RAF C-130K Upgrade
Ecce Homo! Loquitur...
Thread Starter
RAF C-130K Upgrade
Obviously a bit of life left in the old dog yet.
Jane's:
The UK Royal Air Force is to have part of its long-term fleet of 25 Lockheed C-130K Hercules C.1 airlifters equipped with what is described as "an enhanced vision system". Marshall Aerospace of Cambridge, UK, was appointed prime contractor and systems integrator under the terms of a contract awarded this summer.
As aircraft design authority (under Lockheed Martin auspices), Marshall is leading a team comprising the following:
· BAE Systems Avionics, providing the Titan 385 multisensor turret, a fixed low-light TV camera array and an imaging framing store; plus a Honeywell 764G embedded GPS/inertial navigation system which includes the BAE Systems TERPROM terrain-awareness and warning system.
· QinetiQ, providing an advanced mission computer and sensor-augmented display image enhancement system.
· BarcoView, providing flat-panel avionics displays.
· Io Limited, providing data-entry and audio-warning systems.
· Goodrich Sensor Systems, providing the digital air-data computer and a total air- temperature sensor.
According to the UK's Defence Logistics Organisation, work on the contract.......began in August and is due to be completed by the beginning of 2004.....
Once complete, the Hercules equipped with this new system will have a state-of-the-art thermal night-vision system with many uses beyond enhancing flight safety at night.
Jane's:
The UK Royal Air Force is to have part of its long-term fleet of 25 Lockheed C-130K Hercules C.1 airlifters equipped with what is described as "an enhanced vision system". Marshall Aerospace of Cambridge, UK, was appointed prime contractor and systems integrator under the terms of a contract awarded this summer.
As aircraft design authority (under Lockheed Martin auspices), Marshall is leading a team comprising the following:
· BAE Systems Avionics, providing the Titan 385 multisensor turret, a fixed low-light TV camera array and an imaging framing store; plus a Honeywell 764G embedded GPS/inertial navigation system which includes the BAE Systems TERPROM terrain-awareness and warning system.
· QinetiQ, providing an advanced mission computer and sensor-augmented display image enhancement system.
· BarcoView, providing flat-panel avionics displays.
· Io Limited, providing data-entry and audio-warning systems.
· Goodrich Sensor Systems, providing the digital air-data computer and a total air- temperature sensor.
According to the UK's Defence Logistics Organisation, work on the contract.......began in August and is due to be completed by the beginning of 2004.....
Once complete, the Hercules equipped with this new system will have a state-of-the-art thermal night-vision system with many uses beyond enhancing flight safety at night.
Last edited by ORAC; 4th Nov 2002 at 20:02.
That was the original idea.
However, in the interest of saving cash and keeping Fatty Brown in office, they've come up with a simpler solution......
CLEAN THE DAMN WINDSCREEN!!
However, in the interest of saving cash and keeping Fatty Brown in office, they've come up with a simpler solution......
CLEAN THE DAMN WINDSCREEN!!
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: States sometimes
Posts: 96
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Yea, I think its based on the South African upgrade where they went for a glass cockpit plus other gucci kit, yet still kept the Nav and Air Eng!!!? Another fine example of Smart Procurement. Anyway, whatever upgrades the K gets it won't be able to hold a candle to the J.
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: London
Posts: 4
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Good Mickey,
Nothing whatsoever to do with the SAAF mod. Now let's see, the RAF are providing covert low level vision capability for C-130K's, what's the betting it's for a quantity of 6 aircraft? Now what do the 6 C1's that the RAF still have do?
Proone
.......I'm not here.........................
Nothing whatsoever to do with the SAAF mod. Now let's see, the RAF are providing covert low level vision capability for C-130K's, what's the betting it's for a quantity of 6 aircraft? Now what do the 6 C1's that the RAF still have do?
Proone
.......I'm not here.........................
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 105
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
What are we doing?
The role these ac are intended to fill can be done by the J, only done better – and that’s not my opinion but that of a number of pilots and ALMs on the J that have also spent a lot of time in the particular role we’re talking about.
Also these particular K frames are already an electrical nightmare – new kit integrated into an old airframe using a system of springs, wires and sealing wax. Why even try when we have an ac that is virtually plug n play - and could do the job to such good effect?
The role these ac are intended to fill can be done by the J, only done better – and that’s not my opinion but that of a number of pilots and ALMs on the J that have also spent a lot of time in the particular role we’re talking about.
