Dude, 14" of ice and snow on the ground, 20 degrees F. A nice cab uncorked and mini crab cakes from Costco in the oven!
-
Please take a moment and update your account profile. If you have an updated account profile with basic information on why you are on Air Warriors it will help other people respond to your posts. How do you update your profile you ask?
Go here:
Edit Account Details and Profile
Random Griz Aviation Musings
- Thread starter Griz882
- Start date
hlg6016
A/C Wings Here
My time was before the J model. It's hard for me to wrap my mind around someone seating on his thumb there in the center seat. I'll have to listen to this again after I've had some coffee. The crew coordination at the end has me shaking my head.
Last edited:
Unfortunately, not tracking any of the ops out there.
The 46 NATOPS is dated 2009, and yes has what some of us would call a modern avionics suite.
As far as "legacy suck', that is a matter of opinion.
The T-34C was a luxury (digital and A/C) compared to the T-28C (which I wouldn't trade that flight time for anything).
OMG, RMI and CDI on separate displays?... wah wah wah.
I remember the 46 having an NDB (no not an ADF) with a BFO (beat frequency oscillator) that allowed you to move the antenna and listen for the null in a tone.
New, glass, digital, etc. etc. is great, don't get me wrong.
But you knew you had a handle on understanding the system when you could fly a holding panel with only one VOR/TACAN or ADF. Having to switch back and forth between the two stations that identified the holding fix.
My personal opinion is that the initial training aircraft should be a simple as possible, with the minimum of glass on the panel. Allow for learning to fly, not learning to fly the system.
Back in the '70s, even going from a TH-57A to a TH-1L (HT-8 the HT-18) was quite a transition, done in a controlled training environment.
Now the SNA spends as much time (maybe more) learning systems, rather than flying.
Yes I'm an old gray aviator, but basics are basics, and are best taught without glitz, glamour, and glass.
Oh I miss the giant percolator urns in the ready room.
I don't know if anything's changed, but the USMC only did day drops as of around 10 years ago.
I can appreciate and agree about the idea of understanding fundamentals first, but given the jump in tech from the notional T-34 cockpit in Primary to what's now in Advanced and the fleet, it benefits the student to start them at a higher level so the jump isn't so great.
And this illustrates my point (and I'd argue counters yours). Why make it such a jump when you're also making a fairly large jump to the next type of airframe (fixed-wing to helos, prop to jets, SEL to MEL, etc)?
I'm not a basics/fundamentals hater, by any means. For example I think we're getting too reliant on GPS on the tactical level (see: ASW). But I also don't find it particularly useful for studs to have to learn how to fly an ADB approach when that flight time could be spent of something more valuable.
I've mentioned this before, but...gliders. Super cheap, easy to do in a minimal sense, no upper bound on doing well. Tons of stick and rudder. Energy management++. They learn formation flying (or catapults) from day one.
I couldn't agree more. This was already occurring in the '90s.
Trying to get people to just fly a TERF route with a chart and looking outside (and no GPS) was like asking to replace coffee in the ready room with fruit juice.
Come to New England…same cold, less snow…but howling winds that will keep any daring Cub pilot grounded!Up at Red Stewart airfield (40I) and these fuckers in the Cub are going at it! 19 degrees F. Hello Ice Man - Type I and Type iV fluid please!
Ballsy!
Then one might argue, approach pipeline selection from a different aspect, and have then go straight to their fleet aircraft training squadron.
Why waste time and money on "training" aircraft, squadrons, facilities, support organizations, PCS moves, and myriad other costs associated with traditional training.
This way there is no learning curve issues going from training to fleet aircraft.