I love that fact that Ward never dumbs down any dialogue on these interviews.

@calholli

19 күн бұрын

The ability to throw in a dumbed down analogy every now and then is great for painting the whole picture from different angles. It's not a bad thing. Albert Einstein: "If you can't explain it to a six year old, you don't understand it yourself."

@jamesklee

19 күн бұрын

Truly one of the best perks of watching this channel. I really like it when he gets to nerd out with a fellow aviator.

It's a bit like F1 today IMHO. Simulators have hugely impacted how drivers approach a weekend, especially for tracks they've never been at. They are now good enough that they get the driver really close to the real item so that when they turn up they already know the layout, where to brake, accelerate, etc. Same with simulator training - make use of it to get the pilot to that 95%+ region, so you can make full use of the real deal to find that last 5%.

As a guy who has been through it, there is NO replacement for time in the jet. Do I wish we did more simulator training? Do I wish we had VR? Absolutely. More. In no way should we be removing syllabus flight events and replacing them with sims. When I got to the fleet, sims were an afterthought. But the smart students would grab extra sim time (if they could find it) and rehearse SFWT events in it. THAT is what we need more of.

@ret7army

19 күн бұрын

Better said than me

@diegorhoenisch62

19 күн бұрын

I appreciate your perspective. That said, for a variety of reasons(carrier resources, finances, etc.), that presentation is the future. You don't have to agree with it, but that is where things are heading.

@davidsmith8997

19 күн бұрын

Isn't that what he was proposing? Spend time in the sim to help spot weaknesses or areas of improvement, practice them in the sim, and then get out and fly the mission in real life? Or did I miss something?

@charlescdt6509

19 күн бұрын

Eventually, it will all be done by drones so no need for flight time (unless you want to be a commercial pilot).

@stacymcmahon453

19 күн бұрын

Well to be fair, DW said that too. And I'm just a guy in the Internet, but I when you combine budgets with the opportunity to move certain training events from real life to simulators, I have to think you're in a lot more danger of replacing flights than either Ward or DW are admitting here.

I was a Navy Air Traffic Controller from 78 to 86. Two WestPacs, 4 years at NAS Whidbey (4 year sea-shore rotations). This video makes me think of a past experience, while not completely related, interesting nonetheless. At Whidbey a good friend ran the EA6-B and A6 simulators. He asked me to help with a pilot tour group on my day off. 10 Canadian commercial airline pilots. Each received two passes at the deck in the A6 night carrier landing simulator. Started at 6+ miles to a PAR (precision approach radar) approach called by me. Zero sea state, wind @ 10 down the deck. 1 pilot managed to trap…1 time! Their lack of performance was not a knock on their abilities, rather an illustration of the difficulties inherent to US Naval aviation.

@Borzoi86

19 күн бұрын

A thousand years ago, I flew CH-46 choppers as a Marine Reservist at NAS Whidbey. A gorgeous place to fly! Mother Marine Corps scuttled our squadron to save some pennies in the early 1980s. Some of us--Gasp!--resigned our commissions--Double Gasp!--and joined the USAR as warrant officers to fly their CH-47s at Everett, WA. Any port in a storm, eh?

@fredmdbud

19 күн бұрын

this is why pilots are not interchangeable - you would equally not expect a fighter pilot to sit in a commercial jet and land it satisfactorily with zero training and experience. or a military cargo plane, for that matter. also why pilots need to get refresher training after time flying a desk. the magic word is "currency". you just sat at a scope and looked at the track and the deck camera ...

@rael5469

18 күн бұрын

"Their lack of performance was not a knock on their abilities, rather an illustration of the difficulties inherent to US Naval aviation.' On the other hand, my entire class of mechanics who had just done a systems intro class on the A320 ....in the full motion simulator everyone in the class was able to do a takeoff and a successful landing. That's everyone in the class. Not a blown tire among us. That's how easy the A320 is to fly. Of course we know the real trick is how well would we do in a landing on the Hudson.

@jyellowhammer

14 күн бұрын

@@fredmdbud The magic word is proficiency sir.

