Heads Up! Fighter Pilot: The Real Top Gun
I would suggest that todays RAF pilots are just as competent as we were and just as dedicated! I personally sympathise with them on the current length of training, but that is hardly their fault! Times change but it is my guess that the guys and girls are just as keen and competent as we were and will give all they can to their chosen career. Let us move on
Jindabyne,
I stand by what I said as it is factual. We never had to do it for real, and there was never any risk of having to do it for real.
That is not the case today, so why on earth you think that attitude contemptible is beyond me.
Sorry if you can’t handle the truth,
I stand by what I said as it is factual. We never had to do it for real, and there was never any risk of having to do it for real.
That is not the case today, so why on earth you think that attitude contemptible is beyond me.
Sorry if you can’t handle the truth,
and there was never any risk of having to do it for real.
I really enjoyed the first episode and found it entertaining, informative and highly relevant in the 21st Century. The characters displayed the same skill, professionalism and passion for flying as any of their forebears but came across as openly honest human beings, not deferential, hide-bound automatons.
Roll on the next episode.
Roll on the next episode.
I’ve now watched the second half, having given up on the day, and it either improved, or I was less grumpy today (undoubtedly the latter). I still have criticisms and they’re all to do with the production, rather than the subjects, but as I said, it’s not made for me, it’s made for others and has to compete with the likes of Love Island (yes, that series has finished this year, no idea how I know that! 
), so what do you expect!
), so what do you expect!
Given the programme's references to 'Top Gun', it's quite appropriate that the Fleet Air Arm was responsible for creating the original US Navy ‘Top Gun’ school at Miramar Naval Air Station near San Diego.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/ukn...y-British.html
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/ukn...y-British.html
I enjoyed the programme-its very different to the Fighter Pilot Series of the 80's when I was dreaming of a Bucaneer/Tornado cockpit for myself.
The Top Gun thing is a little cringeworthy to be honest, but Joe Public will identify with that more (and after all this programme is aimed at Joe Public, not current or ex-mil pilots).
And yes, the instructional technique does rather seem to have changed since the John McRae era, but its a different world with different students, and as long as the finished product is fit for purpose for the front line, then who cares?
I'm not sure the but about logging into the F-35 was particularly good PR though....although the other insight into operating the jet was very interesting.
The Top Gun thing is a little cringeworthy to be honest, but Joe Public will identify with that more (and after all this programme is aimed at Joe Public, not current or ex-mil pilots).
And yes, the instructional technique does rather seem to have changed since the John McRae era, but its a different world with different students, and as long as the finished product is fit for purpose for the front line, then who cares?
I'm not sure the but about logging into the F-35 was particularly good PR though....although the other insight into operating the jet was very interesting.
Jindabyne,
Please stop sending me rude and offensive private messages.
If you can’t tolerate opinion or sustain an argument I suggest you avoid rumour and news sites.
Please stop sending me rude and offensive private messages.
If you can’t tolerate opinion or sustain an argument I suggest you avoid rumour and news sites.
I have just watched the programme, having recorded it, and having been conditiioned by reading this thread beforehand. I get the part about it having been dumbed down to make it accessible to the general public, and I don't have any conceptual difficulty with this. My only gripe is with the extent of the dumbing down, exemplified by the recurring references to "fast jet driving tests". Surely even the dimmer elements of the general public deserve something a bit more thought provoking and insightful than this?
The programme makers seem to have been given some pretty special access, particularly in the US, but appear to have squandered it producing something with marginally less gravitas than the "epic" Eddie Stobart series.
Heres hoping episode 2 is a bit more substantive.
The programme makers seem to have been given some pretty special access, particularly in the US, but appear to have squandered it producing something with marginally less gravitas than the "epic" Eddie Stobart series.
Heres hoping episode 2 is a bit more substantive.
Join Date: Dec 2018
Location: Dundee
Posts: 2
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
In the 1970s, fast-jet pilots learned to fly the Gnat at Valley, then did a short Hunter refresher course before going to TWU at Chivenor or Brawdy. The courses at Valley were very much 'Training Command' and a lot of time was occupied learning how to stop the Gnat trying to kill you! There was NO 'tactical' formation flying; indeed, the TWUs wanted to teach that from a clean sheet.
Moving to TWU, you went into Strike Command. No more read-and-white trainers, you flew green and grey fighters - and the ethos was very different. Hard work, it is true, but very rewarding with lots of low level, simulated attack profiles, live strafe, bombing and rocketing at Pembrey range.
