Discussion in 'Gouge' started by Marine86, Nov 18, 2010.
Coffee's still free though
Food is still free at Jack Edwards... And now AMS has a satellite facility there which was also awesome. I finished up IFS there last week and after the ground school portion, I had a blast flying. Can't speak for Trident, but AMS at Gulf Shores has their stuff together and the atmosphere is good too.
So here's my question: I was told that because I hold multiple commercial pilot ratings and have a few hundred hours under my belt (in the grand scheme of things, this is by no means a lot btw), I get to skip a few Navy flight courses. Is this one of them? I mean, I wouldn't mind boppin around in a C172 for a few days. It's one of the cheapest planes for spin awareness training and I love spinning planes, but if all they do is get you to your first solo it seems a little redundant for those with a PPL or higher. It sounds like IFS makes you get your private pilot license from the FAA. If that's the case, Gleim, ASA, and Jeppesen, all make great publications with the entire FAA test bank published for you to memorize. I used Gleim for my private and instrument, and used ASA for my commercial, FOI, and FIA. Both publications are great.
If you have a PPL or higher, you will skip IFS.
IFS students are issued Jeppesen texts including the question bank and use their online training for ground school.
You can request an accelerated syllabus in Primary too, but I'd say you'd be stupid to do that. Don't hide your flight time, but no one can make you take the accelerated.
Dude - forget the civie time, you should consider not doing the accel course. I have pretty much most Commercial fixed wing rating MEL,MES,SEL,SES with a fair amount of acro/warbird/ tailwheel time, blah blah... And I just got my ass kicked by the T-38 sim. Take EVERY study/training advantage you can - seriously! It's different.
+1 heck yeah! I have commercial instrument and pretty jealous of my roommate flying in IFS, while I beat my head into the Aero and engines book. Although I am stoked to be getting closer to wearing that green bag to work. Either way IFS is a grain of salt in your navy flight training, make use of it because you learn a lot of important material that even the most seasoned pilot has most likely forgotten.
Right, but if you already have your PPL you don't have the option of doing IFS, you just don't get to do it.
right, guess i was more implying towards requesting the accelerated syllabus, through metaphor... my braining is turning to smush as we speak.
I'll offer the dissenting view:
I did the primary accelerated syllabus. At no time did I feel like I was at a disadvantage because of it. Only a few flights in contacts are cut out. In fact when I was going through the lousy T-34 maintenance situation combined with the sketchy weather, the program helped me get through contacts reasonably without having to do a bunch of warmups, since it was easier to get less X's. The other times you "accelerate" is some RI sims go away and maybe an RI flight or two. Frankly I couldn't stand to be in those sims so it was good to have less of them. PAs and Forms are unchanged since they are not as common to civilians.
Most will probably say "yeah you did less of those events but you got less practice!". True, but that was easily compensated for by my civvie time. Lots of people like to say that the military way is so different. While this is true, in my opinion there isn't much difference in PRIMARY. Sure, the IPs are tougher and have higher standards. The VFR pattern is noticeably different, and more emphasis is placed on EPs than civilian entry level training, but other than that, the substance of the training is not that much different in my opinion. Having prior experience MORE than made up for a couple of X's going away and I was happy to have more time away from building 89 in Corpus.
A lot of the guys I know with prior training (beyond a simple VFR ppl) did substantially better gradewise. That's not a guarantee, but it was a trend I observed. That goes for primary ONLY and after that all bets are off.
I digress. My point is: if you want to do the accelerated program don't be turned off to it immediately. It's only a FEW X's that get combined and the prior experience should definitely help you out.
All of the above is obviously first hand, but I've heard that echoed from other Commercial certificated pilots who have gone through, and ONE more point is this (if I remember correctly): As it was explained to me, the minute you are no longer performing well, they'll just stick you back on the regular syllabus.
The biggest thing is, the grades you get, divided by the total graded items. If you do well, then it's EASIER to get a much higher NSS because that ratio is easier to make a higher number, by dividing by a much lower total graded item number. If you don't do as well, then it can go lower a lot faster too, but they'll just stick you back on the regular syllabus and give you all the extra flights you'd have had taken out otherwise so you won't suffer.
The first part is good gouge. The second part is bad gouge.
First part: If at any time your grades decrease below a 50 NSS you will IMMEDIATELY be put into the regular flow syllabus.
