HeliFOs

[MasterBates]

I can also see the "HELL NO" argument coming from the pilots on that one, but I would also like to think the Hummoles would also like someone experienced up front.

There was a similar discussion of possibly putting NFOs in HSL-Birds (as the left seater does mostly what are NFO duties), and the "Nugget will kill crew on varsity night" came up as well.

You want me, fresh out of -120 driving you or ODB to the back of the boat on a bad night or with some compound emergency?

Ok, any nugget from -120. You may not want me driving, just because I am me.

 

[Uncle Fester]

...which is the usual argument I get from los pilotes. To which I'd say, somehow the Prowlers and Hooves made do with nuggets in the left and FOs in the right. To which they'd say, yeah, but this pig ain't a jet, no HUD, no ejection seats, and so on.

Of the dark and scary varsity nights I've been flying, I have only once ever seen a nugget get yanked for a seat-swap with the more senior CP (skosh gas in the NAG, single-engine, hot and humid, no power for a wave-off, considering the barricade). I'm sure it's happened other times, but for the most part, the advantage of having two pilots seemed mostly about murmured wisdom and and experienced hand in the right seat.

It's never going to happen - the community collectively made the decision that they'd rather have pilots half-trained as scope monkeys than FOs half-trained as co-pilots.

So to answer your question: sure, why not? Assuming the guy in the right has the training and experience to adequately back him up. That's the real issue, and why I think it's relavent to this discussion.

It kinda seems a catch-22 sort of argument. FOs can't/shouldn't be CPs (or instructors) because they don't have or the training or experience. Why don't we train them or give them or the experience? Because FOs aren't CPs/instructors.

RIOs, WSOs and ECMOs have been soothing aboard rattled nugget pilots for a while now, because they get the training and experience to do so. If the Navy is willing to invest the time and money in training up FOs, I see no reason why they can't be good CPs, COTACs or instructors, even in clown jets.

But what the fuck do I know?

 

[Flash]

There was a similar discussion of possibly putting NFOs in HSL-Birds (as the left seater does mostly what are NFO duties), and the "Nugget will kill crew on varsity night" came up as well.

I don't see the problem with that, the Royal Navy has been doing it for a very long time.

 

[S.O.B.]

I don't see the problem with that, the Royal Navy has been doing it for a very long time.

Do they fly in that configuration under all conditions?

 

[Flash]

Do they fly in that configuration under all conditions?

As far as I know, the only time they fly with two pilots is when they are planning on flying much longer than usual and not mission specific.

http://www.royal-navy.mod.uk/server/show/nav.2398

http://www.visitandlearn.co.uk/trackendurance/simpson.asp

 

[Gatordev]

I don't see the problem with that, the Royal Navy has been doing it for a very long time.

The Royal Navy also doesn't have the availability that HSL does. Yes, it could be done. We could make do with yet another cutback/compromise, but why? And who will VERTREP when the approach is to the port side? Who will fly the take-off when it's to starboard? Could the right seat do all that? Yup, but again, see above.

 

[S.O.B.]

I don't see the problem with that, the Royal Navy has been doing it for a very long time.

I agree, most civilians seem to do it. I think we would need to give our nuggets a few more hours before letting them do single pilot.

 

[Gatordev]

I agree, most civilians seem to do it. I think we would need to give our nuggets a few more hours before letting them do single pilot.

Most civilians are going to the back of the boat at night, possibly on goggles? Everyone seems to be in agreement that using NFOs is bad in this case because, among the many reasons, he/she can't take the controls. Oh no! The dreaded UNDER-RUN!!! (yes, I know it can snowball very quickly). But now you're saying that it makes sense to spend more money and training (money, the very thing that is trying to be reduced) to train up nuggets and then put them w/ someone who can't grab the controls when that same nugget goes into the black hole. Mind you the HSL RAG is already severely over-tasked as it is and keeps getting more items added.

Everyone is railing against stupid decisions, and right now removing a link in the chain by doing away w/ another pilot in a Bravo/Romeo is a perfect example of one of those decisions.

 

[S.O.B.]

I think we give ourselves too much credit. Are we saying that landing a helo at night on a small boy is more difficult than landing a jet at night on a carrier?

