JeremiahWeed

I guess I'm missing something here. Does "Holloman" means something else other than an AD base in southern NM? What about it was a bad idea from the start?

Why is this? It's been a while for me, but I always thought it was a pretty good location in terms of ramp space, airspace, terrain, ranges, etc. What happened?

FedEx. However, “left” implies it was voluntary. Initially leaving was their idea - you know.....that whole furlough thing. My role in the outcome began when they recalled me and involved flipping them the bird from my MD-11 right seat making twice what i’d make if I had gone back. One of the best decisions of my life - but, made under different circumstances than today.

I'm going to guess and say you're at UAL? (unless there's another airline out there restricting altitude knobs to the PM only). That was their thing when I was there. The PF never set the altitude on the MCP even with the autopilot engaged. My next and then current airline were the exact opposite. The entire MCP including altitude knob was the PF's with autopilot on - the PM's with it off. FWIW, during my time at UAL the attitude about matching the heading knob was - do it. However, anyone who saw it could just reach up and do it at cruise regardless of who was flying. That wasn't written anywhere, it was just the way it was done.

Just FYI: Airlines give zero f#cks about this. Same training for all no matter how "airline ready" someone might think they are.

I think you'd be disappointed. I don't care that much about it. I've just seen it screwed up enough and flown with certain folks who absolutely lack any level of mental flexibility to work outside the lines occasionally. Huggy asked and I tried to provide a semblance of a valid answer. Buddy Spike added another one.

I'll take a shot at this. Before I do, I will caveat everything by saying I think Boeing's approach to heading bug logic is extremely flawed and I share your frustration with this tedious routine we follow as we fly. My frustration lies in the poor design of the system. However, I do feel that the technique of matching the bug is a necessary evil for a few reasons. I've flown four Boeings (737, 757, 767 and currently fly the 777). I've also flown the A320 and the MD-11. Without getting unnecessarily aircraft specific, I'll just say that there are far better ways to skin this cat and the heading select logic found in other aircraft is vastly superior in my opinion. As you mentioned, the logic includes removal of the bug when not in use. Some systems also can "remember" which direction the heading knob was turned prior to actually engaging the heading mode. In addition, some systems put the heading bug in a dormant state once the aircraft has captured the selected heading. By this I mean it's not always "hot" like on a Boeing and turning the knob to a new heading will not create an immediate turn. The button must be actuated again to begin the turn. I offer this info only to illustrate that someone's background in other aircraft can set up the potential for errors when "muscle memory" and former habits potentially surface at the wrong time during high workload situations. So having everyone start on the same page and keep them on that page when things get busy has huge value in my opinion. Also, FWIW, matching the bug to current heading is procedure at FedEx and was at United when I worked there - not sure about now. You may not be able to find that specifically addressed in your books but I would argue that's it pretty much procedural with most Boeing operators whether they put it in print or not. So, one of the big reasons we do this is standardization. We successfully put two (or more) pilots who've potentially never flown together and only met an hour or two prior together on flights routinely. A major reason this happens uneventfully every day is standardization. You didn't care about the U2 heading bug at times and at others you chose to do something with it you found helpful. In a single seat aircraft you have that luxury since your techniques and opinions are the only ones that matter. At "brand-X" you don't have the same leeway without creating the potential for confusion. I'm not trying to make matching the bug to your heading a bigger deal than it really is, but not doing it can lead to other issues - some big, some small. Maybe it's in the sim or out on the line, but depending on who you're crewed with, what seems like a little thing can turn into something big in rapid fashion. For example: While we all know assumptions are bad and making mode changes without verifying the variables is bad technique, I'm sure you've seen someone just reach up and push the heading knob when ATC clears you to "maintain present heading". Their assumption is the bug is matched - which at many airlines is a valid assumption since it's procedural (not excusing not checking first - but we are dealing with fallible humans). So, you get rushed and give the jet to the other guy in the descent so you can load and brief the approach. Today, you left the bug "over your shoulder" and it's not even visible on the ND. So, he attempts to comply with ATC's instructions and assumes the bug was matched. When the unexpected turn starts, he realizes it isn't and now has to recover. Recovery techniques are going to vary from rapidly dialing in your old current heading (if he remembers), using heading hold, going back to LNAV momentarily, etc. That doesn't even account for the startle factor which will vary based on proficiency level, fatigue, distraction, etc. and may delay the recovery attempt while he tries to figure out what happened. The bottom line is, a matched bug or even something close is going to be more forgiving of bad technique and avoid potentially bigger issues. On a side note - I highly recommend using "Heading Hold" when complying with "maintain present heading" for this very reason (technique only). Since your technique means the heading bug could be anywhere at any time prior to you using heading select, by definition, you have to select something you want with the MCP knob before you engage Heading Select ("center the bug before you mash down" as you put it). On the other hand, those who match the bug can immediately engage Heading Select and then turn the knob to the desired heading. That distinction is important. Since your technique involves an extra step, EVERY TIME you use Heading Select, that's something the pilot monitoring has to be looking for as well. Since it's non-standard, that's going incumbent on you to make sure he's aware that needs to be in his cross-check. For example, ATC gives you a 220 degree heading change "the long way around" to the right. Any heading selected on the left of your compass rose when the button is pushed is going to command a turn to the left. So, are you going to dial in your current heading, THEN engage Heading Select and then command the turn to the right? Every time?... no matter what? Would it ever be possible (habit, task saturated, fatigue, etc) you might first select the desired heading and then engage heading select commanding a left turn you would then need to reverse? I'd guess it's unlikely these issues are going become life or death matters. If they snowball thanks to a really bad day or just Murphy's law, they could still turn ugly with the FAA. Is it really worth any issues arising because you want to make a point? Most likely your airline pays you a pretty good bit of money to fly their jets and they want them flown their way. Why not make it easy on yourself and your crew members and play along?