@jyellowhammer

14 күн бұрын

@@rael5469 Yea, they don't pay the big dollars for when things go right, it is for when things go wrong.

As always, very informative, Ward. You two made it clear, the VR simulator training will not be replacing real-life flight training, but rather it will enhance overall aviator training. Saving time, money, and in the end, naval aviator lives.

@NarutokunJB

17 күн бұрын

Yup. I sat in the full cockpit trainers for the T-38C. They don't have the canopy bows and cockpit visual references for formation or BFM/ACM. The VR sims I worked on bring that and also far lower cost, plus tracking where the student is actually focused and a whole host of other benefits.

@flparkermdpc

13 күн бұрын

WOW. JUST WOW.

@flparkermdpc

13 күн бұрын

I am really happy for the aviators who won't be making the fatal mistake while in training, losing not only a life ɓùt all the investment from kindergarten to now.

OMG...!!! Ward...!!! I love this kind of interview with the guys that are on the "bleeding edge" of what is coming. To hear how they are getting objective data on performance and proficiency is so exciting. He talks so fast and has such an in-depth knowledge of his subject I was giggling trying to keep up. I spent a lot of time on flight simulator (primitive as it was) when I was training for my private. It helped me greatly. Can't imagine how much these new ones with the help of AI, eye tracking, response time recording, etc. are going to improve training. Just so great to have the kind of access you provide. Thanks again Ward for what you do.

The next next Navy Flight School will be in Mooch’s attic.😉

@GregKrsak

19 күн бұрын

Ah, yes. 😂 But where will the plaque for the alternates be?

@benjaminperez7328

19 күн бұрын

@@GregKrsak Wherever Mrs. Mooch wants it to be.

@Borzoi86

19 күн бұрын

In a decade or so, all attack missions will be executed by pilot-less aircraft. Manned a/c will be constrained to transport, patrol and most (but not all) chopper missions.

So basically if you are somewhat proficient in DCS you have effectively made it through stage 1 and or 2 of flight school

@benjaminperez7328

19 күн бұрын

We’re getting there…….

@michaelrunnels7660

19 күн бұрын

Does DCS measure your eye movements to see where your attention is?

@funkyschnitzel

19 күн бұрын

​@@michaelrunnels7660 get yourself a tobii eye tracker and you could definitely rig that up.

@tsangarisjohn

19 күн бұрын

DCS pilots; we are ready for the real thing dude !!! 🎉🎉🎉 😂😂😂😂

@funkyschnitzel

19 күн бұрын

@@tsangarisjohn I can say from personal experience that simulator time (dcs, msfs, etc) absolutely does increase proficiency when you start your civilian pilot licence. I've never flown a military jet (and I doubt I ever will) but I did start my private pilot licence recently, and my instructor has regularly commented that I am well ahead of the curve thanks to my simulator experience.

Sounds like justification to bring back dedicated training carrier , I guess FCLP is the next best thing. This is why Navy used to operate the USS Lexington CVT-16 Essex-Class Carrier for training new naval aviators from 1962-1990.

@maccarr9923

16 күн бұрын

Have you ever heard about the Great Lakes carriers lol

Simulators are so useful in learning. The plane can only do so much before is runs out of fuel ...... simulator not the case. I'm retired from American (1988-2018) and I love the full motion sims of the Boeing and Airbus fleet ....... thanks for the sharing Ward.

@grahamstrouse1165

17 күн бұрын

That only works if the simulator is has close to a 1:1 correlation to reality.

@EllipsisAircraft

16 күн бұрын

And you are far less likely to become deceased for a mistake in a simulator. This alone will save several promising aviators every year.

Thanks Ward, wonderful interview, very informative and exciting things ahead for Naval Aviation and the aviators sitting in the seats! Can't wait to watch cutting edge technology and AI incorporated together to improve the system. Although, even with aircraft becoming easy to fly, and bring aboard the ship, it still comes down to "Meatball, Lineup, and AOA", data management control, and some great stick and throttle skills. High tech simulation and repetition will certainly prepare our aviators to a readiness level well beyond what we were In the F-14 FRS's, but I still would like to see 10 and 6 on a FRS Naval Aviator prior to sending him to the fleet!