But when the Hawk appeared on the scene, it replaced Gnat/Hunter at Valley AND Hunter at TWU. A lot of savings could therefore be made in type conversion. But Valley was still 'flying training' and TWU was still 'tactical training' That changed further when the rather despised 'mirror image' scheme started, Chivenor closed and everything went to Valley. Which meant a lot of wasted time with detachments at St Athan for weaponeering at nearby Pembrey.
Along came more technologically advanced front line jets and training on the Hawk T2. 'Fast jet driving tests' apart, flying the aircraft isn't as demanding as the Gnat / Hunter as it is safer. has vastly better cockpit ergonomics and systems and live weaponeering is no longer deemed necessary. So no waiting for the cloud to lift at Pembrey any more, or for someone to shoot the flag off the back of Puddy's Meteor ending the air-to-air range sortie at Hartland . Synthetic training systems are in greater use - all we had at Brawdy was a Hunter sim and bits from crashed aircraft nailed together to teach gunsight control etc.! Low level planning now uses an automated system rather than paper maps and gorilla snot glue; also I would doubt whether 'sight piccy' drawings are necessary given the HUD symbology now available. No-one could possibly prefer the faff of sorting out half a dozen Hunter cine mags on the way to the range, of that I'm sure!
So yes, the new era training is hugely different to that of previous years. Whether students and staff really interact in the air as they did in the programme I do not know. Lucky blighters will eventually fly F-35B or Typhoon; the failure rate is quite reasonable these days but hard work is still needed, albeit with a different emphasis.
It's just such a pity that the RAF has been forced into MFTS though - but I suppose that'll give instructors greater opportunities to gain instructional experience than if they were merely biding their time champing at the bit to get back to the front line.
Moving to TWU, you went into Strike Command. No more read-and-white trainers, you flew green and grey fighters - and the ethos was very different. Hard work, it is true, but very rewarding with lots of low level, simulated attack profiles, live strafe, bombing and rocketing at Pembrey range.
But when the Hawk appeared on the scene, it replaced Gnat/Hunter at Valley AND Hunter at TWU. A lot of savings could therefore be made in type conversion. But Valley was still 'flying training' and TWU was still 'tactical training' That changed further when the rather despised 'mirror image' scheme started, Chivenor closed and everything went to Valley. Which meant a lot of wasted time with detachments at St Athan for weaponeering at nearby Pembrey.
Along came more technologically advanced front line jets and training on the Hawk T2. 'Fast jet driving tests' apart, flying the aircraft isn't as demanding as the Gnat / Hunter as it is safer. has vastly better cockpit ergonomics and systems and live weaponeering is no longer deemed necessary. So no waiting for the cloud to lift at Pembrey any more, or for someone to shoot the flag off the back of Puddy's Meteor ending the air-to-air range sortie at Hartland . Synthetic training systems are in greater use - all we had at Brawdy was a Hunter sim and bits from crashed aircraft nailed together to teach gunsight control etc.! Low level planning now uses an automated system rather than paper maps and gorilla snot glue; also I would doubt whether 'sight piccy' drawings are necessary given the HUD symbology now available. No-one could possibly prefer the faff of sorting out half a dozen Hunter cine mags on the way to the range, of that I'm sure!
So yes, the new era training is hugely different to that of previous years. Whether students and staff really interact in the air as they did in the programme I do not know. Lucky blighters will eventually fly F-35B or Typhoon; the failure rate is quite reasonable these days but hard work is still needed, albeit with a different emphasis.
It's just such a pity that the RAF has been forced into MFTS though - but I suppose that'll give instructors greater opportunities to gain instructional experience than if they were merely biding their time champing at the bit to get back to the front line.
I’ve now watched the second half, having given up on the day, and it either improved, or I was less grumpy today (undoubtedly the latter). I still have criticisms and they’re all to do with the production, rather than the subjects, but as I said, it’s not made for me, it’s made for others and has to compete with the likes of Love Island (yes, that series has finished this year, no idea how I know that! ), so what do you expect!
), so what do you expect!As you’re now based at a secret training establishment, I hope you will encourage your customers to call you mate, while discussing Love Island in the sortie briefs.
ps, your profile shows in Hampshire?
In the 1970s, fast-jet pilots learned to fly the Gnat at Valley, then did a short Hunter refresher course before going to TWU at Chivenor or Brawdy. The courses at Valley were very much 'Training Command' and a lot of time was occupied learning how to stop the Gnat trying to kill you! There was NO 'tactical' formation flying; indeed, the TWUs wanted to teach that from a clean sheet.
