For those who are voluntold or are going to volunteer for Vance AFB flight training!

[zab1001]

Yeah, I misread CircleK, I thought he was referring to 737 MMA advanced.

 

[highlyrandom]

"Actually, a stud recently selected P-3's here at VT-28 and was sent to Vance for training"

I believe you, but training in what? I thought turboprop training was key to the whole P-3 thing because you get all those asym thrust scenarios and feathering props and such. Weird. Have details? It's probably someone from my API class, they all selected within the last 2-3 weeks.

 

[zab1001]

I believe you, but training in what? I thought turboprop training was key to the whole P-3 thing because you get all those asym thrust scenarios and feathering props and such.

Nah. It's more to ingrain the side-by-side, pilot copilot, CRM thing. That and the heavy emphasis on instruments, shooting approaches with emergencies/checklists/comms, yadda yadda.

I have no idea what a single engine approach in a T-1 feels like, but I'd wager it's pretty different from the T-44/C-12 (is a T-1 considered centerline or assymetric thrust?).

Feathering a prop isn't a big deal, I'd wager it isn't mych different than shutting down an engine on a T-1 ("left/right, confirm?" "left engine confirm" etc)

Regardless, when you hit the RAG, as a CP/3P, you only do 3 engine landings, which aren't all that difficult (at least at training weights). "The aircraft reacts to total thrust" (P-3 Job Aid?) The assymetry issue isn't that bad until you start talking about 2 engine landings, which aren't introduced until a few months into your Fleet squadron's 2P program. By that time, you've forgotten pretty much everything from your advanced days anyway.

The issue of the prop training...eh...the power plant and prop on a P-3 operate very differently from the trainer systems. We get our share of retreads from other platforms that don't have to go through any trainer syllabus and jump right into the P-3.

There are a few ONAV and VNAVs at the end of the syllabus, but really, they're more for show-and-tell, "there I was" from your IP.

The only disadvantage I see is the lack of Orion and Aries IPs to gouge you up on the Fleet and their platforms. The Navy guys are also notorious in VT-31 and VT-35 for being systems Nazis, which is just preparation for the RAG and the Fleet. Standard advice is appropriate "Do what you can to stay in Navy training. If you can't, suck it up, you'll come back someday."

 

[bunk22]

You Naval service guys/dolls need to look at AF JSUPT as an extention of OCS/TBS. Very rigid, inflexible and professional. The USAF takes it quite seriously in creating the absolute best military aviators in the world. The AF mission is to totally dominate the aerospace arena anywhere on the planet. That's their only reason for existence. Whether it's downtown Bagdad or downtown Moscow. They are the FIRST team in AIR POWER. They must be the best on what they do. No credit in combat on being second best.

Could it be more lax, perhaps. But so could Navy OCS or USMC OCS/TBS but it isn't. The Navy OCS and USMC OCS/TBS standards will never be lowered to be more enjoyable. In fact, you can compare AF JSUPT to the Marines TBS. High standards, pressure cooker environment, and team oriented.

Remember in the USAF, the majority of combatants are aviators/officer and they must be tested as early as possible for their flying/leadership abilities.

Each service flight program produces a quality product. But never dis ANY service when it truly test their students and brings on the pain.

I glad to see that some Naval officer realize the AF is not a walk in the park. The Navy/Marine have quite a mission around the boat. And, they must expect/demand the USAF to be the best AF in the world.

If you want a laid back flight training environment, don't go AF. You will be tested and the AF WILL BRING ON THE PAIN.

Probaby the most gay reply I've ever read on this site. Good job turbo :icon_smil Otherwise, great thread though. Just a quick question for those who have flown the T-6, what makes it a little hot rod? I've heard some good stuff about it. Reason I ask is I just might get orders as a T-6 IP at a certain NFO squadron in P-Cola.

 

[Goober]

You Naval service guys/dolls need to look at AF JSUPT as an extention of OCS/TBS. Very rigid, inflexible and professional. The USAF takes it quite seriously in creating the absolute best military aviators in the world. The AF mission is to totally dominate the aerospace arena anywhere on the planet. That's their only reason for existence. Whether it's downtown Bagdad or downtown Moscow. They are the FIRST team in AIR POWER. They must be the best on what they do. No credit in combat on being second best.

