergraduate Pilot Training—Helicopter (SUPT—H) to the Army, while retaining the Air Force-specific combat search and rescue (CSAR) and Special Operations training.

In October 1970, the first Air Force student pilots reported to Fort Rucker, Alabama, to undertake basic helicopter training with the Army. This marked the beginning of the end for the Air Force Helicopter School, which ceased to exist in 1971.

Helicopter training returns

Although the 23rd Flying Training Squadron (FTS) had been training Air Force students since 1994, the training programme was owned and operated by the US Army. The Air Force students followed the Army’s Rotary Wing Qualification Course before attending the “Air Force-unique” training that taught helicopter operations specific to the Air Force.

This all changed in 2004, when the Air Force retook ownership of its helicopter training programme. The change of ownership coincided with the Army’s announcement of the retirement of the UH-1H. As the Army had no further use for these helicopters, 40 were handed over to the Air Force at no cost. In the training role, the UH-1H has been gradually replaced with the TH-67 Creek (Bell 206B-3 JetRanger). The “Flat Iron” air ambulance detachment was the last Army unit to fly the UH-1H at Fort Rucker but these aircraft, too, were retired on 17 May 2011 and were replaced by the new UH-72A Lakota (Eurocopter EC 145).

“It was a sensible move,” says Captain Steve Reagan, the 23rd FTS Assistant Director of Operations. “While both operate helicopters, the Air Force flies different missions from the Army, in particular CSAR, Special Operations and Missile Wing support. We also operate different types, like the HH-60G, the UH-1N and the CV-22. The Army operates none of these specific types. So when our primary training helicopter, the UH-1H, was retired from the Army, it made sense for the Air Force to take the training programme back.”

Taking full control of the entire training programme allows the Air Force to create an even more efficient programme, tailored specifically to the needs of its student pilots, as Captain Reagan explains. “When our students arrive here at Fort Rucker, they already have flying experience. Before coming here, the students first go through primary aircraft training on the T-6 Texan II where they learn basic airmanship, instruments, navigation and formation flying. For the Army students, their helicopter training will be their first flying experience. It is a very different approach.”

Although the joint training programme came to an end, the 23rd FTS remains at Fort Rucker, which is the Army’s primary flight training facility. The large complex includes no fewer than six different airfields, including Cairns Army Air Field where the 23rd FTS is located. There have been several discussions about moving the squadron to Kirtland Air Force Base, New Mexico, to centralise all the Air Force helicopter training.

“These discussions keep surfacing from time to time,” says Captain Reagan, “but Fort Rucker is a great location for basic helicopter training. Because we are at sea level, the UH-1Hs are easy to fly in these thick air conditions, which create a more forgiving environment than the hot and high conditions at Kirtland, where the high altitudes and the hot conditions make flying a lot more challenging for the students. While I am certain they would cope just fine, it would increase their workload significantly. And besides, it is very valuable for them to experience the difference between flying conditions in Alabama and New Mexico. It will help them prepare for any future deployments in places like Afghanistan.”

Fellow instructor pilot Captain Derek Spears agrees. “Fort Rucker has all the facilities we need. Besides all the facilities here at Cairns, we also use the many remote training areas or RTs. That’s what they call the landing zones that are spread around Fort Rucker. There are 47 of these and they come in different shapes and sizes. Some are plain fields; others are located on hillsides and slopes, or in tight enclosures in forest areas. There are concrete pads and areas with sand to train brown-out landings. Everything we need is right here.”

Although the training mission has moved from the Army back to the Air Force, the 23rd FTS still enjoys wholehearted support from the Army’s aviation community. The “Flat Iron” detachment and other units provide logistical support when required and the 23rd FTS is firmly established in the Fort Rucker community. The privilege to use the Army’s extensive training facilities at Fort Rucker is a key factor in the squadron’s ability to train the next generation of first-class pilots.

Inspiring leadership

The 23rd FTS, commanded by Lieutenant Colonel Stephen Moyes, is a well-oiled machine that delivers a constant stream of highly motivated and skilled pilots. To ensure that all students receive the right amount of attention, the squadron divides the students into small classes of four to seven students each. At the time of writing, the squadron was training 31 students, divided over six classes, with each class at different phases of the 115-hour long training programme. From start to finish, it would take the students about six to seven months to graduate.

The 23rd FTS delivers just 65 to 70 new pilots per year, reflecting the small size of the helicopter community within the Air Force. With an increasing number of students expressing a desire to fly helicopters and tilt-rotors, students must compete for the small number of available training slots.

“The Air Force is putting more emphasis on the helicopter mission, with positive results,” says Captain Reagan. “Today, far more recruits in basic training are aware that the Air Force has helicopters. News coverage of helicopter operations in Iraq and Afghanistan certainly has helped. During the cross-country navigation phase of the training, we also fly to Laughlin and Columbus to visit the training wings there. We present the helicopter missions to the students in primary aircraft training, do a static display with our TH-1Hs and answer a lot of questions. There has been a tremendous uptake in interest and there is a real competition for our training slots. The students that arrive here at Fort Rucker are very happy they made it into the programme. They are highly motivated and very enthusiastic, and they raise the bar every year.”

Once the students arrive at Fort Rucker, they are absorbed into the small, tight knit helicopter community and supported by the instructor pilots who generously share their experiences with them. The 23rd FTS has 20 military instructor pilots, with four more experienced pilots undergoing pilot instructor training. Additionally, URS Corporation provides another 11 instructor pilots, many of whom previously served within the armed forces. Together, the instructors create an atmosphere of support and motivation for the students, which has been a key factor in the success of the 23rd FTS, as Captain Reagan explains: “We really want all of our students to succeed and graduate—the Air Force has a strong need for skilled pilots. In Hollywood movies, pilot training is often portrayed as a constant effort to wash out students, but that is not us. We do everything to support our students. Since 2005, only three students were not able to complete the programme, for different reasons.”

The instructors come from all corners within the Air Force and the wider armed forces. Between them, they have accumulated an impressive number of flight hours, with extensive experiences across the full palette of military helicopter operations, including many wartime CSAR and special operations missions.

For example, Lieutenant Colonel Denehan, the Director of Operations (DO), flew CSAR missions during Operation Allied Force over former Yugoslavia. In May 1999, Lt. Col. Denehan, together with Lt. Col. Kunkel, the current Squadron Commander of the 41st RQS at Moody AFB, rescued a downed American F-16 fighter pilot from behind enemy lines in Serbia. This Fighting Falcon pilot was none other than Major General Goldfein, who commanded the 555th Fighter Squadron at the time of Operation Allied Force and is now the director of air and space operations at Air Combat Command.

Lieutenant Colonel Dermody flew covert missions with the MH-53J Pave Low III while serving with the 20th Special Operation Squadron, a legendary Air Force Special Operations helicopter squadron that new operates the new CV-22 Osprey. Lieutenant Colonel Jones flew helicopters with the US Army before flying the UH-1N with the Air Force Space Command at Vandenberg Air Force Base, California. Major McIntyre flew the UH-1N and the HH-60G before becoming an instructor pilot on the T-6 Texan II. He was offered a position with the 6th SOS, an elite training squadron within the Air Force Special Operations Command, but opted to become an instructor with the 23rd FTS instead. Every single one of the more than 30 instructors at the 23rd FTS has an equally interesting background in military aviation.

First contact

The 23rd FTS currently operates 13 UH-1H Iroquois and 19 TH-1H Huey II helicopters. When the Air Force received the Huey helicopters from the Army, it contracted Bell Helicopter to upgrade 24 of them to the new TH-1H Huey II standard. Bell Helicopter not only rebuilds the helicopters to a near zero-hour state, but also fits a more powerful engine and a completely digital glass cockpit, squeezed into the streamlined Bell 212 nose. The squadron expects to receive the final three—which are currently being produced in the Bell Helicopter facility at Ozark, some 25 kilometres east of Fort Rucker—in April 2012.

Before the students can actually take to the skies in a Huey, they must first get through the Academics phase, in which they thoroughly study both the UH-1H and TH-1H. In passing this phase, the students become familiar with the electrical, hydraulic and fuel systems, the engines and power train, the flight control and rotor systems, and the avionics of both helicopter types.

Finally, the students can then get their first taste of rotary flight, which is very different from flying the T-6 Texan II, according to Major McIntyre. “Even for me, it was quite an adjustment to go back to helicopters after having flown the T-6 for so long. With the T-6, you get so used to flying at high altitude where things just happen at a very different pace. But in the Huey, the flying takes place at 500 feet or less and that’s quite a challenge. The T-6 is a much faster aircraft but you usually fly the Huey at tree top level, and that’s where things happen very, very quickly.”

In the Contact and Emergency Procedure phase, the students start the actual flying part of the training programme. During this phase, the students are taught the basics of flying the UH-1H, including taxi procedures, takeoffs and landings, and hovering. But the Emergency Procedure training is arguably the most important phase, in which the students are taught how to deal with any emergency that might occur in flight or on the ground. By constant repetition, the instructors ensure that these lifesaving procedures become second nature. Throughout the entire programme, students are asked to recite emergency procedures during each briefing. Failure to provide a satisfactory answer will immediately result in an unsatisfactory grade, even before the students have climbed into the cockpit.

Upping the ante

Having successfully completed the Contact and Emergency Procedure phase, the students then move onto the TH-1H, which they fly for the remainder of the programme. The transition process includes a couple of days of classroom study and flying time in the state-of-the-art full motion TH-1H simulator.

The transition process helps students to get acquainted with the new digital cockpit, which is very different from the analogue UH-1H. Whereas the UH-1H uses an array of dials and gauges, the TH-1H displays all the important flight information onto three large multi-functional displays (MFD). The TH-1H received a digital cockpit to ease the transition from the T-6 Texan II into new generation aircraft such as the CV-22 Osprey and the future replacement of the HH-60G and UH-1N.

But despite its rudimentary cockpit and lack of power, students like Lt. Mark Foyle of Class 11-09 cherish the opportunity to fly the UH-1H Iroquois. “I started out flying the UH-1H and it is a real classic—probably the best-known helicopter in the world. I am very happy I got to fly it. Each Huey out there on the flight line is different. There are ones I liked to fly and others I didn’t like as much. The new TH-1H is very different, though—all digital and a lot more power. Almost too much power, as we usually only carry three people. After moving onto the TH-1H, we do not get to fly the UH-1H any more, which is a shame because it is such a legendary helicopter.”

Having completed the transition onto the TH-1H, the training programme continues with the Instruments and Cross-Country Navigation phases. Despite being equipped with MFDs, the TH-1H is purposely not equipped with a moving map display, as students must learn to navigate without any digital assistance.

In the subsequent Day Remote phase, the students have to combine their previously learned skills to navigate to unfamiliar landing sites or Remote Training areas. Once the site has been located, the students must evaluate it while airborne to determine if and how they can land safely. This involves considering the wind, elevation, temperature, pressure altitude, power requirements, the approach path, the size and slope of the landing area, the touchdown point and an escape route. Mastering these procedures is important, as they are integral parts of the search and rescue (SAR) missions performed by both the UH-1N and HH-60G. Sometimes, the instructor pilots simulate a rescue operation by tasking the students to retrieve a person from a location that is completely unfamiliar to them.

The Day Remote phase is followed by the Day Tactical phase, during which the students are gradually introduced to the concepts of tactical helicopter operations. First, the students are introduced to flying in a low-level environment. Although familiar with the TH-1H at altitude, the students will have to adapt to flying constantly below 300 feet AGL. The students are taught to constantly scan for any threats and perform simulated cargo pickups at different landing zones. After flying the Day Tactical single-ship solo flight, the students practise formation flights at or above 300 feet AGL before performing formation flights at lower altitudes.

With the Day Remote and Day Tactical phases behind them, the students enter the final and most demanding phases of the training programme, the Night Remote and Night Tactical training sorties. Already challenging in broad daylight, the students must now master the same Remote and Tactical operations in total darkness, aided by night vision goggles (NVG). To graduate, the students only have to pass the Night Tactical Single Ship check rides. The nocturnal training phase also includes two non-graded tactical formation flights to introduce the students to NVG formation flying.

After completing these exciting night flights, the students can graduate and finally get to wear their wings. After mastering the T-6 Texan II in basic training and both the UH-1H and TH-1H at Fort Rucker, the students can finally call themselves pilots. But despite wearing their wings, there is still more learning ahead of them before they can join their operational squadrons.

Pick your aircraft

During the later stages of the training programme, students are asked to list their preference for the UH-1N, HH-60G Pave Hawk or CV-22 Osprey. During the Navigation phase, the students get to make cross-country flights to Moody AFB in Georgia and Hulbert Field in Florida to get acquainted with the Pave Hawk and the Osprey. The students are ranked by their achievements, with the best students getting to pick the aircraft or helicopter type they would like to fly, although the needs of the Air Force are ultimately the deciding factors.