Fascinating! Love this video Mooch. Interesting, factual, and even entertaining. Thanks for sharing.

This seems like a pretty natural evolution since the Navy adopted the Microsim (FS2002/EPS) in about 2002. Then EPS became Prepar3D and "microsim" took a leap forward. Now with these capabilities and fidelity that's both visual and behavioral fidelity; the plane becomes a testing tool. When my youngest was flying at 12, we practiced the planned and just taken lessons in FSX. We used the same plane as she was flying at the school, with accurate scenery. The first time out, she taxied with the instructor simply pointing and took off unassisted. I looked over from the back and the instructor was covering but not touching anything. Some perfectly coordinated turns and landing almost unassisted demonstrated her ability to apply what she learned on the desktop. She always said it was easier in real life. So I can see all of the "bugs" being worked out before the aviator student ever sits a plane and their being practically qualified already. Certainly, both the microsim and the Level D sims have proven over and over again that the in air training curve is significantly flattened. Personally I'm both scared of the exponential growth of AI and related tech while being completely enthralled with its applications here. Talk about conflicted. 🙄

Wow very interesting. I was not a pilot but aircrew, so I have spent lots of time in training flights, touch and goes. Some fun, lots were boring, and some were scary. I really enjoy your channel. Thanks

What an engaging conversation. Both of you gentleman showed such a grasp of the subject.

This is how my flight school runs, Shadowlands Online Flying Training, based on DCS but also community centric. It was always coming to this as aircraft developed into weapons and information distribution platforms.

Wow! Pro as always, thank you both!

Great information Ward. Thanks

Thanks Ward, for another timely video about what's going on with the new technology coming out and the potential changes in training. I hope aviators and aircrew will still get enough flying hours.

I agree with you Ward, a great explanation. Thanks again. Doug

Never knew a conversation I barely understood could be so interesting

My oh my how technology is changing everything ! I’m not a pilot but I done what I think is the best next thing and worked at VT-7 and VT-19. Prior to that I worked on the Abraham Lincoln on the flight deck but mostly at McCain field in meridian. For a total of 24 years and the changes I’ve seen are mind blowing. The things I got to see are now obsolete. When I stared I’m meridian it was the ole T-2 Buckeyes and the A-4 Skyhawks. Sure miss those jets even if you smelled like you just had a long soothing bath in JP5 at the end of the day. I’ve always wondered Mr.Ward if I’ve ever launched and recovered your aircraft in meridian. I’d be willing to bet I have. I sure miss those days ! Fly Navy !

Great vid! Sims are fantastic...long ago when dinosaurs roamed the earth, I was type rated in the Lear 45. Never even sat in one previously. Did the whole 2 week course at Tucson in the sim plus classroom instruction. Did the entire flight check (4 hours...2 left seat, 2 right seat) in the sim, passed, then the next day got in the jet and flew it to Lancaster, California to have dinner with my chief pilot's buddy, then flew back to TUC the next morning to meet up with our company's VP and flew him to DCA. Before the Lancaster flight, never flew the actual aircraft. Seemed amazing to me!

Thanks! Fantastic interview Ward! Explanation of PLM was very enlightening.

Excellent interview! Thank you gentlemen!

As a retired airline pilot we spent a great deal of time in simulator training and the first time we ever flew the actual plane was with a check pilot It worked out really well well NoI would never compare myself to a fighter pilot and their skills and youthful reactions They are amazing

Great information!

Great video as usual. However, whenever I watch one of these videos about the newest and greatest technological advancement in military hardware, I am reminded of a line of dialogue from the movie "Star Trek II: The Wrath of Kahn" where Scotty, after removing a handful of critical components from the newest, greatest, fastest starship says, "The more they overthink the plumbing, the easier it is to stop up the drain."

