HeliFOs

[bert]

Two points:

Pumas VERTREP single piloted. I don't listen to the other pilot -- just the AW.

The guy in the left seat on a SOF mission / CSAR mission runs the mission: Nav, Comms, FLIR......kinda sounds just like ASW to me.....

And again, the Brits do it.....and everyone has availability issues....

You "don't listen" to the other pilot because you are already a HAC and presumably won't need a little advice from your co-pilot since you are already where you are supposed to be doing what you are supposed to be doing. If a 2P didn't listen to your "suggestions" while still in the learning curve I hope you would boot his ass out and get another that looked just like him.

(And as a side note, VERTREP isn't really going to last as a fleet mission anyways.)

Personally, I don't see this changing because we wouldn't really save any money unless we left a seat empty. It isn't that we couldn't make it happen with a FO, it is just that there is not enough incentive to bother trying.

 

[CWJones411]

What are the primary reasons front or back seat NFOs are not given sticks in fixed wing aircraft?

 

[Gatordev]

Personally, I don't see this changing because we wouldn't really save any money unless we left a seat empty. It isn't that we couldn't make it happen with a FO, it is just that there is not enough incentive to bother trying.

I'm sure there's at least another few ways of saying this that can make the thread last several more pages. I'm game if you are. Smiles, of course.

(And as a side note, VERTREP isn't really going to last as a fleet mission anyways.)

HSL/HSM (again, the original premise of the thread/post) will most likely always operate independently at some point, in which case VERTREP will still be done by a fleet pilot/airframe (and not EverBlackKMAXWater).

 

[bert]

I'm sure there's at least another few ways of saying this that can make the thread last several more pages. I'm game if you are. Smiles, of course.

HSL/HSM (again, the original premise of the thread/post) will most likely always operate independently at some point, in which case VERTREP will still be done by a fleet pilot/airframe (and not EverBlackKMAXWater).

Since I can't stay on topic anyways... LMSI and Kaman have a partnership going now for a UAV Kmax currently in the demo stage but getting a fair amount of interest from the services. If somebody decides to drop the coin it really doesn't have far to go to be ready.

 

[MasterBates]

UAV for VERTREP?

That being said, I like the K-Max. Flies nice.

 

[A4sForever]

What are the primary reasons front or back seat NFOs are not given sticks in fixed wing aircraft?

They haven't been trained to fly the aircraft ... ???

 

[ea6bflyr]

They haven't been trained to fly the aircraft ... ???

That's funny, I knew a whole bunch of S-3 NFOs that could fly the jet. Some C-12's have NFOs in the right seat. In addition, way back when, they used to have Aircrewman fly in the right seat of the S-2 at Barking Sands.

I still defer back to my previous point that flying in a dynamic environment at LOW altitude is more suited for two single anchors up front.

So that's the real reason they got rid of the A-6. Damn Pilots trying to rule the world.....

-ea6bflyr

 

[A4sForever]

That's funny, I knew a whole bunch of S-3 NFOs that could fly the jet. Some C-12's have NFOs in the right seat. In addition, way back when, they used to have Aircrewman fly in the right seat of the S-2 at Barking Sands....

Immaterial ... it's a non-argument. I can run the NFO system in any aircraft I've ever set foot in ... not as good as the mission NFO ... but like you said: "could" ...

It's not any more germane (and I don't mean Jackson) than saying that "I" could run the B/N mission from the left seat in the A-6. I COULD have (and did) in a very limited fashion when the need arose ... but "doing it" and being the "real deal" is light years apart.

Having flown the C-12 quite a bit -- I can state w/ no hesitation or reservation that an NFO in the right seat is only good for conversation on a long LOG flight and switching radios ..

NFO's aren't trained to fly ... soooooooooooooo ... until that changes ... ??? What's the point of all this useless exercise in mental masturbation ... ???

 

[bunk22]

That's funny, I knew a whole bunch of S-3 NFOs that could fly the jet. Some C-12's have NFOs in the right seat. In addition, way back when, they used to have Aircrewman fly in the right seat of the S-2 at Barking Sands.

Define "fly"....I could get my 10 year old to fly an aircraft as well. Lot more to it than that. There is a simple reason there are those with two anchors and those with one. If there wasn't a reason and difference for it, there wouldn't be two types of wings.

 

[S.O.B.]

Define "fly"....I could get my 10 year old to fly an aircraft as well. Lot more to it than that. There is a simple reason there are those with two anchors and those with one. If there wasn't a reason and difference for it, there wouldn't be two types of wings.