Also these particular K frames are already an electrical nightmare – new kit integrated into an old airframe using a system of springs, wires and sealing wax. Why even try when we have an ac that is virtually plug n play - and could do the job to such good effect?
Join Date: May 2001
Location: uk
Posts: 215
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Roboalbert
J model fantastic blah blah blah. J model plug and play blah blah. Your posts are always the same mate. I wish everything in life was as good as the J model!
Maybe it could replace the Jaguar and the GR7 as well.
Did the original post ask you whether the J model could do a better job than the K? And as for role knowledge....I ask you!
Stick to trucking old boy!
J model fantastic blah blah blah. J model plug and play blah blah. Your posts are always the same mate. I wish everything in life was as good as the J model!
Maybe it could replace the Jaguar and the GR7 as well.
Did the original post ask you whether the J model could do a better job than the K? And as for role knowledge....I ask you!
Stick to trucking old boy!
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 105
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Rude by name Rude by nature
Sorry but if you look, the opinions on which ac could do the job in question better were not mine – I merely repeated those of a couple of people who have a great deal of experience in that particular area. As for the ‘J model fantastic blah blah blah’ – well sorry mate but that’s the truth.
The original post certainly begs the question what are we doing. The airframes to be upgraded are s*****d – why not spend the money on an ac that will give a better return over the long term.
Maybe the money would be better spent on new undercarriages for those Mk1s.
Sorry but if you look, the opinions on which ac could do the job in question better were not mine – I merely repeated those of a couple of people who have a great deal of experience in that particular area. As for the ‘J model fantastic blah blah blah’ – well sorry mate but that’s the truth.
The original post certainly begs the question what are we doing. The airframes to be upgraded are s*****d – why not spend the money on an ac that will give a better return over the long term.
Maybe the money would be better spent on new undercarriages for those Mk1s.
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Swindon
Posts: 14
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Robo,
Merely stating comments you've heard from J boys will always have a biased edge to them. The J IS a good aircraft and MOST LIKELY will fill the role we are talking about, however the crew complement should change for that role.
Anyone who has ever flown knows that pilot performance is inversely proportional to information inputs, either visually or audible. I have flown on missions on the K where pilot overload was becoming noticeable due to the amount of information trying to be assimilated by the handling pilot. When you start to realise that you might have AWACS info on one radio, interplane on another, contact with the troops on yet a third radio, normal intercom usage, satcom info coming into your headset in one go, that's a large amount of traffic to prioritise and digest. The loadie WILL be down the back during an infil, or exfil and so won't be on the flight deck to help out. Throw in some audio warnings from your DAS and possibly a minor technical snag and I would have to say that flying ability WOULD SERIOUSLY be degraded!
Technically the aircraft is very good and will only get better with more upgrades, but please let's be realistic about the crew manning for the more esoteric roles. I have no preference for Eng/Nav, merely would like to see that third person there. I don't agree with it being another pilot, but another crew member whose prorities are away from up/down, left/right....! This would give a more balanced view and allow the pilots to concentrate on flying/navigating.
Times are changing and we have to move forward, but let's walk first before sprinting......
Merely stating comments you've heard from J boys will always have a biased edge to them. The J IS a good aircraft and MOST LIKELY will fill the role we are talking about, however the crew complement should change for that role.
Anyone who has ever flown knows that pilot performance is inversely proportional to information inputs, either visually or audible. I have flown on missions on the K where pilot overload was becoming noticeable due to the amount of information trying to be assimilated by the handling pilot. When you start to realise that you might have AWACS info on one radio, interplane on another, contact with the troops on yet a third radio, normal intercom usage, satcom info coming into your headset in one go, that's a large amount of traffic to prioritise and digest. The loadie WILL be down the back during an infil, or exfil and so won't be on the flight deck to help out. Throw in some audio warnings from your DAS and possibly a minor technical snag and I would have to say that flying ability WOULD SERIOUSLY be degraded!
Technically the aircraft is very good and will only get better with more upgrades, but please let's be realistic about the crew manning for the more esoteric roles. I have no preference for Eng/Nav, merely would like to see that third person there. I don't agree with it being another pilot, but another crew member whose prorities are away from up/down, left/right....! This would give a more balanced view and allow the pilots to concentrate on flying/navigating.
Times are changing and we have to move forward, but let's walk first before sprinting......
