Military Aviation A forum for the professionals who fly military hardware. Also for the backroom boys and girls who support the flying and maintain the equipment, and without whom nothing would ever leave the ground. All armies, navies and air forces of the world equally welcome here.

Phenom

Old 29th Jul 2018, 10:20
  #41 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Outside the Fence
Age: 67
Posts: 306
Equally challenging on Tornado F3. Night close formation F3/F3 was probitited until NVGs. Consequently, taking a first tourist for their first night AAR was an experience. There was also no requirement to be dual so required a Nav with a good line in chat. On one occassion it took 30 minutes (one full slot) just to get the abo into the waiting position.

I still believe that ALL military pilots should be taught, and have the basic skills in ALL facets of "Military Aviation" of which formation is one. We are not talk Reds standard but a knowledge of the fundimentals and a rudimentary skill level.

There can be no doubt that the present ME students are "short changed" in their training. Those who have graduated in recent years do a very credible job having recieved the absolute minimum throughout their Cranwell flying training!
Dominator2 is offline  
Old 29th Jul 2018, 10:53
  #42 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Germany
Posts: 1,967
Originally Posted by BEagle View Post
ME aircraft which require air-to-air refuelling in the receiver role have to be flown in close formation. Fewer types are so equipped these days, of course.

Teaching night close formation to new VC10 co-pilots who hadn't had the benefit of traditional BFTS training was often quite demanding...
Fair point Beags. Misssed AAR in my thought process.
VinRouge is offline  
Old 29th Jul 2018, 11:01
  #43 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 1999
Location: Quite near 'An aerodrome somewhere in England'
Posts: 25,414
I'm surprised that F2/F3 night close formation was banned without NVGs. It was certainly included on the Bucc and F-4 OCUs. Rather easier on the F-4 as the formation references were more obvious.

Dominator2 , I certainly agree that
ALL military pilots should be taught, and have the basic skills in ALL facets of "Military Aviation" of which formation is one.
Pity the poor souls who're only getting 'ME' EFT these days. Around 65 hrs total, but only around 3 hrs solo.... No solo sector recce, no solo aeros, no solo PFLs - just a first solo, one circuit consol. trip...and a solo ML navex.

But what do we old dinosaurs know....
BEagle is online now  
Old 29th Jul 2018, 11:53
  #44 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Outside the Fence
Age: 67
Posts: 306
BEagle,

Due to the poor external lighting provided by BAes and the variable geometry of the aircraft, the TPs decided that the references were not adequate for a "line pilot" to be able to formate safely!

There is no doubt that it was not as easy as the F4 but correctly taught it was viable. Obviously, on NVGs it became a regularly practiced discipline.
Dominator2 is offline  
Old 29th Jul 2018, 11:58
  #45 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2017
Location: On the road side by a knackered old Ford.
Posts: 18
Pity the poor souls who're only getting 'ME' EFT these days.:[/QUOTE]

Forgive my ignorance, but does that mean that students are being streamed before EFT? And if so, on what basis?
ollie135 is offline  
Old 29th Jul 2018, 21:53
  #46 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2018
Location: UK
Posts: 11
I well remember in RAFG prior to GW1 only 3 crews per Squadron were AAR qualified for the Goose Bay deployment Jets, too difficult apparently! Once the proverbial hit the fan, it was easy enough for everyone! I remember the relatively easy non NVG flying was night line astern close formation. You could see the ’red’ jetpipes easily enough, mind you, no one was shooting at you!
EXFIN is offline  
Old 29th Jul 2018, 22:28
  #47 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Banished (twice) to the pointless forest
Posts: 1,541
Not really thread drift...

One of our clients has a collection of Porsche 911 Supercars. Each of them is a top of the range, in the era it was built.

The 70's car is his favourite, the 90's is the best looking, and the new one... he dismisses as "That's really just an Audi." when he talks about it. He tells me that the rest of the Porsche drivers in his club feel the same about them.

I wonder if the same can be said of the Pilots being produced by/for the RAF today.

In five years time, will the RAF still be the chosen supplier of aircrew for the rest of the worlds expanding air forces? Will it have become obvious to those who buy/rent such talent, that the foundations were weakened and the output, competent or not, is based on sand by comparison to how it was?

Older and very experienced Saudi pilots might see that the standard of guys arriving to teach their sons at Tabuk, are not of the same experience as they guys who did that job 20 or 30 years earlier.

I'm sure we all understand Bob's desire to keep quiet and smile; that's how you get paid. We also understand that the blame, and the solution, are on the desks of people in London.

