Boeing or Lockheed?

[Flash]

By the way, my scenario was envisioned with the MMA as the plane without a NAV and with every Gucci nav system possible. The point was no one paid attention to them when they needed to. Go through an EP sim and you might be suprised where you end up flying in the middle of a somewhat benign EP and the evaluator deliberately flies just a little off course.

 

[UncleFester]

I think there will almost certainly be at least 2 NFOs in the back of the new plane; big-wing airplanes with large missions have long OTJ periods for new NFOs, just as there's a 3P-2P-PPC progression. Way too much to learn it all in the RAG. He/she will probably be called the NAV whether he actually does much navigation or not, though the job will probably be more akin to an Assistant TACCO.
As for the training pipeline, for pilots, my money is they'll expand the Tinker E-6 program with some trainer 737s, and shrink VT-31/35 just to keep the Herk/Hummer/Heavies pipelines alive. As long as the Nav is kicking in the money, I don't think the AF will have a problem with expansion.
For NFOs, I think they'll go to a program like what they do for E-2s now - send them on to the RAG after Intermediate and have them get winged there. I hear rumors they want to do that for the P-3 community anyway.
As for what they'll call it... since the 737 is already in the fleet as the C-40, maybe the PC-40? Nah, probably the P-8. "New airplane" and all.

 

[UncleFester]

It's always entertaining to watch the "nicknaming" process for new planes, too. I think there's actually a Congressional committee that does it now, which explains why it takes so long and the results usually suck. "Lancer"? "Spirit"? Come on.
I vote for "Buccanneer" or "Privateer" in memory of the WWII planes, seeing as how that's the current spirit of the age ("Texan"). Of course, those names also celebrate lawlessness, which is out of vogue in the Touchy Feely Corporate Navy.
Any other ideas?

 

[zab1001]

I think there will almost certainly be at least 2 NFOs in the back of the new plane; big-wing airplanes with large missions have long OTJ periods for new NFOs, just as there's a 3P-2P-PPC progression. Way too much to learn it all in the RAG. He/she will probably be called the NAV whether he actually does much navigation or not, though the job will probably be more akin to an Assistant TACCO.
As for the training pipeline, for pilots, my money is they'll expand the Tinker E-6 program with some trainer 737s, and shrink VT-31/35 just to keep the Herk/Hummer/Heavies pipelines alive. As long as the Nav is kicking in the money, I don't think the AF will have a problem with expansion.
For NFOs, I think they'll go to a program like what they do for E-2s now - send them on to the RAG after Intermediate and have them get winged there. I hear rumors they want to do that for the P-3 community anyway.
As for what they'll call it... since the 737 is already in the fleet as the C-40, maybe the PC-40? Nah, probably the P-8. "New airplane" and all.

Running MMA pilots through TONE's at Tinker really wouldn't be a huge problem. Trying to run the FRS there would, even with all the 737 support, since most of the tactical syllabus in the plane requires water. EMATT's and torps don't work too well in prairie dirt.

 

[paikea]

Even though civilian, the Boeing 7E7 Dreamliner looks ufckin' awsome! http://boeing.com/commercial/7e7/flash.html

 

[Jaxs170]

Ah, Zab, what they hey is TONE's at Tinker??? I mean I am stationed here and I have no idea what that is or is supposed to mean. I will say I do not think you will find a single TACAMO guy who would be upset if we got more 737s and had to do the innitial MMA training, I sure wouldn't. Heck, that could mean another possible flying job and if flying jobs are becoming as scarce as the rumors are saying they are, bring on the new guys!

I will have to say, I do not think the AF will be too keen on taking in more Navy studs to train on the T-1. Vance is pretty much maxed on on the T-1 side right now, and with the very strong probability of Columbus closing, they certainly will not be able to handle 100 Navy studs per year (or whatever the numbers turn out to be), no matter how much the Navy is will to pay them.

 

[zab1001]

TONE= T-1.

The problem with doing full MMA FRS in Vance is the requirement for a legitimate aquatic range for tactical training. VP-30 in Jax (FRS) doesn't just train up newly winged guys as co-pilots, they also re-qual O-4s and O-5s coming back to the fleet, which requires a legitimate aquatic range. Plus, they do initial and re-fresher re-quals for all the enlisted aircrew in the back. My bet is Vance may serve to qual up the first few guys in the MMA development team as IPs for pilot/co-pilot evaluations while they work the kinks out (probably at Pax). But the FRS will have to be near the water, and lets not forget how ingrained the Maritime Mafia is in the Jax world.

As far as advanced goes, my GUESS would be they will have to buy a squadron's worth of T-1s or something similar and turn VT-31 in the Maritime/TACAMO advanced squadron. Keep VT-35 in C-12s, and joint, for the E-2/C-2/C-130 crowd. It will be interesting to watch and see what happens.

 

[Dunedan]

Those HUD's are FAA certified for CATIIIb (before the Navy, I worked for the company that makes them), and capable of taking the plane through landing and rollout in CATIIIc (0-0) weather. The only reason the FAA won't certify them for 0-0 is because there's no way (yet, they're working on it) of getting from the runway to the ramp in 0-0. I'd bet, however, that by the time the Navy gets 'em, we'll be landing and taxiing in 0-0.

 

[TANGO 1]

Anybody here seen the new F/A- 18 supposed to take the place of the EA-6B. They have 3 i think down at Pax River in Md. They have a whole bunch of **** there. I saw the x-35 and the 33's when i went there

 

[Jaxs170]

TONE= T-1.

The problem with doing full MMA FRS in Vance is the requirement for a legitimate aquatic range for tactical training.

As far as advanced goes, my GUESS would be they will have to buy a squadron's worth of T-1s or something similar and turn VT-31 in the Maritime/TACAMO advanced squadron. Keep VT-35 in C-12s, and joint, for the E-2/C-2/C-130 crowd. It will be interesting to watch and see what happens.

Ah, T-ONE, gotcha, this is my Sunday as I had to work all weekend so my brain is still in slow mode. All those MMA FRS at Vance notions I'm thinking you meant Tinker.

As for your last part, amen brother, if the T-1 was flown under CNATRA rules everyone and their grandmother would be going for an stud or IP slot in it. I summized this type of plan whereby we give the AF VT-31 (or at least their planes), get T-1s from them, and keep VT-35 for the E-2/C-2 and Herk bubbas. One can pray this will happen as I will be, and hopefully within the next 5 years or so.

 

[VetteMuscle427]

Anybody here seen the new F/A- 18 supposed to take the place of the EA-6B. They have 3 i think down at Pax River in Md. They have a whole bunch of **** there. I saw the x-35 and the 33's when i went there

Yeah, I'm down there every couple weeks for my internship... Driving there the first time, I saw a Super Hornet screaming around at low level... I almost wrecked cause I was trying to watch it instead of the road.

 

[TANGO 1]

The Super Hornet are just big. They are almost 3 times the size of the regualr hornets. They are awesome. They are bigger and carry more payload. More banging and yarnking capabilities. You just have to love it when you hear a hornet flies low banking and pulling about +7g's. They were actually built to take over from the F-14 so, you go figure. They have massive engines.

 

[FlyingDoc]

I thought they had the exact same engines?

 

[FlyingDoc]

My bad:

C/D has F404-GE-402 enhanced performance turbofan engines

E/F has F414-GE-400 turbofan engines

That came right off of Navy.mil factfile

 

[TANGO 1]

right on, i was going to ask you how you knew that. Well the E/F engines are bigger given about 25% extra power over the 404 engine.