If you're thinking about Dropping out.

[MasterBates]

Both were light years better than VTs for multi

Sent from a van down by the river via Tapatalk

 

[jtmedli]

Both were light years better than VTs for multi

Sent from a van down by the river via Tapatalk

That's what I've heard also.

 

[wlawr005]

I think that jet land is more relaxed with EPs/NATOPs/briefs because jet EPs aren't that hard. Once shit goes wrong, you have a few options and then you either land/trap or eject. We don't have a lot of moving parts or any way to touch/change/switch anything that's broken. We don't even have circuit breakers in the cockpit. Knowing what relay turns on the light bulb for the pressure switch for the number three compressor blade is useless info when you're trying to figure out everything else. Even our systems are pretty simple (just speaking for the T-45 here).

Helos on the other hand are far more complex when it comes to systems and EPs. Systems knowledge greatly influences what actions you take in certain emergencies and you are usually much closer to the ground when shit goes wrong, giving you less time to think about stuff. Jets usually have altitude equaling time, helos don't. I personally think that's the difference regarding the styles...it's just different types of flying.

I could be wrong.

 

[MasterBates]

Pretty much spot on.

Multi adds pain because VP and USAF are involved.

Sent from a van down by the river via Tapatalk

 

[MIDNJAC]

I think that jet land is more relaxed with EPs/NATOPs/briefs because jet EPs aren't that hard. Once shit goes wrong, you have a few options and then you either land/trap or eject. We don't have a lot of moving parts or any way to touch/change/switch anything that's broken. We don't even have circuit breakers in the cockpit. Knowing what relay turns on the light bulb for the pressure switch for the number three compressor blade is useless info when you're trying to figure out everything else. Even our systems are pretty simple (just speaking for the T-45 here).

Helos on the other hand are far more complex when it comes to systems and EPs. Systems knowledge greatly influences what actions you take in certain emergencies and you are usually much closer to the ground when shit goes wrong, giving you less time to think about stuff. Jets usually have altitude equaling time, helos don't. I personally think that's the difference regarding the styles...it's just different types of flying.

I could be wrong.

I'd agree. And once you progress to the grey jets (only speaking to VFA here), while there is maybe just slightly more of an emphasis early in the RAG on systems (compound EP's, sort of twice as many moving parts with 2 motors, etc), it isn't a hallmark of the community, and there is no stump the chump kind of stuff or systems drawing diagrams and other BS up on a briefing board. It is expected that you know them, know your boldface cold, and execute properly and prudently in an actual emergency......and in the legacy world, we have started to see some weird stuff that isn't necessarily in the PCL, so the standard of systems knowledge has probably gone up since our skippers were JO's. But I digress........the emphasis is on tactics, and employing the jet as a weapon. You can't do that without knowing the basics of operating the airplane, but you are useless if you are a master of NATOPS but a moron tactically. The human brain only has so much capacity for information, so you have to pick and choose, and compartmentalize. I don't know if it can be said open source how long our tactical pubs are, but suffice to say that they make the big book look like a leaflet. As a VT student or even Cat 1, the expectation is that you know the tactics, and your flight lead will teach in the brief and the debrief. It is challenging (though I have seen it) to teach someone during the flight if you are not in the same airplane. You have to be trusted to go out and do it on your own 70% of the time, and then all the time in the fleet. So when you are talking about blocks of flight in training that maybe have 1 or 2 dual-ed up hops, to include a safe for solo check, they have to be damned sure you can execute the next 3-4 or how ever many solos after that safely, not just talk about doing it safely. A similar mentality exists for the SWFT wingman stuff in the fleet. Lead briefs and teaches, and then the learning happens in the debrief. Hopefully some learning occurred in the flight, but if you are a bonehead lvl II like I was, then maybe not

 

[CharlieMike]

Thanks for pointing out the differences, everyone.

