USN Seek F-35C Surrogate Training Aircraft
According to this article on the T-38s used as companion trainer to the B-2, the difference between the aircraft is exactly the point as they are used for exercising different parts of the pilots’ skill set. Interesting that they make the (few) ab-initios fly 2.5 years in the T-38 before even touching a B-2, which speaks to BV’s point.
Sims will increasingly be the best way to carry out tactical training; the primary gaps I can see are physiological (tolerance to ‘g’, airsickness and disorientation) and general airmanship. The latter could potentially be overcome if the synthetic environment was made more realistic in terms of things like ATC, other ‘random’ traffic, radio chatter, weather, etc - today’s sims are a rather sterile environment where the focus is very much on the exercise.
Sims will increasingly be the best way to carry out tactical training; the primary gaps I can see are physiological (tolerance to ‘g’, airsickness and disorientation) and general airmanship. The latter could potentially be overcome if the synthetic environment was made more realistic in terms of things like ATC, other ‘random’ traffic, radio chatter, weather, etc - today’s sims are a rather sterile environment where the focus is very much on the exercise.
3 decades ago when MAC and SAC existed, likes of 2nd Bomb Wing had a cadre of then ATC T-38 Detachment for Accelerated Co-Pilot Enrichment Training or Seymour-Johnson ...so co-pilots on Kc-10 would build up hours in T-38...or T-37.
Cheers
Re: the T-38 companion trainers
USAF switch to dual-track training from T-37/T-38 universal pilot concept for all (USN also utilizes dual-track) took the TTB track students from T-37/T-6 into T-1s for advanced training. FAT track students flew T-38s, next up T-7s. (USN used C-12s/T-1s for P-3/P-8/COD or E-6 types and T-45s for the fighter types.) Lots of good CRM training in T-1s.
It's humorous to me that USAF has to put the bomber types back in the T-38 to get what they really want, notably before even getting into the lowly co-pilot seat to use that wonderful CRM stuff. But they've done currency companions for years....BUFFs had T-38 companions, Tankers used T-37s. Previously in the interest of reduced $$$, not necessarily upgraded skills, just not reduced skills....enrichment?.
And re: simulation/synthetics
It's very possible these days that some of the simulation doubters flew as passengers on an airliner where the first landing was the new captain's first landing in the actual aircraft type. And with High Level Architecture Linking, all those extra airmanship promoting features (Realistic wx as well as ATC/AWACS/GCI, random traffic, etc.) can be synched and incorporated in the multi-cockpit simulations.
But I also think it's questionable for front-line fighter drivers not to be in the primary aircraft for at least 30 hours a month (ha ha), maybe as low as 20 with quality simulations available. I got 8600 mil actual fighter/trainer hours in 24 years which comes out to average 29.8 hours a month....just about right.
And I don't think it's prudent to put only 2nd tour folks in F-35s, you need the lower grade types to tend the squadron coffee bar (and in the old days stock the beer cooler).
USAF switch to dual-track training from T-37/T-38 universal pilot concept for all (USN also utilizes dual-track) took the TTB track students from T-37/T-6 into T-1s for advanced training. FAT track students flew T-38s, next up T-7s. (USN used C-12s/T-1s for P-3/P-8/COD or E-6 types and T-45s for the fighter types.) Lots of good CRM training in T-1s.
It's humorous to me that USAF has to put the bomber types back in the T-38 to get what they really want, notably before even getting into the lowly co-pilot seat to use that wonderful CRM stuff. But they've done currency companions for years....BUFFs had T-38 companions, Tankers used T-37s. Previously in the interest of reduced $$$, not necessarily upgraded skills, just not reduced skills....enrichment?.
And re: simulation/synthetics
It's very possible these days that some of the simulation doubters flew as passengers on an airliner where the first landing was the new captain's first landing in the actual aircraft type. And with High Level Architecture Linking, all those extra airmanship promoting features (Realistic wx as well as ATC/AWACS/GCI, random traffic, etc.) can be synched and incorporated in the multi-cockpit simulations.
But I also think it's questionable for front-line fighter drivers not to be in the primary aircraft for at least 30 hours a month (ha ha), maybe as low as 20 with quality simulations available. I got 8600 mil actual fighter/trainer hours in 24 years which comes out to average 29.8 hours a month....just about right.
And I don't think it's prudent to put only 2nd tour folks in F-35s, you need the lower grade types to tend the squadron coffee bar (and in the old days stock the beer cooler).