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Wilts
Age: 57
Posts: 35
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Darkside 2
'Anyone who has ever flown knows that pilot performance is inversely proportional to information inputs, either visually or audible. I have flown on missions on the K where pilot overload was becoming noticeable due to the amount of information trying to be assimilated by the handling pilot'
You've hit it on the head mate. Exactly where was that information that was making the pilot's workload so noticeable coming from? AUDIBLE - Could it perhaps have been from the continual competition that exists between the Nav and Co to navigate 50 yds left of a dead tree stump because the system has not allowed them to utilise a perfectly good bit of equipment that has been fitted since Gulf War 1? VISUAL - The J HUD provides all the information and more than what is ever available on the K.
'When you start to realise that you might have AWACS info on one radio, interplane on another, contact with the troops on yet a third radio, normal intercom usage, satcom info coming into your headset in one go, that's a large amount of traffic to prioritise and digest'.
Perhaps thats why the J crews from day one on the Tac Cse will be trained and will be expected to communicate, authenticate and pass timely information to/from C3 etc etc etc. If the LM is available he will back up the PNF (Pilot-Non-Flying or WSO depending on your open-mindness), however, two pilots will be expected to achieve (and by the way can achieve) the whole gambit.
'However the crew complement should change for that role'.
How can you on one hand challenge Robo with statements like
'Merely stating comments you've heard from J boys will always have a biased edge to them' yet state yourself 'however the crew complement should change for that role'. You have obviously a biased opinion yourself?
'This would give a more balanced view and allow the pilots to concentrate on flying/navigating'.
The pilots are more than capable of flying and navigating with what the aircraft already has - they do not require a balanced view - unless of course they're double assymetric - then again the HUD even shows that!.
Finally, 'Times are changing and we have to move forward, but let's walk first before sprinting......'
I believe this comment should be directly reversed back to the likes of yourselves. Times have changed and the quicker we all (the RAF) realise the potential of modern technology then the better we will be able to prosecute our business.
'Sir, you are drunk'.......'Madam, in the morning I shall be sober and you will still be ugly'
'Anyone who has ever flown knows that pilot performance is inversely proportional to information inputs, either visually or audible. I have flown on missions on the K where pilot overload was becoming noticeable due to the amount of information trying to be assimilated by the handling pilot'
You've hit it on the head mate. Exactly where was that information that was making the pilot's workload so noticeable coming from? AUDIBLE - Could it perhaps have been from the continual competition that exists between the Nav and Co to navigate 50 yds left of a dead tree stump because the system has not allowed them to utilise a perfectly good bit of equipment that has been fitted since Gulf War 1? VISUAL - The J HUD provides all the information and more than what is ever available on the K.
'When you start to realise that you might have AWACS info on one radio, interplane on another, contact with the troops on yet a third radio, normal intercom usage, satcom info coming into your headset in one go, that's a large amount of traffic to prioritise and digest'.
Perhaps thats why the J crews from day one on the Tac Cse will be trained and will be expected to communicate, authenticate and pass timely information to/from C3 etc etc etc. If the LM is available he will back up the PNF (Pilot-Non-Flying or WSO depending on your open-mindness), however, two pilots will be expected to achieve (and by the way can achieve) the whole gambit.
'However the crew complement should change for that role'.
How can you on one hand challenge Robo with statements like
'Merely stating comments you've heard from J boys will always have a biased edge to them' yet state yourself 'however the crew complement should change for that role'. You have obviously a biased opinion yourself?
'This would give a more balanced view and allow the pilots to concentrate on flying/navigating'.
The pilots are more than capable of flying and navigating with what the aircraft already has - they do not require a balanced view - unless of course they're double assymetric - then again the HUD even shows that!.
Finally, 'Times are changing and we have to move forward, but let's walk first before sprinting......'
I believe this comment should be directly reversed back to the likes of yourselves. Times have changed and the quicker we all (the RAF) realise the potential of modern technology then the better we will be able to prosecute our business.
'Sir, you are drunk'.......'Madam, in the morning I shall be sober and you will still be ugly'
A few years ago when certain Liars from Lockheed came to extol the virtues of their forthcoming digitally-remastered Albert, they did at least concede that an 'auxiliary crew station' could be provided for more demanding roles than A-to-B $hit-shifting. So far TS or helicopter AAR, it was envisaged that an extra crew bod would be carried.
Do our C130Js have the AuxCS?? Or was it yet another Lockheed porky....
Do our C130Js have the AuxCS?? Or was it yet another Lockheed porky....
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 105
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Darkside 2
Sorry just to clarify I am one of the J boys – so yes that probably does make me biased, since I know what the ac is and can do.