@phluphie

19 күн бұрын

Search for Spock

@babboon5764

19 күн бұрын

@@phluphie Why? Where'd you leave him [I *hate* it when the old guy just wanders off]

@LowEarthOrbitPilot

19 күн бұрын

Micromanaging

@gregoryschmitz2131

19 күн бұрын

That is nonsensical because this has nothing to do with removing stuff at the Fighter end which would cripple you. A Commercial Jet Simulator fulfills all the flying requirements for a pilot. If you are not current, you do your take off and landings in one, not the real thing. Other than not doing Mach 1.5, it is no different. Beat up a fighter for take off and landing? . USAF could do virtually all its C-17 Training as its simply routine, sub Mach and take off and landing (and navigation). You can do emergencies and not loose the bird. This is not whiz bang, its using what we have and bringing the Military Training programs into current tech that is effective vs wasteful and finding the weakness to train out or up and out and not waste time if they are not trainable (or much sooner). The only new part is being able to see metrics that tell you what you need to know.

@manuwilson4695

19 күн бұрын

Bloody nonsense, movie crap 💩!

19:28 this does indeed sound pretty amazing, and kind of reminds me of the "everyone has an optic now" issue with Marine marksmanship. The new tools are probably going to be robust enough that people can just take them for granted 99.9% of the time, but for that 0.1% of the time something doesn't turn on, it's still nice to be able to plink a target with irons. I'm guessing pilots will (for a long time to come) still get training to grab a wire the old fashioned way.

Self deprecation and humility on the part of a distinguished career naval aviator is admirable and refreshing. If that can be transferred to young aviators in the fleet, the true checking of the egos walking through the threshold of the (de)briefing rooms, will contribute enormously to mission readiness and individual competence. That is easier said than done in an environment awash in testosterone (and now estrogen too!). In order to meet the growing global threat in a time of constricted budgets, this new training philosophy and technical capability is essential to a robust nationaldefense!

@AshAirheart1995

19 күн бұрын

U do know men and women have BOTH testosterone and estrogen right? 😂

Fascinating conversation. So many new concepts and interesting training aids.

As a pilot who was apart of project avenger and utilizing VRs and having an IP there with you teaching(not evaluating) was extremely valuable. There is no substitute for actual X’s with real world consequences. We had live ATC in the VR who was a qualified controller in the virtual world and that was extremely valuable as well. The only thing I would say is, the VR is not good for switchology. I would submit that AR in a cockpit that has buttons and switches that you can actually manipulate would be the best. Get with Microsoft and video game designers and make a step by step tutorial similar to a video game to help walk you through each thing without needing an instructor to teach you. Make enough of them that they are always available for students to go in and do again with enough instructors that help not a crusty sim instructor that doesn’t like their job and only there because it pays well. Making things easier like flying the AC is a benefit not a detriment. The more things that you can make simple or easier will produce more pilots and free up brain power. I didn’t say lower standards. Legacy AC were designed and built by engineers not UI And UX designers. Which is why you had to be “smart” to be a pilot. Because you have all these unintuitive systems to manage. We should be simplifying every possible thing we can. More pilots, faster training, simpler systems equal more bang for the buck and more pilots.

@jyellowhammer

14 күн бұрын

Bro Microsoft sucks as far sims go today. Get with the DCS or XPlane developers (Arma included) for the best results.

fascinating and instructive discussion

Great discussion.Very informative

"No airplane ever"... Guessing Mr. Kindley never flew the L-1011 with Direct Lift Control.....

Another great video. Ward your channel never disappoints keep up the great content!

I do appreciate the value of simulators in training pilots to include the reduced cost. With that said simulators do not replace in cockpit experience. So interviewing a simulator salesman doesn’t give me any confidence.

It's nice to see new generation simulators and a new training methodology. I’m probably already an old guy too, if I still found old, ancient, “lamp” simulators, not FFS. Great interview! 👍

This is a natural follow-on from "The Navy Budget is Dangerously Low"...

Fantastic discussion.

Awesome interview and a very interesting topic. I’d love to hear you two talking about the PLM stuff, too!

Great episode, as usual.

Should take a carrier out of deployment rotations and use it as a training vessel for recent graduates to rotate through. They could leave port but keep close to the US coasts on very short cruises. This could serve as an initial sea duty for everyone in the Navy, making sure that no one gets stuck on shore in maintenance for their entire initial contract without ever going to sea any more.

@Pwj579

16 күн бұрын

This is why Navy used to operate the USS Lexington CVT-16 Essex-Class Carrier for training new naval aviators from 1962-1990.