Second part: Right when I got to primary the NSS formula was changed (according to my STUCON anyway, and I also verified it by looking at the new primary MCG). Total Graded Items are no longer a variable in the primary NSS formula. So you do not get the benefit of NSS boost by doing less graded items. It used to be that it was a good deal: the Navy would save money by requiring less flights and the stud would get a grade boost most likely. However, now it has become just cost saving for the Navy. As I said before, though, I found the experience to be a great option (as did another person in my class who was on the program).
I would definitely buy that. I think the important distinction is, as you say, the difference between a standard VFR PPL and a commercial license. Sure there are plenty of exceptions, guys who are stuck in their old ways and can't relearn things, can't cope with the different training style, etc., but for the most part (from the very little I've heard anyway) it seems like they do better.
My question is do (or can) the IP's show any subjectivity? It would seem very easy to hold them to a higher standard. Working on the logic that while someone with their commercial may be better pilot in beginning stages of primary, or most of primary for that matter, that extra flight time could be compensating for a lack of natural flying ability, work ethic, studying, etc. (or not?). As opposed to some stud with little to no time, who may not be right there, but is catching quickly and by the time Advanced/RAG/Fleet rolls around would be a much better stick.
It may be an opinion, and we all know about opinions, but I think there is a folly in that last line that many people buy into.
The way the Navy judges performance is basically how FAST you adapt and perform. How QUICKLY can you learn to do a stall/spin/landing/loop and do it within certain standards. I can promise you, virtually ANYONE, given enough time, training and practice, can go and knock out a "5" on any maneuver. But the Navy rewards those who learn it FASTER with better grades.
By the time Advanced/RAG/Fleet rolls around, I think all pilots are about equal in skill. That's the folly I think many people fall into. They assume that whatever pipeline/community is the "pick of the week" and requires a higher NSS is where the "good pilots" go. Not true. I think most E6/Helo/P-3/Jet pilots over a long enough timeline will be about equal in skill/proficiency... it's mostly just on the front-end, who learns faster and who picks it up easier, is who gets the higher grades and writes their own ticket.
Disclaimer: not denying there are some jet guys who are rockstars and some helo/Maritime guys who probably suck, but the above is just a general observation/armchair quarterbacking.
That is a good question. When I started primary I heeded the advice of "don't advertise prior experience, but don't deny it when asked." It was good advice because it implied honesty without arrogance. However, since many IP's knew I was on the accelerated syllabus it wasn't that big of a secret, but not all of them knew and I did have to answer them when they asked.
As to the subjectivity...I was very impressed with my IPs (T-34 and sim) with regards to this issue. They were professionals who knew that they were grading me to a standard (CTS) and not to their own opinion of how I should be doing. If I earned a 5 on something, I got it. Same for a 3. In exactly the same way as anybody else. If I earned a 3 on something it wasn't because "I've got experience so I should've done it better". It was because it wasn't up to standards for a 4, the same standards applied to any other non-prior experience stud.
Also, it's important to note that even though I had prior time, I didn't have less of a work ethic. I didn't take anything for granted. Maybe some prior-experience guys did, but I knew a lot of prior-time guys and none of the ones I knew personally slacked off or tried to rely on their experience for grades. Yes, the flying and SA was easier for prior time guys, but you still had to know EPs, FTI, course rules, etc. cold just like anybody else.
Not all civilian pilots are cut from the same cloth. Let's face it, most civilian instruction is solely for the purpose of passing a checkride. Airmanship is generally a foreign concept in practical application...hard for a 300 hour CFI to teach experience...and the learning curve is at your discretion and thickness of your wallet. So a dude has a commercial...what does that mean? That means he was able pat his head and rub his belly long enough for an examiner to sign him off after a large cash payment. You see this all the time in the warbird/jet community. Dudes that paid money to get "trained" and typed in their P-51s/L-39s - all to become a burning hole in the ground because they thought their "training" gave them an edge and their 'talent' was a filler for learning things they didn't know. So a dude can teach people how to do chandelles in an Arrow - so what? Just because you have a commercial/CFI/ATP doesn't mean you'll have anymore airmanship than the next guy.*
This post is filled with assumptions and in my opinion is a GROSS oversimplification.
