Heads Up! Fighter Pilot: The Real Top Gun
Are you saying that some of them were flying without gloves? My reaction to blokes calling each other "mate" is just to harumph a bit and shrug my shoulders. Dispensing with gloves when flying a fast jet, though, is just unbelievable. I once attended a talk by a retired USAF VSO who had been a fighter pilot in the Korean War and had been in a crash when his aircraft caught fire. He had gloves on but rolled down so that his wrists were exposed. One wrist was so badly burned in the fire that he was in danger of losing that hand which was only saved by means of some very clever surgery. After that I never flew without ensuring that my gloves were pulled right up and securing my flying suit sleeves around them, a lesson these "mates" need to learn, it seems
Unfortunately, yesteryear’s flying gloves can be incompatible with today’s touch screens and ever more complex HOTAS. Have a look on YouTube and you will see many ‘modified’ gloves with fingers and thumbs missing on modern Fighter Jock’s gloves. I agree, MDC splatter is probably the worst risk, but then again many canopies go ‘in a oner’. There is supposed to be a mod inbound for gloves to be painted with something to help with touchscreens - that doesn’t aid the HOTAS issue though. Maybe we should go back to the ergonomic slums of cockpits, that you could operate with club-hand and stumps, of the Lightning, Harrier GR3, SHar, Hunter, Bucc or Phantom (other slums were available!).
As for length of time in training. Yes, MFTS has been a bit of cluster, but it is nearly where it should be (I would say 80%). However, for these students then you need to cast your minds back to 2010 when the SDSR effectively sacked 170x RAF student pilots; those who survived endured a 2-3 year hold waiting for EFT, but when they got there the props kept falling off the Tutors that introduced more delay, then Tucano went slow for a bit and finally Hawk T2 had a few moments (remember the loss of power incident) - it all adds up for an unfortunate few for Flying Training edging out to 9 years from start to finish OCU. We also have students holding a year or so at the moment (reducing fast), and that is a different matter of changing 5x training aircraft types inside 2 years - that has not gone as well as planned, but is finally starting to deliver as planned. However, that is at the rate required by the SDSR in 2010 and the enhancements for the growth dictated by the SDSR 2015 is still being rolled out and will take up to another couple of years or so. So as ever, we can all chuck spears at the contract, but the requirement has changed so many times that the program never really stood a chance of instant success - not helped by a rather odd set of choices in aircraft types!
Of course, for those caught up ‘in the holding pattern’ in the middle of this transition, it is pretty bloody frustrating. But then again, they will have one of the best jobs in the world when they get there and I would hope it is worth the wait. There are also people working on several significant improvements to the training pipeline and this should increase capacity and bring the length of time training well back under control. Time will tell if we should have a shared optimism that these improvements will do the job.
As for length of time in training. Yes, MFTS has been a bit of cluster, but it is nearly where it should be (I would say 80%). However, for these students then you need to cast your minds back to 2010 when the SDSR effectively sacked 170x RAF student pilots; those who survived endured a 2-3 year hold waiting for EFT, but when they got there the props kept falling off the Tutors that introduced more delay, then Tucano went slow for a bit and finally Hawk T2 had a few moments (remember the loss of power incident) - it all adds up for an unfortunate few for Flying Training edging out to 9 years from start to finish OCU. We also have students holding a year or so at the moment (reducing fast), and that is a different matter of changing 5x training aircraft types inside 2 years - that has not gone as well as planned, but is finally starting to deliver as planned. However, that is at the rate required by the SDSR in 2010 and the enhancements for the growth dictated by the SDSR 2015 is still being rolled out and will take up to another couple of years or so. So as ever, we can all chuck spears at the contract, but the requirement has changed so many times that the program never really stood a chance of instant success - not helped by a rather odd set of choices in aircraft types!
Of course, for those caught up ‘in the holding pattern’ in the middle of this transition, it is pretty bloody frustrating. But then again, they will have one of the best jobs in the world when they get there and I would hope it is worth the wait. There are also people working on several significant improvements to the training pipeline and this should increase capacity and bring the length of time training well back under control. Time will tell if we should have a shared optimism that these improvements will do the job.
[QUOTE=BEagle;10550953]
6. I was lucky enough to be on the first of the 'new' Chivenor courses and reckon that sharpend and his colleagues had it spot on at the time.
How true I always thought Beagle was rather smart.
6. I was lucky enough to be on the first of the 'new' Chivenor courses and reckon that sharpend and his colleagues had it spot on at the time.
How true
I always thought Beagle was rather smart.
"Mildly" Eccentric Stardriver
Please explain to an aged sky-god (?). The young lady is on a low-level mission requiring precise timing and concentration. The "distractions" of ATC, include an airline pilot (guilty) contacting the handling agent reference his disabled passengers. On VHF?