However, I say again, the views were from experienced K guys who now fly the J and have spent most of their fairly lengthy careers involved in “the more esoteric roles” you elude to. Interestingly TS course development would seem to suggest that the pilot workload in the TS environment is considerably lower in the J.
Perhaps that because of the way the information is presented to the crews.
‘Anyone who has ever flown knows that pilot performance is inversely proportional to information inputs, either visually or audible’ – bit of a sweeping statement really.
Yes I guess its true if the information comes from five other voices on a noisy intercom, a random scattering of warning lights and more dials than you can shake a stick at. If however the information is presented in a simple graphical form lying in the pilot’s field of view then assimilating information becomes a lot easier. Radios wise - well how strange that on a recent TS exercise the only ac to pick up an all important HF message was a J.
Facilitator obviously has his own views as to whether or not the ac needs an extra someone in the third seat for more demanding roles. I think however we won’t really know until it’s tried. However what's your point - some K crews will carry an extra person for certain roles so I guess there still isn’t that much spare capacity among a five man crew.
The costly bespoke upgrades we are talking about presumably means that these half dozen very tired C1s are going to soldier on in this particular role for the next 5 to 10 years. The TS courses start in the New Year and by the time the kit arrives for the C1s the J will be well established as an airdrop platform.
Its time someone bit the bullet and realised that what we really need are half a dozen J frames with FLIR and a full DAS. The stuff will bolt straight into the ac’s avionics racks and displays and will give us a platform that will do the job for many years to come.
hush my mouth
Sorry just to clarify I am one of the J boys – so yes that probably does make me biased, since I know what the ac is and can do.
However, I say again, the views were from experienced K guys who now fly the J and have spent most of their fairly lengthy careers involved in “the more esoteric roles” you elude to. Interestingly TS course development would seem to suggest that the pilot workload in the TS environment is considerably lower in the J.
Perhaps that because of the way the information is presented to the crews.
‘Anyone who has ever flown knows that pilot performance is inversely proportional to information inputs, either visually or audible’ – bit of a sweeping statement really.
Yes I guess its true if the information comes from five other voices on a noisy intercom, a random scattering of warning lights and more dials than you can shake a stick at. If however the information is presented in a simple graphical form lying in the pilot’s field of view then assimilating information becomes a lot easier. Radios wise - well how strange that on a recent TS exercise the only ac to pick up an all important HF message was a J.
Facilitator obviously has his own views as to whether or not the ac needs an extra someone in the third seat for more demanding roles. I think however we won’t really know until it’s tried. However what's your point - some K crews will carry an extra person for certain roles so I guess there still isn’t that much spare capacity among a five man crew.
The costly bespoke upgrades we are talking about presumably means that these half dozen very tired C1s are going to soldier on in this particular role for the next 5 to 10 years. The TS courses start in the New Year and by the time the kit arrives for the C1s the J will be well established as an airdrop platform.
Its time someone bit the bullet and realised that what we really need are half a dozen J frames with FLIR and a full DAS. The stuff will bolt straight into the ac’s avionics racks and displays and will give us a platform that will do the job for many years to come.
hush my mouth
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Swindon
Posts: 14
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Facilitator,
I hope you have the credentials that you "have done the job" and are therefore able to justify your claim that the J model CAN do the job we are on about.
Of course I have a biased opinion.....I want to see the aircraft perform to it's utmost and as safe as possible...or did that escape your attention? I said I didn't care if it was a Nav/Eng, or PNF/WSO as you quite rightly pointed out from your so obvious two winged rhetoric. It is a shame that you didn't get to fly Harriers or Jags, and then you could have been even happier all by yourself!
If you have "done the job", then you should have known that in certain threat environments the loadie will be in the bubble, heads out for all the nasties that are trying to shoot you out of the sky. For this and the requirement for him to be down the back a lot of the time he cannot be relied upon to be there to process the information I was on about. If you speak to any of the lads that have been involved in the operations conducted before Christmas, then you will not get much support for your insistance that the J can do everything. I completely agree with you that the navigation side is much simpler and that is a huge workload reduced and this all because the FMS is never wrong....or is it????
Your comment about how J crews will be trained to communicate, authenticate and reply to C3 elements timely is fine because war/conflicts always follow a clear set of rules and structures.......doesn't it???
I am not wishing to throw stones and so damage your ivory tower, but the Herc is a mighty beast and can't be tipped on it's arse and the afterburners shoved in to get out of trouble, or even use Martin Bakers wonderful invention that you clearly hanker after..........
