Re: off topic. Pitot tubes
Well, quite honestly, before my current assignment where I fly with USAF pilots from many non-fighter airframes, I would have never believed it. Now...I do.
I'd never seen that sort of thing anywhere in any of the nooks-and-crannies of the fighter and trainer community where I've spent my career. I've seen plenty of pilots who were all over the skills spectrum; some fantastic, some average, and some below average. All of them, however, came from aircraft where, if there was even an autopilot or TCAS on the airplane, it was only used extremely rarely. The vast majority of the flying skills were of the actual stick-rudder-throttles variety. When given a raw "flying skills" task, the majority of them were quite good at making the jet do what it needed to do.
Note: I'll admit that after years of such experience, I was completely unaware of how to work modern FMS systems and skillfully manipulate an integrated autopilot. That was probably my most significant challenge in getting my most recent type rating: I wanted to solve every problem I couldn't sort out by kicking off the autopilot and hand flying...which didn't exactly meet the intent of the training course, ergo to learn how to operate the systems on the new aircraft. But, I have to ask, what's the bigger challenge: learning to work an FMS, or re-learning stick-and-rudder? I'll take my predicament, thanks, rather than the other way around.
Never, however, had I ever seen in my USAF career pilots who use the automation so much that they see actual core skills like stick-and-rudder and visual lookout as contingencies when the FMS, autopilot, and TCAS are inop. I don't know if it's the result of apathy or simply "the way it is" in some of the heavy communities, but it sure as hell is rampant. It's probably something, as mentioned in my last post, that serves these pilots perfectly well in 99% of what they're called upon to do in their particular jobs. I can imagine that hand-flying a 9-hour transoceanic crossing would get a little tiresome (although I did it in the Eagle several times...but C-17 and KC-135 and KC-10, etc, pilots do that regularly).
I don't think it's a "talent" issue with these guys -- they're not some kind of morons, and clearly they possess the skills and intelligence to make it through rigorous training and maintain high standards in their own missions. I think it's more of an "experience" issue - flying skills are perishable, and without frequent practice they can atrophy quickly. Some of these pilots simply aren't called upon to use the basic skills that often, and as such, their skills in working the automation are the ones that are the sharpest. Naturally those skills are the ones they're going to call upon first.
I have, however, now witnessed what you mention in your post with mine own eyes...and therefore I now Believe.
Originally posted by stuntflyr
View Post
I have to fly with those types every day. They're usually ex-military
I'd never seen that sort of thing anywhere in any of the nooks-and-crannies of the fighter and trainer community where I've spent my career. I've seen plenty of pilots who were all over the skills spectrum; some fantastic, some average, and some below average. All of them, however, came from aircraft where, if there was even an autopilot or TCAS on the airplane, it was only used extremely rarely. The vast majority of the flying skills were of the actual stick-rudder-throttles variety. When given a raw "flying skills" task, the majority of them were quite good at making the jet do what it needed to do.
Note: I'll admit that after years of such experience, I was completely unaware of how to work modern FMS systems and skillfully manipulate an integrated autopilot. That was probably my most significant challenge in getting my most recent type rating: I wanted to solve every problem I couldn't sort out by kicking off the autopilot and hand flying...which didn't exactly meet the intent of the training course, ergo to learn how to operate the systems on the new aircraft. But, I have to ask, what's the bigger challenge: learning to work an FMS, or re-learning stick-and-rudder? I'll take my predicament, thanks, rather than the other way around.
Never, however, had I ever seen in my USAF career pilots who use the automation so much that they see actual core skills like stick-and-rudder and visual lookout as contingencies when the FMS, autopilot, and TCAS are inop. I don't know if it's the result of apathy or simply "the way it is" in some of the heavy communities, but it sure as hell is rampant. It's probably something, as mentioned in my last post, that serves these pilots perfectly well in 99% of what they're called upon to do in their particular jobs. I can imagine that hand-flying a 9-hour transoceanic crossing would get a little tiresome (although I did it in the Eagle several times...but C-17 and KC-135 and KC-10, etc, pilots do that regularly).
I don't think it's a "talent" issue with these guys -- they're not some kind of morons, and clearly they possess the skills and intelligence to make it through rigorous training and maintain high standards in their own missions. I think it's more of an "experience" issue - flying skills are perishable, and without frequent practice they can atrophy quickly. Some of these pilots simply aren't called upon to use the basic skills that often, and as such, their skills in working the automation are the ones that are the sharpest. Naturally those skills are the ones they're going to call upon first.
I have, however, now witnessed what you mention in your post with mine own eyes...and therefore I now Believe.
Comment