RAF Flying Trg System - How good
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Wales
Posts: 1
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hello all,
Some interesting views on EFT, just wandering if you boys have any on AFT. For what it's worth, I agree with DB6. I flew Bulldogs with Yorkshire UAS (the finest) and I can't see how having the roll rate it did provided any real benefit. As I understand it, the Firefly can still perform all the basic manouvres required on an Elementary course, with additional power to boot. So what are you all arguing about? Whats more important in my mind is why we are still flying around in a 1970s cockpit at Valley when the frontline of the near future requires guys with a very different training.
Your thoughts?
Some interesting views on EFT, just wandering if you boys have any on AFT. For what it's worth, I agree with DB6. I flew Bulldogs with Yorkshire UAS (the finest) and I can't see how having the roll rate it did provided any real benefit. As I understand it, the Firefly can still perform all the basic manouvres required on an Elementary course, with additional power to boot. So what are you all arguing about? Whats more important in my mind is why we are still flying around in a 1970s cockpit at Valley when the frontline of the near future requires guys with a very different training.
Your thoughts?
The Gnat had an instrument system which closely resembled that of the Lightning and Buccaneer - OR946. The Hawk instruments used to be reasonably similar to the F4, Harrier and early Jag (head down) - but it's increasingly less representative of current fighterbombers.
Why no upgrade? No doubt the bean counters expect some fairy godmother to do that with the dreaded MFTS.........
Plans for the Gnat replacement were well advanced over 30 years ago - are there any plans for a Hawk replacement yet?
Why no upgrade? No doubt the bean counters expect some fairy godmother to do that with the dreaded MFTS.........
Plans for the Gnat replacement were well advanced over 30 years ago - are there any plans for a Hawk replacement yet?
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: UK Sometimes
Posts: 1,062
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
One could argue the same for EFTS/MELIN and METS with C130J,C17 and A400M being a far cry from the current instrumentation available. But I believe Tutor has some good kit (vice Bulldog steam driven stuff) but is it really still not cleared for IMC? If this is still the case, someone needs a rocket up their jet-pipe! Who is accountable for this cok-up?
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Tx, USA
Posts: 63
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
All the talk above is sound.
I'd like to offer my own perspective if I may?
The Hawk, albeit a little antiquated now, was more about teaching the main problems of FJ flying......that of prioritisation. What I mean is, if you don't prioritise, you'll run into trouble very very quickly indeed. As far as the glass cockpit debate is concerned, I agree! We are in the business of training guys/girls to fly front-line aircraft with relatively hi-tech kit. It is to the disadvantage of someone coming from the venerable Hawk T1 to a Harrier etc; compared to someone from NFTC with all that gucci LRG, MFD, blah kit experience. So, we need a training system that duly reflects the next stage of training. Glass cockpits, information management are paving the way ahead (just ask BAe how hard they're working on fusion!) Let us give our pilots the best possible opportunity.
I found it an additional challenge to master the HOTAS issue on top of the other pressures involved with an OCU, so pull fingers out and invest in a system that'll make us envious to the rest of the World. We have a second-to-none level of instruction, we just need a platform of equal credibility!
BD
I'd like to offer my own perspective if I may?
The Hawk, albeit a little antiquated now, was more about teaching the main problems of FJ flying......that of prioritisation. What I mean is, if you don't prioritise, you'll run into trouble very very quickly indeed. As far as the glass cockpit debate is concerned, I agree! We are in the business of training guys/girls to fly front-line aircraft with relatively hi-tech kit. It is to the disadvantage of someone coming from the venerable Hawk T1 to a Harrier etc; compared to someone from NFTC with all that gucci LRG, MFD, blah kit experience. So, we need a training system that duly reflects the next stage of training. Glass cockpits, information management are paving the way ahead (just ask BAe how hard they're working on fusion!) Let us give our pilots the best possible opportunity.
I found it an additional challenge to master the HOTAS issue on top of the other pressures involved with an OCU, so pull fingers out and invest in a system that'll make us envious to the rest of the World. We have a second-to-none level of instruction, we just need a platform of equal credibility!
