Do T-6 students practice SFO's or forced landings

[Skitzo]

I hope this means only ENJJPT folks go U-28 now. Newbs have a hard enough time with the ELP in I/Q from what the FTU is telling me.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Don Frank]

From the syllabus:

"Students will not practice ELPs. IPs may accomplish PELs or SLFs for their own proficiency on any flight in the syllabus, and may use them as an opportunity to demonstrate instructional points."

[Stitch]

2 hours ago, Day Man said:

uhh...her engine was working bro.

You are correct sir. My point, not put forward very well, was knowing procedures can save your ass.  Imagine being a low-time 16 year old PPL stud having a very serious emergency and handling it like a pro.   You go girl!   Here's the ATC audio...

 

[Standby]

10 hours ago, di1630 said:

Not popular opinions I know. I did both an ELP and BFM yesterday...I could probably use a high intensity A/G scenario instead.

I think you are spot on. Nobody is arguing the merits of energy management or properly handling an EP but the amount of effort dedicated to teaching students the ELP is likely wasted. 

[tedybearofdoom]

I think 19-09 is the first class completely on the new syllabus so they don't even have to do any ELPs, just an IP demo. 07 and 08 were on the old syllabus but had a bunch of stuff that was syllabus waived to try and match the new syllabus. ELPs were still taught to us but no focus on it during normal sorties, only had to do it prior to solo rides for currency. Still had to know the GK though.

[viper154]

FWIW, When I saw that T-1 on the screen at track select one of my first positive thoughts was “well at least I’ll never do a ELP again” Joke was on me, I’m now 2/2 on being assigned aircraft with one engine. 

I think we have two valid points here, we spent a hell of a lot of time doing them in UPT, and that time could have been more focused on building other skills that would more likely apply in day to day aviation. On the other hand, it was a great airmanship builder, and it was a challenging task that you needed to demonstrate you had the ability to learn the task at hand in a given amount of time to pass. 

Probably could have made it a item you needed to demonstrate the ability to do before the end of the contact block but didn’t have to do on a checkride. I see no reason a student that is allowed to area solo and do advance aero alone shouldn’t also be expected to at least attempt to recover a engine out jet in glide back range. If they mess it up, sure punch no questions asked, soon as you realize you can’t make it, and if you dead stick it in as a student the squadron will meet you at the jet will top gun music blaring and high fives.  

If the drone bros are practicing them and expected to land a engine out robot plane we should probably expect our youngins with their ass on the line to at least give it a shot. 

Edited September 14, 2018 by viper154

[Day Man]

3 hours ago, Stitch said:

You are correct sir. My point, not put forward very well, was knowing procedures can save your ass.  Imagine being a low-time 16 year old PPL stud having a very serious emergency and handling it like a pro.   You go girl!   Here's the ATC audio...

I agree with you fully, and think we're doing a disservice to the studs by not making ELPs a requirement. Just saying it's an apples/oranges comparison for an engine-out scenario vs a gear issue with plenty of time to talk through it with tower/wingman/SOF/etc.  

[Standby]

1 hour ago, viper154 said:

I see no reason a student that is allowed to area solo and do advance aero alone shouldn’t also be expected to at least attempt to recover a engine out jet in glide back range. If they mess it up, sure punch no questions asked, soon as you realize you can’t make it, and if you dead stick it in as a student the squadron will meet you at the jet will top gun music blaring and high fives.

Until you’re the SP and you realize you totally fvcked away the ELP and punch below mins and put your jet fuel laden missile into the on base daycare. People shit talk the abilities of student pilots and blast the current quality of UPT products...why all of the sudden are people up in arms about teaching a one-off skill that doesn’t directly apply in follow-on airframes? Energy management in undergrad training can be taught in ways other than ELPs...why dedicate over 30% of your instruction to something that is unlikely to happen? I’m not talking about reduced EP training, just ELPs for the UPT student. 

Edited September 14, 2018 by Standby

[AZwildcat]

Again...lowering standards to cram more bodies through the pipeline each year.  But none of these new pilots will be staying in past their 10 year point anyway, so statistically a shorter career means less exposure to losing an engine....besides who doesn't want a tie from martin baker.