I'm reading your post with a giant question mark over my head. What extra special insight have have you suddenly been granted while waiting in the OTS pipeline (whatever that is) that's allowed you to witness all this incompetence on the part of the AD USAF? You've spent 4 years in your current position and felt a strong enough call to seek out the OTS/UPT opportunity while somehow remaining unaware of the faults of the USAF? Now that you've been selected, what's changed? Do OTS candidates get on some kind of "Here's all the dumb shit we're doing in the USAF" newsletter mailing list or are you being brought into top secret Lockheed meetings you previously had been left out of? Seriously, what exactly are the "one disaster after another" you have been able to personally witness that's created this level of doubt? I'm not saying there's not plenty of issues with the AD USAF. Generally speaking, those issues don't rise to the level of pain required to make someone consider bailing on the AD until they're a mid-level O-3 approaching the end of their UPT service commitment. You usually don't see that low a pain tolerance in a brand new butter bar never mind a civilian who hasn't even started day-one or raised his hand and taken the oath. Go fly USAF airplanes - fighters if you can. The ANG is a great option if you can swing it without porking away the bird you already have in your hand. But, either way, spend your younger years doing one of the best jobs this country has to offer. Yes, there's a price to pay to do it, sometimes a really big price. I seriously doubt you'll find too many guys here who feel their choice was a mistake.

For the same reason I flew with a S&W .38 revolver from Jan to Mar of 1991.

Agreed. He appears to be confused about his freedom of speech and the job he was hired to do. The first doesn't give him carte blanche to accomplish the second any way he wants. There's that whole syllabus thing. Since I'm pretty confident a HS syllabus doesn't include indoctrination into this little toad's world, he clearly went outside boundaries of what he was hired to teach.

More like he commands them not to die. I'll bet they probably complied.

Noted. So, when someone posts a trailer to an as yet to be released movie and the comment is "that movie was incredible" we're supposed to assume he meant the first one? Nah.... a little clarification would have made it a bit more clear. YMMV.

??? The one just above your post due for release summer 2018?

It may not be on your list of potential employers, but from what I understand, FedEx is holding to the 12.500 lb. GW aircraft regarding flight time. Below is from their pilot credentials section: 1500 hours total fixed-wing time as pilot-in-command (PIC) or second-in-command in multi-engine turbo-prop A/C or jet A/C or combination thereof (GTOW 12,500). A minimum of 1000 hours total fixed-wing pilot-in-command in multi-engine turbo prop A/C or jet A/C or combination thereof (GTOW 12,500 or greater) is preferred.