Among the students of Class 11-07, the most senior class of the course, the preferences and opinions varied across the board. The students in this class were going through the Night Remote training at the time of the writer’s visit and had just been asked to list their aircraft of choice.

Second Lt. Patrick Mount wanted nothing more than to fly the HH-60G Pave Hawk, whereas 2nd Lt. Ryan Springer listed the CV-22 Osprey as his first choice. Second Lt. Ben Soifer actually had no preference as to what he flew and was happy to fly whatever the Air Force handed him. Only 2nd Lt. Tyler Gibson knew for certain that he would fly the HH-60G Pave Hawk with the 129th Rescue Wing of the California Air National Guard. Unlike the active duty Air Force, both the Air National Guard and the Air Force Reserve directly recruit their aircrew for the specific aircraft they operate. These students know from the very beginning what aircraft they will get to fly after graduation.

When asked how the students of Class 11-07 reflected on their time with the 23rd FTS, 2nd Lt. Ben Soifer said, “For me, it has been an incredible transition. At first, when trying to hover in the daytime, the helicopter was all over the place. But now I am doing it in the dark, wearing NVG!” Second Lt. Ryan Springer adds, “When I first came here, I didn’t even know how a helicopter flew. But during the Academics phase, your eyes really open. Then you get into the cockpit for the first time. Fortunately, the Huey is very forgiving and the instructors are so experienced that it makes the transition easier when coming from fixed-wing. After a couple of weeks, you finally get somewhat of a handle on the flying and hovering, and here we are now, flying at night, at low level and navigating and all. It’s incredibly exciting; it is very cool stuff!”

After graduation

After receiving their wings, the students are finally referred to as pilots. But they must still undergo training on the aircraft assigned to them. For all SUPT-H graduates, this training starts with the 58th Operations Group at Kirtland AFB, New Mexico. Depending on the aircraft type assigned to them, the new pilots will join the 71st Special Operations Squadron (SOS) for CV-22 training or the 512th Rescue Squadron (RQS) for training on the UH-1N and HH-60G.

As the graduates are already familiar with the Huey, the UH-1N training only takes three months. Transitioning onto the HH-60G Pave Hawk, a much larger and more complex helicopter, takes between six and seven months. But the transition period for the CV-22 Osprey takes over a year, as the pilots must familiarise themselves with the new phenomenon of tilt-rotor operations. The Osprey training also takes place with the US Marine Corps at New River, North Carolina.

But before the pilots can report to Kirtland AFB, they must first tackle the Air Force Survival, Evasion, Resistance and Escape (SERE) School at Fairchild AFB, Washington. At the SERE School, the pilots are taught the skills that enable them to survive in all climates, including woodcraft, wilderness survival techniques, emergency first aid, land navigation, camouflage techniques, methods of evasion and communication protocols.

They are also taught how to resist the enemy when captured and how to escape. A lot of the training material is based on the actual experiences of American and Allied airmen shot down or captured during the Second World War, Korea, Vietnam and the Gulf War.

Return to Fort Rucker

After completing their helicopter training with the 23rd FTS, the students of Class 11-07 and 11-09 leave southern Alabama to conduct their follow-on training with the 58th Operations Group in New Mexico and the SERE School in Washington. But after serving with their squadrons for several years, some may return to Fort Rucker to become flight instructors like Captain Steve Reagan. Like the other instructors at the 23rd FTS, his passion and experience are a daily inspiration for his students, and he enjoys every minute he gets to teach others the art of rotary flight.

“SUPT-H for me was a blast. I showed up to pilot training (T-37s at Columbus AFB, MS) wanting to fly helicopters. I wanted to fly CSAR in the HH-60G Pave Hawk. Flying at Fort Rucker during SUPT-H was probably one of my top experiences during my career. From day one, it was a great and valuable course. The instructors, both URS and Air Force active duty, were excellent and provided me the instruction and skills needed to go fly the HH-60G, and to perform in challenging environments and situations. I still use techniques today in the helicopter that I learned while here as a student. I would brag to my friends going through T-38s and T-1s all the time about flying at night on NVGs during pilot training—they were so jealous!

“I graduated from SUPT-H in May of 2005. I was lucky to get my first choice, which was the HH-60G Pave Hawk. I completed initial qualification in the HH-60G at Kirtland AFB in December of 2005 and arrived at Moody AFB in the same month. I was stationed at Moody AFB for four years and eight months. During my time at Moody, I upgraded to Aircraft Commander and Flight Lead in the HH-60G. I deployed five times—three times to Iraq and twice to Afghanistan—and I did pretty much every mission that falls under Personnel Recovery (CSAR, MedEvac, CasEvac, humanitarian aid and relief). I also participated in the recovery of unmanned aerial vehicles and support of the President of the United States. I moved to Fort Rucker in September of 2010 and completed my instructor upgrade in the TH-1H. I have been flying with students ever since.”

Future proof

Helicopters and tilt-rotors are firmly established within the Air Force and will be part of the inventory for the foreseeable future, as will the CSAR, Special Operations, distinguished visitor transport and missile wing support missions. As such, the Air Force will have a continuous need for highly skilled pilots. Having retaken ownership of the basic helicopter training, the Air Force has been able to fully optimise the training programme, from primary aircraft training on the T-6 Texan II to mission-specific training on the CV-22, HH-60G and the UH-1N.

The 23rd FTS plays a crucial role in this chain, by converting students into educated, experienced and skilful helicopter pilots. The success of the 23rd FTS is not merely a result of classroom training, but also of the supporting and inspiring environment that is created by the squadron commander and the senior instructors. This environment ensures that students feel supported and motivated to succeed, despite the steep learning curve and the many challenges they must overcome.

With the TH-1H Huey II, the 23rd FTS has the right training platform for the years to come. The TH-1H is a reliable, powerful and forgiving helicopter that provides an excellent introduction into the art of rotary aviation. The TH-1H is also an extremely cost-effective solution, especially when considering the Air Force received the original UH-1H airframes at no cost. The Huey II upgrade not only delivers a modern, powerful training platform but also achieves a significant reduction in maintenance costs. Thanks to the 23rd FTS and the TH-1H, the iconic Huey sound will be heard over Fort Rucker for many years to come.

23rd Flying Training Squadron

The 23rd Flying Training Squadron is the sole unit within the United States Air Force that provides basic helicopter training, which is referred to as Specialised Undergraduate Pilot Training—Helicopter (SUPT—H). All UH-1N Twin Huey, HH-60G Pave Hawk and CV-22 Osprey pilots will have passed through the 23rd FTS at Fort Rucker, Alabama. The squadron is commanded by Lt. Col. Stephen R. Moyes, who took command in July 2010, having previously been the Director of Operations for the 94th Flight Training Squadron at the US Air Force Academy in Colorado Springs. The 23rd FTS current Director of Operations is Lt. Col. Denehan, assisted by Capt. Reagan as the Assistant Director of Operations.

The 23rd FTS reports into the 58th Operations Group and 58th Special Operations Wing (SOW) at Kirtland Air Force Base in New Mexico. The 58th SOW provides undergraduate, graduate and refresher training for the combat search and rescue, special operations, missile site support and distinguished visitor transportation missions. As a training wing, the 58th SOW falls under the Air Education and Training Command (AETC) rather than the Air Force Special Operations Command (AFSOC), despite being a special operations wing.

The 23rd FTS can celebrate its 70th anniversary this year, as the squadron originates from the 76th Bombardment Squadron (Medium), which was activated on the 15th January 1941 and operated various bombers before joining the war in Europe in 1944 as the 23rd Troop Carrier Squadron. The squadron was deactivated in 1946 but made a brief return as the 23rd Helicopter Squadron in 1956, flying the H-21 Shawnee until 1958.

The Vietnam conflict saw the reactivation of the squadron in 1966, as the 23rd Tactical Air Support Squadron (TASS). The 23rd TASS operated as Forward Air Controllers out of Thailand, flying the O-1F Bird Dog, the O-2 Skymaster and ultimately the OV-10 Bronco. The pilots of the 23rd TASS operated over the Ho Chi Minh Trail in Laos, marking targets for air strikes and supporting rescue operations of downed airmen. The 23rd TASS participated in several high profile operations including the rescue of Lt. Col. Hambleton, better known as “Bat 21 Bravo”.

During Operation Desert Storm, the 23rd TASS deployed to Saudi Arabia with its OA-10 Thunderbolt II aircraft. Although the A-10 was designed as a tank killer, the squadron operated the Warthog in the “Fast FAC” role over Kuwait and Iraq. After only three years of A-10 operations, the 23rd TASS was deactivated in November 1991. The squadron was reactivated at Fort Rucker in 1994 as the 23rd Flying Training Flight, before being redesigned as the 23rd Flying Training Squadron on 21 December 1999.

The Bell Huey II—more than just an upgrade

The Huey II upgrade transforms the UH-1H Iroquois into a modern, powerful and practically zero-hour helicopter with excellent performance. Although the TH-1H is essentially a modified UH-1H, the Huey II is a much more capable helicopter and is also a lot cheaper to operate.

The Huey II is fitted with a T53-L-703 engine that delivers 1,800 shaft horsepower—400 hp more than the T53-L-13B that powers the UH-1H. The time between overhauls (TBO) for the upgraded engine has been increased from 1,100 to 5,000 hours. An increased TBO means significant cost savings, as it allows the helicopter to fly much longer before undergoing an expensive overhaul.

The main transmission is rebuilt and upgraded to accommodate the more powerful engine, allowing for 1,290 shp on takeoff. The main transmission TBO is extended from 1,100 to 6,000 hours. The existing gearboxes are replaced by new 42-degree and 90-degree gearboxes, with an increased TBO from 1,500 to 5,000 hours.

The Huey II also receives the main rotor blades, tail rotor and tail boom from the Bell 212. The Bell 212 main rotor blades are larger and have a wider cord, resulting in increased lift. The Bell 212 tail rotor blades also have a wider cord and moving the tail rotor to the other side of the tail boom increases the tail rotor authority by 50%. The new tail boom uses push–pull control rods instead of cables, which also increases safety. All these Bell 212 parts are newly fabricated parts, and also include a brand new main rotor and tail rotor hub assembly, a new mast, new pitch change links and the addition of a KAflex drive shaft. Naturally, these new parts all have a much-improved TBO, with 4,000 hours for the main rotor blades and 2,500 hours for the tail rotor blades. The new main rotor mast TBO has been increased tenfold, from 1,500 to 15,000 hours. The Huey II airframe also receives structural modifications, with a strengthened pylon support structure and a Bell 212 lift beam.

The Huey II supports the standard UH-1H nose or the Bell 212 nose—the latter offering more space for a digital or glass cockpit. When fitting the heavier MFDs, the Bell 212 nose is also helpful for an improved centre of gravity. Bell Helicopter allows the customer to customise its Huey II upgrade, offering a wide range of options for cockpit systems and onboard equipment. The Air Force TH-1H is fitted with a completely digital cockpit, but other Huey II customers have opted for the more traditional analogue gauges instead, which are also overhauled or replaced when necessary. Regardless of the choice of cockpit displays, each Huey II is completely rewired and fitted with a new battery and generator.

Building the Huey II

The Bell Helicopter facility at Ozark, Alabama, is the home of the Huey II programme. Located close to Fort Rucker, the facility is not hard to miss, as one only needs to look out for the many UH-1H airframes parked on the ramp.

The Huey II manufacturing process takes places in two separate halls. The first step in the Huey II process is the removal of the original UH-1H tail boom. Only the front fuselage is used; the original tail boom is recycled for parts for existing UH-1H customers. Upon entering the first hall, the UH-1H front fuselage is completely stripped down for the Pre-Shop Analysis (PSA). During the PSA phase, the fuselage is sandblasted to remove any paint and then carefully inspected. The Bell engineers inspect every single rivet hole and every individual panel to determine if the fuselage is suitable for modification and note down any structural repair work that is required. It is not uncommon to find bullet holes and scars of battlefield repairs on airframes that served in Vietnam. All the retained parts are also carefully examined and marked for overhaul or replacement where necessary.

After the PSA phase, the fuselage is transported into the second hall, where it enters a loop track across all the different stations. At the first stations, all the PSA repairs are carried out. Then the fuselage receives its structural modifications, the new lift beam and the new attachment fittings and support structure to accommodate the new Bell 212 tail boom. Upon reaching the end of the hall, the UH-1H fuselage is ready to receive the new tail boom and rotors, and the new dynamic components. While passing through several stations, the new Huey II helicopter starts taking shape and slowly transforms from an empty airframe to a complete helicopter. Along the way, the engineers also fit the new wiring, battery and generator.

As part of the final assembly, the helicopter is painted in the customer’s colour scheme and is then transported back to the first production hall. Here, the Huey II modification is completed by installing the new T53-L-703 engine and completing the cockpit installation. In case of the TH-1H, the MFDs were supplied by the Air Force, but the cockpit configuration can be customised for each customer and ranges from a full digital cockpit to an analogue cockpit, supplemented with GPS, moving map or other digital systems. After almost a year of hard work, the UH-1H has been transformed into a brand new Huey II helicopter, featuring more than 14,000 new parts.

