di1630

Oh I’m not arguing to replace all or even a majority of flying with sims. I’m just saying that we CAN update and replace flown syllabus items with them and we should explore this and it’s being proven at the UPT/IFF level already. Which and where to cut/change will widely vary by airframe. I’d say on the fighter side the A-10 has the least potential for sim replacement due to the stick-rudder mission demand and jets like the F-22/35 which are more sensor based have the most potential but I think they already do rely on sims heavily vs other fighters. If time/money were unlimited, we’d do 100% flying. But F-22 cost what? $60k per hour? We also need to get real About updated missions. I was talking with a viper guy today who felt his community did too much A/A training vs his realistic real world combat role which he considered A/G. I don’t think he’s wrong. Yeah, I get this pisses people off. Example 5 years ago most Eurofighter pilots were claiming “not a pound for air to ground” (aka 90’s eagle pilots) and are now begging for a A/G role to stay relevant as they find themselves a 90’s 4th gen A/A fighter in a 2020 world. Heavies. I’m admittedly naive. I’d think you want to practice instruments in a sim and do real world mission stuff like assault landings and airdrop but maybe I’m underestimating the complexity of an ILS in a C-17. Good discussion guys, I’m not saying I’m right, I’m saying I believe I’m right...big difference. Sent from my iPhone using Baseops Network mobile app

An ILS to mins is the same execution as an ILS to wx cats except the numbers change. One just has a higher safety margin for error but I’ve never had an ILS with an error so great I couldn’t land and that’s counting the ones on raw avionics. With 2019 wind corrected steering bars etc, ILS practice should not be the reason we burn 69,000lbs of gas to practice vs a sim. Sent from my iPhone using Baseops Network mobile app

$70 less in my zip code...glad I’m grandfathered Sent from my iPhone using Baseops Network mobile app

I would expect the F-35/22 trainee to gain a lot of those skills in sims regarding tailored instrument events. As for heavies, I think the T-1 could be used as a sort of heavy track version of IFF. Build solid airmanship in T-6’s, have 10-15 T-1 flights built around your heavy skill set. I don’t have a lot of experience in crew aircraft but from sitting jumpseat in C-17 and C-5’s watching an IP look over the shoulder of a AC and copilot, I don’t see why a lot of the systems/EPs, instruments couldn’t be done in sims and the most of the learning on real missions with proper supervision. ....Like the airlines, who care about efficiency. I am admitting I may be naive on the heavy side so Spears accepted if there are good counterpoints. Sent from my iPhone using Baseops Network mobile app

Problem is real: we waste a lot of time/money teaching unnecessary skills and skimp in other areas because we are comfortable doing it the way it’s always been done. And on the heavy side: I’m not sure why they even need to fly so much vs sims. I always wondered what they were doing for so long in T-1’s. Why not just axe that phase and get them into sims in their primary jet. I can’t imagine a C-17 sim hour costs more than an actual hour in a T-1. Any heavy guys on here care to debate the finer points? Sent from my iPhone using Baseops Network mobile app

I was chatting with some old who retired 20+ years ago dudes the other day, they had flown F-4’s, vipers, eagles, hogs, the spectrum and they were asking about what the flying was like these days. A lot of “I can’t believe you guys don’t do xyz anymore! That’s all we did back in 19xx.” I did my best on an unclass level to explain our weapons and technology. Hearing things like the how PGMs work and the TGP capes blew their minds. The look on their faces when they heard the lowly A-10 from their day now had a color HMD, PGMs etc was classic. In the end, I realized that these guys were stuck in time and their legacy viper/hog/eagle was nothing like the ones of today. That’s why I am all for change and applaud our leadership for breaking the cycle of “well, that’s how we trained in 1995 and I turned out ok.” Sent from my iPhone using Baseops Network mobile app

I flew the tweet, dropped BDU’s from a T-38A with a manual pipper and I still have become completely reliant on datalink and other technology to the point that when it fails, it’s mission degradation. Yeah, I’m more comfortable than the young guys when some stuff fails but that doesn’t happen often. I’d hate to dust off my manual bombing skills on the fly. We were saying the same thing about datalink/HMD/PGM reliant Lt’s in 2012 and most of those guys we worried about “what if” have all been just fine whether it be combat in Syria or training at home. In 2003, my b-course IP’s were saying the same thing about my class because we had EGI and if that failed...watch out, those dumb f-ers can’t navigate with INS drift. Every generation is one computer glitch away from catastrophe, only to be saved by their tacan, eyesight and stby pipper. Sent from my iPhone using Baseops Network mobile app

No, I’m talking about how today’s new jets train for future peer fights. F-4’s without guns, I get it, I’ve heard it too many times to count and it’s valid to argue if the F-35 should have more gun, maneuvering ability etc but that ship has sailed and we are stuck with it. The contingency plans in 2019 generally aren’t “you might have to dust off those old fashioned fighter pilot skills” and I’d they are, you were sent into combat in the wrong airframe for the high end fight. Some airframes probably require a bit more legacy skills than others. A-10 for example operates a lot and always will where nose position and maneuvering is important. Other jets focus on running the electrics and staying as far from the fight as possible. For them, the current T-38 syllabus is less relevant. I’m not saying cut it all, I’m saying tailor it for the spectrum of jets a t-38 grad can go to, and the legacy “one size fits all” t-38 track is not the answer. F-16 is a great example where contingency plan in a big war may be “dust off some old school skills” but that is a remote contingency. But yes, a F-16 pilot probably needs IFF / b-course focus a bit more in some areas. T-38 is great for teaching certain flying aspects but a lot of those aspects have drastically decreased in relevance over the past decade or two. Sent from my iPhone using Baseops Network mobile app