Your comments have only confirmed that you are a "No stick/No vote man" and I am glad that you are on another type to me.
Happy flying........
I hope you have the credentials that you "have done the job" and are therefore able to justify your claim that the J model CAN do the job we are on about.
Of course I have a biased opinion.....I want to see the aircraft perform to it's utmost and as safe as possible...or did that escape your attention? I said I didn't care if it was a Nav/Eng, or PNF/WSO as you quite rightly pointed out from your so obvious two winged rhetoric. It is a shame that you didn't get to fly Harriers or Jags, and then you could have been even happier all by yourself!
If you have "done the job", then you should have known that in certain threat environments the loadie will be in the bubble, heads out for all the nasties that are trying to shoot you out of the sky. For this and the requirement for him to be down the back a lot of the time he cannot be relied upon to be there to process the information I was on about. If you speak to any of the lads that have been involved in the operations conducted before Christmas, then you will not get much support for your insistance that the J can do everything. I completely agree with you that the navigation side is much simpler and that is a huge workload reduced and this all because the FMS is never wrong....or is it????
Your comment about how J crews will be trained to communicate, authenticate and reply to C3 elements timely is fine because war/conflicts always follow a clear set of rules and structures.......doesn't it???
I am not wishing to throw stones and so damage your ivory tower, but the Herc is a mighty beast and can't be tipped on it's arse and the afterburners shoved in to get out of trouble, or even use Martin Bakers wonderful invention that you clearly hanker after..........
Your comments have only confirmed that you are a "No stick/No vote man" and I am glad that you are on another type to me.
Happy flying........
Ecce Homo! Loquitur...
Thread Starter
If I may interject into a family affair,
Whilst the J may have many wonderful abilities, it does not include the ability to procreate. We only ordered 25, enougth to replace half the fleet. Until, therefore, additional airframes are procured, the Ks will have to continue to serve. No one is going to order more new aircraft until the saga of the A-400M is settled; and if the A-400M is selected then the new airframes won't arrive till 2010-12 at the very earliest.
It therefore follows that the Ks are going to have "soldier on" for another 8-10 years regardless of how roles are shuffled around.
The only question to be answered is in which role(s). Which role would you suggest they could take to release Js to assume the TS task? In the meantime, the upgrade would seem cost effective at £20M in total.
Whilst the J may have many wonderful abilities, it does not include the ability to procreate. We only ordered 25, enougth to replace half the fleet. Until, therefore, additional airframes are procured, the Ks will have to continue to serve. No one is going to order more new aircraft until the saga of the A-400M is settled; and if the A-400M is selected then the new airframes won't arrive till 2010-12 at the very earliest.
It therefore follows that the Ks are going to have "soldier on" for another 8-10 years regardless of how roles are shuffled around.
The only question to be answered is in which role(s). Which role would you suggest they could take to release Js to assume the TS task? In the meantime, the upgrade would seem cost effective at £20M in total.
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: roughly near Everleigh DZ
Posts: 166
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
BEagle - yes there is an aux crew station with a seat that can slide between what was the eng posn and what was the nav stn.
RoboAlbert, Darkside2, Facilitator, - this "mine's better than yours slanging" does us no favours on this forum and is probably better saved for the bar at EGDL on a fri night.
I personally think the way foward is to look at how the two types compliment each other and that we should maybe consider a slightly larger outfit that operates both models, we could certainly learn from each other as well as creating significant advances in capability.
Maybe then our combined energies could be directed at the more important problem of working for a "shiney" Gp that likes to revel in our success without overtly supporting the "rule bending" often required to get the job done.
Well done, by the way, to anyone who may be reading and who may have been on a list recently and who may not have been named. I'm sure that whatever you did was carried out with strict adherance to GASOs!!!
RoboAlbert, Darkside2, Facilitator, - this "mine's better than yours slanging" does us no favours on this forum and is probably better saved for the bar at EGDL on a fri night.
I personally think the way foward is to look at how the two types compliment each other and that we should maybe consider a slightly larger outfit that operates both models, we could certainly learn from each other as well as creating significant advances in capability.
Maybe then our combined energies could be directed at the more important problem of working for a "shiney" Gp that likes to revel in our success without overtly supporting the "rule bending" often required to get the job done.
Well done, by the way, to anyone who may be reading and who may have been on a list recently and who may not have been named. I'm sure that whatever you did was carried out with strict adherance to GASOs!!!