@jyellowhammer

14 күн бұрын

Just build a scaled down version. Simple. Put all types of trainees on it. Not just jet Jockeys. Make it a floating school.

I find this interesting and I'm not a military pilot, but love hearing these interviews as I enjoy learning about how these projects are developing especially with A.I.

The way he describes it makes indeed a lot more sense. When I was in ENJJPT we had a fixed syllabus, but no way to deviate from that. So weak areas were just as much touched as strong areas. This way of training could produce better results, but indeed never replaces aircraft time. There is a huge difference between flying a simulator and flying a real plane, cannot compare it at all. I would call a simulator more a procedural trainer, so that you know what to do in the plane when it gets that far. I know that, in order to cut cost on the F35 flying, they also will have more simulator hours in order to prepare for a mission. Hearing the PLM story was extremely interesting. Changing the camber of the wings ? Never would have thought about doing that in order to control pitch, but it makes a lot of sense. Very interesting developments and great interview.

Another first rate interview! Damn good show Ward !!

He went from fleet aviator to selling a product, happens I suppose. Good on Mooch for asking the detail questions

Great info

Ward, Thanks.

Wow, great interview!

Im in the navy flight pipeline currently. We are seeing this real-time the development adaptation of new tech being used in training. In primary, and intermediate although some are greeting it with open arms many instructors and admin are pushing back. Its creating a divide that can be counterintuitive with what to practice; prepare for sim vs flight time.

Excellent video... top 10%!

Interesting aspect - an engineering solution to extending aircraft service life through making the forces on the airframe less stressful in descent, and hopefully, touchdown. And it makes landings easier.

Good thing I made it through when I did... Not sure I would have squeak by in the new syllabus!!

I operate in the simulator space for a different platform, but these interviews provide great takeaways that improve my abilities as an instructor.

Interesting discussion. It's hard to beat clean data driven analysis. It's implementation and use in training are the keys to making it an outstanding tool, or a swamp of misery for all involved. Thanks for bringing us along to the fair.

I worked at BMH with Ed Harvey and Jack McGinn in the NASMP days and and early Navy Continuous Training Environment development and the odd R&D thing on the side. A famous MIG insulter (Pig Checcio) worked with us from time to time. It's interesting to hear how our work has evolved and use of LVC has worked its way into core pilot training. Some sort of training management was rattling around at the time. Apparently it has grown up into something that can effectively guide pilot advancement through the syllabus. Good to see one's work live on and evolve. Good episode.

Having spend hundreds of hours in F-15, 727, MD-88 simulators, there is great value to simulators. Getting lots of reps and being able to reset to a point where you made the mistake is invaluable. But in the end, you have to put it into practice in the jet. I remember feeling pretty confident in the MD-88 sim, but visual cues from that 18" before touching down was impossible to simulate. My first landing was rough!

Cool information.

Very interesting subject matter, thanks

Flying in a sim is different than an aircraft. Buck fever in the real bird is a thing. The idea of having virtually no flight time in the aircaft before going up in the actual bird for a check ride sounds terrifying. It sounds like they are trying to reduce flight school to multiple sim periods and a check ride. I don't see this ending with confident capable Aviators coming out of flight school. Aircrews will be mission capable, but lack confidence in their aircraft.

@fredred5037

19 күн бұрын

They just need to meet diversity quotas. Job performance is irrelevant

@horsemumbler1

19 күн бұрын

I don't think you actually listened to the brief.

@fredmdbud

19 күн бұрын

For jets than only come in 1-seat versions (F-35), that is not possible.

More that great, this is an outstanding video in terms of content and direction, and direct application. If it works well, can easily see this approach taken up by other career fields.

Thanks!

Very informative ! Thank You !

That was fascinating.

A simulator will never replace time in the cockpit flying.

