• 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

USMC RW - Strike Transition / Conversion

PMPT

Well-Known Member
Just as an FYI, they're no longer sending Marines to the boat to CQ (at least in Kingsville, can't speak for Meridian). They waived a bunch of phase two flights for Navy guys, but the Marines will end up doing them all, thus taking about the same amount of time.

yes, my understanding right now is that DCA has not officially yet signed off on the change, but for the time being it does look like CQ is dead in the water unless you end up as a F-35C selectee. and yes we are maybe losing 1.5 hours of flight time but we are making it back up with more low levels/strike stuff. frankly i'm pretty gutted to not go to the boat and do arrested landings (the heart and soul of fixed wing naval aviation, no less), but alas.
 

whitesoxnation

Well-Known Member
pilot
Contributor
yes, my understanding right now is that DCA has not officially yet signed off on the change, but for the time being it does look like CQ is dead in the water unless you end up as a F-35C selectee. and yes we are maybe losing 1.5 hours of flight time but we are making it back up with more low levels/strike stuff. frankly i'm pretty gutted to not go to the boat and do arrested landings (the heart and soul of fixed wing naval aviation, no less), but alas.

I’m not proximal to the problem or the T-45, but why not just get guys to the RAG faster and cut out all the “extra” stuff to make up for the lack of the boat.

Extra experience in 500’ low levels and CCIP (at best) bombing are two things we don’t need. We need bodies in cockpits in the fleet learning fleet tactics and, yes, filling ground jobs that right now a lot of people are dual hatting to cover down on.
 

PMPT

Well-Known Member
your guess is as good as mine. the ironic thing is that the items that have been revived were thrown out in november as being outdated or, I guess, not being worth the time being put into them.

edit: might have been dec or jan that a waiver was brought in to axe them. I can't recall.
 

Treetop Flyer

Well-Known Member
pilot
yes, my understanding right now is that DCA has not officially yet signed off on the change, but for the time being it does look like CQ is dead in the water unless you end up as a F-35C selectee. and yes we are maybe losing 1.5 hours of flight time but we are making it back up with more low levels/strike stuff. frankly i'm pretty gutted to not go to the boat and do arrested landings (the heart and soul of fixed wing naval aviation, no less), but alas.
Are they keeping all the FCLP’s? That’s a good chunk of the flight time in advanced
 

PMPT

Well-Known Member
Are they keeping all the FCLP’s? That’s a good chunk of the flight time in advanced

I'm not 100% sure. you'd have thought it would save alot of time but by the numbers I had seen, the flights added back in would somehow nearly equal the hours being cut.
 

Pakol

Learner's permit
pilot

Nothing like being 2/3rds of the way through CQLs and yanked back into BFM. I didn't want to go C's Miramar anyway ?
 

wlawr005

Well-Known Member
pilot
Contributor
The syllabus waivers and changes are being dictated from way up the chain. No one close to the problem agrees with them and have several alternative ideas that are being vetted for presentation. Ultimately an entire rewrite is coming soon with less emphasis on Intermediate and more on Advanced. The FRS should be dictating what syllabus they want and since we have five T/M/S FRSs we are servicing it takes awhile to get everyone in agreement. The most obvious COA is to tailor flight training to platform, thus reducing the overall time and cost to train. However, that requires an overhaul of MPTS and the overall platform selection process itself. To add to the conundrum, CQ might be going away entirely by the end of the year and there may be a new jet training platform in use within the next five. I foresee a solution sometime in 2045, give or take a decade.

If IPs were waiving flights we'd waive BIs entirely, cut RIs in half, make the syllabus function so you could do FAM and AN together. Cut basic form and cruise form in half, and emphasize TACADMIN from day one. Additionally the NFAM syllabus is dumb and FCLPs may be going away entirely. That's all Intermediate flight hours that could be spent in Advanced doing stuff that actually prepares you for the FRS.
 
Last edited:

Flash

SEVAL/ECMO
None
Super Moderator
Contributor
To add to the conundrum, CQ might be going away entirely by the end of the year and there may be a new jet training platform in use within the next five.

Are both those for real? I know the USAF selected a new jet trainer, the T-7, is the Navy getting on that bandwagon too? And no CQ?
 

SynixMan

HKG Based Artificial Excrement Pilot
pilot
Contributor
Maybe I’m just a dumb helo guy, but TCQ always seemed like an immense use of resources, both in flight hours and the boat. In today’s fiscal environment, add in magic carpet and possible Navy only trainer replacement, not surprised they are being revisited.
 

Python

Well-Known Member
pilot
Contributor
Maybe I’m just a dumb helo guy, but TCQ always seemed like an immense use of resources, both in flight hours and the boat. In today’s fiscal environment, add in magic carpet and possible Navy only trainer replacement, not surprised they are being revisited.
Before Magic Carpet it is most definitely NOT a waste of time or resources. But since PLM is here, the debate is reasonable.
I’m just surprised they’re removing so much stuff from intermediate. I understand the emphasis being on advanced to prepare for the FRS, but I can’t help but think that shortening the basics will leave students underprepared for advanced.
 

taxi1

Well-Known Member
pilot
Before Magic Carpet it is most definitely NOT a waste of time or resources. But since PLM is here, the debate is reasonable.
I’m just surprised they’re removing so much stuff from intermediate. I understand the emphasis being on advanced to prepare for the FRS, but I can’t help but think that shortening the basics will leave students underprepared for advanced.
Quantity has a quality all its own, including quantity of flight time. Ass time in the cockpit doing pilot stuff.

Wonder if you couldn't expand the T6 time with much more solo ops, independent ops, X-countries. Bomb dropping. Form acro. Can it do BFM-lite? I never flew it, so completely spit-balling.
 

Jim123

DD-214 in hand and I'm gonna party like it's 1998
pilot
Wonder if you couldn't expand the T6 time with much more solo ops, independent ops, X-countries. Bomb dropping. Form acro. Can it do BFM-lite? I never flew it, so completely spit-balling.
The T-6 has plenty of its own availability issues. The Navy hasn't invested in enough spare parts and other support, pretty much from day one. And improvements where a little bit would go a long way (such as decent tires) have come at the speed of government.
 

xmid

Registered User
pilot
Contributor
Wonder if you couldn't expand the T6 time with much more solo ops, independent ops, X-countries. Bomb dropping. Form acro. Can it do BFM-lite? I never flew it, so completely spit-balling.

We tried doing some of this. Shifting some intermediate flights to the T-6 and changing our approach speeds to mimic the T-45. Advanced eliminated some BI/RI events and their students struggled. I was told they were doing partial panel work in the T-45, and we didn't have the ability to fail instruments in the T-6. So the students were entering BI/RI's further along in the syllabus without having any exposure to partial panel.
 

taxi1

Well-Known Member
pilot
We tried doing some of this. Shifting some intermediate flights to the T-6 and changing our approach speeds to mimic the T-45. Advanced eliminated some BI/RI events and their students struggled. I was told they were doing partial panel work in the T-45, and we didn't have the ability to fail instruments in the T-6. So the students were entering BI/RI's further along in the syllabus without having any exposure to partial panel.
It was a thought...

As an aside, when I did safe for solo checks in the T-2, I got in the habit of bringing along some tape and taping over the student's attitude gyro before the flight. The plane was up for VFR without one. It was interesting the impact it had on the quality and precision of flying. :eek:
 
Top