Have to agree with DummyRun, what is it with you Hercules boys (and girls)? All you seem to do is attack each other in public. The loadies all seem to hate/resent the navs, the J boys fight and bicker with the K boys, etc, etc. You all come over very badly on what is a PUBLIC FORUM!
I'm old, when I joined the RAF there was a common enemy, the Russians. Those days are no more (thankfully), not sure who the enemy is now (probably Gordon Brown and the treasury!!), but we seem to have descended into fighting each other! Any attempt at logical arguement/discussion rapidly descends into mud slinging and barbed comments. I had some vague concept that WE ARE ALL ON THE SAME SIDE, but no doubt I am so old I am out of touch with the modern RAF!!!
I'm old, when I joined the RAF there was a common enemy, the Russians. Those days are no more (thankfully), not sure who the enemy is now (probably Gordon Brown and the treasury!!), but we seem to have descended into fighting each other! Any attempt at logical arguement/discussion rapidly descends into mud slinging and barbed comments. I had some vague concept that WE ARE ALL ON THE SAME SIDE, but no doubt I am so old I am out of touch with the modern RAF!!!
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Wiltshire
Posts: 16
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well said Dummyrun,
I am one of the Js main fans, and I have done the job in the past and observed very recent events. The J is the way ahead of course. It is a superb ac with much potential. It is a vast improvement over the good old ship in the low level (day and night) role - which of course it was built for. But I admit it is not yet ready for the most demanding tasks. If a few bits of kit were fitted it soon could be. Moding up the K may be a short term cost effective fix, but the end product will be less capable.
People should be looking at joint fleets, use each type at what it is good at in the short term. I don't know why darkside is so wound up because he couldn't be more wrong about facilitator - he is very much a multi crew man. Its just he has first hand experience of new technology. Darkside should see whats available before going off on one.
As for the third pilot station. we thought it might be necessary for some jobs. However, as things develop, this has been questioned and the jury is still out. The USMC have fitted out the old nav station in their tankers for use by either a third pilot or second loady. It now appears that for most missions this will not be required.
I am one of the Js main fans, and I have done the job in the past and observed very recent events. The J is the way ahead of course. It is a superb ac with much potential. It is a vast improvement over the good old ship in the low level (day and night) role - which of course it was built for. But I admit it is not yet ready for the most demanding tasks. If a few bits of kit were fitted it soon could be. Moding up the K may be a short term cost effective fix, but the end product will be less capable.
People should be looking at joint fleets, use each type at what it is good at in the short term. I don't know why darkside is so wound up because he couldn't be more wrong about facilitator - he is very much a multi crew man. Its just he has first hand experience of new technology. Darkside should see whats available before going off on one.
As for the third pilot station. we thought it might be necessary for some jobs. However, as things develop, this has been questioned and the jury is still out. The USMC have fitted out the old nav station in their tankers for use by either a third pilot or second loady. It now appears that for most missions this will not be required.
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Nellis of course...
Posts: 28
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
As a former operator of the sturdy K, and a current operator of the J, I have a great appreciation for the merits of both types. It is hugely entertaining to hear this 'I've got a steering wheel and you haven't' banter. Makes me laugh!
Facilitator is correct (and incidentally does have the credentials). The J can do the job, I have seen it. It can do the job when the strict set of rules goes out of the DV window. I have seen that too.
And as for Darkside2, have you ever flown on a J on a Tactical mission profile? If not I suggest you try it. But then again I guess your mind is already made up judging by the tone of your posts. No seat, no like it...
Facilitator is correct (and incidentally does have the credentials). The J can do the job, I have seen it. It can do the job when the strict set of rules goes out of the DV window. I have seen that too.
And as for Darkside2, have you ever flown on a J on a Tactical mission profile? If not I suggest you try it. But then again I guess your mind is already made up judging by the tone of your posts. No seat, no like it...
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: States sometimes
Posts: 96
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think that it is the K crews that need the upgrade judging by their recent efforts in SA. How many miles away from the DZ were the troops dropped?? (Staff demo to boot!!)
Hence the need for an Upgrade. The eyes on the old K navs need 3 monthly checks!!
At least when the J starts dropping full time we will no longer have to endure the dulcid tones of the Nav.'s "Red-on....green-on....red-on.....Lts out". Hes 'surplus' to requirements (he he)!!
At least when the J starts dropping full time we will no longer have to endure the dulcid tones of the Nav.'s "Red-on....green-on....red-on.....Lts out". Hes 'surplus' to requirements (he he)!!