In limited cases, yes. I heard the instructors could not tell a difference between them vs a UPT grad. Caveat, these people were super sharp which is why they were selected. It shows you can train a good product on minimal flying if you select the right people. This could go down the wormhole of are we as a AF selecting the best pilot candidates. I don’t think we do. Other variables...how is IFF doing on training a product? When I went thru, very little was relevant to what I saw in the b-course skills wise. It was BFM and dive bomb-centric with legacy wingman admin focus. Today, wingmen are expected to fly formations based off sensor cues at 6.9+ miles, work their systems and have tools like HMD and data links to free up flying workload so they can maneuver to a large bubble in space to release their PGM’s. It’s a far cry from following lead to vid your target and roll in for a weapons pass. Whole new world, I say embrace it, move on. Accept some short term pain and flailing while we experiment to make things better. *IFF has complained about the UPT product for as long as I’ve been in the USAF and I’ve seen specific people they thought were bad UPT products go on to be tactical leaders in our most advanced jets. Because guess what...being .2nm wide on the way to the MOA or setting bad aspect on a BFM set just doesn’t matter much in reality. Sent from my iPhone using Baseops Network mobile app

Sure, as of recently, the T-38 track was designed to produce the standard legacy wingman in attitude and aptitude. Tons of tac form, how to take direction as 2 some blatantly outdated things like a bunch of formation landings. The avg standard was based on setting the foundation for a basic F-16/F-15C wingman. We need to shift our training on the fighter side towards the “cough” 5th gen wingman mentality. Unfortunately the T-38 really can’t do a lot to prepare kids to fly jets like the F-35. I’d say airmanship, the basics of handling/tac form, form approaches are valid but there’s no reason to spend 20 flights focusing on tac turns. UPT next has shown that we can put the “right” people in fighters with a fraction of the training vs legacy UPT and they can excel. Of course kids going to legacy fighters might need some prep but those skills can be focused on in IFF tracks and polished in the B-course. I say cut the syllabus, place more focus on specialization during IFF to meet the needs of VASTLY different skill sets required in the spectrum of current fighter aircraft inventory. Sent from my iPhone using Baseops Network mobile app

What skills are missing with the grads going to heavies that AMC is complaining about? I’m amazed most deficiencies can’t be fixed via sims. And I’m of the opinion that changes need to happen across the board. We can prep guys on the fighter side much better for the realities of being a 2019 fighter pilot if we let go of some legacy thinking. Sent from my iPhone using Baseops Network mobile app

I was grandfathered under the old ATP test rules while I was overseas. I know I have 6 months to get it done from my return. Is that 6 months to the day or the end of the 6th calendar month? Sent from my iPhone using Baseops Network mobile app

In 18 years and I’d guess 500+ refuelings, I never joined up on the right so it’s been changed for a long time. Sent from my iPhone using Baseops Network mobile app

Anyone heard rumors on the FY20 ACP? Sent from my iPhone using Baseops Network mobile app

Where are all the old T-37’s that were in the boneyard 15 years back? Surprised there aren’t any private ones making the rounds. Sent from my iPhone using Baseops Network mobile app

Technology has advanced so far that if an airframe can be multi role, the pilot can handle it much easier now than 20 yrs ago. Some airframes like the A-10 really can’t be multi role, but you also don’t want an F-35 wheeling over the battlefield so niche single missions are still viable. Sent from my iPhone using Baseops Network mobile app

Why anyone with the option to buy F-35’s for $80mil a piece would instead go 4th gen is beyond me. Sent from my iPhone using Baseops Network mobile app

The EF2K is on life support only because the export market to countries that aren’t allowed to buy the F-35 like Kuwait/Saudi. Why would the Germans buy it and spend much more money on a much less capable airframe? Keeping jobs and €’s in the EU...which should tell you what you need to know about their tactical air priorities. Sent from my iPhone using Baseops Network mobile app

I really enjoyed Apache Warrior on Netflix about the first night of GW2 picking a fight with Iraq. Ballzy Sent from my iPhone using Baseops Network mobile app

Any info on take rates? FY19 should be in the books. Sent from my iPhone using Baseops Network mobile app

The left will vote for whoever CNN/MSNBC tells them is good and can beat trump. Let’s not get too far into them caring about issues. Tulsi has no chance because the media hasn’t pushed her. You guys are critically thinking about stuff when the reality is, the avg millennial dem wants to know what free stuff they are getting and who will make them feel better/scare them the least. They want this conveniently via social media or quick blurbs, nothing in depth. Not a Trump lover but I hope he wins by a landslide. The dem platform flat out scares me. Sent from my iPhone using Baseops Network mobile app

Thoughts on the communist....I mean democrat candidate debates? Sent from my iPhone using Baseops Network mobile app

Today’s social media and news is full of people outraged that we are abandoning the Kurds...most of those people had never heard of the Kurds. This was going to happen eventually. Sent from my iPhone using Baseops Network mobile app

Anyone know the channels of a group of people wanted to buy a trainer from the boneyard like a T-38? Sent from my iPhone using Baseops Network mobile app

I agree it’s probably too early to draw conclusions but given the number of people in this board who are opposed to change, I find it interesting that there are guys making it through. By the way, that info was from a LM instructor, not a VR proponent. Technology is changing tactics the way INS/GPS changed navigation. I think we should train to that and also face some unpopular realities about what legacy airframes will do mission-wise in the future. With PGMs and evolving roles, we can cut some training in some areas and shift that to other places. Sent from my iPhone using Baseops Network mobile app