Value for money

The complete Huey II package transforms the UH-1H from a reliable but dated workhorse into a modern utility helicopter, fit for duty in the most challenging environments and the increased performance gives the Huey II much better “hot and high” capability. The older The UH-1H performs very well at sea level but struggles at altitude: it can operate at 12,000 feet but with a significantly reduced payload. By comparison, the Huey II has been designed to meet those high altitude challenges and has a service ceiling of 16,100 feet and an IGE hover of 12,000 feet.

At approximately US$5.2 million, the basic Huey II is an affordable option for many existing UH-1H operators. Although this version does not come with a digital cockpit, it does include new gauges. Adding a full digital cockpit will cost an additional US$237,000, but there are practically no limits on the options customers can add to their Huey II configurations. The military police of Rio Janeiro, Brazil, requested a completely armoured Huey II that can withstand machine-gun fire, is fully night capable, and is equipped for SAR operations. This is no ordinary police unit, as it operates in the slums of Rio de Janeiro, one of the most lethal law enforcement environments in the world. To meet these demands, Bell Helicopter designed a Huey II with exceptional survivability for both helicopter and crew, while still retaining the ability to operate in mountainous and hot areas.

The Huey II has been well received by both new and existing Huey operators, and Bell has successfully sold the Huey II to military, law enforcement and government customers. Current domestic Huey II customers include NASA, the US Department of State, the US Customs and Border Protection agency and several law enforcement departments.

Internationally, the Huey II has been equally successful with customers including the Philippines Air Force; the Argentinean Army; the Colombian Army, Air Force and National Police; the Brazilian Military Police; the Armed Forces of Kazakhstan; the Yemeni Air Force and the Iraqi Air Force. The capability to operate in hot and high environments is proven by the daily operations with not only the Yemeni and Iraqi Air Force but also by being the helicopter of choice for the US Department of State anti-narcotics operations in Afghanistan.

The Japanese Ground Self Defence Force (JGSDF) operates the locally manufactured UH-1J, an upgraded Huey that is very similar to the Huey II. Built under license by Fuji, the UH-1J also features a T53-L-703 power plant, a Bell 212 nose and a Bell 212 tail boom.

(Would have been) the smart choice for New Zealand

Bell Helicopter claims that, compared to the standard UH-1H, the Huey II decreases operating costs by more than 30%. The increased TBO for all major components represents a noticeable reduction in maintenance costs while also increasing operational availability across the fleet. The added benefit for existing UH-1H operators is that neither aircrew nor technicians need extensive retraining, and existing maintenance equipment does not need to be replaced.

This could have made the Huey II a very appealing option for the Royal New Zealand Air Force (RNZAF), especially in the current economic climate. When fitted with a complete digital cockpit, a Huey II upgrade would cost approximately NZ$6.3 million. According to figures listed on the RNZAF website, this would be less than a tenth of the cost of a single NH90. The website lists a total package cost of NZ$771 million, with a third reserved for support and logistics. This leaves NZ$514 million for eight NH90 helicopters—or around $64 million each. According to the RNZAF website, the NH90 was selected to resolve three key issues with the existing UH-1H fleet: airframe fatigue problems (including fin spars and rotor blades), equipment obsolescence and limited performance in tropical conditions.

Upgrading the existing UH-1H fleet to the Huey II standard—complete with digital cockpit including GPS and a digital moving map, possibly an integrated FLIR and fitted with SAR equipment—would have resolved these key issues and would certainly have been a much cheaper solution than the NH90. The RNZAF’s extensive experience of operating, maintaining and supporting the UH-1H would have remained directly applicable to the Huey II. And, moreover, the RNZAF could have continued to operate many more than eight helicopters—for much less money.

Acknowledgements

The article would not have been possible without the tremendous support of the United States Air Force, the 58th SOW, the 23rd FTS and Bell Helicopter. The author would especially like to thank Lt. Col. Moyes, Lt. Col. Denehan, Lt. Col. Dermody, Lt. Col. Jones, Major McIntyre, Capt. Reagan, Capt. Spears, and the students of Class 11-09 and 11-09; and, at Bell Helicopter, Barry Ford, Bridget Hall and Mac McMillan.

For the first time since the 1999 intervention in Kosovo, the French Navy has found itself carrying out a large-scale combat operation. Henri-Pierre Grolleau reports from the deck of the Charles de Gaulle in the Gulf of Sirte.

Compared to the Kosovo crisis, a lot of things have changed for the French Navy (Marine nationale). The Foch has been sold to Brazil (as São Paulo). The outdated F-8P Crusader, the Etendard IVPM and the Alizé have all been withdrawn from service, while the Super Etendard has been modernised extensively and is now known as the Super Etandard Modernisé (SEM). Even more important has been the introduction of the Rafale multi-role fighter, the E-2C Hawkeye early warning aircraft and the Charles de Gaulle carrier. For the French Navy, all these changes have resulted in the creation of an extremely powerful, coherent and efficient power-projection tool equipped with the latest combat aircraft, precision weapons, satellite communication systems, tactical datalinks, and command and control networks.

Deployment orders

The French Navy was engaged from the very start in Libya to help evacuate French and European citizens; some of its surface vessels were sailing off the Libyan shores when the bombing campaign was launched. For the Charles de Gaulle, it all began on 17 March 2011 when the carrier received its deployment orders; three days later, it left its Toulon home base. The Charles de Gaulle’s captain, Jean-Philippe Rolland, said he was aware that when the ship returned from the Indian Ocean in February, it might be required to deploy again at short notice. Normally, the ship is held at five-day readiness, but with the onset of the Libyan crisis, it managed to sail in just under three days. According to Captain Rolland, the most complicated part of the preparations was to move all the support equipment and spare parts needed for the Rafales, the SEMs and the Hawkeyes from Landivisiau and Lann-Bihoué naval air stations. This was a massive logistical effort involving numerous heavy trucks. When the Charles de Gaulle departed on 20 March, it carried “a fairly standard ammunition allocation” but it received additional ammunition from the fleet replenishment vessel Meuse to refill its stocks after numerous firings.

The Charles de Gaulle’s carrier air group conducted its first operational missions over Libya on 22 March 2011. For the next five months, the vessel and its aircraft were very active during Opération Harmattan (the name given to its Libyan operation by the French; the UK called its operation Operation Ellamy, the Canadians called it Operation Mobile and the USA called its participation Operation Odyssey Dawn). Wave after wave of fighters and attack aircraft engaged hundreds of military targets during pre-planned attacks, and destroyed scores of armoured vehicles and artillery batteries. The Charles de Gaulle returned to its Toulon home base on 12 August 2011 after spending 138 days at sea—120 of them involving aeronautical activity. The carrier air group logged more than 3,600 flying hours in 1,350 offensive sorties in support of Opération Harmattan: 840 strike sorties by Rafales and SEMs, 390 reconnaissance sorties by Rafales, and 120 command and control sorties by Hawkeyes. In addition, Rafales and SEMs carried out 240 buddy–buddy refuelling sorties. These figures do not take into account the numerous helicopter sorties or the training sorties performed by Rafales, SEMs and Hawkeyes.

French Task Force

The French Task Force, TF473, was under the overall command of Rear-Admiral Philippe Coindreau, an experienced naval aviator who previously flew Atlantique 2 maritime patrol aircraft. The task force’s mission was to protect civilian populations and to ensure that the no-fly zone prescribed by UN resolution 1973 was respected. The French Naval Carrier Strike Group, comprising the Charles de Gaulle, its carrier air group and escort vessels, is an extremely efficient power-projection asset that is fully capable of conducting offensive operations. Tasking for the task force was conducted by the Combined Air Operation Centre in Italy. Rear Admiral Coindreau said that officers in the Combined Air Operation Centre who were in charge of establishing the Air Tasking Order were aware of Charles de Gaulle’s way of operating, and they took everything into account in order to adjust the takeoff and trapping times in order to match the ship’s launch and recovery cycles. All flights were planned carefully to reduce the risk of “blue on blue” engagements.

On average, Charles de Gaulle launched two or three waves a day towards Libya, including one at night. Rear-Admiral Coindreau said that this was not an “all-out effort” and added that the Charles de Gaulle could have increased its operational tempo significantly if required. The aim was to be able to remain deployed for an extended period, which was why the number of daily waves was relatively restricted. In addition to pacing the number of daily waves, the task force utilised one “no-fly” day every nine or ten days to give it some breathing space and allow essential maintenance to be carried out, such as maintaining the ship’s catapults. Organic training was kept at a strict minimum, but there were a few inexperienced pilots who were given the opportunity to log additional flying hours. All such training was conducted towards the north to ensure training flights did not enter the area of operation accidentally.

With so many countries involved, the intervention over Libya was (and is) quite complex. As soon as aircraft were catapulted from the Charles de Gaulle, they came under NATO command. However, individual French warships remained under national command. Rear-Admiral Coindreau said this was pretty similar to what France did in Kosovo and what it routinely does in Afghanistan. What was different for the French compared to their participation in Kosovo was the fact that in Kosovo, they only flew in daytime, whereas nearly half of the French missions over Libya were conducted at night. Furthermore, in Kosovo, they mainly dropped laser-guided bombs. This time, with significantly expanded offensive capabilities, French forces were able to utilise cruise missiles, laser-guided bombs and GPS-guided precision weapons. “These are major differences that clearly illustrate all the changes that the French Navy and the Aéronavale have gone through in less than ten years,” said Rear-Admiral Coindreau.

Blue water operations

During most of the mission in the Mediterranean Sea, the Charles de Gaulle’s carrier air group was split into ten Rafale multi-role fighters of Flottille 12F, six SEM strike fighters of Flottille 17F, two E-2C Hawkeye airborne early warning aircraft belonging to Flottille 4F, two Dauphin and one Alouette III search and rescue helicopters of Flottille 35F, and one Puma and two EC725 Caracal combat search and rescue (CSAR) helicopters of Escadron d’Hélicoptères 1/67 ‘Pyrénées’. In addition, there were a number or rotary assets spread among Marine nationale surface vessels: a Lynx anti-submarine helicopter aboard the duty anti-submarine frigate, two Panthers aboard the duty air-defence destroyer and stealth frigate, and an Alouette III light helicopter aboard the fleet replenishment vessel Meuse, which shuttled back an forth between France and the area of operation.

The Charles de Gaulle sailed within a Carrier Vessel Operating Area (CVOA)—a “box” in which it could launch and recover its aircraft freely. Although the carrier’s precise operating area was a well-kept secret, all of its fighters operated without any diversion, which meant that, had a problem occurred, they would not have been able to divert to Malta, Sicily, mainland Italy or Greece. As a result, organic tanking was a key mission for the Rafales and the SEMs of the carrier air group. During this author’s visit to the carrier, at least two Rafales and two SEMs were configured as buddy–buddy tankers, each with in-flight refuelling pods on their centreline pylons and drop tanks under their wings. One of these tankers was launched systematically before any recovery cycle, ready to give away fuel to any fighter that might encounter difficulties when attempting to trap back aboard the carrier, while another remained on standby, ready to be catapulted away should the situation get worse.

Reconnaissance

Reconnaissance was one of the key missions of the Charles de Gaulle’s carrier air group. With the advent of the Pod Reco NG (New Generation Reconnaissance Pod, also known on the export market as AREOS, for Airborne REconnaissance Observation System), which entered service in late 2010, the French Navy considers it is equipped with one of the best reconnaissance systems in the world. Thanks to the Pod Reco NG’s powerful dual band infrared/visible sensor mounted in a swivelling turret at the front end of the pod, the Rafale can remain outside the range of enemy air-defences, taking incredibly sharp pictures from standoff distances, by day and night. Similarly impressive is the capability to transmit all imagery taken during the mission in real time via a broadband datalink system that offers a 360-degree coverage. The highly directive data beam is extremely difficult to intercept, and all data can be encrypted for additional security. During its most recent refit, the Charles de Gaulle was fitted with a dedicated antenna optimised to collect all data sent by the Pod Reco NG. Aboard the carrier, highly specialised photo interpreters and intelligence officers can start reviewing and analysing the images as soon as the Rafales are within transmitting range.

Typically, the carrier launched two reconnaissance missions a day, one of them at night. Each mission, which photographed dozens of targets during the flight, was conducted by two aircraft, each of which was equipped with one Pod Reco NG, four MICA air-to-air missiles and two 2,000-litre drop tanks. During the sortie, everything possible was done to minimise the pilots’ workload and the pod, which was pre-programmed precisely before flight, pointed its main sensors at areas of interest automatically. As a consequence, the pilots could cover large areas in a limited amount of time while concentrating on the tactical situation and any potential surface-to-air or air-to-air threats. In addition, pilots also had a “target of opportunity” mode at their disposal that proved ideal in some circumstances. The pod is equipped with large data recording systems and, as a result, pilots say they never experienced any capacity issues, even with the Pod Reco NG “on” throughout an entire sortie.

