One seat Vs. Two

[Mach 2.2]

I'm a cadet at RAFC Cranwell (no jokes) and have to do an essay on the one seat/two seat conundrum. Does anybody know of any good sources of information about this?

Thanks.

[Chris Kebab]

Oh no, here we go........!

[Mach 2.2]

I'm assuming that this has been a 'good' debate on here before then....

Not really looking for opinions, valid as they all are. More just sources of info that I can quote in the essay.

[ORAC]

I'm not taking sides, but this (http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/library/report/1989/RRG.htm) article should be good for some quotes.....

[16 blades]

Personally, I think 5 seats beats all other options!.......

[Mad_Mark]

No, has to be 12 seats (though 13 was better!)

MadMark!!! :mad:

[soddim]

Be careful not to confuse the staff with real tactical arguments - better to make the economic case for single seat since that is the way we are going with Euroblighter

[Hueymeister]

Personally..More seats = shared workload = better task management = greater chance of mission success + better Flt Safety. CRM has to be sound....., try searching on Crew Resource Management themes too...that's a corking subject!!!..If this makes no sense ..then I humbly apologise..suffering from a weizen (beer) induced hangover! :yuk: :yuk: :E

[BEagle]

Nope - 3 in the front and 295 in the back is the way ahead!

Try sensor fusion, smart cockpit and a few other buzzwords. Oh - and the absence of the half-winged one from the back is less of a problem in modern AD aircraft than it was with old clunkers like the F4 and Borenado F3. Still an advantage for bombers like the GR4 though.

[factanonverba]

This is an extract from an article in Aviation and Space Technology by an ex F-4E (both air-air and ground attack) and F-5E aggressor pilot. You may not agree with all his points but many are true:
1. A better trained pilot flying a simple aircraft will beat a lesser trained pilot flying a sophisticated aircraft.
2. A simple aircraft is more reliable, costs less to maintain, and is easier for the pilot to become combat proficient in than a sophisticated aircraft.
3. Experience tells you when to have your head in the cockpit and when to be out. The pilot who will win is the one who has the experience to keep his head 95% out of the cockpit and who is flying an aircraft that allows him that freedom.
4. If either member of a 2 seat aircraft is inexperienced, the entire crew will be ineffective.
5. Experience is not defined by the completion of training requirements but by the individual's level of confidence in the combat arena.
6. The amount of armament on board does not necessarily correlate to the number of enemy aircraft that can be shot down.
7. In most instances, multiple crew aircraft led to confusion in the cockpit and over the radio.
8.It is just as easy to get a dead six shot on a single seater as it is on a two seater.
9. The pilot in a 2-seater, due partly to relying on the other crew member for certain critical functions, tends to be complacent and not as resourceful as his single-seat counterpart. The single-seat pilot is forced into the situation and must be resourceful or die.
10. Aircraft that can fight slowly will win more engagements. Speed may be life but you'll never kill anybody racing around with your hair on fire.
In short, I have more respect for the cocky obnoxious single-seater who knows what he is doing because he has the training, experience and the confidence necessary to be effective in the air-to-air combat arena than the pilot of a 2-seater, who needs the the warm feeling of another set of eyeballs.

[ZH875]

Ah, but if you have two seats, you must rely on the chap in the back setting the weapon switches correctly. If he doesn't, you have to go around again and accept the consequences .....

[Blakey875]

Ouch! But then you end up writing books and getting freebie entrances into all the Airshows and become a self taught defence expert........

[Chris Kebab]

Now now - I know of an awful lot of single seat switch pigs!

But back to the original point. Personally I think this is probably a spot of mischief from your flt cdr or whoever set the paper. The number of seats in an aircraft is a function of the generation in which it was designed, the level of installed technology and its role. Setting a paper with such a title doesn’t really show a great deal of imagination from the individual (then again I suspect that may be why he/she was posted there). I mean name me a two seat fighter currently under design on a drawing board – exactly! It’s about as relevant as discussing the pro’s and cons of a sextant versus a GPS.

It is a busted flush question from a bygone age – a much better paper, showing somewhat more insight, would have been to discuss one seat versus no seats (i.e. manned vs unmanned); you could probably get a Smartie point by mentioning that in your conclusion.

This next few decades will see many military piloting roles follow the same career route as radio operators, navigators and air engs’ whether we (yes I am one!) like it or not. It’s happening already - stand by to see tranche 3 Eurofighter replaced by stand off missiles.

[jungly]

For FJ training, 2 seats is almost certainly prefered, although if you ask a QFI, sometimes it would be better single seat!