What he's saying makes sense to a certain extent. My UAV unit came to the same conclusions about training and simulators about 15 years ago. However, those decisions were made due to rather intense budgetary and time constraints. While a certain amount of sim time is mandated, we went well beyond that minimal time because we had no choice. Our unit's budget for flight training was capped at the minimal aircrew training program proficiency requirements set by the Army. Sim time, however, was free so we did the best we could do to make sure the new guys were ready before we put them behind the controls of a real bird. We were able to get it done, but if we had the choice we would have preferred to get them spooled up with real flight hours instead of sim time. Now, to counter the inevitable argument that these new jets are more about systems management than stick and rudder flight training and because of this sim time is more effective than actual flight hours, you need to bear in mind that operating a modern UAV is NOTHING BUT systems management. There is so such thing a "stick and rudder" in the UAV world, you are managing an autopilot from launch to recovery. Despite this, you reach a point of diminishing returns with a sim. Nothing replaces real flight hours, even in the UAV world. I wonder if the Navy would make these same decisions with training if they had a budget appropriately sized to the op tempo that they are being told they need to perform at.

Training command PLM could also result in narrowed lateral wave-off-window ... reducing the impact of off-nominals (e.g., gear versus tie-down point, gear versus deck light). Extend that to the fleet nets even better FLE savings.

Good sims are a good thing, but there is no replacement for full motion and feeling the G forces.

What a great, nuanced breakdown of 21st century naval aviation! With today’s massive information overload, the aircraft have to be simpler to land. Ward, thanks again.

Good stuff, I like what I am hearing. Should positively augment traditional training and I’d widely implement it.

You have to get DW on in the future and do a Deep Dive:tm: on PLM, how they put it on the F/A-18 and maybe some good insight on how it works.

Great interview Mooch. NAVAIR (and CNATRA specifically) is definitely moving into the next generation!

The sims better be REALLY GOOD !

@7:20 This is the what I wished we did 40 years ago, and is probably going to be the future now that AI is so well embedded in modern technology. Good for them to be the leading edge, I hope they have fantastic results with future students.

They've come a long way since I was a yellow shirt,on the,USS RANGER 75/78

Fascinating (I'm an English major!). Also encouraging that people with such smarts are working to make our armed forces better.

I get what is being said, but is there a problem that needs correction? Besides money and time lost, are the pilots coming out of the training command, not the required level? How many flights does it take to get used to positive g's, negatives, bad weather, formation flying, etc? I would say sims certainly help to a degree, but this is not always civilian, straight, and level flying. Is this just about money? I'm obviously old-school Naval Aviator trained. I also believe the more looks at the boat, the better. I know the Magic carpet helps quite a bit but more to the dynamics of the boat, IMO of course.

@WALTERBROADDUS

19 күн бұрын

How are you going to achieve more time without a dedicated training carrier?

@fredmdbud

19 күн бұрын

all that is the "nugget" tour

I still wonder if it's a good idea not to have carrier qualifications as part of the requirement. Simulators are great but as Mover and Gonky from another channel said, it can't mimic all the little environmental feels of flying, good to have the ability to do real landings, even if most of the time will be done on simulators.

More effective training than the Singer built Link trainer we did IFR training in? Wow, that’s Cool…. lol

I especially like these insider interviews that Ward's background brings to the channel. Chats like this and interviews with admirals are always most special, which we don't get to see too often.

Amazing how far we have come with IT. The 1st time I ever saw a carrier deck was in the T2C. I envy the guys now but wouldn’t trade the freedoms we had then to what seems to be a more restrictive military culture now.

Here is a thought. Calculate the amount of hours saved on Airframe alone.

As a trainer, I find this very interesting.

Now they need to do the same for combat vehicle crew men

What an idea. When ya don't have a.carrier available just omit the training requirement for carrier qualification.

Wait!!! PLM sidebar!?!?!? I’d (WE) would love to hear that sidebar conversation!!!

What's the process for pipeline selection? Fixed v Rotating wing? Is it grades, aptitude, preference or the dreaded "Needs of the Navy". I always figured most want to be fighter jocks. Who wants to be a COD driver?

@thomasfitzgerald1027

19 күн бұрын

Once you start flight school, the goal is to get your wings. If you struggle, you want to finish and fly where they put you.

