Jump to content
Baseops Forums
Guest oliwoody

Track Selects and Assignment Nights

Recommended Posts

10 hours ago, dmginc said:

No, you're right.  I'll own it.  I should have put down the beer and google'd it before posting.  For some reason I thought AMC was only C-17's, C-5's, C-21's, and a few others I'm sure I'm forgetting.  Thought tankers were their own thing.

A SAC warrior at heart, that's all. NBD.

  • Like 3
  • Haha 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Reading through the posts, I'm somewhat shocked by the JSTARS, but the ACC heavies thing does make sense. Is this a long-term strategy, to make all ACC heavies go through T-38s or are they still going to drop those from T-1s as well?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Kiloalpha said:

Reading through the posts, I'm somewhat shocked by the JSTARS, but the ACC heavies thing does make sense. Is this a long-term strategy, to make all ACC heavies go through T-38s or are they still going to drop those from T-1s as well?

They’re dropping from T-1s primarily. As a T-38 student now in JSTARS, I can tell you almost none of the 38 syllabus carries over into this airframe. They don’t even let us talk on the radio while “monitoring the autopilot” 🙄

  • Haha 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I think if you’re flying you should talk on the radio.  I’m curious why people teach/practice the other way.  


Standard in the Herk community. Although after doing this for a while, it does get annoying to have to (for example) tell the co “tell them we’re ready for lower” when you’re PF and want to descend.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, tac airlifter said:

I think if you’re flying you should talk on the radio.  I’m curious why people teach/practice the other way.  

Because crew duties in the -1 says the PNF is there to get the ATIS and talk on the radios.

Edited by LookieRookie

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, LookieRookie said:

Because crew duties in the -1 says the PNF is there to get the ATIS and talk on the radios.

So -1 change FCIF is in order?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, tac airlifter said:

I think if you’re flying you should talk on the radio.  I’m curious why people teach/practice the other way.  

Because that's standard PM duties across all crew (civil and military) aircraft I'm aware of.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I remember being a new 130 CP and talking on the radio while the other guy flew.  If anything unusual happened, the pilot spent time telling me what to say then I’d say it.  To me it’s CRM degrading.  Anyway, when I was a 130 IP I liked to have the PF talk.  Every CP seemed to prefer it, and we’d stay engaged by swapping legs.

When I went to fly something  more tactical, the standard was PF talks because there’s a lot for the PNF to do.  It makes sense if the PNF is busy.

Understand it’s a standard in many communities and been done that way forever.  Not sure those are good reasons to continue, so I was curious what the advantage is to that method.  Sounds like “keeps the CP awake” is it?

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, tac airlifter said:

I remember being a new 130 CP and talking on the radio while the other guy flew.  If anything unusual happened, the pilot spent time telling me what to say then I’d say it.  To me it’s CRM degrading.  Anyway, when I was a 130 IP I liked to have the PF talk.  Every CP seemed to prefer it, and we’d stay engaged by swapping legs.

When I went to fly something  more tactical, the standard was PF talks because there’s a lot for the PNF to do.  It makes sense if the PNF is busy.

Understand it’s a standard in many communities and been done that way forever.  Not sure those are good reasons to continue, so I was curious what the advantage is to that method.  Sounds like “keeps the CP awake” is it?

Agreed, if the PF is task saturated it’s definitely helpful to delegate radios to the PNF (or other tasks for that matter) but 99% of the time it seems to make more sense to keep the radios with the PF. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This appears to be a fairly "mil-centric" discussion.  So, as someone who has only flown crew aircraft on the civilian side, I'm finding what seems to be a PF talking on the radio preference a surprise.  Maybe there's some mil specific situations that are driving this we airline guys don't deal with.  But, just flying A to B?  If we threw an equal number of airline guys into this thread, you'd be hard pressed to find any of them who would want the PF talking during normal ops.  So, I'll just throw this out for the sake of discussion and another viewpoint.

I'd vote PF does not talk on the radio.  If the PM (that's "pilot monitoring" - i.e. PNF in airline speak) isn't talking on the radio, what's he doing?  I think it does help him stay engaged and also tends to force some dialogue on items like wx deviations, climb/descent requests or any other changes to the status quo.  A PF who also has the radios is probably more likely to make a unilateral decision and request a course of action with ATC while not conferring with his PM which is going to degrade CRM.  As the PF, asking the other guy to request a descent or some other routine request is really not that inconvenient.

A non-normal or emergency situation, is about the only time you'll see airline guys having one pilot do the flying and talking.  It's very common in the airline world to give the radios and the aircraft to the FO while the Captain does some battle management, runs checklists, confers and gathers info from various sources and evaluates options.  He then presents the options to the FO for his input, makes a decision and depending on the circumstances, maybe take the a/c for landing or continue to monitor while taking the radios back from the FO.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Unnecessary, extraneous interplane chatter as far as I’m concerned. I’d rather spend that dead-air time talking about something meaningful like what kind of hot pockets the crew is whipping up. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

20180727_065533.thumb.jpg.c9b8907484c9cc7070bdfee80f748d82.jpgA small part of why I love the Viper...

Edited by Magnum
  • Like 2
  • Haha 2
  • Upvote 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20180727_065533.thumb.jpg.c9b8907484c9cc7070bdfee80f748d82.jpgA small part of why I love the Viper...

There’s nothing for the family model or is all of that spelled out in the v3?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, MooseAg03 said:


There’s nothing for the family model or is all of that spelled out in the v3?

Nothing

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Pilot Training Next (PTN) Drop
CAF-
2 x F-35
4 x F-16
MAF-
3 x C-17
2 x KC-10
1 x MC-130J
1 x C-146
1 x U-28


Are we still on course for the fighter guys to not do IFF? Anyone know?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, Bode said:

Are we still on course for the fighter guys to not do IFF? Anyone know?

Rumor is the Viper tracked guys are going to next Kelly B Course. Should be interesting.

Edited by Inertia17

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Pilot Training Next (PTN) Drop
CAF-
2 x F-35
4 x F-16
MAF-
3 x C-17
2 x KC-10
1 x MC-130J
1 x C-146
1 x U-28


So of the 20 who started, 15 were officers and 5 enlisted so it looks like 1 May have washed out. I tried to find articles about this, did these guys do any actual flying in the T-6 or something else? Sure seems like a fast timeline, the info I could find says it was supposed to be a year long program.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, MooseAg03 said:

So of the 20 who started, 15 were officers and 5 enlisted so it looks like 1 May have washed out. I tried to find articles about this, did these guys do any actual flying in the T-6 or something else? Sure seems like a fast timeline, the info I could find says it was supposed to be a year long program.

I believe it was ~30 hours flying in the T-6 in around 6 months.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
35 minutes ago, Inertia17 said:

I believe it was ~30 hours flying in the T-6 in around 6 months.

So their 31st hour will be in the single seat F-16? That seems like a crazy jump. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They had to have flown more than 30 hrs in 6 months, that'd be about 3 sorties per month if true. Please tell me that's a typo. Going from barely being able to find your own ass in a T-6 straight to a $90M jet with 40K thrust where a brand new wingman is expected to have the SA/decision making ability of a 4th gen flight lead...yep this is going to work well. 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now



×