Stupid Questions about Naval Aviation (Part 3)

[The Phiz]

I appreciate your input - Next time I'm in BIs I'll be certain to look to you for guidance when I'm struggling and you can describe in detail the numerous options that are available to me to ensure a good scan.

I am in no way saying that I am better at BI's than you. I've never seen you fly, and I am new to the T-45. I was just telling you my impressions of the -C vs my only other experience, T-34, seeing as how you expressed that you didn't know what it was like in the -C. I have no clue what an -A looks like from the inside (but I keep picturing the 34 cockpit).
I find that with the Dual MFD's I feel like I am a little more on top of my scan vs. primary, but that could be a function of practice, as I put much more practice into T-45 sims than 34 Sims.

 

[MIDNJAC]

Now if you want to see my little stud brain explode, have me shoot that Hi-ILS into MGM... Tacan Arc, off arc inbound ILS to a different location, (not at tacan station), to a MA using a different Tacan. Everytime I try "Request climbout.." and get "Published Climbout"... damn.

Mr Z (and others) love to make you do the published MA. Good practice I suppose, but it can also bite you. NMM is a weird little place of comfort, where you generally know what to expect from ATC 95% of the time, and your sim training is tailored to that. With this, one tends to get into the habit pattern that if MA instructions aren't provided, then you are expected to fly the published missed. Not always so, as I found out one afternoon recently shooting an approach to Pt. Mugu. Realized a mile or so before the FAF, during the handoff to tower, that I had not gotten instructions, and my spidey sense made me think...."hey this is socal, I doubt they are going to send me on the published"....I did look like an idiot trying to copy down instructions while flying an unfamiliar approach, and delaying my check in with tower, but I guess at least it saved me a flight violation. Point being that, some day pretty soon, you are going to be putting a lot more of your brain power in to the tactical stuff (study wise), and you are kind of expected to just make it happen during the admin portions of the flight. This is where good habits will make your life 100 x easier, and bad habits will make for colorful ends to otherwise good flights. You are doing the right thing, just don't let the cozy world of Meridian make you complacent!

 

[Gatordev]

It's very possible I'm not understanding the whole story here, but I have to ask... Why would you get a flight violation if you went missed, called missed, and started to execute the published instructions? I have no doubt they wouldn't WANT you to fly the published missed, but they can't fry you for it if you weren't told otherwise. Again, I'm guessing there's a little more in the details, but it's always a pet peeve of mine when controllers get upset at people when they're doing exactly what they're supposed to do and the controller didn't bother to amend the instructions and it becomes his inconvenience.

 

[HAL Pilot]

^ What he said. If you haven't received missed apprach instructions, you fly the published missed. Very rarely have I ever received missed approached instructions and I've flown the publish missed at LAX twice in the last 3 years - once for no field at minimums (went around and did a Cat III) and once because the SOB in front of me stopped with his tail still sticking out onto the runway. The second was during clear and a million VFR weather/visual approach and we flew the ILS missed (airlines always back up visual with ILS when available), checked in with SOCAL and were just about to enter the hold when they started vectoring us. No question from anyone why we flew what we did, yet alone any mention of a flight violation.

 

[MIDNJAC]

Roger that, good to know. I guess I at least saved myself from having to fly an annoying published MA procedure.

 

[eas7888]

Another stupid question. . .

Approach plates for the military ... are they identical to the ones used on the civilian side? For instance, do you use the same NACO plates that I would use shooting an ILS in a Bonanza, or are there significant differences?

 

[MIDNJAC]

Another stupid question. . .

Approach plates for the military ... are they identical to the ones used on the civilian side? For instance, do you use the same NACO plates that I would use shooting an ILS in a Bonanza, or are there significant differences?

The plates we use are somewhat different in layout to the Jepp style plates used by most civilian pilots. They contain the same information, but there is a difference in presentation. And of course we have some approaches that are not used by civilian pilots (hi-tacans for example)

 

[Python]

The plates we use are somewhat different in layout to the Jepp style plates used by most civilian pilots. They contain the same information, but there is a difference in presentation. And of course we have some approaches that are not used by civilian pilots (hi-tacans for example)

I think he was referencing civilian NACO (government) plates, as opposed to the jepp plates. And they are pretty much the same as our DoD plates.

 

[eas7888]

The plates we use are somewhat different in layout to the Jepp style plates used by most civilian pilots. They contain the same information, but there is a difference in presentation. And of course we have some approaches that are not used by civilian pilots (hi-tacans for example)

I think he was referencing civilian NACO (government) plates, as opposed to the jepp plates. And they are pretty much the same as our DoD plates.

Thanks guys, I was wondering if they were like the civilian NACO plates, I suppose they're probably printed by the same people. That would make sense. Are there any significant difference between the two, i.e. military specific information on the plates?

 

[MIDNJAC]

I think he was referencing civilian NACO (government) plates, as opposed to the jepp plates. And they are pretty much the same as our DoD plates.

Ahhh sorry, my reading comprehension is low today I guess. Yeah, my dad always used to get the NACO plates, and while I haven't seen one in a while, I remember them being similar to the DoD issue plates.

 

[coolhandlukesd]

LT Theodore Ellyson was the first US Naval Aviator, so who was the first NFO or Navigator?

Ok I looked and I can not find anything on this one....Or I have not looked in the right place.

 

[jcj]

Civ NACO plates & DOD plates are very similar. One difference is DOD plates are printed on much better paper than the NACO "a little bit better than toilet paper" plates.

 

[eas7888]

Civ NACO plates & DOD plates are very similar. One difference is DOD plates are printed on much better paper than the NACO "a little bit better than toilet paper" plates.

Now that you mention it, I have been tempted to take a stack of my old ones camping with me. . .fire starter/toilet paper.

 

[Uncle Fester]

LT Theodore Ellyson was the first US Naval Aviator, so who was the first NFO or Navigator?

Ok I looked and I can not find anything on this one....Or I have not looked in the right place.

The first Naval Aviation Observer (NAO) was Admiral William Moffett. In 1968 all NAOs were re-designated NFOs, so I don't know if there was technically a 'first' NFO.

 

[Old R.O.]

^
Uncle Fester is right on with his post. The NAO/NFO program was not a "straight line," as was the Naval Aviator program.

There was a two-part article (16 total pages) in the Spring 2010 and Summer 2010 issues of The Hook magazine about non-Aviator crewman in Naval aircraft, including the rocky path to command that was finally made a reality in the early 1970s.

PM me if you'd like a PDF of the articles