 

[phrogdriver]

This carries to the overall structures of the communities. Helos are all multi-crewed, and moreover, between the Navy, Marines, and Coast Guard, there are widely disparate missions. The strike pipeline is built around single-pilot aircraft that mostly do one mission (yes, I realize there are some E2/C2 cats in there). They can focus on tactics more earlier in the learning process. It would be pointless to go too deep into attack, assault support, SAR, ASW, or any of the many missions in the naval helo communities. This is especially true when students are going to be winged as copilots and work under the tutelage of HACs for a long time before signing for any gray helos.

 

[PropAddict]

Does anyone who uses the term "Type A" actually know what it really refers to? It's not actually supposed to be a compliment
http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Type_A_and_Type_B_personality_theory

1. Who links to the mobile verison of Wikipedia?!?

2. From Wiki, "The theory describes a Type A individual as ambitious, rigidly organized, highly status conscious, can be sensitive, care for other people, are truthful, impatient, always try to help others, take on more than they can handle, want other people to get to the point, proactive, and obsessed with time management. People with Type A personalities are often high-achieving "workaholics" who multi-task, push themselves with deadlines, and hate both delays and ambivalence."

That describes pretty much every decent pilot or naval officer I've ever met.

Whether it's considered complimentary or not, it seems accurate.

 

[BusyBee604]

I'm fine with the threadjacks.

My challenge now is to find something motivating and exciting other than flying, I don't want to end up in a cubicle (yet) if I can avoid it.



I don't want to piss anyone off or misrepresent what I'm trying to say, so FWIW if I'm totally off feel free to let me know. And this has nothing to do with how things are in the fleet...I'm only going off of what I've observed and heard from my buddies who recently winged.

In some ways, like as far as duty and the command and all that, things seem a little stricter in the HT's.

Most of my friends out there said they had more fun in Advanced than they did in Primary. And some of them did struggle in Primary. I don't know many jet guys that would say the same thing. I mean, there are definitely fun things and things you feel immensely proud at having accomplished, but most guys I talk to are getting their asses kicked right up until their last block of flights.

In T-45 land, the emphasis is more on the flight than the briefings. You may get grilled leading up to an end of block flight/solo, but generally the IP does the talking and you're expected to demonstrate your knowledge of the procedures and maneuvers during the flight. The whole process usually takes two hours, but only because you're showing up an hour early to claim your board and get it and the computer setup. From what I've heard about helos, every brief is an interview to go flying that the stud has to pass, most taking around 2 hours, and you can expect to get grilled. The understanding is that if you show up knowing your shit, you can get plenty of instruction in the air if it's just about monkey skills.

I'm pretty sure that like the VTs, the HTs have studs and IPs share the ready room, unlike in Primary. Once you get used to this, it makes perfect sense.

As far as personalities go, I'd wager that the majority of studs that go jets are more type-A. This is purely anecdotal, and it's not a judgment about anyone. Like I said, most of my friends were type-A compared to most civilians, but in the aviation community, probably relatively less so. I also found it interesting how prevalent the Academy guys are out here- I'm an OCS grad. And that almost everyone is engaged, married, or in a pretty serious relationship. Over Christmas, 2-3 guys in my class all got engaged. It'd be interesting to see stats on all of this.

And I'm not saying I wish I went helos, in case it seems that way. When I finished Primary and found out I had the grades, I had to take a shot at jets, and I'm glad I did. I have other friends who debated until the very last minute, and when decision-time came, they had an easy time figuring out what they really wanted.

Mostly speculation, based a bit on your short exposure, but mainly on heresay from others, which may... or may not be valid... With all due respects, you decided on your own, to drop.. er, DOR even just prior to solo, and I guess you have good reason(s), I respect that. I hope you considered that once this action was taken... there would be no "mulligans" i.e., reversal of that decision, and any hope of acceptance for any military aviation training, was gone.

Given your inexperience in the flight training program, I do not believe you are in the least qualified to blog on flight training in general, and advanced or fleet in particular, or give opinions on personality types for different communities

Some of what you say is obvious... like Advanced is easier than Basic/Primary. It has always been thus. You ARE an aviator when you survive to that point, you're just learning a new aircraft/community, and polishing up on flight basics, plus intro to community tactics. That's why there is almost no attrition in advanced.