Could it be more lax, perhaps. But so could Navy OCS or USMC OCS/TBS but it isn't. The Navy OCS and USMC OCS/TBS standards will never be lowered to be more enjoyable. In fact, you can compare AF JSUPT to the Marines TBS. High standards, pressure cooker environment, and team oriented.

Remember in the USAF, the majority of combatants are aviators/officer and they must be tested as early as possible for their flying/leadership abilities.

Each service flight program produces a quality product. But never dis ANY service when it truly test their students and brings on the pain.

I glad to see that some Naval officer realize the AF is not a walk in the park. The Navy/Marine have quite a mission around the boat. And, they must expect/demand the USAF to be the best AF in the world.

If you want a laid back flight training environment, don't go AF. You will be tested and the AF WILL BRING ON THE PAIN.

 

[Ex Rigger]

Probably? I'm just glad we all found ourselves enlightened to the fact that the AF BRINGS THE PAIN!:icon_lol:

 

[ACurry]

Actually, a stud recently selected P-3's here at VT-28 and was sent to Vance for training.

I've talked to several Navy Instructors here at Vance regarding Adavanced for P-3 selects here. THe answer I've been given is that there is no reason for them sending P-3 selects here since the AF does heavy training on T-1 Jayhawks. So as far from what I've been told. P-3 selects will NOT be going to Vance for Advanced Training. Nice rumor though.

 

[highlyrandom]

woohoo

More correctly, I'm glad the rumor has been put to rest, so that I have a better idea of where I might be moving. Uh...

 

[T37Driver]

I didn't think Vance was bad at all. I'm not just saying that because I got my pick, I actually enjoyed my time there. Kinda miss some things about the AF but then again, I'm one of those guys who wanted to be an F-15C pilot before I signed up with the Navy. Don't get me wrong, I love the Navy so don't start bashing me. LOL

 

[TrunkMonkey]

Probaby the most gay reply I've ever read on this site. Good job turbo :icon_smil Otherwise, great thread though. Just a quick question for those who have flown the T-6, what makes it a little hot rod? I've heard some good stuff about it. Reason I ask is I just might get orders as a T-6 IP at a certain NFO squadron in P-Cola.

I've never flown in the T-34, so I have no basis for comparison, but the things that I hear cited most often as to why the T-6 is "better" are the ejection seat, the air conditioning, glass cockpit, and better birdstrike protection. With its flaws being flimsy gear, tires that explode easily, no beta, and a crappy fuel gauge.

 

[bunk22]

I've never flown in the T-34, so I have no basis for comparison, but the things that I hear cited most often as to why the T-6 is "better" are the ejection seat, the air conditioning, glass cockpit, and better birdstrike protection. With its flaws being flimsy gear, tires that explode easily, no beta, and a crappy fuel gauge.

I would imagine the ejection seats are no doubt a benefit. I would think the tires exploding are tied into the braking system, like on the E-2 and C-2. Meaning the brakes are on top of the rudder pedals and some pilots push on the rudder and inadvertently step on the brake at high speed, blowing the tire. No beta? Interesting.

 

[Fly Navy]

I would imagine the ejection seats are no doubt a benefit. I would think the tires exploding are tied into the braking system, like on the E-2 and C-2. Meaning the brakes are on top of the rudder pedals and some pilots push on the rudder and inadvertently step on the brake at high speed, blowing the tire. No beta? Interesting.

That's why man created Anti-Skid.

The T-6A also has much more power than the T-34C.

 

[bunk22]

That's why man created Anti-Skid.

The T-6A also has much more power than the T-34C.

No anti-skid for the Grumman products. I've never blown a tire on the COD, knock on wood. Sure, I've crashed one but the tires didn't blow.......they melted in the fire.....very different

 

[Fly Navy]

No anti-skid for the Grumman products. I've never blown a tire on the COD, knock on wood. Sure, I've crashed one but the tires didn't blow.......they melted in the fire.....very different

 

[jg5343]

I would imagine the ejection seats are no doubt a benefit. I would think the tires exploding are tied into the braking system, like on the E-2 and C-2. Meaning the brakes are on top of the rudder pedals and some pilots push on the rudder and inadvertently step on the brake at high speed, blowing the tire. No beta? Interesting.

Not sure why we would need beta in a plane that stops in less than 3k' of runway no problem. I have also never had to even worry about running out of fuel in it so the gas guage is never an issue. As far as blowing tires goes, no one has in 6 months that I have been here, nor have they warned us of the dangers that they easily will.