Concur with Kenny. Unless you can do a Millennium Falcon jump at the merge, no amount of currently available "transonic acceleration" is going to help. You would probably need to already be going 1.5+ to even have a prayer. If you're talking accelerating from turning speeds after a merge, forget it. Separating from an aware 4th Gen or better fighter at the merge or even worse, post-employment from a valid WEZ ain't happening without weapon failure or pilot error.

And those are RFs. Can you imagine a C or E model with 18 mark-82s and some missiles? Min-burner on one engine just to stay on the boom!!

So, do you have some examples of how an air-to-air pilot might apply these principles to employment in 2017? What am I going to do or think differently in an F-22 or even an F-15 as I commit ~100 NM from some inbound hostiles? Back to the B-1 for a moment, when faced with a known threat approaching a BVR WEZ, what is that pilot who is well versed in this line of thinking going to do today that he wouldn't have done a week ago before he read your paper?

I think one of the best periods would have been Korean War - F-86. Gun only jets with a willing adversary who came up and tangled on a pretty regular basis and lots of Aces. Fighter pilot heaven.

Ok, you asked. Fedex 777. Mission is to make the company billions and for me grab some of the crumbs to the tune of $250K a year as a co-pilot(First Officer). Typically work 12-14 days per month either all at once with the rest of the month off or week-on, week-off. Much of that work time is soft time (i.e. not actual flying hours). Typically, I'm paid for 80-90 flight hours each month, but it's rare for me to actually have air under my ass for more than 50 hours each month. Since I'm an FO, many trip are as a relief pilot which involves deadheading around the planet in business or first class to various locations where I will meet up with the crew and act as the "free agent" third or fourth pilot on a long haul flight and then part ways. For the last 10 years straight, I've made the highest level in American Airline's frequent flyer program annually and have 1.5 million miles to use for family leisure travel. I can choose how I orchestrate my passenger deadhead flights using the company money available and any extra $$ is available for various travel expenses incurred in conjunction with any trip. Next month, I will be picked up at my house by a limo (paid for by Fedex) and driven to O'hare to begin my journey to Tokyo. My trip is due to start on a Thursday but since I'm not going to follow the deadhead schedule, I will stay home on day one getting paid. Friday, I will fly from O'hare to Tokyo in a lay flat business class seat sipping single malt and maybe catch a movie. From there, I'll take the bullet train to Osaka and have about 48 hours off before I have to work. My only flight on this trip is a 4-hour leg from Osaka to Guangzhou, China. Once I arrive in China, I'm done. I have a quick 12-hour layover and then I'm scheduled for 3 day deadhead sequence to get back to Memphis. Since I don't want to go to Memphis, I'm going to stick with the original plan of a private car driving me to Hong Kong which will get me to my first flight out. Thanks to my frequent flyer status, American has upgraded me from business to first class on my HKG to DFW flight. Once at DFW, I'll hang in the lounge until my flight back to O'hare. Once back to Chicago, another limo will take me home, dropping me off on Wednesday, 5 days after I was picked up. Since I shaved some time off my trip home by deviating, I'll be on the clock for almost 24 hours after I get home. For my trouble, I'll have about 30K more frequent flyer miles and my paycheck will be about $10K fatter (before taxes). Now the rest of the story........ About the time I'm landing in China after the 4.0 from Osaka, my family will be doing the Christmas morning routine. Being an almost empty nester, that's okay and gives someone with little ones a shot at being home. Hardly as noble as it sounds. I'm just a lazy MFer. Getting paid 10-grand to deadhead in style back and forth from Asia so that I can fly a single 4 hour flight is a fair trade off. That trip plus another for the first 6 days of Dec make up my month. So, that's one snap-shot of the Fedex 777 thing. Believe it or not, I've had better months, but this will definitely be a good one. The bad ones can be tough but with a little seniority, the good far outweighs the bad. Our bad doesn't hold a candle to the long days those of you still doing the job for big blue deal with. So, when you decide to bail, come on over - the water's fine. I usually get a paid commute via private car and first class international deadhead every month. There's lots of "Q" in the QOL and I definitely recommend it. Also, WTF is a "stewardess"?

"The MP failed to recognize an impending collision while reading his formation flying line-up card....................."