I (we) wish you well in your future pursuits, you made a tough & gutsy decision. I too, hope you don't end up in the "Home Sweet Cubicle" world, BTDT... it's the pits!
BzB

 

[phrogdriver]

1. Who links to the mobile verison of Wikipedia?!?

2. From Wiki, "The theory describes a Type A individual as ambitious, rigidly organized, highly status conscious, can be sensitive, care for other people, are truthful, impatient, always try to help others, take on more than they can handle, want other people to get to the point, proactive, and obsessed with time management. People with Type A personalities are often high-achieving "workaholics" who multi-task, push themselves with deadlines, and hate both delays and ambivalence."

That describes pretty much every decent pilot or naval officer I've ever met.

Whether it's considered complimentary or not, it seems accurate.

1. I was on my phone.

2. To go further:

Type A Behavior: Its Diagnosis and Treatment, Friedman suggests that Type A behavior is expressed in three major symptoms: free-floating hostility, which can be triggered by even minor incidents; time urgency and impatience, which causes irritation and exasperation usually described as being "short-fused"

The term just gets thrown about wildly, and is used to basically say one is not a slacker. "We're all Type A personalities, here..." That's not what it's really about. It's supposed to be about risk-factors for heart disease.

 

[LFDtoUSMC]

1. I was on my phone.

2. To go further:


The term just gets thrown about wildly, and is used to basically say one is not a slacker. "We're all Type A personalities, here..." That's not what it's really about. It's supposed to be about risk-factors for heart disease.

To really learn about personality types and trait theory one needs to take the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator™.

The MBTI® is a test that was adapted from work completed by Carl Jung in the early 20th century. Katherine Briggs and her daughter Isabel Briggs Myers continued with Jung’s research and the result in the mid 1900’s was the MBTI® This test helps establish personal preferences with regards towards sociological interactions and how understanding those preferences may help individuals and organizations make better use of their and their employees’ preferences.

http://www.humanmetrics.com/cgi-win/JTypes2.asp (This is not the full test, but gives a decent idea of what type you would be.)

http://personalitypage.com/html/high-level.html

 

[phrogdriver]

To really learn about personality types and trait theory one needs to take the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator™.

The MBTI® is a test that was adapted from work completed by Carl Jung in the early 20th century. Katherine Briggs and her daughter Isabel Briggs Myers continued with Jung’s research and the result in the mid 1900’s was the MBTI® This test helps establish personal preferences with regards towards sociological interactions and how understanding those preferences may help individuals and organizations make better use of their and their employees’ preferences.

http://www.humanmetrics.com/cgi-win/JTypes2.asp (This is not the full test, but gives a decent idea of what type you would be.)

http://personalitypage.com/html/high-level.html

I'm too lazy this second to do a literature search, but from what I've read lately, Myers-Briggs is falling out of vogue. This is one example of some newer takes on it.

http://skeptoid.com/episodes/4221

 

[LFDtoUSMC]

I'm too lazy this second to do a literature search, but from what I've read lately, Myers-Briggs is falling out of vogue. This is one example of some newer takes on it.

http://skeptoid.com/episodes/4221

There are certainly valid points in the article. I am not a MBTI fan boy by any stretch. It is just an interesting tool I have used in a few classes along the way as well as completed some surreptitious type-watching. In your linked article as well as other critical articles I have seen, the biggest issue people take with the test is that respondents are cloistered to one of the 16 types. However, they miss the big picture; those types only indicate a preference. Human nature will not allow you to remain in one mind set your entire life, your preferences change based upon many factors.

I am no psychologist, but I do know that is not an exact science. You are bound to have differing opinions. Coupled with the fact that there has been much more research conducted since Jung's I am not surprised that more people are finding fallacies with the MBTI.

 

[scoolbubba]

Both were light years better than VTs for multi

Sent from a van down by the river via Tapatalk

I always thought Multi Advanced was awesome, especially with hindsight. I guess that just goes to show that it can always get worse...or better!

 

[scoolbubba]

Wise words....


I (we) wish you well in your future pursuits, you made a tough & gutsy decision. I too, hope you don't end up in the "Home Sweet Cubicle" world, BTDT... it's the pits!
BzB

BzB, as always, nails it.