|
Grob Tutor G115E Page 1
|
|
Grob Tutor G115E However, early flights revealed a number of design deficiencies and when the second prototype flew the following year, it had been substantially redesigned and featured a taller fin and rudder as well as a relocated tailplane. |
|
|
| Build quality appeared to be very high.
The aircraft is constructed almost entirely from composite materials, primarily
carbon-fibre reinforced plastic. The fuselage is quite interesting in that
it is of a semi-monocoque design that is constructed from two vertically
split halves. Aerodynamically, it is very clean, with the only anomaly being
a relatively large ventral strake under the fin. The wings and tailplane
are of the 'sandwich' type, with a honeycomb core covered with CFRP skins,
while the flying controls are made from rigid foam covered with fibreglass.
An Eppler aerofoil section is used for the mainplane while, rather curiously, a NACA section is used for the tailplane. Only the elevator trim can be adjusted in flight, although both the ailerons and rudder feature ground adjustable trim tabs. The electrically actuated flaps are of the plain type. Power is provided by the ubiquitous 180hp Lycoming O-360 (actually an AEIO-360), which is fitted with a Christen inverted oil system and spins a three-blade Hoffmann constant-speed prop. Fuel is contained in a pair of integral wing tanks, which have a total capacity of 33 Imperial gallons, with the engine being fed from a 1.2 gallon collector tank. The aircraft is approved for up to three minutes of continuous inverted flight. A tricycle-type undercarriage is fitted, with the nosewheel connected to a gas-damped strut, while the mainwheels are suspended from a cantilevered spring-steel arrangement. As I was to discover, the Tutor's undercarriage is on the firm side and (in common with other aircraft fitted with a spring-steel undercarriage) is not particularly well-damped. All three wheels feature relatively close-fitting fibreglass wheel spats. Steve is one of the flying instructors at Headquarters, Elementary Flying Training Services unit at RAF Cranwell, and had generously brought an aircraft down to Sibson for a Today's Pilot flight test. Unlike purely civilian aircraft, which generally only require a headset to fly, as the purpose of EFTS is to train pilots for the military their aircraft need more equipment to fly. Steve had thoughtfully brought a helmet, flying suit and parachute for me to wear, so while Fletch began photographing the Tutor, I got into the flying suit, adjusted the helmet to fit and strapped the parachute on. Up until this point, the Tutor had been making a very favourable impression. The walkround had revealed a sturdy, well-made airframe, while my initial look inside led me to believe that the cockpit and instrument panel were equally well-designed. However, when Steve suddenly produced three different coloured cushions of varying thickness and explained that although the rudder pedals were adjustable, the seats weren't, I have to admit to being less enamoured. This aircraft has been designed as a trainer and, amongst other things, is used to fly cadets with the various Air Experience Flights dotted around the UK. These cadets must come in every conceivable shape and size. Call me a bluff old traditionalist, but in my humble opinion, I really don't think it is that difficult to design an adjustable seat. If I bought a car I would expect the seats to adjust, so it beggars belief that a modern, certificated aircraft does not offer the same facility. I'm fully aware that non-adjustable seats can be made that much stronger, but I still think that this design was far from satisfactory. That criticism aside, I thought the rest of the cockpit was excellent. In keeping with the military philosophy, the cockpit is configured to be flown solo from the right seat, so having slid the large sliding canopy fully aft and installed the correct cushion I dropped down onto the right seat and began to strap myself in. The five-point harness is very good, possibly the best I've ever seen in an aircraft in this class, and having strapped myself in I adjusted the rudder pedals via the knurled wheel mounted in the floor. I then began to assess the overall layout of the controls and instruments
while Steve settled into the other seat. The curved control sticks are
topped with comfortable pistol grips and fell nicely to hand, as did the
engine control quadrant levers for throttle, propeller and mixture. These
are mounted in a neat central console, which extends aft from the base
of the instrument panel back between the seats. Apart from the power control
levers the console also carries the flap switch and its co-located indicator,
the elevator trim wheel and its adjacent indicator, the knob for alternate
engine air, the three -position fuel valve and also the fuel on/off cock.
An interesting anomaly was that the flap switch has four pre-selected
settings (0), TO (15°), Land (45°) and Full (60°). I found
this rather curious, as almost all aircraft in this category land with
full flap. Two clues indicated that, despite its 'G' registration, this
aircraft normally operates in a military environment namely there was
a small UHF radio tucked away at the bottom of the panel below the avionics
stack and there were no keys. I thought that the instrument panel was
very well laid out; with the primary flight instruments arranged in the
time-honoured 'Basic T' directly in front of the pilot, along with the
tachometer and combined manifold pressure/fuel flow gauge. The left side
of the panel contains an altimeter and artificial horizon for the instructor,
a VOR/ILS and GPS plus the various engine monitoring gauges. Two features that I definitely approved of were the 'needle and ball' type Turn and Slip (better, in my opinion, than the Turn Co-ordinator which is more usual these days) and also the parking brake, which was easy to both reach and operate. This may sound trivial, but this year I've flown at least two aircraft with awkward parking brakes. The cockpit is sufficiently wide to avoid constantly rubbing shoulders with the other occupant and the generous baggage bay behind the seats is accessible in flight. So far so good, but as Steve slid the large canopy shut I suddenly became aware that there was a considerable blind area, caused by the combined thickness of the arch of the canopy bow and the windscreen frame. I found this rather curious. Grob has a great many years of experience working with composite materials and I just couldn't help but feel that neither the canopy bow nor windscreen frame needed to be quite so thick. Conversely, I thought the canopy locking latch was excellent. It is easy to operate and also obvious when the canopy is locked. Engine start was the usual fuel-injected Lycoming procedure, and we were
soon taxying out. The Tutor promptly revealed itself to have very pleasant
ground handling characteristics with excellent visibility and powerful
progressive toe-operated hydraulic disc brakes. The nosewheel steers through
the rudder pedals and can be turned nine degrees either side of neutral,
although if differential braking is used for a tighter turn, the nosewheel
castors up to 47° each way. |
||
| Contact
Webmaster | Back to home page
| Back to Flight Test page © Key Publishing Ltd. |
||