In those days very few had Flying Nick names.
PS. Plus lots of “Spud” Murphy, “Tug” Wilson, “Hoppy” Hopkinson, etc...
I too was stunned at how effortlessly stable the aircraft seems in the hover. The thing looks as though it's been nailed to the sky, and when descending it looks like it's coming down on a lift. A truly impressive fusion of mechanical, hydraulic, electronic and computer systems that appears to give its pilot so many options and advantages.
I lost count the number of times in Hawk and Tornado I would say to the other mate in the cockpit “Off Guard” when someone started using it for chit-chat, practice pans or “Securite, Securite...”. I would say it is distracting and also means you can’t speak/hear your formation or talk to anyone else in your aircraft that is flying 250ft MSD at 420-540kts with a whole bunch of other hazards trying to kill you. I also suspect that the TV producers made it out to be slightly worse than it actually was - but that is media/journalism for you.
BV and LJ,
I am not offering any criticism but trying to explain some misunderstandings.
YES, in 1972 we certainly did call our instructors Sir at AFTS whenever at work, on the ground or in the air. In the Mess or socially elsewhere it was first names for all (or nearly all) JOs. Once at TWU it was first names except when in the Sh1t. In those days very few had Flying Nick names. They really appeared from the USAF in the late 70s when the F15 and A10 appeared in Europe. I was lucky enough to teach in the air until 2011 and even then neither instructors nor students used such facile language as that used at the beginning of the programme.
As to the standard of instruction in the 70s and 80s. Personally my instruction in the early 70s was outstanding at Linton, Valley and TWU. It was a different era when things were done differently. The proof was in the outcome of the product. Operating a Cold War jet was a totally different proposition to operating a 5th Gen aircraft in 2020. The threat which was ever present put a totally different emphasis on Flight Safety. People were expected to take far greater risks than is acceptable today. Consequently, they viewed fast jet aviation in a totally different way. Still professional but operating in an Air Force with different expectations of it's fighting men and woman (or course no women in fast jets in that era).
Don't become too dismissive as there is always something to learn. Non of us has ownership of being right all of the time, although some may be correct for some of it!
I am not offering any criticism but trying to explain some misunderstandings.
YES, in 1972 we certainly did call our instructors Sir at AFTS whenever at work, on the ground or in the air. In the Mess or socially elsewhere it was first names for all (or nearly all) JOs. Once at TWU it was first names except when in the Sh1t. In those days very few had Flying Nick names. They really appeared from the USAF in the late 70s when the F15 and A10 appeared in Europe. I was lucky enough to teach in the air until 2011 and even then neither instructors nor students used such facile language as that used at the beginning of the programme.
As to the standard of instruction in the 70s and 80s. Personally my instruction in the early 70s was outstanding at Linton, Valley and TWU. It was a different era when things were done differently. The proof was in the outcome of the product. Operating a Cold War jet was a totally different proposition to operating a 5th Gen aircraft in 2020. The threat which was ever present put a totally different emphasis on Flight Safety. People were expected to take far greater risks than is acceptable today. Consequently, they viewed fast jet aviation in a totally different way. Still professional but operating in an Air Force with different expectations of it's fighting men and woman (or course no women in fast jets in that era).
Don't become too dismissive as there is always something to learn. Non of us has ownership of being right all of the time, although some may be correct for some of it!
I too was stunned at how effortlessly stable the aircraft seems in the hover. The thing looks as though it's been nailed to the sky, and when descending it looks like it's coming down on a lift. A truly impressive fusion of mechanical, hydraulic, electronic and computer systems that appears to give its pilot so many options and advantages.
The Digital Advanced Flight Control Systems (DAFCS) installed on U.S. CH-47F Chinook helicopters is helping pilots make safer desert landings.
The Common Avionics Architecture Systems (CAAS) glass cockpit, DAFCS "provides the pilot with heightened situational awareness and safety," said Mark Ballew, Boeing’s senior business development manager for tandem rotor aircraft. "For instance, you can plug the data for an instrument landing at a specific airfield into DACFS, and the system will execute it for you. If you have to break off a landing and do a go-round, DACFS can be set to automatically execute the go-round."
DACFS is proving itself in Iraq and Afghanistan, where 26 CH-47Fs are equipped with the system. "DACFS can help you deal with brownouts during landing," Ballew said. "You can program the system to level off in a stable hover at 15 feet, then to lower you a foot at a time to the ground automatically." A helicopter pilot who served in Desert Storm, Ballew knows what it is like to get disoriented by blowing sand during touchdown. "DAFCS was designed to deal with such problems," he said. "We’ve had a lot of feedback from pilots serving in Iraq and Afghanistan who say the DAFCS system has made their landings much safer and more predictable."