Although, understandably, crews could not divulge precise details about the tactics they use, they were able to explain that the main advantage of flying in pairs is that each aircraft is able photograph the same target from different angles or directions and/or from different altitudes. Alternatively, they adjust the route they fly so that each fighter in the patrol photographs widely separated targets on each side. Because of the constant threat of small-arms fire in Libya, it is fair to assume that it is unlikely the Rafales flew at low-level. As a result, the infrared line scanner mounted at the rear of the Pod Reco NG, and optimised to take horizon-to-horizon imagery from very low altitudes, could only have proved useful for mapping.

Ground attack

Protecting the civilian population from Gaddafi’s government forces required precision strikes and in this role, the Charles de Gaulle’s SEMs and Rafales were extremely active, dropping hundreds of precision weapons each week. Exact numbers of weapons dropped are still classified; however, in a single day during the author’s visit aboard the carrier, the Rafales of Flottille 12F dropped no fewer than seven GBU-12 and AASM bombs. The fighters either conducted planned missions or were scrambled to provide additional firepower when required. The fact that the Charles de Gaulle was cruising not far away from the battle zone was an obvious advantage in reducing the reaction time significantly.

Flottille 17F SEMs mainly operated as hunter-killer teams, with the leader acting as a “spiker”, using its Damoclès laser-designator pod, while the wingman always flew as a bomber, carrying laser-guided bombs. During the author’s visit to the Charles de Gaulle, the SEMs were all fitted with LL5081 decoy dispensers with varying combinations of chaff and flares. In addition to their Damoclès laser-designator pods, the “spikers” also carried two 1,100-litre drop tanks under the wings but were unarmed. The bombers carried a more impressive load that comprised two LL5081 dispensers, one Barracuda jammer, one Magic 2 infrared-guided short-range air-to-air missile and two GBU-58 laser-guided bombs, plus a full load of 30 mm rounds for the two cannons. The GBU-58 is, in fact, a Paveway 2 kit mated to a BANG 125-kg bomb body. The 275 lb (125 kg) and 550 lb (250 kg) bodies in service with the Aéronavale were specifically designed by MBDA and SNPE (Société Nationale des Poudres et Explosifs; Explosives and Powders National Society) for service aboard the Charles de Gaulle.

The presence of two nuclear reactors aboard the carrier imposed the adoption of insensitive munitions that could resist external (accidental or deliberate) aggressions by fire, explosion or penetration by high velocity fragments. Called BANG/CBEMS (Bombe Aéronavale de Nouvelle Génération/Corps de Bombe à Effets Multiples Sécurisé; New Generation Naval Aviation Bomb/Multiple Effects Insensitive Bomb Body), the new munition offers improved performance, and can destroy hardened targets and generate fragments to attack soft targets. A new low-sensitivity explosive, the B2214, was designed by SNPE specifically for the BANG. The GBU-58 with a BANG 125 body is the weapon of choice for the SEM for operations over Libya, as it is felt that this lightweight weapon is extremely useful in a number of scenarios where collateral damage has to be avoided at all costs.

GBU-12 and AASM

Flottille 12F and its Rafales bore the brunt of the French Navy effort over Libya. For air-to-ground missions, the Rafales were either equipped with four GBU-12 Paveway 2 laser-guided bombs or four AASM (Armement Air Sol Modulaire; modular air-to-surface armament, also informally known as “Hammer”) GPS-guided precision weapons, plus a full load of flares and chaff and MICA (Missile d’Interception, de Combat et d’Autodéfense; Interception, Combat and Self-Defence missile) air-to-air missiles.

Operation Harmattan was the first time the Flottille had used the Damoclès laser designation pod in anger. The pod was fitted to aircraft—irrespective of whether they were armed with the GBU-12 or the AASM, and was used for target identification at long distances—for the guidance of GBU-12s or to determine the precise coordinates of a target before engaging it with an AASM. According to the pilots, the Damoclès proved more effective in the Rafale than in the SEM because of the better quality and the higher resolution of the displays in the Rafale’s cockpit. The Damoclès was a useful addition to the Front Sector Optronics (FSO; an internal system mounted above the nose of the Rafale) that comprises a powerful TV sensor, a laser rangefinder and an infrared search and track system.

For the Charles de Gaulle’s aircrews, the Damoclès arrived at a crucial moment, and they were able to “spike” autonomously without resorting to buddy lasing. The Damoclès now incorporates a number of ameliorations that benefit both the SEM and the Rafale communities: laser pointer, laser spot tracker and recce mode. The Damoclès is optimised for the air-to-surface role, while the FSO is optimised for the air-to-air mission. Both have advantages and drawbacks and pilots regularly switched between them according to the conditions—for example, day, night or sand storms. In very bad weather, when they could not see the ground at all, pilots could still “paint” radar images of the target areas using the RBE2 high-resolution radar mode.

Both the GBU-12 and the AASM comprise a guidance kit mated to a BANG/CBEMS 250 kg bomb body. Compared to the GBU-12, the AASM is a powered weapon fitted with a range extension kit at the rear that allows targets to be engaged at ranges exceeding 50 kilometres. During the author’s visit to the Charles de Gaulle, only the GPS-guided variant of the AASM was in service aboard the ship. The GPS/infrared-guided variant had been qualified, but paperwork allowing its deployment from the carrier had not yet been finalised.

The GBU-12 was mainly used for “dynamic targeting”—a kind of close air support, but without any forward air controller on the ground. The AASM was mostly fired against high-value and well-defended military targets, such as ammunition dumps, air-defence systems and hardened shelters.

On average, the Charles de Gaulle launched between eight and 12 Rafale attack sorties a day. According to a Flottille 12F spokesperson, compared to the SEM, the Rafale offered a significantly larger load-carrying capability; a two-ship Rafale patrol carried a combined total of eight bombs and eight air-to-air missiles, while a SEM two-ship formation carried just two bombs and one self-defence missile. The Rafale’s range is reportedly excellent too: the aircraft typically flew two-hour sorties over Libya without needing in-flight refuelling, while, with tanker support, they flew four-hour sorties.

Although the air-to-air threat was assessed as very low or negligible, there was the possibility that aircrews might have found themselves engaged with Libyan aircraft in last-ditch attempts to regain air supremacy. This was why the Charles de Gaulle’s aircraft carried MICA missiles for self-defence and air superiority until the end of the deployment.

Scalp attack

Within her extensive storage facilities, the Charles de Gaulle can carry an extremely wide array of weapons, including Scalp cruise missiles. The Scalp is a member of the Scalp/Storm Shadow/Black Shaheen family, whose origins can be traced back to the French Apache anti-runway missile. The airframe and engine combination of the Scalp/Storm Shadow/Black Shaheen is very close to that of their forebear, but in the Scalp, the ten Kriss runway-busting submunitions of the Apache have been replaced by a single Broach warhead designed to defeat hardened structures such as ammunition dumps, buried command posts or reinforced aircraft shelters. The Rafale M is currently cleared to be catapulted with a single Scalp under the centreline pylon, plus two 2,000-litre drop tanks and up to six MICA missiles.

Flottille 12F fired four Scalps from the Charles de Gaulle at a Libyan target—believed to be an air base—while a further seven were expended by Air Force Rafale and Mirage 2000D strike fighters. Although it is not possible for the French Navy to disclose operational details, it is fair to assume that targeting data for the Scalp missiles were downloaded to the Charles de Gaulle via the Syracuse 3 satellite communication system. It is no secret that the Centre National de Ciblage (National Targeting Centre)—a joint unit based in Creil, north of Paris—has the capability to produce all navigation and targeting data from reconnaissance pictures taken either by Rafales equipped with Pod Reco NG recce pod or by the Helios 2A and 2B military observation satellites. France also has the autonomous capability to produce accurate 3D digital elevation databases used for automatic terrain following by the Scalp cruise missile (or by the Rafale, if needed). It should be noted, however, that the Charles de Gaulle’s own targeting cell could also create its own databases prior to a Scalp attack. For a country like France, the autonomous capability to deliver stealthy cruise missiles from the sea at will is a crucial tactical and strategic advantage. It sends a clear signal that France can destroy heavily defended targets from stand-off ranges with clinical precision, by day or night. It should be noted here that a naval variant of the Scalp, the MDCN (Missile De Croisière Naval, or naval cruise missile), is currently under development. It will equip the new Aquitaine-class frigates (the first of which started her sea trials in April 2011) and the future Suffren-class nuclear attack submarines.

Rafale success

For the French Navy, this operation—the first massive engagement of the Rafale in a major conflict—proved an unconditional success. The commanding officer of Flottille 12F described the Rafale as “a brilliant fighter, capable of performing the whole spectrum of tactical missions.” He described how the squadron had carried out strike and reconnaissance missions without any dedicated escort using the RBE2 radar, the Link 16 and Spectra electronic warfare suite to maintain all-round situational awareness. “If intercepted, we could have engaged and destroyed any airborne threat with our MICAs during those missions.” He said the Rafale’s sensor and armament suite had proved extremely effective and remarkably flexible. He gave the example that although the Rafale’s weapon system had not been designed specifically for the DEAD (Destruction of Enemy Air Defences) role, by utilising all the aircraft’s sensors—the high resolution radar mode, the Spectra suite, and the Damoclès and FSO optronics systems—the squadron proved fully capable of detecting, localising and engaging enemy surface-to-air missile sites. Indeed, squadron aircraft destroyed SA-3 and SA-6 SAM systems with the AASM, including some mobile systems, which was a significant achievement. He said that Flottille 12F was one of very few units in the world capable of carrying out such a variety of missions from a carrier deck—from reconnaissance to nuclear deterrence, DEAD, anti-ship attacks, close air support and air-defence.

Operation Harmattan demonstrated, once again, that naval power and, specifically, naval air power, are decisive tools in modern warfare. The Charles de Gaulle and its carrier air group played a pivotal role in the NATO air campaign against Libya, delivering massive firepower against fleeting targets. The French flagship was undoubtedly the most powerful naval asset taking part in the operation, which helped safeguard the lives of countless civilians.

The author would like to thank Rear-Admiral Coindreau, Captain Jean-Phillipe Rolland and all Charles de Gaulle’s personnel for their kind help during his visit. Special thanks also to Captains de Frégate Bonneau and Gander, Lieutenants de Vaisseau Delorme and Errard, Ensign de Vaisseau Lugrin and Aspirant Latil for organising the visit.

Article by Rob Neil.

In the early 1980s, when Piaggio Aero named its new aircraft Avanti (“forward”), the name couldn’t have been more appropriate. Today, the beautiful sleek Avanti II is still futuristic, and is still simultaneously the world’s fastest civil turboprop and, arguably, its “greenest” business aircraft. It is as “modern” today as it was when it first flew, and is even more desirable. A full quarter of a century after the first Avanti first flew, the Avanti II is appealing to increasing numbers of business aircraft buyers, who are beginning to appreciate what this outstanding aircraft offers in the way of performance and comfort, as well as genuinely green credentials.

The Piaggio P180 Avanti was first conceived and designed by Piaggio in the late 1970s. In 1983, Gates Learjet became a partner, but withdrew from the programme for financial reasons at the beginning of 1986 and was no longer involved by the time the first Avanti first flew in September that year.

The timing of the Avanti’s arrival on the international scene in 1986 was far from ideal. Launched at a time of international economic slow-down, and when oil prices were still realistic, the Avanti was ahead of its time and faced stiff competition from the perceived “status” of its jet competition.

It is important to note at this point that the Avanti’s competition has only ever been jets—I suggest the Avanti has never been remotely in the same class as any other turboprop. With a top speed of 402 knots (Mach 0.70), the Avanti II leaves every other turboprop far behind. It is not only faster than the smaller jets like the Cessna CJ1 (389 knots) and Embraer Phenom 100 (390 knots), but it also rivals other light jets, like the Cessna CJ2 and CJ3, and is not much slower than some others like the Hawker 400XP and the Embraer Phenom 300 (both 450 knots), and the Raytheon Premier IA (451 knots).

The unfortunate arrival on the scene of the ill-fated Beech Starship several months before the first Avanti appeared might conceivably have influenced some potential buyers negatively. Beechcraft’s brave attempt to produce a futuristic turboprop alternative to business jets proved to be an unmitigated commercial disaster and, I suspect, possibly swayed opinion against “advanced” turboprop aircraft at a time when competing jets were comparatively far more affordable to buy and operate. Whatever the reasons, Piaggio Aero sold fewer than 100 Avantis during its first 20 years.

The improved Avanti II received US and European certification in 2005 and was certified in Australia in 2010. Within six months of its US and European certification, 70 of the new aircraft had already been ordered, 36 of them by a single company—Avantair in the US—which is currently the largest single operator of the type in the world. With more powerful engines, the Avanti II is slightly faster and has even better fuel economy than its already speedy and fuel-miserly predecessor, and it incorporates a new glass panel cockpit and modernised systems.