[tedybearofdoom]

1 hour ago, viper154 said:

Probably could have made it a item you needed to demonstrate the ability to do before the end of the contact block but didn’t have to do on a checkride. I see no reason a student that is allowed to area solo and do advance aero alone shouldn’t also be expected to at least attempt to recover a engine out jet in glide back range. If they mess it up, sure punch no questions asked, soon as you realize you can’t make it, and if you dead stick it in as a student the squadron will meet you at the jet will top gun music blaring and high fives. 

I don't even know if the new syllabus has many solo's, I didn't even get to do an area solo 😞

07 and 08 had one pattern solo and one form solo.

[jazzdude]

Until you’re the SP and you realize you totally fvcked away the ELP and punch below mins and put your jet fuel laden missile into the on base daycare. People shit talk the abilities of student pilots and blast the current quality of UPT products...why all of the sudden are people up in arms about teaching a one-off skill that doesn’t directly apply in follow-on airframes? Energy management in undergrad training can be taught in ways other than ELPs...why dedicate over 30% of your instruction to something that is unlikely to happen? I’m not talking about reduced EP training, just ELPs for the UPT student. 

Lots of skills in the ELP are being learned. Energy management. Effect of wind on groundtrack. Planning ahead and adjusting on the fly. Knowing where my nearest emergency field is and whether I can make it there while concentrating on other tasks. Handling an emergency with a definitive time limit (time doesn't stand still in the jet like in stand up). Plus, every jet has the possibility of becoming a glider, we should be giving our pilots at least some exposure to forced landing in UPT to build that foundation of airmanship.

ELPs are pretty much the only exposure T-6 studs get to handling emergencies in the jet, and which lays the foundation for staying cool, calm, and collected when things start going downhill.

By the same token, why teach aerobatics? Or spins? Most pilots will never do those maneuvers in their MWS. But there's value added in doing those maneuvers-again, understanding energy, looking outside while maneuvering, etc. But I've got a bigger chance of my C-17 turning into a glider and executing a forced landing than me needing to barrel roll or do a spin recovery.

It's all about laying a solid airmanship foundation for future instructors to build upon, versus teaching anew in a more expensive jet.

Sent from my SM-T700 using Tapatalk

[MooseAg03]

I also don’t think 30% of T-6 instruction was spent on ELPs.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Standby]

X-Files: the truth (and data on time spent teaching ELPs) is out there.

I never said the principles learned and airmanship developed from ELP training were invaluable...just that it is time wasted on a UPT student when leadership has decided that syllabus reductions (read: cuts) were going to occur. Over the past decade, how many dead stick landings have occurred in the military? How many times has en ELP ACTUALLY been executed? Not taking precautionary landings, but no shit engine out landings? Aerobatics teach energy management and visual lookout while under time constraints, so what’s your point?

Two minor points: 1) the T-6 isn’t a jet 2) don’t fly into extreme thunderstorms and you won’t have to deadstick your C-17. 

Edited September 14, 2018 by Standby

[jazzdude]

We're cutting the fundamentals when it's cheap to train, and pushing it to the MWS, where there are competing priorities (like learning to employ your aircraft in combat vs basic airmanship skills).

Hell, even Joe Schmo getting his PPL check does an emergency descent to landing.

We've also cut VFR flying, and fundamental navigation skills (clock to map to ground), and now it's ORM high if you want to go fly a true visual low level without reference to the magenta line in my jet.

The problem isn't near term. These studs will probably be fine, barring having to deal with a true emergency. In 5 years though, these students will be the IPs, and won't have the knowledge/experience to pass it on.

Sent from my SM-N920V using Tapatalk

[ayz33]

I've only done civilian flight training so far(no upt yet) and reading this thread blows my mind...

[di1630]

I've only done civilian flight training so far(no upt yet) and reading this thread blows my mind...

Oh yeah...why is that?


Sent from my iPhone using Baseops Network mobile app

[ayz33]

50 minutes ago, di1630 said:

Oh yeah...why is that?