@calvinlee1813

19 күн бұрын

Some guys always wanted P-3s, E-6s, and yes C-2s. It depended on the time frame. I know folks from several communities and they all enjoyed their aircraft. I drove the Fat Albert Flight Crew to NAS Willow Grove and they were very happy not going to the Boats, be their CVs or LHA/LHDs. Know a A-4 guy who transited to Phrogs and a Prowler guy who wanted V-22s.

I would suggest a hybrid model where a pilot who is lagging in proficiency can do the extra time in the sim to catch up with his or her classmates. That would be the ideal carrot for the student who is driven to both achieve and be a part of the team. Maybe that is already part of the training model. Hope so.

That all sounds like a very well thought through approach Maybe as AI gets still lighter & more compact it can give pilots real time feedback in the air too ? - That's useful in heading off bad habits before they've ingrained - 'Practice Makes Perfect' was long the mantra BUT 'Practice Makes *Permanent* is closer to how we learn ,,,,, So Wipe out the bad habits before they're repeated & it'll all go faster & better. Just one quibble - Surely once all-round competent, Pilots NEED to physically land on a carrier? You can have the world's best HD surround videos It still won't replicate what it's like to put your plane on deck which is rising and falling Eeek feet per wave cycle whilst spray mist and whatever add their own distractions. Especially when that's underpinned by the fact it looks like a matchbox floating on a lake & you KNOW you have to land on it cos you lack the fuel to back 🙄 So That transition must happen - but when?

So apparently AB just announced the permanent ending of CNATRA Strike CQ! RIP.

So much is just a repeat of the same old issue. We had the same arguments, issues, and discoveries when we stated converting the training F-16 Maintainers to do Engine Runs on a fully simulated Engine Run Simulator as a tool to give repetitions and save fuel back at Hill AFB in the late 70s.

Pilot classes generally didn't stay together. One we got to the VT's, each SNA progressed at what rate you were scheduled at, not by class. If your onwing went on leave, you didn't fly

@kayakutah

19 күн бұрын

That was my experience as well (but that was in 1978!). But maybe that has changed.

@tomdangelo3162

19 күн бұрын

@@kayakutah 1987-88 for me

This was good ! Keep him in your Rolodex

Oh! Why didn't someone say that PLM was just Direct Lift Control. In DCS in the F-14 I'll just trim the nose for angle of attack and use DLC and throttle to get the glide slope. Neat.

As usual very interesting. at 1:43 how is it that CDR Boyle has x7 3 wire but avg is 4.0? And some 1 wire is yellow and some red. maybe red is close to the stern. some 2 are grey other green. B I assume is Bolter.

@Wannes_

19 күн бұрын

The red is likely when they taxi forward into the #1 wire 😲

This may also be a nice way to measure skill set decay with time it is not used. {^_^}

JoJo going at it, while the two talk business.

My 84yo father was RAAF Sqd Ldr ('68 Viet. Iroquois) and I run him on DCS (Fixd/Rot).... undoubtedly he's (still) a real pilot but has enormous trouble with Sims. I'm guessing its that 'seat of pants' disconnect aspect. At 56 I seem to translate easily (car sims etc), so it's a generational evolution thing perhaps.

@fredmdbud

19 күн бұрын

they also do sessions in simulators with physical feedback (tilts and haptic response), too

I’m retired, Army and Civilian RW SP/IE and I’ve trained using both systems. I can say more simulator and less aircraft flight training, will lead to less confidence in the aviator. They have to find a safe medium, and not assume one-size fits all

@wyskass861

19 күн бұрын

Nobody here is saying a one size fits all. In fact the point is exactly the opposite by focusing on the individual more. Simulator fidelity is much more than it used to be. Maybe it would be useful to consider the differences from your experiences to the current state of technology. Also the point made here was best utilization of resources. Cost and Time. Is 1 hour of flight time more useful than 10 hours of sim time where you can get right into the relevant personal weaknesses? Especially as flying the plane is not the main challenge anymore. if the mind can't really tell the difference between real plane and sim, the sim becomes much more useful per time and cost. Planes are kept in better conditions and pilots more proficient. On a related note, in top level motorsport, we have been seeing people come from sim racing getting into real cars with a fraction of the years of progression needed otherwise.