BD
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Hook, Hants
Age: 68
Posts: 286
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
An interesting debate - and most of it spot on (in my humble opinion)
Having done the 'old' 100 hr JP course (in 106 hrs including the chop ride), and having subsequently spent time as a QFI (Bullfrog) and QHI, I have seen the system try to save money by cutting the time taken to the front line. No matter how high the quality; if you cut down on time in the air you are shooting yourself in the foot. No-one learns airmanship, CRM and all the other up- to-the-minute touchy-feely blah in 5 mins flat. Yes, the equipment issues are important - but shortening the training system will not work no matter how swish the training aircraft are. I understand that there is a lot of work going on to introduce aircraft that do have cockpit displays and systems remotely representative of what the winged warrrior of tomorrow will look at! I live in hope
Having done the 'old' 100 hr JP course (in 106 hrs including the chop ride), and having subsequently spent time as a QFI (Bullfrog) and QHI, I have seen the system try to save money by cutting the time taken to the front line. No matter how high the quality; if you cut down on time in the air you are shooting yourself in the foot. No-one learns airmanship, CRM and all the other up- to-the-minute touchy-feely blah in 5 mins flat. Yes, the equipment issues are important - but shortening the training system will not work no matter how swish the training aircraft are. I understand that there is a lot of work going on to introduce aircraft that do have cockpit displays and systems remotely representative of what the winged warrrior of tomorrow will look at! I live in hope
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Wiltshire
Posts: 16
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I am not a QFI so I can not comment on the training system. However, I have been a 4 eng ME FI on and off for many years, both steam driven and electric. The output standard of the system has always been variable, probably due to recruiting problems and fluctuating entry standards.
It has been quite common to have to give additional training to ab initios over and above the basic conversion. However, I must say the standard of todays new co-pilots seems pretty good, certainly better than in the early 90s. Or maybe they are just sending us the better end of the market now.
I know that there is a team looking at the wet dream replacement, both interim and long term. I believe one aim is to do more training relevant to each role so that front line convexs can be more streamlined
It has been quite common to have to give additional training to ab initios over and above the basic conversion. However, I must say the standard of todays new co-pilots seems pretty good, certainly better than in the early 90s. Or maybe they are just sending us the better end of the market now.
I know that there is a team looking at the wet dream replacement, both interim and long term. I believe one aim is to do more training relevant to each role so that front line convexs can be more streamlined
The 'additional training over and above initial conversion' which will be available from now on is going to be very strictly rationed indeed on the Vickers Funbus. If the abbos don't crack their ac cat and IRT first time there'll be very limited remedial and retesting available before they get the "What does your Mum call you, Bloggs?" chat. That's the brutal truth - we can't afford the cost in time or money to 'carry' anyone any more.
So 3FTS output needs to be to an uniform standard. None of this 'send the better guys to the 2/3-person flightdeck and the weaker ones to ac with a 4-person flightdeck where there'll be 3 others to look after them' nonsense. We train First Pilots, not V-force flap snatcher/wireless operators!
Personally I think that we'd be far better off sending all our future ME pilots to the US to do a course on the Texan II and T-1 Jayhawk pre-ME OCU than continue to fart about with Fireflies and aged old Wetdreams.
So 3FTS output needs to be to an uniform standard. None of this 'send the better guys to the 2/3-person flightdeck and the weaker ones to ac with a 4-person flightdeck where there'll be 3 others to look after them' nonsense. We train First Pilots, not V-force flap snatcher/wireless operators!
Personally I think that we'd be far better off sending all our future ME pilots to the US to do a course on the Texan II and T-1 Jayhawk pre-ME OCU than continue to fart about with Fireflies and aged old Wetdreams.
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 104
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Venerable Hawk
Ref AFT and our dearly loved Hawk, I recently learned what the Yanks did with their T-45s and T-38s.
In the case of the T-45, the fleet was upgraded to almost complete glass cockpit standard for around the equivalent of £1 million per airframe, fitted and returned to service originally in 60 days which was then reduced to 25 days, within 1 year of the requirement being issued!
The Americans intend to keep the T-38 airframes until 2060 (read it again) and they too have undergone a similar upgrade and also the L159.
UKMFTS will have to decide whether we upgrade our Hawk T1 fleet or buy new, more appropriately equipped airframes. Probably something like the 128 in whatever spec. Furthermore, if we ever get modern cockpit to train our FJ pilots, what relevance has the Tucano?
In any case, we look certain to soldier on (around Wales) with map and stopwatch (and head fire) for at least another 5-8 years. What standard will the FJ OCU's require by then, bearing in mind Typhoon, JSF, GR9(!) etc?
Ray.
P.S. Creamie, methinks you live 100 yards away!
In the case of the T-45, the fleet was upgraded to almost complete glass cockpit standard for around the equivalent of £1 million per airframe, fitted and returned to service originally in 60 days which was then reduced to 25 days, within 1 year of the requirement being issued!
The Americans intend to keep the T-38 airframes until 2060 (read it again) and they too have undergone a similar upgrade and also the L159.
UKMFTS will have to decide whether we upgrade our Hawk T1 fleet or buy new, more appropriately equipped airframes. Probably something like the 128 in whatever spec. Furthermore, if we ever get modern cockpit to train our FJ pilots, what relevance has the Tucano?