The Avanti’s unique configuration is undoubtedly the key to its performance and economy. Piaggio says that the Avanti’s configuration, in which its curvaceous fuselage contributes a tangible percentage of its total lift, enables its wing to be 34% smaller than on a conventional aircraft. The Avanti’s pusher configuration, in which there is no propeller-induced disruption to airflow over the wing, allows the wing to maintain laminar flow over 50% of the wing’s chord, compared to a maximum of around 20% of the wing chord typically obtained with a tractor configuration.

The combination of the fuselage doing a good chunk of the lifting, reducing the amount of wing required to do the rest, and clever manufacturing techniques in which larger single panels are built to closer tolerances, means the Avanti is a remarkably drag-free aircraft, which is why it is so economical.

The Avanti’s foreplane, with no flying control surfaces, is not a canard, although it features flaps that extend in concert with the main wing flaps. As is the case with most aircraft featuring foreplanes or canards, the angle of incidence of the Avanti’s foreplane prevents the main wing from stalling, as the foreplane stalls first and lowers the nose, and thus ensures smooth airflow is maintained over the main wing.

The Avanti’s flight controls are all manual and are aerodynamically balanced for lightness, while, to maintain aerodynamic efficiency, the ailerons have completely sealed gaps.

With the hot exhaust from the Pratt and Whitney PT6A-66B engines flowing over them, the propellers do not require any anti-icing system, which saves complexity and cost. One side-effect of the propellers’ location in the wake of the engines’ exhaust is the unusual noise they produce to listeners on the ground. While this unique Avanti howl has been the source of complaints at airports where Avantis operate frequently (for example, at Naples, Florida, where Avantair is based), the aircraft meets the requisite modern noise standards with decibels to spare.

When one reads various reviews or pilot reports about the Avanti (whether the early model or the new Avanti II), a recurring complaint from reviewers is a perception that the Avanti is “expensive”. Compared to a loaf of bread, it is indeed expensive. However, in order to make a fair comparison, once again, it is important to note that this aircraft should only be compared with jets and not with other—less competent—turboprop twins. When one compares the Avanti II appropriately, I suggest it immediately begins to look extremely competitively priced. If one wants an aircraft with high speed, low fuel burn, proven reliability, a large comfortable cabin and unmatched style, I suggest the Avanti II is, in fact, something of a bargain.

Not only is the price of a new Avanti II (just under US$7.2 million fully equipped) not expensive compared with mid-size jets (it is a travesty to compare it to “light” jets), but with a fuel burn around 40% less than even light jets and around 25% better than its closest turboprop “competitor”, the Avanti II’s indisputable green credentials mean an owner faces significantly lower ongoing fuel bills that will soon compensate for any (“perceived”) high purchase price.

I recently had the opportunity to ride as a passenger in an Avanti II that was flown by Piaggio Aero’s flight operations manager and experimental test pilot, Lorenzo Villi. For several reasons, my Avanti II experience ranks as one of the most memorable passenger flights I have had. Firstly, I was blown away by the deceptive interior size of the aircraft. From the outside, its sleek futuristic lines give the aircraft the appearance of being far smaller than it is. So much so, that upon first stepping aboard, I did a double-take and was tempted to step back outside to confirm I was stepping into the same aeroplane I had just been looking at. I have used the “Doctor Who’s Tardis” analogy before, but never has it seemed more appropriate than it did upon stepping inside the Avanti. With a full 1.75 metre height, the central aisle virtually disappeared into the distance at the rear of the aircraft where beautifully polished wooden panels and a door separated the main part of the cabin from the separate bathroom/lavatory.

The aircraft we flew was configured with club seating for four at the rear of the luxuriously spacious 1.85 metre wide cabin cabin, a two-seat divan at the front on the starboard side, with a refreshment cabinet and a single-place divan on the port side just aft of the entry door. The covered lavatory seat could be used as an additional—and still comfortable—seat if required.

The interior accommodation was as opulent as one would expect of a $7 million business aircraft, with the seats finished in sumptuous beige leather, and side-panels and pull-out tables of polished wood. The size of the cabin interior reminded me more of the mid-size Hawker 800 (in which the cabin’s height and width are identical to the Avanti) than the light jets aircraft it ostensibly competes with, like the Cessna CJ2 and CJ3, the Embraer Phenom 100 and 300, the Hawker 400 and the Beechcraft Premier.

Once we were settled in the aircraft, Lorenzo started the Avanti’s two PT6A-66B turboprop engines. The sound and sensation was quite unlike anything I had experienced before. With the two propellers situated well behind the passenger cabin and facing rearwards, it was incredibly quiet inside, with almost no perceptible vibration, and was definitely unlike any other turboprop I’ve ever been in; it was much, much quieter.

John Bingham, the president and CEO of Piaggio America, who spoke to us before the flight, told us we could expect to be impressed by the lack of noise; his claims were certainly not overstated. The Avanti II is so delightfully quiet inside that from the cockpit, Lorenzo could hear spoken conversation from those in the rearmost passenger seats during every stage of flight. With interior noise levels measured at 68 dbA—compared to 78 and 77 dbA respectively for the Cessna Citation CJ2 and CJ3 jets, and 80 dbA for the Beech King Air 350 turboprop—the Avanti II’s near-silent cabin is a stress-free, relaxing haven for the aircraft’s occupants, who can converse comfortably with anyone else on board without raising voices.

The streamlined nose of the Avanti results in very little wind noise in flight. In some jets I have flown in, the noise of 400-knot wind whistling around the cockpit can be quite noticeable. Not so in the Avanti, which retains its murmur-quietness even at high speed. When you fly as a passenger in the aircraft’s main cabin, it feels remarkably jet-like in terms of smoothness and quietness with only the faintest (almost soothing) trace of vibration hinting at the presence of its two five-bladed Hartzell propellers.

The Avanti’s rate of climb is a respectable 2,770 ft/min—not far short of many of its jet competitors. It has a service ceiling of 41,000 feet—also very close to that of its jet competitors, and equal to or better than its turboprop rivals. Importantly for the Avanti’s occupants, with a 9.0 psi cabin pressure differential, the cabin altitude never exceeds 6,000 feet, which is extremely relaxing and comfortable for occupants during long flights. Even more importantly for its aero-medical operators, the Avanti II can maintain a sea-level cabin altitude to 24,000 feet, giving them enormous flexibility when transporting pressure-critical passengers.

The Avanti II I flew aboard had been involved in a trial with the Royal Flying Doctor Service (RFDS), which was comparing the aircraft with the King Airs and Pilatus PC12s it currently operates. While the Avanti is more “expensive” to purchase than the King Air, its combination of higher speed and economy of operation would mean that the price of the fuel it saved compared to the King Air would pay for the difference in purchase price within one year of typical RFDS operations. In addition to the lower fuel burn, in RFDS service, an Avanti would offer the benefits of much shorter block times than a King Air—important for severely injured patients for whom time is critical—and the ability to maintain a sea-level cabin altitude to 24,000 feet (compared to 15,290 feet for the King Air and just 13,100 feet in the PC12).

During our brief flight of around an hour, Lorenzo took the Avanti to around 39,000 feet. At no stage during the (rapid) climb, brief cruise or descent did we encounter even the faintest trace of uncomfortable turbulence. In a typically dynamic afternoon sky filled with cumulus cloud, one might have expected more than the odd bump or two, but the Avanti’s three-surface configuration with its thin, narrow high aspect ratio main wings near the rear of the cabin balanced by the elegant foreplane, and small conventional horizontal tail surfaces allowed the aircraft to slice through bumps effortlessly and gave us a very smooth ride.

After a near silent descent, I had almost forgotten we were not in a jet until the use of reversible pitch hauled us to a halt in an impressively short length of runway and provided a pleasant reminder of the flexibility conferred by propellers.

I would have loved an opportunity to take the Avanti’s controls, but enjoyed the experience of being a passenger so much that I was happy just to watch Lorenzo do all the work.

If I were in the market for a “mid-size” business aircraft and I didn’t need intercontinental range, the Piaggio Avanti II would—unquestionably—be my aircraft of choice. From a personal perspective, it offers so many things I like in an aircraft: it has plenty of power; it is fast, comfortable, extremely economical and reliable (I love the fact that it has two PT6s); and, of course, it is one of the sexiest aeroplanes around, despite its age—the Avanti is truly gorgeous from almost any angle, especially in flight. These days, when so many people are eager to criticise aircraft owners for environmental disregard, Avanti owners can stand tall and legitimately claim to be doing their bit for environmental responsibility.

Piaggio Aero believes that as the world’s fuel prices continue to increase, the Avanti II’s unrivalled economy will be a strong drawcard for those in the market for a business aircraft. It is looking at promoting the aircraft outside its traditionally strong US and European markets, and Brazil and Australia are two regions the company is looking at seriously.

Unfortunately, while there are around 7.2 million reasons why I will not be buying an Avanti II, there are plenty of other potential buyers in the market who do not share my budget limitations. For these people, Piaggio Aero has been making the most of the “recession”, and increasing manufacturing capacity and spares stocks in anticipation of better times. Although the company struggled to survive the 90s, it is now in sound financial health with three strong major shareholders—Ferrari, Mubadala Development and Tata—and is perfectly placed to take the next step forward and offer the perfect aircraft to suit the current environmental and economic climate.

Mount Cook Airline, as it is known today, has a long and extremely proud history as a pioneer in New Zealand’s air transport industry. The company had its roots in the 1920s when it was originally established at Timaru by Rodolph Lysaght Wigley as the New Zealand Aero Transport Company. Having originally begun transport and tourism services to and from the Mount Cook region using cars, Wigley purchased a number of ex-RAF Avro 504s and some Airco DH-9s, with the intention of operating a commercial air service in the area.

Wigley displayed incredible visionary foresight in appreciating the South Island’s tourism potential but—as the term “visionary” defines—he was ahead of his time in attempting to establish a commercial air service there, and the public wasn’t quite ready for it. Like all true pioneers, he persevered and, in the 1930s, he operated a Waco aircraft as Queenstown-Mount Cook Airways Limited for scenic flights in the region. However, despite the fact that The Mount Cook Transport Company was the largest tourism organisation in New Zealand by 1930, it was really only after World War Two that the public was really ready for “large-scale” and growing tourism in the area, and a newly renamed Mount Cook and Southern Lakes Tourist Company began servicing the market with coach tours.

Although Rodolph Wigley retired before a truly viable commercial airline market was established in the Mount Cook region, his vision came to fruition when his son, Harry (later Sir Harry) Wigley, took over the business. Harry Wigley, who flew as a fighter pilot during WWII, shared his father’s visions of a southern air service and he really understood how aviation could present the grandeur of the Southern Alps to the world.

As one of his first successful efforts, Harry Wigley modified an Auster Aiglet with skis in order to carry passengers into the most spectacular regions of the Southern Alps. He made his first successful ski landing on the Tasman Glacier in 1955 and, a year later, the company began operating commercial ski-plane flights within the Mount Cook National Park. In the late 1950s, Cessna 180s and 185s replaced the Austers as ski-planes. Today, although it is now a different company, the commercial ski-plane operation originally begun by Harry Wigley continues to operate at Mount Cook, with Cessna 185s still serving alongside Pilatus Porters, as well as some helicopters.

In 1961, the Mount Cook and Southern Lakes Tourist Company bought its first large aircraft (an ex-NAC DC-3), which it operated to Queenstown—originally from both Christchurch and Dunedin, but later, also from Rotorua and Auckland.

In 1967, the company took over another notable New Zealand air service, Tourist Air Transport Ltd (TAT), which incorporated the previous companies Southern Scenic Air Services, Ritchie Air Services and West Coast Airways. As a result, Mount Cook and Southern Lakes Tourist Company inherited an amphibious operation and briefly operated amphibious services in both the Auckland and Southland regions using Grumman Widgeons.

It was in 1968, though, that Mount Cook Airlines—a division of the Mount Cook and Southern Lakes Tourist Company—made what was arguably the company’s most significant move to date and bought its first Hawker Siddeley HS748 to replace the DC-3 on the airline’s scheduled services. The turboprop HS748 was an excellent choice for the airline, with a 44-passenger load equivalent to a coach-load of tourists—a handy feature in the event of a diversion due to weather, when a Mount Cook Line bus could take over and carry passengers to their eventual destination. By the mid-1980s, Mount Cook Airline was operating a fleet of six HS748s, making it the largest independent scheduled airline in New Zealand.

In addition to its amphibious operations, the company diversified briefly into other aerial work, including agricultural operations and floatplane services, but by the end of the 1970s, it had directed its focus on its airline and ski plane tourism operations; it purchased Pilatus Porters for its ski-plane operations and also bought some smaller feeder aircraft like de Havilland Twin Otters, Britten Norman Islanders and Piper Chieftains, and divested itself of “non-core” aircraft and operations.

