C vs. E/F

[skidkid]

Never done a night strafe jet style so I am out of my lane here I just wanted to adress the no depth perception on the gogs. When FACing I did see a few very low pull offs at night so I am sure it is a serious challenge etc. I do scan hud tgt something left or right over and over again on gogs in an attack to help avoid tgt fixation, I realize the profiles are apples and oranges but the concepts are the same.

 

[Flash]

Im going to but in here for a second to dispell a common myth. You have depth perception on NVGs, that is why you have a tube for each eye (stereo vision). You are confusing depth perception with pereferal vision, during the day both play a role in judging speed and closure. At night when you go from an almost 180 FOV (day time) to a 40 FOV (NVGs) you lose the pereferal cues you are accustomed to and as many new NVG pilots do blame it on a lack of depth perception. If you move your head more and scan from side to side you will get some if not most of the cues you are used to.

I am not sure about that, my experience with NVG's was that you didn't have depth perception worth a damn, especially when joining up with your wingman. The lack of peripheral cues has a lot to do with it but I don't think that was it.......NVG's were cool to fly with but stressful........

 

[MasterBates]

For those of us who operate(d) below 200' AGL at night, they are a godsend..

There is Depth Perception to be had, but I did not "get it" until about 150ish hours on NVGs.

Out of curiousity, do E2s or C2s use goggles at all?

 

[Huggy Bear]

Here is the deal:

-In the eyes of Bupers, you are an FA-18 pilot. Although the C is a different platform from the E/F NATOPS wise, you can easily transition between tours. In other words, you can do like me, fly Charlies for your fleet tour, then teach at the E/F FRS, and be wide open for C/E/F for all tours. At your stage, certainly don't try and game it career wise, your first tour won't matter too much down the road. Also, the JSF is so far off you have no chance of flying it on your first tour.

-The planes fly nearly identical. The E/F has a few improvements in certain areas, but nothing dramatic. The C flies a little more nimble in certain areas, ditching, or visual bombing. It's a wash in my opinion.

-The E/F has a ton more gas and bringback, which is huge for the boat. I would welcome not having to show up bingo on the ball like we often had to do in the legacy. The downside of the extra gas of course is that you fly a lot of tanking missions (a lot of folks don't mind or actually enjoy the tanking). If I were to stay in and go back to the fleet, I would want the E/F simply for the extra gas, if nothing else.

-Like someone said, 122 and 106 train differently. At 106 you select E or F very early in the FRS and are trained that way. We used to do that at 122 but found that we were making lazy F pilots. The F guys got so used to relying on their intructor wso's that they became lazy. Also, there was a tendency to stick the weaker students into the F pipeline. About a year and a half ago we started training everybody to be single seat and then let them select just before the boat. This is making much stronger pilots across the board, as their instructors are now more of coaches/observers and can't carry the load for a weaker student. The counter argument (largely favored by old tomcat folks) is that the F guys leave the FRS without a true appreciation for the crew concept. I disagree, but there you go.

-An interesting observation I have made is that most pilots, when we had them select early at the FRS, wanted F's. Once we changed our syllabus to train them single seat the majority of pilots wanted single seat for their selection.

-As far as the single vs. two seat, well there are perks to both. I think I could happily go back to a two seat squadron, but I am glad I flew single seat for my first tour. There is a certain amount of pride in being able to do everything for yourself, and it is the only single seat plane left in the navy.

-Most instructor pilots who leave the FRS for a follow on tour prefer to do what they did in their first fleet tour. If they flew single seat they almost always want to return single seat, and vice versa.

 

[Pugs]

Here is the deal:
The E/F has a few improvements in certain areas, but nothing dramatic. The C flies a little more nimble in certain areas, ditching, or visual bombing. It's a wash in my opinion.

Guess you only get to be nimble in that ditching manuever once huh? :icon_tong

 

[T37Driver]

If you go Rhinos it will be decided at the RAG....the two coasts differ in how they choose.....122 out at lemoore has everyone go through as an E guy i believe(somebody back me up on this) and then when they get towards the boat they designate echo or fox. The argument being you can make an E guy an F guy, but not necessarily the other way around. At 106 they designate E or F before fams.

You are right but E/F designate before FAMs is a recent thing really. However, I do like the new way it is. You learn to work with your WSO early on and not be concerned throughout your time there whether you're going one way or other. I am personally enjoying the single seat...Experiences will VARY.
Oceana sucked but not nearly as bad as Lemoore. Kinda miss the town center and Red Star...Ah, good times.