Keeping quiet is not really helping anyone except Bob, and of course the folk cashing the cheques.
airpolice is offline  
Old 29th Jul 2018, 23:01
  #48 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Banished (twice) to the pointless forest
Posts: 1,541
Originally Posted by BigGreenGilbert View Post

thatís pretty harsh air plod, and I am not sure BV deserves what youíre implying. Of course, you have a bit of previous with BV though donít you?


Yeah, we do have previous. I suggested that there was a dangerous fault with the operation of the Hawk T2 and he said it was fine. The T2 stopped flying, things were changed and it's all gone quiet now, because, as Bob tells us, there's no point in talking about it.

I'm not implying anything. I'm stating that it's not in Bob's own interests to be saying that things are not good.
airpolice is offline  
Old 30th Jul 2018, 08:15
  #49 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Outside the Fence
Age: 67
Posts: 306
May I stop any further thread drift now? This thread started with the problems with the Phenom and impact on ME pliot training.

Two questions:

First, what is the RAF doing to rectify the problems with it's ME pilot training. Clearly the MFTS solution will NOT produce either the required quality or numbers? Doing nothing is not an answr?

Secondly, when will the RAF accept that streaming too early and not teaching core Military Aviation flying skills to ALL pilots will never produce the quality of pilots required at all levels. If the RAF is to survive some of the poor decisions concerning Flying Training must be reverserd. Short Terminsm and finance must not be allowed to over-rule common sence and good practice.
Dominator2 is offline  
Old 30th Jul 2018, 11:29
  #50 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Cambridge
Posts: 619
Originally Posted by Bob Viking View Post
This thread is in danger of getting a bit like a Volvo driver trying to convince a VW driver which car is best now!

Maybe Ascent/Affinity just got bored of all the opinions thrown at them and drew a name out of a hat.

Next up letís all try to agree on the best fighter aircraft ever built.

BV
A much easier one BV. The Spitfire of course. :-)
Treble one is offline  
Old 4th Aug 2018, 10:15
  #51 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Outside the Fence
Age: 67
Posts: 306
Is anyone able to help?

What is the RAF doing to rectify the problems with it's ME pilot training. Clearly the MFTS solution will NOT produce either the required quality or numbers? Doing nothing is not an answer?
Dominator2 is offline  
Old 4th Aug 2018, 11:40
  #52 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Banished (twice) to the pointless forest
Posts: 1,541
Originally Posted by Dominator2 View Post
Is anyone able to help?
Doing nothing is in fact, not only the answer, it's the only option.

Soon with so few airframes and instructors... doing nothing is all the system will be capable of.
airpolice is offline  
Old 4th Aug 2018, 14:31
  #53 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Bed
Posts: 184
Lease back some of the old king airs, give the qfi’s some new pens and magi-boards?

or maybe not.....
sangiovese. is offline  
Old 4th Aug 2018, 14:50
  #54 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Banished (twice) to the pointless forest
Posts: 1,541
Originally Posted by sangiovese. View Post
Lease back some of the old king airs, give the qfiís some new pens and magi-boards?

or maybe not.....
You might be on to something there...

Maybe what's needed is for a VSO to establish, say, an Urgent Operational Requirement, for MEFT and contract it out. A new company staffed by recently released QFIs, flying recently released aircraft. They could of course operate from somewhere that's quiet nowadays, like Cranwell perhaps.

Such a company would of course need to charge top end market rates, in order to pay the staff enough to tempt them back (away) from where they have settled. The attraction of flying without a blue suit / secondary duties and the prospect of not being posted, might appeal to enough of them.

I'm sure that would not be cheap, but it would be effective, in a very short timescale. Feed them just some of the hundreds of trainee Pilots already in the holding system, and things are looking up already.
airpolice is offline  
Old 4th Aug 2018, 15:23
  #55 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Pathfinder Country
Posts: 447
There's a Varsity in very good nick' at the Museum at Newark?
aw ditor is offline  
Old 4th Aug 2018, 15:26
  #56 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 1999
Location: north of barlu
Posts: 6,157
Each time I see one of these threads telling me the new aircraft is always tech and not fit for purpose I can’t help thinking about the introduction of the Airbus A320 into British airways service, the cynics told us that the aircraft just a French joke and so unreliable that they would never be more than the original ( B Cal order ) of ten aircraft in British airways service.......................... That prediction went well !
A and C is online now  
Old 4th Aug 2018, 15:58
  #57 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Bed
Posts: 184
Originally Posted by airpolice View Post
You might be on to something there...