Woooooooo...Easy now........Please don't define "fly." Last time I got into this debate my avatar changed to a dick or something, my signature had me proclaiming that "I liked cock", and I was locked out for a week. Some FOs are very sensitive to the definition of "fly."

http://www.airwarriors.com/forum/showthread.php?t=142125

 

[HooverPilot]

That's funny, I knew a whole bunch of S-3 NFOs that could fly the jet. Some C-12's have NFOs in the right seat. In addition, way back when, they used to have Aircrewman fly in the right seat of the S-2 at Barking Sands.



So that's the real reason they got rid of the A-6. Damn Pilots trying to rule the world.....

-ea6bflyr

I have tried with all my might to stay out of this thread...but you sucked me in. This is a useless argument. In the Viking community, the NFO's are outstanding NFO's and very well trained copilots. They learn it from the beginning at the FRS. The front seat NFO (COTAC) provided backup on the instruments and outside scan throughout the flight. Actually, they were tasked with all the duties of a copilot in the cockpit except flying & the safety of flight decisions.

Yes, in the Viking we often let the NFO's fly the airplane. Not all the time, but at the right time. Some days we would have a "competition". the guy who saw the contact first got to fly the rig, we would cloud surf, I even let a few NFO's try a touch & go during FCLP's. However, the NFO never flew the pass at the boat, never did the night rigs, never flew a weapons delivery profile, never flew the night rendevous or tanking. Why? Because that was my job/Mission. The NFO had a job/Mission too, it just wasn't flying. So yes, many NFO's got plenty of stick time in the Viking (and some even got pretty good), but the mission flying was done by the pilot while the NFO did their part of the mission.

As to this discussion, meh, waste of time. Bert hit it on the head. We (the Navy) have a way of doing things, and it isn't going to change...

 

[HooverPilot]

I agree with you Nose, but there's the argument that S-3 did it.

Not to say that they did not have mishaps that were attributed to the low-time pilot factor.

There have been several mishaps that were a direct result of a low time pilot. same in any community that has a single pilot airframe. The S-3 was multi-piloted when it first came into the Navy. Holdover from the S-2 days. It was quickly discovered that the jet was capable of being flown safely with just 1 pilot and the mission was improved with another NFO to assist with the ASW mission. I can't comment on flying heavy ASW in the Viking. When I started flying the bird in 2000, that mission area had pretty much been dropped. We could work as a torp/buoy truck for another asset, but we couldn't prosecute a contact solo. No acoustic ability left in the aircraft. They also took the SENSO out of the aircraft at the same time.

 

[ea6bflyr]

Immaterial ... it's a non-argument. I can run the NFO system in any aircraft I've ever set foot in ... not as good as the mission NFO ... but like you said: "could" ...

It's not any more germane (and I don't mean Jackson) than saying that "I" could run the B/N mission from the left seat in the A-6. I COULD have (and did) in a very limited fashion when the need arose ... but "doing it" and being the "real deal" is light years apart.

Having flown the C-12 quite a bit -- I can state w/ no hesitation or reservation that an NFO in the right seat is only good for conversation on a long LOG flight and switching radios ..

NFO's aren't trained to fly ... soooooooooooooo ... until that changes ... ??? What's the point of all this useless exercise in mental masturbation ... ???

A4s et al,
My post was not to ruffle feathers, but to provoke thought with an OPEN MIND, not mental masterbation. While NFOs currently are taught limited Aviator skills in primary, this could evolve with a paradigm shift to re-define what NFOs can and cannot do with the appropriate training. Could I fly a Helicopter, YES, and I have. Could I fly a fixed wing prop or jet aircraft, YES and I have. Could an NFO fly in the left seat of a Helo? Yes, with the proper training.

In my time in the Navy, I have always taken on assignments with the 'can-do' Navy spirit. Instead of saying NOPE, NEVER, CAN'T DO; let me ask:
How could NFO flight training change in order to take on co-pilot flying responsibilities? Whether it be a Helo or Jet?

-ea6bflyr

 

[NozeMan]

It wouldn't be as simple as altering NFO training to use them in the Helo world....you'd have to completely revamp the pilot training as well. The HTs are meant to produce competent copilots and the FRS produces competent copilots in model. Our sylabi would have to be lengthened to produce qualified PICs. Our ~7 month advanced would be a LOT longer, probably closer to the jet advanced and our FRS would be significantly longer as well.

 

[A4sForever]

A4s et al,
My post was not to ruffle feathers, but to provoke thought with an OPEN MIND, not mental masterbation.....

I know, I get it, no harm, no foul ... just make certain you wear a cruise sock over your head ... you know; for the "mental" part ...