• Please take a moment and update your account profile. If you have an updated account profile with basic information on why you are on Air Warriors it will help other people respond to your posts. How do you update your profile you ask?

    Go here:

    Edit Account Details and Profile

IFS down the tubes?

kmac

Coffee Drinker
pilot
Super Moderator
Contributor
To restate what e6bflyer said, the purpose of IFS was not to make better students but to identify and attrite the very poor performers before they got in the T-34 (and then T-6). Its purpose was to help the Navy out, not the individual.
 

Python

Well-Known Member
pilot
Contributor
As a guy who came in with a small amount of civilian experience (commercial, IR, single engine, minimum hrs), I will say that there were plenty of guys with 0 hrs who did just as well or better than me in primary, and did better than I did in jets and the FRS. In fact, I may be one of only a couple guys in the JOPA in my squadron who had any prior experience flying before the Navy. It is just a completely different kind of flying. I think instrument experience gave me a small leg up in primary (which is not something that every PPL guy has), but after that, it didn't matter at all.

I'll disagree. But I'll save my energy in this thread.
 

NavAir42

I'm not dead yet....
pilot
I'm curious if IFS is helping the Navy out from an economics standpoint. As a primary instructor, I can't tell the difference between a student who has gone through IFS and one who hasn't. With the exception of students who come in with significant flight time and ratings, I don't see any difference between a student who has done IFS and one who has a PPL. Come to think of it, my foreign students with zero flight time did just as well as my American students with IFS/PPLs. I remember thinking as a student that IFS wasn't worth a whole lot in the grand scheme of things, but maybe that's just because I don't see the cost/attrition stats.
 

MIDNJAC

is clara ship
pilot
I'll disagree. But I'll save my energy in this thread.

No need to hold your tongue bro. My experience was only mine, and that isn't to say that there weren't others that were different. I wasn't the best guy that the jet VT's ever saw.......it took a long time for my "lightbulb" to go off, and even as a SH, it was FWT before I really knew wtf I was doing. Most of that was just my personal struggle to unbox suck, but having prior experience had nothing to do with that process. If you are a natural then I don't think it much matters what you did before the Navy. For the rest of us, it takes work and studying, and trying harder than others, and that is maybe something you have as a civilian pilot and maybe something you don't.

BTW where you at right now? You have to be at least close to A/A right?
 

Python

Well-Known Member
pilot
Contributor
No need to hold your tongue bro. My experience was only mine, and that isn't to say that there weren't others that were different. I wasn't the best guy that the jet VT's ever saw.......it took a long time for my "lightbulb" to go off, and even as a SH, it was FWT before I really knew wtf I was doing. Most of that was just my personal struggle to unbox suck, but having prior experience had nothing to do with that process. If you are a natural then I don't think it much matters what you did before the Navy. For the rest of us, it takes work and studying, and trying harder than others, and that is maybe something you have as a civilian pilot and maybe something you don't.

Not calling myself a chuck Yeager or anything remotely like that. Just saying that prior experience NOT being helpful is an exception as far I see. I had a bunch of time and it made primary easier (I think the "navy way" doesn't kick in until advanced), but in tactical flying my SA level is as good/bad as any other student (mostly bad). That'll come with more time I hope.
 

kmac

Coffee Drinker
pilot
Super Moderator
Contributor
I remember thinking as a student that IFS wasn't worth a whole lot in the grand scheme of things, but maybe that's just because I don't see the cost/attrition stats.

IFS was worth it if the stats say money not spent in T-34 man hours, maintenance, fuel, etc. due to a student attriting outweighed the cost of sending all non-PPL holders through it. That's the reason PPL folks didn't go through IFS... They had already shown that they most likely were not the bottom of the barrel.
 

HAL Pilot

Well-Known Member
None
Contributor
I won't say IFS is needed because history shows it obviously is not. But I wonder if the bean counters did a cost benefit analysis or if it was just low hanging fruit and easy to say "I cut my budget".

I won't argue that successfully completing IFS makes it cheaper to train an individual pilot but I would argue less money is spent if a SNA DORs or attrites out of IFS than if he does out of primary.
 