Moving to TWU, you went into Strike Command. No more read-and-white trainers, you flew green and grey fighters - and the ethos was very different. Hard work, it is true, but very rewarding with lots of low level, simulated attack profiles, live strafe, bombing and rocketing at Pembrey range.
But when the Hawk appeared on the scene, it replaced Gnat/Hunter at Valley AND Hunter at TWU. A lot of savings could therefore be made in type conversion. But Valley was still 'flying training' and TWU was still 'tactical training' That changed further when the rather despised 'mirror image' scheme started, Chivenor closed and everything went to Valley. Which meant a lot of wasted time with detachments at St Athan for weaponeering at nearby Pembrey.
Along came more technologically advanced front line jets and training on the Hawk T2. 'Fast jet driving tests' apart, flying the aircraft isn't as demanding as the Gnat / Hunter as it is safer. has vastly better cockpit ergonomics and systems and live weaponeering is no longer deemed necessary. So no waiting for the cloud to lift at Pembrey any more, or for someone to shoot the flag off the back of Puddy's Meteor ending the air-to-air range sortie at Hartland . Synthetic training systems are in greater use - all we had at Brawdy was a Hunter sim and bits from crashed aircraft nailed together to teach gunsight control etc.! Low level planning now uses an automated system rather than paper maps and gorilla snot glue; also I would doubt whether 'sight piccy' drawings are necessary given the HUD symbology now available. No-one could possibly prefer the faff of sorting out half a dozen Hunter cine mags on the way to the range, of that I'm sure!
So yes, the new era training is hugely different to that of previous years. Whether students and staff really interact in the air as they did in the programme I do not know. Lucky blighters will eventually fly F-35B or Typhoon; the failure rate is quite reasonable these days but hard work is still needed, albeit with a different emphasis.
It's just such a pity that the RAF has been forced into MFTS though - but I suppose that'll give instructors greater opportunities to gain instructional experience than if they were merely biding their time champing at the bit to get back to the front line.
Moving to TWU, you went into Strike Command. No more read-and-white trainers, you flew green and grey fighters - and the ethos was very different. Hard work, it is true, but very rewarding with lots of low level, simulated attack profiles, live strafe, bombing and rocketing at Pembrey range.
But when the Hawk appeared on the scene, it replaced Gnat/Hunter at Valley AND Hunter at TWU. A lot of savings could therefore be made in type conversion. But Valley was still 'flying training' and TWU was still 'tactical training' That changed further when the rather despised 'mirror image' scheme started, Chivenor closed and everything went to Valley. Which meant a lot of wasted time with detachments at St Athan for weaponeering at nearby Pembrey.
Along came more technologically advanced front line jets and training on the Hawk T2. 'Fast jet driving tests' apart, flying the aircraft isn't as demanding as the Gnat / Hunter as it is safer. has vastly better cockpit ergonomics and systems and live weaponeering is no longer deemed necessary. So no waiting for the cloud to lift at Pembrey any more, or for someone to shoot the flag off the back of Puddy's Meteor ending the air-to-air range sortie at Hartland . Synthetic training systems are in greater use - all we had at Brawdy was a Hunter sim and bits from crashed aircraft nailed together to teach gunsight control etc.! Low level planning now uses an automated system rather than paper maps and gorilla snot glue; also I would doubt whether 'sight piccy' drawings are necessary given the HUD symbology now available. No-one could possibly prefer the faff of sorting out half a dozen Hunter cine mags on the way to the range, of that I'm sure!
So yes, the new era training is hugely different to that of previous years. Whether students and staff really interact in the air as they did in the programme I do not know. Lucky blighters will eventually fly F-35B or Typhoon; the failure rate is quite reasonable these days but hard work is still needed, albeit with a different emphasis.
It's just such a pity that the RAF has been forced into MFTS though - but I suppose that'll give instructors greater opportunities to gain instructional experience than if they were merely biding their time champing at the bit to get back to the front line.
Signed, your Gramps.
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Hanging off the end of a thread
Posts: 32,763
Received 2,750 Likes
on
1,171 Posts
Did a stude actually say it had taken NINE years to get form attestation to Valley - is that all I the training machine or is he a transfer fro another branch or commissioned from airman service. If true makes a nonsense of the age limitations for entry to aircrew training
Did a stude actually say it had taken NINE years to get form attestation to Valley - is that all I the training machine or is he a transfer fro another branch or commissioned from airman service. If true makes a nonsense of the age limitations for entry to aircrew training