PPRuNe Forums

PPRuNe Forums (https://www.pprune.org/)
-   Military Aviation (https://www.pprune.org/military-aviation-57/)
-   -   Mil Pilot - Nature or Nurture? (https://www.pprune.org/military-aviation/593508-mil-pilot-nature-nurture.html)

blimey 22nd Apr 2017 23:00

In agreement with LOMCEVAK, so many different skills:

Low level, leading a balbo, harry doggers, winning the debrief, weaponeering, radar, HOTAS, recce, basic handling, formation, aeros, formation aeros, instrument flying, number 3 in the flat turn at Deci with the boss at 4.

Some naturally good at one, distinctly average at another; the odd bloke disconcertingly good at everything. Horses for courses. Though however able you were, you'd always be better at it if you were well nurtured.

Having then to perform under the pressure of someone shooting at you, I would imagine would bring its own challenges.

SpazSinbad 23rd Apr 2017 00:56

My own training experiences are long ago with some expression of them in the 'RAAF 50th Anniversary' thread. http://www.pprune.org/military-aviat...h-reunion.html Interesting to me today are the new ways of RAAF training thusly COACH: 10 Apr 2017 (HEAPS more BUMPF at JUMP)

"...[SLDinfo] The RAAF has adopted a new approach, addressing physical, mental and cultural changes as the key means to get these results.
Air Combat Group Commander AirComm Roberton:
“Innovative training is about taking more of a coaching approach to the task. It is also about giving our trainees the mental and emotional tools to cope with the stress and the challenges to a better job of self-improvement as well.”

He argued that the sports business has provided a number of tools which the RAAF has adopted for fast jet pilot training, including a physical endurance training approach to handling G tolerance.

“It’s a change in mindset of our instructors as well. Some of our instructors now are involved far more in a coaching role, as opposed to just straight instruction.

“They are looking at helping pilots go though the process with far less of a ‘testing mindset’ as their primary focus of attention. [Caught me out a few times 50 years ago now] If you take the testing mindset out, people learn at different rates and you can accommodate that basic reality of teaching and learning.”... Shaping Cultural and Generational Change in the RAAF: The Perspective of Air Combat Group Commander Roberton | SLDInfo

AQAfive 23rd Apr 2017 19:14

OASC selection is really a case of convincing the chairman, the one in the middle, that on a cold damp February evening in the mess, he would find you interesting to chat to. As long as you pass the medical and any aptitude test, then his views are the important ones. The rest is window dressing, so they can write about why you failed to make the grade.

Many years ago a colleague decided to go for a branch commission. He was not only considered by his peers to be outstanding, the station commander, who had known him for some time, dispatched him with his personal recommendation. When he failed OASC because of a lack of leadership potential, his peers and superiors laughed at such a crass and wrong decision. When the Station Commander queried the decision of the board, especially as he had personally recommended the man, he was dismissed with the phrase that it was their decision and that was final.

So whether selection considers nature over nurture is really not an issue. As training progresses no doubt it becomes apparent and in truth we need a mixture of both. A team of leaders is not a team.

As an aside, I was selected for pilot training and as I was waiting for my OCTU course, the station air experience flight gave me a trip in a Chipmonk. Given the controls for the first time I grabbed the control column as if my life depended on it. The Chippy, of course, responded to my nervousness by trying to move in all planes of axis at once. Realising my plight the young pilot regained control explaining where I was going wrong. I must have missed his “you have control” announcement for as I was thinking about what to do with the column he announces “now you have got the idea”, I then realised the perfectly trimmed Chippy was flying by itself.

Guess I'm not a natural then. Oh and I failed OCTU so I never found out.

oxenos 24th Apr 2017 10:07

The issue of who you accept and how much time you give them also depends on how many pilots you need V. how many people want to join.
When I finished on Jet Provosts in '63, we were streamed onto either Gnats for potential aces, or Varsities for the rest. Needless to.say I got Varsities.
Late 70's and I was the chalk and talk pilot on the Nimrod conversion course. At that time,after basic training, pilots were being sent to Hawks, or chopped. The pilots for the Nimrod course were either second tourists from other multis, or pilots who had been sent to the Hawk and not made the grade. I could not understand why those not considered for FJ were not being given the equivalent of the Varsity course.
As well as the normal conversion courses for the Nimrod, we would do quick acquaint courses for senior officers, so that they have some background on the aircraft.
On one of these I asked the SO why we were scrapping people after basic who might make multi pilots, given a suitable course. He had spent some time as a Fairly SO in the training world, so he was a good one to ask.
He told me that when I had joined, the cutoff for accepting someone for pilot training was 100 points on the Aircrew selection board's assessment, the average would have been 110, with one or two up at 125. Because fewer people were applying they had had to lower the acceptance level to get enough recruits. There had then been a juggling act, where if the level was set too low, hardly any of the extra ones recruited made the grade, but if it was set too high, you would be turning away some who might make it. They had therefore come up with the idea that those who got through basic would all be sent to Hawks, and those who didn't make it on the Hawk would be sent to a multi course.
His punch line was " the ones we chop at the end of basic would have trouble riding a f*****g bicycle"
Not long afterwards the effect of the end of the cold war meant that numbers required dropped drastically, so who knows what the entry standard became. ( He assured me that they had made sure that the assessment system itself did not alter)

Rossian 24th Apr 2017 15:42

The "If you ain't FJ you ain't shit"........
 
..... mentality caused the ME world to lose a lot of potentially good operators.

My experience was watching Nimrod QFIs spending a lot of time building up a young man's confidence. They had either washed out at Valley or in two cases who come to mind, a FJ OCU. Those two went on to become very good squadron captains then squadron commanders and station commanders.

One did need a stern talking-to in the back bar one night along the lines of "Listen matey you failed that course, get over it, stop harking back to "when I was on....." and start trying to become the best co-pilot you can be". He went on to do well and is a thoroughly nice chap with it. (Even though he's a pilot and VSO)

I speak as a non-pilot (as oxenos will no doubt attest to in a micrisec) but I watched a fair number of young men going through that evolution from down the back.

The Ancient Mariner

Pontius Navigator 24th Apr 2017 16:58

TAM, WM per chance though I don't recall any bitching.

Rossian 24th Apr 2017 17:37

Nah PN....
 
..... a bit later than that. As an aside one of them asked to come off the OCU because he wasn't enjoying it although he was doing OK. The system answer was to send him to the shrinks at Wroughton not understanding why one wouldn't want to be a FJ pilot.
When it came to a big crew he had the unusual ability to get people to WANT to work for him. It was interesting to watch.

The Ancient Mariner

Pontius Navigator 24th Apr 2017 20:25

Rossian, thank you. I do know another ex-F4 jock who had never really enjoyed the 'toom and had an accident at Gib despite telling the sqn cdr, a nav (aka smiling knife) that he needed more practise after his leave before deploying to Gib. I think he did very well on Nimrods.


All times are GMT. The time now is 21:15.


Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.