MIDNJAC

is clara ship
pilot
Not calling myself a chuck Yeager or anything remotely like that. Just saying that prior experience NOT being helpful is an exception as far I see. I had a bunch of time and it made primary easier (I think the "navy way" doesn't kick in until advanced), but in tactical flying my SA level is as good/bad as any other student (mostly bad). That'll come with more time I hope.

Yeah I can see that, and I suppose that was my experience too. Just quantified in different English.....my prior experience WAS helpful in primary, though I think it was mostly my IR experience that mattered, as BI/RI grades made up a lot of ground when other guys struggled there.
 

MIDNJAC

is clara ship
pilot
IFS was worth it if the stats say money not spent in T-34 man hours, maintenance, fuel, etc. due to a student attriting outweighed the cost of sending all non-PPL holders through it. That's the reason PPL folks didn't go through IFS... They had already shown that they most likely were not the bottom of the barrel.

I'll just say that your voice in the trunk of a T-34 has never left me...........even during fleet CQ last summer, I had the kmac "be on altitude at the abeam +/- nothing" running through my brain......or even last week bouncing at Fentress in the build up to the TSTA that never was to be :)
 

kmac

Coffee Drinker
pilot
Super Moderator
Contributor
I'll just say that your voice in the trunk of a T-34 has never left me...........even during fleet CQ last summer, I had the kmac "be on altitude at the abeam +/- nothing" running through my brain......or even last week bouncing at Fentress in the build up to the TSTA that never was to be :)

Yeah, we'll, I have to hear my own voice now come Wednesday. Hook down, baby!
 

zippy

Freedom!
pilot
Contributor
I'm gonna disagree with the general tone here. I've seen, on the whole, a pretty big difference in contact grades (granted, just by asking and peeking over shoulders) between people with PPLs and other prior time and those who just did IFS. I'm sure the gap would be bigger without IFS. That's a pretty sizable chunk of your NSS. Am I saying you can't get jet grades without a PPL? No, but your odds are a lot better than the guy without one. If anything IFS should be more robust.

For my next two on wings give me a guy who just got his PPL and give me one who just completed IFS and I'll give you two flight students who have nuclear meltdowns during contacts. Their grades will be relatively indistinguishable. I promise you both will be destroyed and rebuilt according to my, and the Navy's, expectations.

Having 300-400hrs flying and an instrument rating will help with basic understanding etc and air work. However, skill level is largely dependent on the individual. The two best students I've ever flown with had zero flight time outside of IFS. The third was a 400hr guy. Most of the rest of the top performers that I remember had zero but there were some other fully rated guys thrown into the mix. A dude who has a PPL and little more experience isn't going to fair much better then a dude off the street with IFS. If you're good you're good. If you suck, you suck.
 

EM1toNFO

Killing insurgents with my 'messages'!!
None
Here's a hundred dollar question... Why the F*** do we still send us double anchor dudes through IFS? Absolutely pointless... Especially for us big bird riding FOs!
 

Pugs

Back from the range
None
Here's a hundred dollar question... Why the F*** do we still send us double anchor dudes through IFS? Absolutely pointless... Especially for us big bird riding FOs!

I'll weigh in as a guy who didn't have an opportunity for IFS and who went through a very different syllabus in 1987/88. While I had about 25 hours of civilian time in ye-old Piper Traumahawk, it would have been very useful for me to have spent a little time in the cockpit with a military mindset instructor to understand the differences in expectations and prep me for VT-10 basic in the turbo-weenie. Two sims didn't do that. There is no doubt in my mind (with 2500 hours of TACAIR NFO time) that having the opportunity to fly an aircraft builds better air sense in an NFO.

At one point there was talk of sending NFO's up through solo but no clue if that happened or not. Don't know if that much investment is needed but I know that on my first couple flights in the T-34 I was waaayy behind and going to T-2's with a whopping 15 flights in the T-34 was certainly a rush.

On the other hand, teaching sailing on the Hermes one day a week for three months was a pretty nice stash but I think I would have gotten more for them out of IFS.
 

Jim123

DD-214 in hand and I'm gonna party like it's 1998
pilot
At one point there was talk of sending NFO's up through solo but no clue if that happened or not.

SNFOs used to solo the T-34 (home field pattern at KNPA only, IIRC). Heck, I'm pretty sure even student flight surgeons used to solo the T-34 as part of their syllabus.
 
Top