In any case, we look certain to soldier on (around Wales) with map and stopwatch (and head fire) for at least another 5-8 years. What standard will the FJ OCU's require by then, bearing in mind Typhoon, JSF, GR9(!) etc?
Ray.
P.S. Creamie, methinks you live 100 yards away!
Join Date: Sep 1999
Location: UK
Posts: 116
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I've been wondering for a while now when we will have a modern cockpit display Hawk. Some of our guys (whenever I say guys that means girls too, OK?) are doing their AFTS (FJ) in Canada and they're flying Hawks with HUDs etc which is the way ahead for our jets at Valley IMHO. If they can build in similar systems to Typhoon, so much the better. Having said that, if you can hit the target with an iron sight, your understanding of what you're doing will stand you in good stead when using a computed sight, but with the reliability of the kit now fitted in the FJs it's a minor advantage compared with the importance of being comfortable with technology.
On the subject of ME training, I agree with those who would bring back a group 2 system. My BFTS QFI was a Kipper fleet driver, and his formation flying, low level and aeros were all very credible and I was fortunate that he was also an excellent instructor. He of course, had been the product of a system which demanded he be taught all the basic disciplines before he went to ME trg. The current system would disadvantage him as a potential Tucano QFI and make it far less likely for him to achieve a FJ crossover if he so wished.
How much formation practice has a new co had when he joins a shiney jet OCU now?
On the subject of ME training, I agree with those who would bring back a group 2 system. My BFTS QFI was a Kipper fleet driver, and his formation flying, low level and aeros were all very credible and I was fortunate that he was also an excellent instructor. He of course, had been the product of a system which demanded he be taught all the basic disciplines before he went to ME trg. The current system would disadvantage him as a potential Tucano QFI and make it far less likely for him to achieve a FJ crossover if he so wished.
How much formation practice has a new co had when he joins a shiney jet OCU now?
Not enough! I see from my first logbook that I did 13:10 Jet Provost formation, including a few solos, on the basic 'wings' course - having never flown formation on the Chipmunk at UAS.
Now the only formation they'll have done is a bit on lightplanes and the useless Wetdream. Which means that the 1 day and 1 night formation trips they get on the VC10 are very interesting for the QFI!!
I get ever so fed up teaching basic formation station-keeping principles on the '10 - thanks to the wretched bean counters stopping BFTS training for ME pilots - but which we were all once taught on the JP!!
Now the only formation they'll have done is a bit on lightplanes and the useless Wetdream. Which means that the 1 day and 1 night formation trips they get on the VC10 are very interesting for the QFI!!
I get ever so fed up teaching basic formation station-keeping principles on the '10 - thanks to the wretched bean counters stopping BFTS training for ME pilots - but which we were all once taught on the JP!!
Last edited by BEagle; 16th Jul 2002 at 17:57.
Join Date: Sep 1999
Location: UK
Posts: 116
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Which proves the point that the bean counters have moved much of the training burden downstream to very expensive ac like the 10. The argument was also extant when they shut the TWUs, saying that now we weren't in a Cold War instant response environment, you could afford to have people on sqns who were "less ready". But the premise of that argument was wrong, because all sqns are busier on real ops now and there's less opportunity to train on the sqns who are busy doing the real thing. (and there are fewer sqns).
The quality must have reduced, and BEagle is finding that. I might have hoped that the extra £3.5 billion being earmarked for defense by GB would improve the situation, but my neighbour, who is an Apache instructor, has just told me that all military flying training will be civillianised by 2007. Anyone care to confirm this? Nothing against civillians (after all, I'm one now), but it can't be a good thing for the future trying to attract quality instructors to a place like Anglesey to train our future Typhoon pilots. Where will be the recent front line experience? There were some excellent old timers at Valley when I was there, but they had to be balanced with the guys straight back from the front-line.
We've never had the best kit in the world, but our training has always given us the edge in terms of getting the most out of what we've been given. Tony Blair says "education, education, education" I say "Training, training, training". I'll agree with him that it's the investment for the future.
The quality must have reduced, and BEagle is finding that. I might have hoped that the extra £3.5 billion being earmarked for defense by GB would improve the situation, but my neighbour, who is an Apache instructor, has just told me that all military flying training will be civillianised by 2007. Anyone care to confirm this? Nothing against civillians (after all, I'm one now), but it can't be a good thing for the future trying to attract quality instructors to a place like Anglesey to train our future Typhoon pilots. Where will be the recent front line experience? There were some excellent old timers at Valley when I was there, but they had to be balanced with the guys straight back from the front-line.
We've never had the best kit in the world, but our training has always given us the edge in terms of getting the most out of what we've been given. Tony Blair says "education, education, education" I say "Training, training, training". I'll agree with him that it's the investment for the future.