The Common Avionics Architecture Systems (CAAS) glass cockpit, DAFCS "provides the pilot with heightened situational awareness and safety," said Mark Ballew, Boeing’s senior business development manager for tandem rotor aircraft. "For instance, you can plug the data for an instrument landing at a specific airfield into DACFS, and the system will execute it for you. If you have to break off a landing and do a go-round, DACFS can be set to automatically execute the go-round."
DACFS is proving itself in Iraq and Afghanistan, where 26 CH-47Fs are equipped with the system. "DACFS can help you deal with brownouts during landing," Ballew said. "You can program the system to level off in a stable hover at 15 feet, then to lower you a foot at a time to the ground automatically." A helicopter pilot who served in Desert Storm, Ballew knows what it is like to get disoriented by blowing sand during touchdown. "DAFCS was designed to deal with such problems," he said. "We’ve had a lot of feedback from pilots serving in Iraq and Afghanistan who say the DAFCS system has made their landings much safer and more predictable."
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: The Alderaan System
Posts: 29
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The sortie where the instructor said that was a Famil trip. The aim is to put the student, who is sitting in the back seat, at ease and ensure his first Hawk trip is an enjoyable one. If the instructor chooses to use some slightly less formal language in order to achieve this aim then what is the harm in that? FJ Instructors use a range of styles during teaching. All have been judged effective by the CFS agents , otherwise they wouldn’t be flying with studes; They are the experts. What are your credentials??
personally I liked the program, and I’m looking forward to the next one.
And what Jindabyne said.
I was a bit confused about the length of time they were said to have waited to fly the Hawk, but didn't most of them seem to already have their 'wings' and I took it that they were transferring over from some other type, to fly FJ (like 'Danners' was ex-helicopters). That might explain some of the more informal cockpit chat if both were already serving pilots?
I got a bit confused about who was flying for which service (and I can't even rely on a beard to tell)
Flug
I got a bit confused about who was flying for which service (and I can't even rely on a beard to tell)
Flug
Homelover,
The point of a famil is also an introduction to SOPs, to set the scene and show the student the importance of the course to come. It's obviously a very difficult, intensive course and I believe that getting airborne for the first time with a 'YeeHah, let's do this" attitude sets the wrong tone, as does calling your student 'mate' and also allowing him or her to do the same to you.
Maybe that's just me. My credentials, as you asked, are that I passed CFS 25 years ago and have been an A2 QFI for the past 20 years. Please tell me yours.
The point of a famil is also an introduction to SOPs, to set the scene and show the student the importance of the course to come. It's obviously a very difficult, intensive course and I believe that getting airborne for the first time with a 'YeeHah, let's do this" attitude sets the wrong tone, as does calling your student 'mate' and also allowing him or her to do the same to you.
Maybe that's just me. My credentials, as you asked, are that I passed CFS 25 years ago and have been an A2 QFI for the past 20 years. Please tell me yours.
'However, for me the fun seems to have mainly evaporated. The Air Force has a job to do and a serious one at that. Fifty years ago our Air Force was very much the archetypal flying club and we enjoyed enormous Esprit de Corps. This was definitely true of my Near East Air Force Squadron. Rules were indeed few and far between, we were not very professional, medals were non-existent and operations were something we only practised for. Of course we were happy despite a distinct lack of facilities and amenities. There was no such thing as personal computers, microwave ovens, Internet, e-mails, iPads, iPods, digital cameras, mobile phones, DVDs, satellite TV, VCRs, PDAs, station exercises, MOTs, breathalysers or drink/drive regulations. GPS and inertial navigation systems were fitted only to Sputniks. Hence navigators were a necessary evil (only joking).'
And I doubt if the pilots featured in the current series would recognise the RAF that I joined. But an interesting topic to discuss would be 'Would they cope without computers. calculators, mobile phones, GPS, sat nav etc etc? In fact, would I now cope? I wonder.
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: The Alderaan System
Posts: 29
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
An A2? I’ll give you some credit. But I’m guessing not an A2 on FJ? I am, on 2 types:Hawk and Tornado. StanP on Tornado. OC CFS Flt on Hawk. I’m comfortable that I have allowed a variety of instructional styles to graduate. They’ve all made good instructors, even if they have occasionally used imperfect English. Crivens! The thought of it.
Can we we stop the willy waving now?
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: The Alderaan System
Posts: 29
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
LJ
My experience of those F4 mates was similar to yours. Flying with M2 made me want to be an AD mate at a time when everyone wanted to fly the jumping bean. God rest his soul. Brilliant guy.
My experience of those F4 mates was similar to yours. Flying with M2 made me want to be an AD mate at a time when everyone wanted to fly the jumping bean. God rest his soul. Brilliant guy.