• Please take a moment and update your account profile. If you have an updated account profile with basic information on why you are on Air Warriors it will help other people respond to your posts. How do you update your profile you ask?

    Go here:

    Edit Account Details and Profile

Neil Armstrong's primary grades

NavAir42

I'm not dead yet....
pilot
I've recently been reading a biography on Neil Armstrong by James Hansen called First Man. Hansen dedicates a chapter on Armstrong going through primary at Whiting. I was a little surprised and even a little encouraged to see that the first man to set foot on the moon had a tough time in Fams. Included in the chapter are several of the grade sheet comments for the 18 flights that lead up to soloing in the SNJ. I thought some of you in primary (and many of you well past primary) would get a kick out of seeing the instructor comments Armstrong received.

Fam 2- Average to above. Student looks around very good &appears to be at ease. Applies instructions above average.

Fam 5- Good hop, satisfactory progress.

Fam 6- Good on procedures for stalls; however has difficulty maintaining constant attitudes. Coordination is weak.

Fam 7- Rough on coordination. Is slow to use tabs (trim) when attitude is changed.

Fam 8- Rough coordination, esp. in turns. Tries to level off at the 90 on approaches instead of making a continuous turn. Has a little trouble maintaining heading on touch and goes.

Fam 9- Doesn't use trim enough- coordination in general is rough. Poor speed and attitude control in the landing pattern.

Fam 11- Entire period, with the exception of spin and high altitude emergency, spent on landings. Good hop.

Fam 12- Aileron and erratic rudder pressures on recoveries. Slow reacting, improper procedures on low altitude emergencies.

Fam 13- Shows very god progress on landing pattern & landings. Mixed up on wind directions on first two high altitude emergencies. Poor pattern.

Fam 14- Unsure of himself on high altitude emergency.

Fam 15- Overall UNSAT. Unsatisfactory for landings: overshot centerline every time on approaches; levels off too high. Below average: taxiing uses too much power and rides brakes; recovers too low on stalls, over controls. Emergencies: no flaps on low emergency, too short on high emergency. Headwork: not thinking enough.

After downing Fam 15 Armstrong went through a training jacket review with the Ops O. He subsequently returned to training, got out of fams and soloed, selected jets, earned his wings, killed commies in Korea, and became the first man to set foot on the moon. Not bad for a guy who downed a flight in primary.

Those of you having a hard time in primary just remember that even Neil Armstrong had a tough time.
 

BACONATOR

Well-Known Member
pilot
Contributor
Wow. Great stuff. Reminds me of the relatively un-impressive COL Mike Mullane as a stud...who turned out relatively impressive in the end.
 

Uncle Fester

Robot Pimp
None
Super Moderator
Contributor
There's a bit in "The Right Stuff" about Chuck Yeager and Neil Armstrong (who was an X-15 pilot at the time). It seems one day it'd been raining at Edwards and there were some questions about whether the Dry Lake was too muddy to land. Chuck says he's been flying out there for 15 years and he knows for a fact it'll be too muddy, but Neil (who by all accounts was a very smart mammal) says that accoring to the metro charts and tables, blah blah blah, it should be acceptable.

So finally the two of them go out in a Cessna to do a test-landing, and sure enough, they get stuck. Chuck says, "Well, Neil, in a few hours it'll be dark, and the temperature's going down to zero, and we're two guys standing out here in the mud wearing windbreakers. Got any good ideas?"

It's always the smart guys who get you in the most trouble.
 

FlybyWired06

New Member
Don't forget, Chuck was also reportedly a STUD during flight training. I read his autobiography and he apparently flew near perfectly on every flight. No specifics were mentioned as far as scores...Moreover, Chuck was an extremely intelligent individual. It isn't that "It's always the smart guys who get you in the most trouble," as Fester says. You get in trouble when you overthink issues and sell your soul to charts and tables and even not so smart (?) people can do that. Chuck also possessed great common sense when it came to flying...but not so great when he was ripping around the desert at night on a motorcyle with no headlight! (also in his autobiography)

I'd be curious to know whether there are any more stories like Neil's out there. Amazing, you can just squeek by in Primary and still be a successful Naval Officer and human being???
 

plc67

Active Member
pilot
Some don't get through at all and still do alright. The name Chesty Puller comes to mind.
 

