Jump to content
Baseops Forums

Hawg15

Registered User
  • Content Count

    74
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    5

Hawg15 last won the day on January 26

Hawg15 had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

135 Excellent

Recent Profile Visitors

721 profile views
  1. I don’t think people would really care as long as they aren't going to fighters. T-38s don’t teach you how to be tactical, they teach you how to fly a fighter aircraft. I’d be more worried about letting the plethora of AMC Q3 everyone for dumb shit dbags into other communities than what they trained in. Although I am against letting them in fighters, but its because its a negative return on investment for the fighter squadron. They will be a better pilots from a basic airmanship standpoint than new guys, but not typically in the tactical flying that makes up being a fighter pilot. I’ve seen FAIPs and crosstrain guys (from non fighters) flow through and they are rarely anymore proficient than the LTs at flying outside of the basics. One of the last few classes even had a 1,000hr + FAIP get washed out for tac admin stuff. Then, once they are out in ops, the squadron has a senior capt, in some cases a maj, who is a basic, inexperienced wingman, when I need one that is an IP for all the LTs and junior Capts that will actually remain in ops for the foreseeable future who are waiting for their 2flug, 4flug, FAC, Sandy 4-1, etc. A fighter crosstrain expedites the whole upgrade process significantly and has a much smaller impact.
  2. IMO that is what kills the light attack altogether if short, unprepared runways is a necessity. The impact of just hardpoints alone on performance is significant, it’s a huge impact when adding bombs and different sorts of pods. The drag hurts even more than the weight. Even jets that have tons of power compared to the hawg feel the struggle when they are heavy and it’s hot on takeoffs. You either will require something that’s in the realm of an actual fighter to get off the ground with some 38s, or sacrifice having a payload that makes you relevant. And if we are talking two engine aircraft that will have SERC requirements here then you can just forget about it. It sounds like they need a helicopter, not fixed wing. If all they want is apkws duct tape that shit onto some U-28s.
  3. There is no measurable or attainable stipulations for withdrawal in their proposal. It’s just a vague “it can’t threaten us” that will be used to oppose anyone who tries to stop sending our kids to die in a pointless conflict that started before they were even born and accomplishes nothing. Anyone who actually supports troops in Afghanistan is part of the problem in our government and military. There isn’t a good reason to be there, or a good outcome, Russia and now the US has proven that.
  4. Are they just not having a lot of 38 studs right now, or are they back to fing them over with the heavies that T-1s don’t want?
  5. That’s BS. I’d follow above guidance. And LOR for something that isn’t illegal and isn’t taking place on government property/time/to personnel/in uniform is ridiculous. It may have been in poor taste, but it sounds like someone who was upset you don’t agree with their personal viewpoints.
  6. Go all in with pilot. It’s a bunch of nonners telling you this BS. If you’re not a DO or CC, you are a pilot first, not an officer. I don’t give a shit how well you write an MFR, I care how well you can kill the enemy that’s threatening the dudes on the ground, how efficiently you can AR the assets that need to get back to the fight, etc. If you’re not spending at least 50% of your work day on becoming a better pilot you are wrong. The nonners are officers first, your job is to actively participate in the fight, not manage those who do.
  7. How am I supposed to get at least 69% of my pee in a bag while flying and sitting down with a 2 piece, wearing a g suit, and a harness? Do they zip up more than normal pants?
  8. Yeah, the last thing I want is to fly an 8 hour sortie with the G-suit jamming the belt and all the weird buttons And extra fabric into me all awkwardly. So to speak.
  9. BFM teaches broad spectrum of skills and has been directly used in recent combat. Saying the last instance of BFM was a guns kill in Vietnam is complete bullshit. That’s more my issue. We have AETC warriors who have spent their whole career there and are decades disconnected with ops. Then they spread this BS to students and kill their interest in flying fighters because they have no understanding of any fighter community. I never said scores of people have died doing them, I said that mishaps, some which involve fatalities, have and will continue to happen for no value to the end user from them (the CAF). It’s not 1970 where we are fine with crashing aircraft on a monthly basis, and AETC T-38s as a whole haven’t been doing too hot.
  10. It’s evident you haven’t seen the HUD tape, and don’t know of what went on in Syria. I doubt you’re going to find any fighter pilot actually doing the job from this century who will agree with you that merging with aircraft and maneuvering isn’t BFM. I also wasn’t aware you could take min range missile shots and not have maneuvered yourself into a WEZ. Maneuver in relation to the bandit is like one of the key aspects of BFM gospel, written everywhere, that is recited like a cult by air to air guys.
  11. I’d argue that you need to watch the Navy F-18-Syrian Su engagement, and really learn anything about what ops were like in Syria. BFM isn’t just going for guns, and ROE often requires a visual identification and signaling on guard/headbutt before engaging. Getting close to, merging, and even shooting down not so friendly aircraft has been an occurrence in the very recent past. Now, while fun to do, I have never seen a legit necessity of a form landing.
  12. We have plenty of VFR departures and recoveries. Some MOAs require IFR due to how center manages them and they can get temperamental if you show up VFR. The range complex is VFR. Standard recovery isn’t typically initial, it’s a TRP. Other fighters do VR and IR routes, but that’s no something we do often. We typically just fly around the range at 100-300ft along a route we plan beforehand or on ingress.
  13. I’d bet money it’s not the first mishap on a form landing or takeoff in the 38. I know a guy who punched out on a form takeoff. I don’t see how landing adds any benefit to the approach. It doesn’t help develop any skill I need in my wingman, and many fighter pilots much more experienced than a student, and most UPT instructors (who have 0 fighter experience) have died doing them. Including the IP at Vance who was experienced in super hornets, vipers, and the T-38. Did you know in many fighters we aren’t even allowed to do a touch and go? Your wheels don’t touch the ground until it’s your full stop. Now I don’t think we should stop them in the 38. On the topic of VFR, it’s how we do most of our flying, yet it was never done in UPT in more than 1 flight from what I remember.
  14. We don’t even have a VOR in the A-10. If your SID/STAR only uses tacans then I can fly it, but I’m still going to say unable. A fighters GPS is made for weapons employment, not navigation. They can only hold a small number of navigation waypoints, and I can only edit the grids and names of the 50 mission waypoints.
  15. Formation landings and takeoffs have always been considered a risk with pilots being against them as long as I’ve been in fighters. The Vance incident was just the perfect example of why. TRs are written in blood. It shouldn’t have to be a daily occurrence before it’s addressed. Risk in our world has to be accepted for a purpose. There is no benefit in a form landing or takeoff to justify acceptIng the risks. I don’t want to be near someone if I lose an engine, have to punch off my stores, or punch out.
×
×
  • Create New...