With the scheduled airline service becoming an increasingly important and busy part of its business, by the mid-1980s, the company began looking at replacements for its 44-seat HS748s. However, although the elderly HS748 was no longer really big enough for the job, a decision on its replacement was delayed when Air New Zealand—which first bought Mount Cook shares in the early 1980s—began increasing its shareholding. By 1991, Air New Zealand had acquired 100% ownership of Mount Cook Airline and the search for a replacement for the HS748 began in earnest.

Eventually, in 1995, a fleet of new ATR72s began to replace Mount Cook’s HS748s. While, from an “airline efficiency” viewpoint, the HS748’s replacement was at least a decade late, the upside was that by delaying its decision as long as it did before eventually choosing the ATR72, Mount Cook Airline got exactly the right aircraft for the job. As time and experience have since shown, the ATR72 has proved to be an efficient, reliable aircraft for Mount Cook Airline and Air New Zealand.

The ATR72 is a thoroughly modern aircraft compared to the HS748. Its construction, systems and avionics are worlds away from the “steam-era” technology of the ’748 and perhaps it is not fair to compare the ’748 directly with the ATR because of the complete generational difference in the two types. Nevertheless, because they both flew the same routes, it is still interesting to compare them.

The writer spent a day with a Mount Cook crew recently on scheduled services between Wellington, Queenstown and Christchurch. Doug Hall, who captained the Wellington–Queenstown and Queenstown–Christchurch legs aboard ZK-MCY, is a long-serving Mount Cook pilot who previously flew HS748s, so he is well placed to compare current operations with those in the older aircraft.

Like all of his counterparts who flew the old ’748s, Doug has fond memories of the English aircraft. While he misses the good old-fashioned “stick-and-rudder, seat-of-the-pants” flying that typified much of Mount Cook Airline’s operations in the old aircraft, equally, he appreciates the reliability, economy and ease of operation of the ATR72 by comparison. He remembers that in the old days, Mount Cook pilots had their work cut out balancing range and payload calculations in the often-challenging weather on the routes they flew. Today, the ATR72’s significantly greater range with a full payload means pilots are no longer ever “embarrassed” as far as payload vs. fuel is concerned. They rarely need to unload passengers or their bags, or agonise over “continue/divert” decisions when flying long sectors on windy or bad weather days.

Apart from the direct operational advantages to flight crews, the ATR’s greater payload/range capability gives Mount Cook Airline the ability to “tanker” fuel when flying to places like Queenstown or Rotorua. In the current climate of astronomical fuel prices, this can save the company money, as fuel is significantly more expensive outside the main centres.

Asked about features of the ATR he particularly liked, Doug said that in addition to its payload range advantages, he really liked its engines and its avionics, which, he said, are consistently reliable. Every pilot wants to know the engines will keep making the appropriate noises, and that the instruments and navaids that guide his or her aircraft safely through the sky will keep it pointing in the right direction.

Another of the ATR72’s good points is its simplicity of operation from a pilot’s perspective. Indeed, from watching the crew perform their duties, it was apparent that the ATR72 is extremely simple to operate, with engine operations and parameters controlled by electronics. For example, as far as power settings are concerned, with an “AUTO” position for propeller levers and a single main detent for the power levers, pilots pretty much need only place the power levers in the detent and then let the aircraft know—via a rotating “power management switch”—which phase of flight it is in and the electronics take care of the rest. And, unlike the ATR’s contemporary, the Bombardier Q300, the ATR doesn’t require any synchronisation of its propellers—the electronics take care of this detail also.

The automation of engine operation also allows the company to budget and plan more reliably. With much less variation possible in operating technique than was possible in the HS748 and other, less automated, types, the ATR72 is a dream come true for company flight planners and bean counters.

When asked about any criticism of the ATR72, Doug said he couldn’t really think of any apart from its air conditioning system; the -500 series of the ATR72 currently in Mount Cook service utilises the same air conditioning system as the ATR72’s smaller sibling, the 42-seat ATR42. As a result, according to Doug, it can’t quite cope with the significantly greater cabin volume of the ATR72 in extremely hot weather. Nevertheless, he counted this as a minor criticism compared to the major advantages the type has in service.

As far as hand-flying the ATR72 is concerned, Doug said its geometry makes it particularly trim sensitive, and pilots are constantly trimming for minor changes in configuration or power. Nevertheless, the trim system is effective and simple, and it is hardly a chore; in any case—as is the most sensible and safest option for most airline flying today—Mount Cook’s pilots take maximum advantage of the ATR72’s effective autopilot and do not do a great deal of hand-flying (unlike the heavily “hands-on” flying undertaken in the HS748). He said the ATR72 is also sensitive to weight and trim when landing and, as a result, nobody can ever guarantee a perfectly smooth landing every time (the comment reminded the writer of the oft-quoted flying instructors’ tongue-in-cheek aphorism: “There are three secrets to making a good landing; unfortunately, nobody knows what they are.”).

Doug’s co-pilot—and the “pilot flying” for the two legs the writer flew with the crew—was Nathan Seaward. Coincidentally, it was Nathan’s second-last day of flying for Mount Cook Airline. Nathan said that although he was leaving to go flying jets, he had enjoyed his Mount Cook service immensely and would miss both the environment within the company and the scenic and varied routes the company flew. Certainly, on a perfect South Island day such as the one we enjoyed, it was easy to see why it would be hard to leave Mount Cook, where so many of the airline’s other pilots choose the Mount Cook lifestyle over a jet career. Having made his difficult choice, Nathan made a great job of his second-last day’s work; thanks to the efficiency of the ATR72 and Air New Zealand’s systems, the flight from Wellington departed on time and was almost 10 minutes ahead of schedule before it reached Queenstown. Accordingly, Nathan diverted a few track miles before reaching Queenstown in order to give the passengers an outstanding scenic flight past the airline’s namesake, Mount Cook. Then, following a beautifully smooth approach to Queenstown’s runway 05, he squeaked ZK-MCY to a satisfyingly smooth touchdown that he mirrored with an equally smooth approach and landing at Christchurch later in the day.

At the end of his time with Doug Hall and Nathan Seaward, the writer had the opportunity to catch up with Allan Brown, Mount Cook Airline’s line operations manager in Christchurch. Allan was able to provide additional perspective, not only as a senior manager, but also balanced by his experience as a pilot who began by flying ski-planes at Mount Cook, and who also flew both the HS748 and the ATR72.

Allan, like every Mount Cook pilot this writer has met, is fiercely loyal to his Mount Cook heritage. At the same time, he is equally proud of the company’s position as part of the greater Air New Zealand brand—particularly in recent years, under Air New Zealand’s current progressive leadership. Allan says Air New Zealand has moved from being a “follower” in years gone by to now being recognised globally as an innovator in the airline industry. Allan says that while the “takeover” of Mount Cook by Air New Zealand 20 years ago might not have been popular with some Mount Cook personnel at the time, there has been a definite change in thinking at Mount Cook. Today, he suggests personnel have two reasons to be proud of who they are and where they work: firstly, all who work at Mount Cook Airline share that company’s rich historical heritage; secondly, as part of Air New Zealand, they understand that they form an essential domestic component of one of the world’s best full-service airlines.

While the aircraft of Mount Cook Airlines (along with Air New Zealand’s two other subsidiary airlines, Air Nelson and Eagle Airlines) all wear identical liveries to those of Air New Zealand’s main fleet, and their respective crews all wear identical uniforms, passengers do not differentiate between any of them; to passengers, they are all “Air New Zealand”. Accordingly, Allan believes that every person who buys a ticket on a Mount Cook aircraft should expect the same—highest—levels of service and safety as he or she rightly expects on any other “Air New Zealand” flight.

When Air New Zealand first took over the various subsidiary airlines, there was fierce “competition” between them. Today, Allan says that has changed drastically and all of Air New Zealand’s subsidiaries work closely together in cooperative synergy. As far as operational matters are concerned, Allan is full of praise for Air New Zealand’s chief pilot, Captain David Morgan, for the influence he has had in improving consistency and standardising procedures amongst the subsidiaries—something that is increasingly important as airlines around the world move towards more sophisticated and accurate performance-based navigation.

It is in the context of being a valuable part of the greater Air New Zealand network, and providing the highest levels of safety, reliability and service, that Allan describes the ATR72 as being a very good aeroplane for the company. Not only does he describe it as having been exactly the right choice for the airline when Air New Zealand took over, but also, he suggests it will remain the perfect choice in future. While ATR aircraft are not without competition in the global market, this writer suggests that it is worth noting that the ATR72-500—which its maker describes as “the world’s greenest aircraft”—fits well with Air New Zealand’s genuine push for environmental responsibility.

Since Saab and British Aerospace stopped producing turboprop aircraft, the most realistic potential alternative (at present) to an ATR is the Bombardier Q400, which has a similar seating capacity. The Q400 is heavier than the ATR (29,260 kg compared to 22,500) and can carry just over a tonne more payload, but it has significantly larger engines (two 4,850 shp engines, compared to the ATR’s two 2,475 shp engines), which means it burns more fuel. Although the larger engines give the Bombardier aircraft a potential speed advantage of around 70 knots over the ATR72, the current price of fuel (something that is highly unlikely to drop significantly in the foreseeable future) is reportedly forcing at least one major European Q400 operator to reduce speed in order to save fuel, thus negating the type’s theoretical advantage. While the Q400 has a definite range advantage (1,360 nm compared to 890 nm for the ATR), this is only relevant if long range is an important consideration.

As an airline manager, Allan is very happy with the ATR’s efficiency and economy of operation. Speaking as a pilot, he praised the same features and benefits of the ATR72 mentioned by Doug Hall, such as its simplicity, reliability, modernity and economy. “In the Hawker Siddeley, you were always doing mental gymnastics, watching your fuel,” he said. “For example, if you were flying Rotorua to Queenstown with a full load, and there happened to be a 40-knot southerly blowing, you knew you were going to have to make the ‘How goes it?’ call somewhere along the way and might end up having to refuel in either Nelson or Christchurch. That just doesn’t happen in the ATR.”

There probably aren’t too many airlines in the world like Mount Cook Airline, which, despite being “taken over” by a bigger player (Air New Zealand) maintains a culture of such historical pride—probably because the smaller airline’s culture is in perfect keeping with the image Air New Zealand promotes of pride in itself as New Zealand’s national airline.

Allan says that being part of the greater Air New Zealand family has provided many benefits that would not have been possible as a small stand-alone airline. For example, Air New Zealand recently purchased and installed a new CAE ATR72 simulator in Auckland. This multimillion-dollar essential tool not only benefits Mount Cook Airline, which previously had to send its pilots overseas for simulator training, but also provides additional revenue opportunities for Air New Zealand, which now sells ATR72 simulator time and provides training to overseas ATR operators.

Considering the challenges of the global market throughout the history of commercial aviation and especially in view of New Zealand’s remoteness, much of Air New Zealand’s (and previously NAC, Air New Zealand and TEAL’s) success must be attributed to its ability to select the right aircraft for the job, whether for domestic or international operations. As an excellent modern example of Air New Zealand’s ability to pick the right aircraft for the job, Mount Cook Airlines’ ATR72s are destined to remain a common sight in New Zealand skies well into the foreseeable future.

When Peter Vincent of Vincent Aviation makes up his mind to do something, it will eventually be done—and done properly. It is undoubtedly why this small private company has somehow survived the worst financial times in living memory and defied the usual demons that afflict aviation.

What began as a tiny charter company based in Wellington has grown to become New Zealand’s only other (still extant) international passenger airline alongside Air New Zealand. Vincent Aviation has a large division based in Darwin, Australia, and operates scheduled passenger services across Northern Australia. The company has an Australian foreign AOC; ANZA approval, which allows it to operate a New Zealand-registered aircraft in Australia; and an approval from Australia’s Department of Transport Regional Services to operate scheduled passenger services between Australia and other countries.

It is not the place of this article to revisit the growth and success of Vincent Aviation’s operations, which have been covered in these pages before. However, the company has recently taken on a new challenge in the form of establishing yet another international operation—this time, between Darwin and Dili on behalf of a new company, Timor Air. By the time this issue is published, it is likely that the last formalities will have been completed and East Timorese authorities will have given approval for Vincent Aviation to operate a regular scheduled service for Timor Air.

The establishment of Timor Air is more than just the start of a new airline. It almost symbolises the re-entry into the civilised world of a nation that suffered firstly at the hands of colonial Portuguese rulers for 200 years, only to be invaded and treated even more harshly by the Indonesian military. More than 100,000 East Timorese people died between 1974 and 1999 when the UN finally stepped in and assumed administration of the country.

Against such a background, the story of the new Timor Air is one of overcoming great odds; of resilience, decency and determination. It is one of East Timor’s own “nobodies”—once an uneducated and a lowly mechanic working on the capital Dili’s wharves—who is behind the new Timor Air. Jerry Desousa escaped the invading Indonesians in 1975 and took around 150 of his countrymen with him to freedom, becoming something of a legend amongst East Timorese people in the process.