Maybe what's needed is for a VSO to establish, say, an Urgent Operational Requirement, for MEFT and contract it out. A new company staffed by recently released QFIs, flying recently released aircraft. They could of course operate from somewhere that's quiet nowadays, like Cranwell perhaps.

Such a company would of course need to charge top end market rates, in order to pay the staff enough to tempt them back (away) from where they have settled. The attraction of flying without a blue suit / secondary duties and the prospect of not being posted, might appeal to enough of them.

I'm sure that would not be cheap, but it would be effective, in a very short timescale. Feed them just some of the hundreds of trainee Pilots already in the holding system, and things are looking up already.

Indeed it’s not as if the principles of teaching anyone to fly a ME aircraft have changed significantly without an IT based underpinning overarching solution based paradigm changing solution that was contracted about 10 years ago and isn’t even slightly working for ME training

I find it quite incredible how a perfectly functioning system was dismantled without fully implemented replacement. That takes a level of serious ineptitude

Last edited by sangiovese.; 4th Aug 2018 at 16:59.
sangiovese. is offline  
Old 4th Aug 2018, 21:44
  #58 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Banished (twice) to the pointless forest
Posts: 1,541
Originally Posted by sangiovese. View Post



Indeed itís not as if the principles of teaching anyone to fly a ME aircraft have changed significantly without an IT based underpinning overarching solution based paradigm changing solution that was contracted about 10 years ago and isnít even slightly working for ME training

I find it quite incredible how a perfectly functioning system was dismantled without fully implemented replacement. That takes a level of serious ineptitude
I'm not at all convinced that inept is a good description, avaricious, rapacious, devious, money grabber or fiscally greedy might be better.

There's nothing in any of this that makes me think it was an accident. What we had was swapped for a great spending of money with other people, and by design, not carelessness.
airpolice is offline  
Old 5th Aug 2018, 07:49
  #59 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 3,822
As I understand it, the contract to run on King Air was expensive and it was cheaper and less risky to use a high-quality commercial training provider for multi-engine training. Especially the extra pilots needed now following the expansion of aircraft numbers under SDSR15. So a competitive was run and L3 won. The plan is to do EFT and then an enhanced lead in course doing more close formation and low level before going to the commercial school. Now seeing as L3 have Boeing and Airbus sims for MCC then the graduates of this program could actually be a better product for Voyager and P8 (and Wedgetail if we buy it). All announced here: https://www.pilotcareernews.com/l3-t...or-raf-pilots/

L3 Commercial Aviation has been selected by the Royal Air Force (RAF) to support the training of future RAF multi-engine pilots in a three-year contract.

L3 will provide a bespoke training course for approximately 100 trainee pilots.

Trainees will undertake a course similar to a Commercial Pilot License (CPL) with Instrument Rating (IR) as well as the Multi-Crew Cooperation (MCC) course to supplement the RAFís own training.

ďThis agreement showcases our ability to offer tailored, cost-effective solutions to meet existing and new customersí bespoke training requirements. We look forward to working with the RAF for many years and welcoming their pilots to our U.K. training facilities,Ē said Robin Glover-Faure, President of Commercial Training Solutions, which is part of L3 Commercial Aviation.

Group Captain David Catlow, from the RAF Directorate of Flying Training, added, ďThis agreement with L3 will help us to deliver more world-class pilots to our operational front line in the timescales we require.Ē

The trainee pilots will start with Officer Training and Elementary Flying Training with the RAF, then carry out the tailored course on multi-engine aircraft before progressing to the MCC course using L3ís flight simulators. The first class of students will begin training with L3 in August 2018.
Oh, and I suspect it is a lot cheaper than running a small bespoke outfit of ex QFIs with some airframes at a MOD airfield as a top up to MEPT on UKMFTS as has been suggested above. Using the capacity in L3ís extant global training system is far better and likely much cheaper.

This course will run in parallel with current UKMFTS MEPT offering the extra numbers of pilots needed for the extra demand of SDSR15.
Lima Juliet is offline  
Old 5th Aug 2018, 11:22
  #60 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Hotel Gypsy
Posts: 2,830
Is it true that some chaps may be going to an orange branded LoCo for part of their training?

(Rumour heard in an FTS bar the other day).
Cows getting bigger is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us Archive Advertising Cookie Policy Privacy Statement Terms of Service

Copyright © 2018 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.