It works for the Brits:why wouldn't it work for us?

If money is the issue then we should: 1) train fewer pilots 2) rethink the career path so we get a better ROI (eliminate the b.s. jobs that anyone with bars or leafs can do) 3) treat them better so they stay in.

Just my 2 cents but the way we manage our resources is retarded; you spend a fortune training a guy for is some cases 2 cruises.

 

[Flash]

Most civilians are going to the back of the boat at night, possibly on goggles? Everyone seems to be in agreement that using NFOs is bad in this case because, among the many reasons, he/she can't take the controls........Everyone is railing against stupid decisions, and right now removing a link in the chain by doing away w/ another pilot in a Bravo/Romeo is a perfect example of one of those decisions.

No, but the Royal Navy pilots are. And yet they have been doing this for years in Lynx, Merlin and Sea King helos in the same conditions that the US Navy operates in. But what would would they know?

 

[MasterBates]

Are we saying that landing a helo at night on a small boy is more difficult than landing a jet at night on a carrier?

I can't 100% say it is or it is not, but when I get back from the boat in December, I'll give my rankings for CV Jet(day) vs FFG(dark ass night).

Keep in mind, that Jet SNAs have more time in Navy aircraft when they get winged than I had total when I left the RAG. I hit the same amount of USN hours as a Jet guy who just winged about 1 month into COMPTUEX.

If helo guys got more time in the HTs, to bring the proficiency up it could be done. I don't see them doing that, but it COULD be done. That being said, I saw some really good sticks in the HTs, and also saw some that should have attrited but were in certain protected classes, or "we need completers, wing 'em and let the RAG sort it out" types.

We have a few that sneak in here (like me) but for the most part, those that can't handle going to das boat by themselves don't get here. Helo guys they just hope "get it" and can make HAC and be safe with more time.

 

[Single Seat]

Yeah Dev? The "dreaded under run" is a non-event in the Wiener, you do it in something closing at several hundred knots it gets ugly a lot quicker. Especially when joining up is part of EVERY flight and becomes routine enough to let your guard down. Unlike T-34's where a stud has like 3 flights doing it, and the IP knows to be on their toes.

 

[MasterBates]

Underruns can also get dicey when there's more than 2 planes.

Naval Aviators can learn from NFOs. SNAs, not so much.

Any Triple-Anchor types want to weigh in on this? FLYTPAY? RetreadRand? Intruder Driver?

 

[Gatordev]

Yeah Dev? The "dreaded under run" is a non-event in the Wiener, you do it in something closing at several hundred knots it gets ugly a lot quicker. Especially when joining up is part of EVERY flight and becomes routine enough to let your guard down. Unlike T-34's where a stud has like 3 flights doing it, and the IP knows to be on their toes.

And if you'll notice, I said I understand it can snow-ball, I was just being sarcastic because everyone seems to be rallying against NFOs in the position we're discussing, then when someone else talks about putting NFOs in a similar position, everyone seems to think that's a great idea.

Could it be done? For the freakin' fifth time, I'll say yes, but in the process, the curriculum (HTs and RAG) would have to be extended (read: cost more money and time) and that is the exact opposite of what the Navy is trying to do.

 

[Gatordev]

No, but the Royal Navy pilots are. And yet they have been doing this for years in Lynx, Merlin and Sea King helos in the same conditions that the US Navy operates in. But what would would they know?

There's no need to get flippant. I'll say it again, the Brits, and generally every other country, do not have the availability that the U.S. Navy does day in and day out, to include HSL.

For the sixth time, yes, we could make it work. But that's the problem nowadays...we're stuck in this mode making everything just good enough to get by. Why do this to ourselves when we have a system in place that already has a safety check in place and a curriculum that is already cheaper and shorter than the alternative?

I think we give ourselves too much credit. Are we saying that landing a helo at night on a small boy is more difficult than landing a jet at night on a carrier?

I'm not saying it's harder or easier, but I can think of at least three -60s that went in the water at the back of a small-boy in my short career. I haven't heard of that many ramp-strikes. Again, I don't think it's because it's "harder" (whatever that means), but when two pilots let an aircraft go into the water, taking one of the pilots away doesn't seem to make sense.