Desousa—a truly patriotic East Timorese national—settled in Darwin, where his first job was as a labourer cleaning printing presses. Later, after moving to Sydney, he secured a job helping detainees at one of Australia’s immigrant detention centres, where he eventually became a manager. After a period at the detention centres, he started a highly successful cleaning business that secured major contracts with hospitals and other institutions until, eventually, this “uneducated mechanic” from Dili’s wharves became a self-made multi millionaire.

Jerry, who has no official position in East Timor and is entirely apolitical, never stopped thinking of returning to his native land, nor of ways in which he could help “his people” as he referred to all those still living under Indonesian rule in East Timor.

As an example of Jerry’s commitment to “his people”, when he took Peter Vincent on a guided tour of Dili in 2002, they were accompanied by four nurses who were supporting an Australian eye specialist who was in East Timor performing eye surgery (in the course of two weeks, the team performed something like 150 cataract operations). As Peter discovered, it was largely Jerry’s influence and organisation that brought the medical team to East Timor and improved the lives of so many locals.

In 2002, Jerry approached Peter Vincent in Darwin with a proposal to help him set up a new national airline for East Timor. At the time, Vincent Aviation had just established a domestic operation in Darwin after finishing a contract to service UN peacekeeping personnel stationed in Timor. It had long been a dream of Jerry’s to establish a national airline for his country and, in Vincent Aviation, he believed he had found just the right company to help him.

While Peter Vincent was enthusiastic from the start, the timing was far from perfect for Vincent Aviation to set up another major international operation even before the fledgling Australian operation was in full swing. However tempting it might have been to jump in at the first promising opportunity, Peter Vincent took the prudent approach and—reluctantly—asked Jerry to wait. For the next few years, the two men maintained a constant dialogue. “I wish I had a dollar for every hour Jerry and I spent on the phone,” says Peter.

As time passed—with the Indonesians now gone and his country finally returning to a state of peace—it became increasingly urgent in Jerry’s mind for East Timor to establish an independent national airline. East Timor was in no state for its government to fund an airline and Jerry knew it would be up to people like him to make it happen.

As anyone who knows aviation will understand, the airline market is a cut-throat one at the best of times, and Vincent Aviation had its work cut out for it making operations in Australia, New Zealand and the Pacific succeed—which it did. However, in getting all of his “ducks in a row” and making a go of existing operations (at a time when others were folding all around him) it meant that Peter Vincent was unable to commit the necessary resources to start up a new airline for East Timor.

By 2008, Jerry Desousa was becoming impatient and wanted to get an airline up and running. At the time, there was no possibility of Vincent Aviation using its using Dash-8—which would have been ideal—because the plane was too busy with regular charter work in New Zealand. As a result, Jerry felt compelled to seek assistance from other operators to try and establish the airline he felt his country needed. He initially approached the Australian company OzJet, which planned to operate a Darwin–Dili service using a Boeing 737-200. Unfortunately, no sooner had Jerry begun arranging things than OzJet went into receivership. Following OzJet’s demise, HeavyLift took over some of OzJet’s aircraft and the company’s AOC. Jerry then negotiated with HeavyLift to pick up where OzJet had left off, but without success.

Following unsuccessful negotiations with HeavyLift, Jerry threw his hand in with a start-up company called SkyAirWorld. Jerry personally paid a significant sum as a deposit (some millions of dollars) on a new Embraer E-190 for SkyAirWorld to operate. Unfortunately, the same day as the new aircraft arrived in Australia, SkyAirWorld went into receivership and the leasing company immediately seized the aircraft. Jerry lost all of the money he had invested personally and was severely embarrassed by the whole affair. Timor Air, as that new airline was to have been known, had already been advertising its start-up, complete with images of the Embraer 190 in Timor Air colours. Furthermore, it had already sold about AU$780,000 worth of fares in advance. Thankfully, the pre-sold fares had all been kept in a trust account and everyone was paid back in full, so while Jerry’s pride might have been severely dented, and a large chunk of credibility for a new airline had crumbled, the one saving grace was that Jerry’s honesty and integrity were not in doubt.

And then the global financial crisis really hit home and Peter and Jerry’s plans for a new Timor Air were temporarily placed on the back burner. Both before and after Jerry’s first failed attempts to get Timor Air off the ground, other parties had toyed with the idea of a Timorese air service but none had followed through.

Showing his true colours—and undaunted by the loss of a few million dollars—Jerry Desousa never gave up on Timor Air, and he and Peter Vincent remained in regular contact, working away in the background formulating plans for an East Timorese air service.

Eventually, the stars aligned, and Jerry’s hopes and plans came together when Vincent Aviation decided to lease two Saab 340Bs for its Australian operations. With the blessing of the Timorese government, and agreement from the president and prime minister of East Timor, one of Vincent’s new aircraft will carry the East Timorese flag and wear the large East Timor Independence Day logo (which the president designed) on its tail when it operates on behalf of the new Timor Air.

The second Saab will operate Vincent Aviation’s growing scheduled services in the Northern Territory and provide a back-up aircraft whenever the Timor Air Saab is down for maintenance.

Because of the way Timor Air has been structured—with Vincent Aviation providing the aircraft and experienced aviation personnel for the Timorese company—it means that Timor Air can concentrate on marketing itself and the many attractions that East Timor has to offer and leave all operational matters to Vincent Aviation.

By early June, Vincent Aviation had already completed the route-proving flights required by NZCAA to show it could operate the Darwin–Dili route safely, and everything was in place to open the doors on the new service. By the time this article is published, the service should already be up and running.

Since the UN brought peace to the country, East Timor has been serviced by aircraft from both Australia (Darwin–Dili) and Indonesia (Bali–Dili)—so why does East Timor need its own airline? Like most remote places with relatively limited demand for air travel and with no real “competition”, fares have been high (as they are wherever a similar situation prevails) and, with the limited numbers of passengers needing to fly, schedules have been infrequent and often inconvenient.

Darwin-based Airnorth operates 76-seat Embraer 170s between Darwin and Dili five days a week—two return flights daily on three days of the week, and a single return flight for two days. Meanwhile, the Indonesian airline, Merpati, operates a single return service daily between Bali and Dili using a Boeing 737-300.

Initially, Timor Air’s service between Darwin and Dili will operate once a day, three days a week. However, Peter expects this to change quickly and predicts an increase before long to two flights a day, five days a week, and he believes the numbers are already there.

“What we’re hoping for,” says Peter, “is that our flight schedule will mirror what happened with our service between Darwin and Groote Eylandt. There, nearly nine years ago, we began by offering two flights a week; we now fly there twice daily, seven days a week. We believe the same potential exists with the Darwin–Dili service.”

Vincent Aviation’s Saabs are smaller and more economical than Airnorth’s jets currently operating the route (38 seats as opposed to 76 seats in Airnorth’s E170s) and this will give Timor Air far more flexibility to lower fares and increase frequency. “This is definitely an area where we see the Saab has an advantage,” Peter says. “We can easily increase frequency if the demand is there and customers will prefer the choice offered by two flights daily instead of just one in a bigger aircraft.”

The Saab 340 has already proved to be a winner for Vincent Aviation. The type was extremely successful and popular in Air New Zealand/Air Nelson service, where it was only replaced because it became too small to operate the increasingly busy routes it flew. Peter says the Saab has been more reliable to operate than they had predicted and has stood up well to the Northern Territory’s harsh conditions. Furthermore, and especially importantly in today’s current fuel market, it has also been far more economical than Peter hoped. On average, the Saabs have been burning only marginally more fuel than the Beech 1900s in Vincent Aviation’s Australian fleet (around 600 litres/hour compared to 550 litres/hour for the B1900) but have 70% more seat miles/hour than the smaller Beech aircraft. “The Saabs have just been brilliant aircraft,” Peter says.

Vincent Aviation is leasing its two Saabs from a company called Red Rocket Aviation based on the Gold Coast. Both of the aircraft were previously part of the MacAir fleet in Australia and, before that, both originally flew with American Eagle in the US. The aircraft bearing the Timor Air livery had only served a few months with MacAir before that company’s collapse, and had been painted just before entering MacAir service.

Both aircraft are relatively low time machines; one had done 24,000 hours and the other only 18,000 when they joined the Vincent fleet. Both were in generally good condition but according to Peter, they still needed “a significant amount of refurbishment” before they were up to Vincent Aviation’s standards. One of the aircraft required a “C-check” and much needed doing before they could be added to the New Zealand register, so both were brought to Vincent Aviation’s maintenance facility in Wellington for refurbishment.

According to Mark Yardley, Vincent Aviation’s chief engineer in Australia, the Saabs are not experiencing the same issues as other aircraft Vincent has previously operated in Darwin. The Northern Territory has just been through worst wet season in living memory and, as a result, electrical, electronic and avionics failures (in other aircraft) have been common. Not so the Saabs, which have experienced almost 100% reliability, according to Peter. The relative simplicity of the Saab (compared to the likes of the Dash-8, for example) is another factor in the Swedish aircraft’s favour—and undoubtedly contributes to its reliability.

In an important move for Vincent Aviation, the acquisition of two larger aircraft of the same type is proving its worth. As good as the company’s (single) Dash-8 is, there are major inefficiencies involved in operating only a single aircraft of any type. Every type requires specific tooling, training (for both engineers and flight crews) and a stock of spare parts. Unfortunately, there is little difference between the spares stockpile required for a single aircraft and that required for a fleet of several aircraft.

Now, with two Saabs already flying, and plans in place to increase this number of aircraft in the next year, the combination of efficiencies of scale and better-than-expected economy of the Saabs’ operation means overall fleet efficiency will increase.

The Saab uses a little more runway than either the Dash-8 or the Beech 1900s flown by Vincent Aviation, but as runway length is not a limitation at most airports used by the company, this is a non-issue.

From Peter Vincent’s perspective, the move to “re-fleet” with Saabs is a win-win. The Saab’s capital cost is only around half that of the Dash-8, while the aircraft offers roughly similar seat-miles/hour, and the price of parts for the Saabs averages somewhere between 50% and 70% of comparable parts for the rest of the company’s aircraft.

It is not only Vincent Aviation’s accountant and operational personnel who are appreciating the Saabs, but also the company’s passengers; the Saabs have wider seats than the Dash-8 and lots of leg room. “Passengers love them,” says Peter.

Peter is aware that his Saabs will be competing on the Darwin–Dili route with Embraer jet aircraft operated by Airnorth. The Embraer 170s are very nice aircraft, according to Peter, but over the short (400 nm) sector between Darwin and Dili, the jets’ slight speed advantage over the Saabs is not significant, and an effort by Timor Air to produce swifter check-in and more efficient baggage handling services will minimise the jets’ advantage further. Timor Air is banking on the fact that, as its business builds and flight frequencies increase, passengers will prefer this convenience to the few minutes (and it will be only a few minutes) saved by flying a jet.

Importantly for Timor Air (and Vincent Aviation), the airline’s status as a national carrier will be extremely important because the United Nations—which is still heavily involved in East Timor—has a policy of utilising the services of local nations wherever possible. Quite rightly, the UN (and many other companies and agencies) prefer to support local companies in order to ensure money stays local rather than going offshore.

However, obviously, this is by no means guaranteed—and neither Timor Air nor Vincent Aviation is relying on it as part of their business models. However, provided a company’s services are priced competitively (Timor Air’s will be), and the service meets stringent safety and maintenance standards (Vincent Aviation’s standards bear any scrutiny), then it is highly likely Timor Air will become the airline of choice between Darwin and Dili for the UN and others.

There is no denying the natural tendency throughout the world for locals to support local businesses and, undoubtedly, the East Timorese government will support its own flag carrier. In East Timor, there is likely to be strong local support for a national airline in preference to any from abroad, as the country has endured so much adversity from outside influences in recent times. The Kiwi connection is highly beneficial as New Zealand and New Zealanders are highly regarded. New Zealand has played an important role in peacekeeping efforts during the last 11 years and these efforts continue today with New Zealand’s military personnel and police admired for the selfless good work they have done (and continue to do).

Peter believes East Timor offers a great deal of promise as a growth market for backpackers and tourists. He says the country is an attractive destination with great scenic beauty, good diving, fascinating history and culture, and an excellent tropical climate. Until now, the missing link, according to Peter, has been an appropriate air service.

Peter says he has already been approached by potential customers wanting him to expand his Darwin–Dili service. As a result, in typical Pete Vincent fashion, he has been brainstorming the possibilities—even to the extent of identifying and costing suitable aircraft to fill the role alongside an expanded Saab fleet.

“We’ve been doing the numbers on several potential opportunities and have identified potential aircraft types to service new routes that would complement what we’re doing in the Northern Territory and [East] Timor. With the routes and [larger jet] aircraft we’ve identified, we should be able to make it work with loadings of as few as 40 people.”