 

[Single Seat]

Concur with all the other Hornet guys on choice.

Single Seat vs. Trunkmonkeys: There's a certain amount of pride to doing the job yourself, and being a single seat guy. Less explaining to do at airshows about who does what, and a single seat jet just looks cooler. That there are PLENTY of times I would have loved (and would love) to have someone to help. In the short hairs doing a DCA at night on goggles, trying to maintain sight of everyone, shoot, notch, work your radar, etc. in a pop trying to refine a designation on the FLIR, gain a tally on the target, roll in, maintain sight, you get the picture. Sure you can do the job single seat, but you have to be that much better (which I'm not yet) to do it all yourself. Oh, and having someone in the back to maintain sight when you're defensive would be nice. Twice as many Officers in the squadron would be nice on occasion as well.

Charlies Vs. Super: The Charlie is lighter, faster, a wee bit more manuverable than the Super, and last count I knew there were a few weps we could carry they can't, but as was said, 15 years olf vs. 5. I'm flying higher lot "newer" Charlies and they're still showing their age. We've got all the toys (402's, APG-73, ATFLIR, etc) but maint. still has their hands full keeping them up and the trap life is growing FAST.

Bottom line as was said, it's all a wash. Everyone is taking bombs to the enemy, but the Charlie is more likely to break on deck, as much as I hate to say it.

 

[wilsonator]

I was exactly as Huggy described. I wanted F's when I started the RAG and wanted E's by the end. Your personality for flying will come out a little in the RAG and although I enjoyed flying with some WSO's, I found myself less distracted on my own. You'll find out what floats your boat. Although I love single seat, I would still rather fly F's than C's just for the sole reason of gas around the ship.

 

[raptor10]

Navy Details New Super Hornet Capabilities

The U.S. Navy's "Advanced Super Hornet" will tie together an electronic attack system with a powerful new radar that would allow the aircraft to find, deceive and, perhaps, disable sophisticated, radar-guided air-to-air, surface-to-air and cruise missiles. Moreover, it could do so at ranges greater than that of new U.S. air-to-air and air-to-ground weapons.

Silence about these key features of the Super Hornet's advanced radar and integrated sensor package is being broken by U.S. Navy and aerospace industry officials just as the President's budget faces scrutiny by Congress. Supporters of the design say it will give the Block II Boeing-built Navy aircraft a fifth-generation capability similar to that of the F-22 Raptor and F-35 Joint Strike Fighter. The Hornet's electronic attack capability could become even more sophisticated with additional modifications, says Capt. Donald Gaddis, F/A-18E/F Super Hornet program manager.

Rhino to Australia: How do you like me now!:icon_smil

 

[Brett327]

Navy Details New Super Hornet Capabilities


Rhino to Australia: How do you like me now!:icon_smil

Yeah, it's called the Shocker.

Brett

 

[Goober]

Didn't say there was..

I may be driving the largest TrunkMonkey transport if Goober has his way..

That's right, bucko...now you just mind your P's and Q's, mister...

Then again, you've got your choice - plane full of NFOs or plane full of (soon to be) COD AWs...

 

[Goober]

Out of curiousity, do E2s or C2s use goggles at all?

There had been talk of it, but at least as of 2004, no. Going back through 120 recently has led me to think that's still the case out in the fleet squadrons. IFR may change that, but even the S-3 didn't use NVGs for IFR (IFR as in refueling).

 

[MasterBates]

During the LEAPEX that was getting my training syllabus arranged, a few people in the VAW/VRC community asked what my quals were, and when I said NVGI (among others) I started getting asked a lot of NVG questions...

That's why I asked...

 

[ProwlerPilot]

A long shot strategy to throw into the mix. Pick Prowlers and be a part of the EA-18G transition, coming to an FRS near you in 2008. Granted, you might get stuck in Prowlers for a couple years, but hey, you can learn to REALLY fly the ball instead of just referencing it!! You get to live in Whidbey, which I think has more to offer than Lemoore, but you will not be a fighter jock. You get a GIB (in fact 3 for the final Prowler years). I would guess you would be in a 18G Growler (not Shocker, even though all of us pushed for it) in about 3 years at most. Probably wouldn't be my choice. Hornets and Supers were first on my list, but hey, needs of the navy!!!

 

[Brett327]

Shocker

You're not giving up that easily, are you? Falcon:Viper / Growler:Shocker

Brett