One other thing about boldface. Learning them with all the punctuation and spelling, being able to regurgitate them at will, dream them in your sleep, etc. are obviously a requirement. At some point prior to actually hitting the flight line, I recommend being able to actually accomplish them. Perhaps that sounds obvious, but trust me... there is a very big difference between being able to write them or recite them verbally while at attention in a stand up brace and actually putting in control inputs and actuating switches. Paper trainer, cockpit mock-up, sim.... whatever is available. Drill them as hard as you do learning to write them properly. Nothing has to be done at lightning speed. Slower (and correct) is usually 'mo better. It's okay to walk down the hill and fck them all. But, when you need to do them in the sim or the aircraft for real, you will be far more effective if you've actually reached in the right part of the cockpit and actuated the appropriate controls as often as you write them out.

ATAC adversary pilot?

I think you're kind of making my point for me. I'm not necessarily talking about USAF A/A assets or turning it into a big "thing" if the threat potential isn't there. Aren't their enough Hornets in a CAW to put a couple of bubbas up in an A/A config to mind the store? Something? I've been party to more than one slowly growing cluster in that general vicinity of the world and it's easy to become the frog in the boiling water. Operators adapt and deal with it. I'm just make some observations on the outside looking in.

I'm not fluent in "Navyspeak" but I know enough to get by. I've been retired for almost 8 years but I think I can extrapolate what I knew back then to have a reasonable idea of the environment. I also freely acknowledge my limited exposure to CAS and A/G in general. So, with that all said.... interesting video, but from what I can tell it seems like it was kind of a cluster. What I got from their story was this: They launch on a CAS mission and plan to stack up over the troops and drop when needed and it's their turn. Mob has an issue with FLIR and by pure happenstance ends up sort of "swinging" to A/A and is the only one with his radar/master mode setup for A/A since everyone else is trying to drop iron. In spite of the presence of AWACS and probably a Navy E-2 (apparently on different freqs than the CAS guys) he ends up being the one to find this lone SU-22. With all the 21st century capes in theater, no one helps with the ID (YGBSM) and he ends up having to do it visually, followed by THREE warning passes (how long did he spend in the Fitter's WEZ doing that?). It's difficult to believe that we're "thumping" all-aspect capable red air threats while dropping flares in their face in an effort to defend our ground troops and local airborne assets. Heater (failed or defeated?) with -120 follow up... good results. Then there's the egress which involves selective jettison of the rest of his A/G ordnance...... not before the A/A engagement???? (But, maybe I'm missing something there? Surface threat post engagement dictated it? Can't land with it?...... Don't know, just seems weird.) I also spent a few brain cells trying to figure out why there were 5 guys talking mission specifics on the stage. Apparently another 2-ship and maybe a single joined them on the egress? I get the tactical environment is challenging there. It sounds like ROE isn't easy to apply and the presence of "grey" players complicates things further. It sounds like the air threat is minimal but obviously has the potential to escalate at any time. So, that begs the question: Why isn't there at least a small amount of dedicated A/A assets. Are we stretched that thin there that everyone has to be ready to pull double duty while stacked up trying to support troops on the ground? No option to put a DCA CAP or two up with one J.O.B. so the CAS assets can focus on that critical (and difficult) mission? It kind of needs to be black or white. It's either a completely permissive A/A threat environment or it's not. If it's not, then expecting guys to just audible the occasional red-air encounter is a recipe for a lucky red kill or worse... frat. What if Mob had been full up FLIR and had his master mode in the soda straw like everyone else? What if the Fitter driver had more of a clue and wanted him some Hornet during the "thumping"? It kind of reminds me of the last F-18 kills almost 30 years ago in 1991. Two guys in A/G mode trying to drop bombs get a short notice threat call. They scramble to "swing" to A/A..... one gets a lucky snap lock and the other digs his lock out of the scope after a couple of sweeps. They stroke a couple of MiG-21s at visual range head on and go back to dropping iron....kind of a close call. But is that as far as we've progressed almost 3 decades later? I don't know. Maybe I'm totally off base and someone can set me straight. I'm happy for these guys and it seems like they executed well overall. Killing MiGs is good sport, believe me. But, this seems like there are some gaping holes in the plan, IMO.

IMDB for Top Gun under "goofs": https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0092099/trivia?tab=gf&ref_=tt_trv_gf When turning in his wings at the beginning of the film, Cougar talks about 'almost orphaning' his new baby. If he'd died he would still have a mother.