I know how civilian training works. You want to know what it means to be a dude with a commercial? For our purposes he is a guy with a bunch of flight experience. You put him into primary where his peers have little to no flight experience. He will do better. Some commercial pilots are better than others. Some guys with no experience pick it up fast. But I'm not trying to point out the exceptions. In general, a commercial pilot with experience will get better grades than a guy with no experience. It's like taking a varsity HS baseball player and putting him back into little league where people are first learning to play (just an analogy guys, work with me). Not all varsity players are that great, and some newbies are naturals, but in general their experience will make them better than the other entry level guys.
Listen, I'm on your side. I think the military trains better pilots and does a much better job in general as a whole. Hands down. But your post comes across as naive. Besides, the proof is in the pudding. The guys with commercials and instrument ratings DO in general get better grades than guys without it. That's not theory, that's what happens in real life.
Basically what I'm saying is that having a Commercial/ATP doesn't imply anything (i.e. don't count your chickens before they hatch). In the civilian warbird/jet world (and other 'communities'),a lot of guys think that having an FAA certificate/rating somehow means that their talent/experience is good enough - when, unfortunately, that isn't the case.
Guys with Commercial/ATP's do wash out as well. If they perform better, good for them. Better to under-promise and over-deliver, than the opposite.
So does the Navy IFS welcome packet specifically mention certain Asian massage parlors that are off limits... cause the AF's does...
PM me and I can provide practice tests that really help with the course.
For serious? That's awesome.
I have nothing to add, except, as a guy that went into pilot training with only a PPL- I'm soaking up as much as I can here and am going to practice the approaches with the cai lab programs and try to get as much out of it as I can before I actually have to do it in the plane.
I'd like to resurrect this post because I wish I had received more explicit instructions for IFS. Along with my brief explanation, I'll add my own personal take in case someone out there cares.
Firstly, lots of people love to puff up their chest and boo ha ha at "how easy" IFS was/is. I feel like although it was easy information, there is a ton of it and you're expected to know it in a fairly short period of time. If you're not accustomed to studying for several hours at a time, nearly every day; then prepare for that change.
1: Modules: You'll get set up with Jeppessen online training modules to do mostly on your own time. You may or may not like them depending on your learning style. This information matches the textbook. You'll be assigned about 4 modules a day, which will probably take around 4-5 hours to complete if you're taking notes/referencing the book for reinforcement. ( I didn't mind skimming through them). These modules/book are the foundation of your testable ground school knowledge in IFS.
2: Tests: There will be 3 stage exams, 1 final, and the FAA exam... Each test is probably about 4 days apart, except for the stage 3 and final which are back to back. ** The stage exams are very specific questions, which can be found in the test guide (given to you) and the FAA question bank (given to you)** These tests will be extremely difficult for you to pass if you do not use that test guide and or the gouge. The readily available gouge is still good for stages 1-3. Stages 1-2 are simple knowledge questions, and stage 3 includes complex and multi-part questions that you should ideally know how to do on your own versus remembering numerical answers from the gouge and supplied materials (which we all did to some degree). The final and FAA exam deserve their own section.
3: Final and FAA exam: The final exam is composed of a randomized assortment of 60 questions, all of which can be found in the supplied question bank (about 750 possible). For this I highly recommend working through the question bank, test guide, and sportys.com FAA study buddy. This is all fine to know, but will get you nowhere unless you realize that this test is back to back with the trickier stage 3 exam so plan accordingly... If you can do the final, then you can certainly do the FAA exam, and you should do so by studying the same sources. Think of the final as the FAA pretest. Also, you will have around 5 more days to prepare for the FAA so its more manageable.
We had people fail stage 3 and the final. Again, you must study the test guide and question bank so you can practice the real questions.
People that say it's super-easy are probably saying that because the nature of IFS is just memorizing a lot of answers. **This is doubly true if you exclusively study the answers, without learning the background** We had a few people do that, and they got by OK, but were on the margin.
Nothing here is super easy or super hard.. There are only people that are prepared and those that are unprepared- but for most of us it will take hard work to get prepared.
I wish it was laid out for me a little clearer, instead of hearing "oh don't worry about it, its so easy". Well here it is. Go get it.
Sorry if I pissed anyone off with forum etiquette or anything, I'm totally new here (but save your welcomes haha that shit is not for me).
I'll try and update again as I finish the flight part of IFS.
pretty good summation. have fun with the flight portion!
Just like API...and Primary...and Advanced.
Separate names with a comma.