Pugs

Back from the range
None
I read his autobiography and he apparently flew near perfectly on every flight.

Yep, almost broke his own arm patting himself on his back. Two others I know who were USAF TPS guys of my Grandfather's era were less impressed.
 

Huggy Bear

Registered User
pilot
Chuck Yeager could also routinely visually spot bogeys at over 50 miles while in Germany (also from his autobiography). Sounds more like Chuck Norris to me.
 

phrogpilot73

Well-Known Member
Chuck Yeager could also routinely visually spot bogeys at over 50 miles while in Germany (also from his autobiography). Sounds more like Chuck Norris to me.
Chuck Norris doesn't spot bogeys. He spots parachutes of pilots who have bailed out rather than dogfight Chuck Norris.
 

Flash

SEVAL/ECMO
None
Super Moderator
Contributor
There's a bit in "The Right Stuff" about Chuck Yeager and Neil Armstrong (who was an X-15 pilot at the time). It seems one day it'd been raining at Edwards and there were some questions about whether the Dry Lake was too muddy to land. Chuck says he's been flying out there for 15 years and he knows for a fact it'll be too muddy, but Neil (who by all accounts was a very smart mammal) says that accoring to the metro charts and tables, blah blah blah, it should be acceptable.

So finally the two of them go out in a Cessna to do a test-landing, and sure enough, they get stuck. Chuck says, "Well, Neil, in a few hours it'll be dark, and the temperature's going down to zero, and we're two guys standing out here in the mud wearing windbreakers. Got any good ideas?"

It's always the smart guys who get you in the most trouble.

Yeager's autobiography is definitely one of the best I have ever read, but I did get the distinct impression that he cut down many of his 'rivals' in the public eye down a bit. Nothing particularly wrong with that, especially coming from someone who has seen and done pretty much what one man could do in aviation, but it is only one man's perspective.

Both men are heroes, without a doubt. But hey, we are all human........except Chuck.....:icon_wink
 

badger16

Well-Known Member
None
I'm reading Boyd,The bio on John "40 sec" Boyd right now and he was also near perfect in his flight training and f'in unbeatable in the air. Amazing guy and pretty good but if you are interested. A little Navy hating, but still good.
 

Gatordev

Well-Known Member
pilot
Site Admin
Contributor
Yeager's autobiography is definitely one of the best I have ever read, but I did get the distinct impression that he cut down many of his 'rivals' in the public eye down a bit. Nothing particularly wrong with that, especially coming from someone who has seen and done pretty much what one man could do in aviation, but it is only one man's perspective.

Really? A hero, no doubt, but I had the hardest time getting through his book. In fact I think I skipped the from the end of WWII to the X-1 (something along the lines of 50 pages) and hadn't missed anything. By 1947 (and said 50 pages later), he was still good at everything, according to him.

Again, a legend and a great asset to aviation history, but sheesh.
 

bunk22

Super *********
pilot
Super Moderator
Chuck Yeager could also routinely visually spot bogeys at over 50 miles while in Germany (also from his autobiography). Sounds more like Chuck Norris to me.

Obviously no disrespect to Yeager, he's a legend afterall and acheived more than I ever will. Yet he was pretty high on himslef in his book as I recall. I supppose he certainly has more than a right to be with his super human abilities, eyesight being one of them. I guess a fighter pilot has to be in the right place at the right time but we can compare his super "Chuck Norris" eyesight to say, our David McCambell, an old man of 34 at the time (or close to it) with not so perfect vision. End result, Yeager...11 kills, a young super human and aviator. McCambell, old fart, bad eyes, 34 kills, 9 on one mission, 7 on another day (5 and 2). Most kills of any US pilot in one tour, most kills on one mission and only US pilot to become an ace in a day twice. Of course as I hear it, McCambell ended his days as an alcoholic. I guess once you've achieved it all, life becomes a bit dull.
 

nittany03

Recovering NFO. Herder of Programmers.
pilot
None
Super Moderator
Contributor
I'm reading Boyd,The bio on John "40 sec" Boyd right now and he was also near perfect in his flight training and f'in unbeatable in the air. Amazing guy and pretty good but if you are interested. A little Navy hating, but still good.
Seems to me that Coram had a little trouble toeing the line between biography and evangelism in that book. A good read, for sure, but to me the author also happened to be blatantly biased towards Boyd.
 
Top