In addition, Peter is already considering the potential to set up a domestic airline within greater Timor. He says there is significant interest locally in having an air service between Dili and Kupang, which is in West Timor, only 130 miles from Dili. While the Saabs would be able to operate the route, Peter believes it would suit a smaller aircraft better and—not surprisingly—he has already identified and costed a number of alternatives that would be suitable in that role also.

Today, Vincent Aviation has a staff of around 65 in Darwin. While this is down slightly on pre-global financial crisis numbers, the company has survived the crisis while plenty of others—many of them much bigger—have not. Now the company is growing again, with the introduction of the Saabs looking like they will contribute significantly to further growth and success. When Vincent Aviation first set up shop in Australia, business was booming for the company in New Zealand—which allowed it to support the establishment and growth of its Australian division. Today, the strength of the Aussie economy means the situation is reversed and Vincent Aviation in Australia can now support its New Zealand operation. By having operations in both New Zealand and Australia, it has given Peter the flexibility to move resources between the two countries as situations change.

“Times were pretty tough for a while there during the last couple of years,” says Peter, “and most smart bean-counters would probably have shut up shop in New Zealand. But that isn’t the way we work; we’ve kept going, preserved people’s jobs and remained viable with lots of hard work…and partly thanks to the growth and success of our Australian operation. Most of all, though, we’ve kept going because we believe there is a future here in New Zealand.”

Despite the difficulties and setbacks of the global financial crisis, and the occasional (hideously expensive) unscheduled major maintenance expense, Peter believes Vincent Aviation has never before had opportunities like it does at present with the pending start of its Timor Air operation. At the time of writing, Vincent Aviation was potentially within a week of being able to operate a jet, with strong prospects of a substantial amount of work for it. With two particularly good audits behind it—one from NZCAA and one from Australia’s CASA—two new Saabs up and running, and Timor Air poised and ready to go, Vincent Aviation’s future looks more promising than ever by fulfilling Jerry Desousa’s life-long dream of providing a national airline for East Timor.

By Rob Neil.

In June 2009, Pacific Wings featured an article on the all-composite Flight Design CTLS light sport aircraft. The Flight Design range was then—and remains—one of the most popular light sport aircraft (LSA) in the world. Flight Design sold the first LSA into India, it was the first LSA to earn Chinese Type Design Approval and it has been the top-selling LSA in the US for six consecutive years. More than 1,700 Flight Design aircraft of different models have been sold in more than 40 countries, many of them to flight training establishments.

When I flew the Flight Design CTLS in 2009, I was hugely impressed with the quality of its build, its outstanding solidity, its ease of flying and its safety features. The CTLS was a “microlight” by technical definition only, and made older generation two-seat general aviation types look decidedly sub-standard by comparison.

It didn’t surprise me in the least to learn that numerous flying schools in the US use the CTLS as a trainer. Having flown it myself, I can confirm that the CTLS provides an outstanding training platform. However, using a CTLS for training is a little like using Porsche Boxters as basic training equipment at driving schools. The Porsches will work brilliantly as driving trainers—but their qualities (and additional cost) are not really necessary.

Several manufacturers are now producing extremely effective and capable LSA/microlights that offer some choice to flight schools considering the non-GA route. However, like Flight Design’s CTLS model, many of them are aimed more at well-heeled private owners than flight schools, and their additional features and qualities make them “over-qualified” for the job.

While numerous flying schools in the US use significant numbers of CTLS models—and reportedly love flying them—Flight Design kept receiving requests from flight schools to produce a simpler, cheaper model to suit their basic training needs.

While already striving hard to meet demand for its composite CTLS, Flight Design responded to the demand for a more affordable and utilitarian aircraft by producing the MC (Metal Concept) model. Having examined and flown the MC, I wondered if perhaps the designation might actually have stood for “Master of Ceremonies”—for it sits squarely at the head of the LSA table alongside Flight Design’s CTLS models.

With an extremely well-engineered steel safety cage protecting the occupants, the rest of the MC’s structure is mainly aluminium, except for composite cowlings ahead of the cockpit. Flight Design has retained the composite landing gear that works so well on the CTLS and, in conjunction with the central European tyre manufacturer SAVA, has also produced special hard-wearing tyres as an option for flight schools to suit the MC’s intended heavy-duty role as a flight trainer. There is also a “Tundra Tyre” option available, which further expands the “utility” opportunities for the aircraft. Notably, although not required for certification in the LSA class, Flight Design is conducting fatigue testing on the MC to ensure its long-term durability.

Except for its impressive size difference—which I will get to shortly—the MC has an almost identical interior to its CTLS cousin. However, a significant difference between the MC and the CTLS is that the MC is the only Flight Design aircraft to offer all-analogue instrumentation as an option; the composite CTLS only offers various “glass” cockpit options—which are also available in the MC, of course.

Designed from the outset as a trainer and more basic utility option, the MC has no need for the extreme range of the CTLS (around 840 nm). With a combined capacity of 100 litres, the MC’s wing tanks are slightly smaller than those of its carbon-fibre cousin (130 litres). However, the MC still has more than enough endurance (around five hours) for the most demanding flight training duties. Its range, at around 640 nm, is similar to the maximum range of the Cessna 172 (a four-seat “touring” aircraft) so it is more than adequate for what most GA pilots consider to be “long-distance” touring.

An important consideration for anyone flying long or far in the MC is its interior accommodation. When I flew the CTLS, I was amazed at the amount of space inside its supposed “microlight” cabin. It is huge compared to conventional GA types and is 24% wider inside than the four-seat Cessna 172 (1.24 metres, compared to just 1.00 metre for the Cessna).

However, as large as the CTLS is, the new MC eclipses it by a considerable margin and is definitely the “stand-out” performer in the interior space stakes. At a truly impressive 1.31 metres wide, the MC is only six centimetres narrower than the 19-seat Beech 1900D airliner—which has a central aisle! Unless one has the time and money to fix wings to the sides of a large motorhome, and if interior size and space are issues for a prospective LSA buyer, the Flight Design MC is unquestionably the aircraft to consider.

In addition to the acres of space available for its occupants, the MC also features a sizeable baggage area aft of the seats, which can hold up to 50 kg of luggage. This is a seriously practical amount of payload for anyone wanting to tour in this aircraft and the cavernous luggage space is easily accessible, as is evident in the attached photographs.

The MC’s metal wing utilises the same aerofoil section as the CTLS. The wing also retains the “reflex” (negative) flap setting used in the CTLS, which, when used in flight, feels like an overdrive in a car and contributes to the aircraft’s excellent speed, range and economy. Considering that its little 100 hp Rotax engine is pulling a veritable “lounge room” through the sky, the MC still manages a comfortable cruise of 110 knots while sipping only 16–22 litres an hour. Compare this to the typical old-technology four-seat “touring” aircraft that require another 60 to 80 hp to achieve a similar cruise speed, but use another 10–20 litres of fuel an hour to do so.

When I reviewed the CTLS and wrote the article in 2009, I commented on the fact that Sport Aircraft New Zealand—the New Zealand Flight Design agency—was formed by two retired airline pilots with lifetimes of flying behind them. I noted that before choosing Flight Design, they had both scoured the world for an aircraft that they felt met their strict requirements for safety, quality and flying characteristics. Since meeting Rudi van der Zwaal and Tim Harrison, I have also met one of Australia’s Flight Design representatives, Leo Moras (Leo’s business partner, Shaun Seipel, was not in Melbourne for the air-show). Like Rudi and Tim, Leo is also a retired airline pilot. He, too, chose the Flight Design range in order to be able to offer his customers aircraft that were safe, comfortable, enjoyable to fly, well built and reliable.

Leo offered me the chance to fly an early production MC following the Avalon Air-show and, having enjoyed the CTLS so much, I leapt at the opportunity. I was not disappointed! I found the MC—like the CTLS—to be one of the easiest to fly, most comfortable and predictable aeroplanes I have flown. I particularly enjoyed the spaciousness in the cockpit, which, on its own, seemed to eliminate the subtle stress imparted by some GA types when working in closely confined cockpits. An Australian CFI who has flown the MC said it “provides a relaxed learning environment where students are not distracted by things such as the confines of the cockpit.”

Entry to the spacious cabin is via “gull-wing” doors on each side of the cabin, which are held in place by gas struts. The seats are positioned at a good height to enable one to slide into the cabin and, by bending one’s knee, to slide the inside leg over the top of the control stick (dual controls are standard) and settle in. Once seated, a four-point harness secures the occupants into very comfortable seats that are adjustable fore and aft to fit pilots of anything up to 6’6” (1.98 metres) in height.

There are a number of handy storage pockets and map holders located throughout the cabin, which is heated and well ventilated. A popular option amongst Flight Design buyers has proved to be a 16.5 x 25.4 cm (6.5” x 10”) photo window. With its already excellent visibility, this contributes to the MC’s suitability for such diverse roles as agricultural or survey operations, animal control or observation, pipeline or powerline inspection, or forestry surveillance.

Like its carbon-fibre cousins, the MC features the same simple system in the cockpit that makes it impossible to operate the aircraft with the fuel lever in the “off” position. By placing the single fuel lever so that it covers the ignition key when the fuel lever is in the “off” position, it is impossible to even start the engine unless the pilot raises the fuel lever to “on”. If fitted with glass cockpit instruments (as Leo’s demonstrator was), fuel quantity and fuel use are available on the secondary multi-function display (MFD). However, to avoid “finger trouble” when inputting fuel figures, the MC also incorporates completely idiot-proof sight gauges in the wing roots that are visible inside the cockpit.

With the fuel lever raised, start-up and taxi in the MC are both super simple, as can be expected from such a light Rotax-powered aircraft. Like the CTLS, the MC has nosewheel steering but no individual brakes; braking is via a single lever on the upper surface of the right side of the central console.

On takeoff, the MC accelerates quickly and, rotating at around 49 knots, it leaps off the ground and starts to climb. With a best rate-of-climb speed of 61 knots, a fully laden MC with its flaps set at 0º climbs at around 850 ft/min (with flaps at -12º and a speed of 67 knots, it climbs at just under 800 ft/min). While these speeds and climb rates are roughly comparable to those of a well-maintained GA two-seater, there is no comparison with the way the MC flies. The MC’s controls are feather-light and completely predictable, with no slack or play.

Once established at altitude, the MC trims easily and flies very smoothly. Its metal wings are longer than those of the CTLS, but because of the flex inherent in their metal construction, the additional wing area does not translate into a rougher ride in turbulence—instead, the wings absorb the minor turbulence loads and provide an extremely comfortable ride.

With a demonstrated crosswind component of 16 knots (11 knots with full flap) and its light, direct controls, landing the MC is a breeze; base leg is flown at 61 knots, reducing to around 48 knots on final.

Like the CTLS, the MC can be fitted with an autopilot to accompany the various glass cockpit options. I spoke to John MacKnight—one of the many Australian customers who have bought Flight Design aircraft from Leo—and he described the autopilot fitted to the CTLS he owns as “the best autopilot I’ve ever used.” As the founder of MacKnight Airlines (1970–1997), winner of the 1998 Aviation Safety Foundation Award and recent recipient of the Medal of Australia for services to aviation, John knows a fair bit about autopilots in GA aircraft!

Whether he or she is buying a CTLS fully-equipped with Dynon Skyview synthetic vision and three-axis autopilot, or a back-to-basics MC fitted with all-analogue instrumentation, every Flight Design customer gets a comprehensive flight manual that is almost a flying training manual as well. Flight Design’s manuals—which are freely available online from Flight Design USA—are great examples of how these important documents should be produced.

While not mandatory in New Zealand or Australia, a ballistic recovery parachute is required in every LSA sold in Europe and, accordingly, this valuable safety feature is standard equipment in the MC. In an aeroplane that is as easy to fly, as sturdily built and fitted with as many modern instruments as the Flight Design aircraft are, one would hope that a ballistic recovery parachute would never be necessary. Nevertheless, it is comforting to know that in the event of an unforeseen catastrophe, an in-flight medical emergency or a case of extreme stupidity, one has that last-ditch life-saving option of pulling the pretty red handle and floating gently to earth.

From a purely aesthetic point of view, the CTLS is—in my opinion—a slightly prettier aeroplane than the MC—although, to the uninitiated, they could easily be mistaken for one another. However, for the likes of flying schools, where things like simplicity, durability, ease of operation, interior space and field maintainability feature higher on their wish lists than aesthetic appearance, the MC will undoubtedly be the Flight Design aircraft of choice. Likewise, for the well-heeled private owner of “well-above-average” dimensions, the MC—kitted out with all of the fancy options available in the CTLS—will still be a perfect choice.

The introduction of the MC provides a thoroughly worthy alternative to Flight Design’s composite aircraft and signals the company’s responsiveness to industry and customer opinion. It is now very much a case of “horses for courses” and with the MC in Flight Design’s stable, it means there are more winning horses for a wider range of courses—and a fitting “Master of Ceremonies” to preside over the LSA revolution.