Sent from my iPhone using Baseops Network mobile app

It's very surprising that ELP's are skipped altogether. It seems like leadership is assuming the 'risk' and cost of a downed aircraft. So there is no training on emergencies altogether? What about troubleshooting? I guess I'm trying to see both sides of the picture. It doesn't sound as easy to perform an off field landing in a t-6 as it does a Cirrus...

When a dead stick does happen, wherever, wouldn't a couple lessons be beneficial if it means that a plane/pilot was saved versus another that didn't quite make it due to lack of decision making training in the situation?

[SurelySerious]

1 hour ago, jazzdude said:

We're cutting the fundamentals when it's cheap to train, and pushing it to the MWS, where there are competing priorities (like learning to employ your aircraft in combat vs basic airmanship skills).

Hell, even Joe Schmo getting his PPL check does an emergency descent to landing.
 

That’s the part that gets me; when we’re not practicing the basic aviation skills a dude in a Cessna practices to recover his aircraft if they’re a solo emer, then it’s questionable. 

[brabus]

1 hour ago, jazzdude said:

We're cutting the fundamentals when it's cheap to train, and pushing it to the MWS, where there are competing priorities (like learning to employ your aircraft in combat vs basic airmanship skills).

Hell, even Joe Schmo getting his PPL check does an emergency descent to landing.

We've also cut VFR flying, and fundamental navigation skills (clock to map to ground), and now it's ORM high if you want to go fly a true visual low level without reference to the magenta line in my jet.

The problem isn't near term. These studs will probably be fine, barring having to deal with a true emergency. In 5 years though, these students will be the IPs, and won't have the knowledge/experience to pass it on.

Sent from my SM-N920V using Tapatalk
 

Agreed, but it is near term if said stud goes to a SE aircraft. There's a lot of young guys flying the viper and lightning who either wasted a lot of time in FTU learning something they should have in UPT or worse, never really did well at it (but got pushed along in FTU) and are an engine failure away from killing themselves and/or destroying a multi-million $ asset. Obviously a problem for U-28s as well, but I'm hoping there's an AC in there who knows how to do an engine out landing (until 5 years from now like you mentioned, then that is out the window)

[tk1313]

23 minutes ago, brabus said:

Agreed, but it is near term if said stud goes to a SE aircraft. There's a lot of young guys flying the viper and lightning who either wasted a lot of time in FTU learning something they should have in UPT or worse, never really did well at it (but got pushed along in FTU) and are an engine failure away from killing themselves and/or destroying a multi-million $ asset. Obviously a problem for U-28s as well, but I'm hoping there's an AC in there who knows how to do an engine out landing (until 5 years from now like you mentioned, then that is out the window)

As it's been explained to me, this is the exact reason they took it out of the T-6 syllabus. They're trying to push studs through T-6 as fast as possible, and ELPs can be pushed to phase III (or further) to make that happen. I don't have wings, so I don't worry my nugget with deciding whether or not I agree... But that's what we're being told.

Edited September 14, 2018 by tk1313

[YoungnDumb]

13 hours ago, Standby said:

why dedicate over 30% of your instruction to something that is unlikely to happen? I’m not talking about reduced EP training, just ELPs for the UPT student. 

30% of the instruction is ELP's?  Damn, my average was way lower then, didn't know I needed to spend 30 minutes per flt teaching ELP's, all that waster time teaching instruments or formation, should have been teaching ELP's...

For the record I think the max ELP's I ever did on a sortie with a student was 5-6.  And seeing as how each only takes 3 or so minutes it's not a very big time waster.  But hey let's not teach appreciation for emergency handling early on, I'm sure they'll pay attention on a Friday afternoon before a long weekend to some sim instructor tell stories from the Tweet about proper EP handling, yup that'll be a worthwhile replacement.

Edited September 14, 2018 by YoungnDumb

[YoungnDumb]

4 hours ago, Standby said:

Aerobatics teach energy management and visual lookout while under time constraints, so what’s your point?

Almost like ELP's do...weird...

[di1630]

It's very surprising that ELP's are skipped altogether. It seems like leadership is assuming the 'risk' and cost of a downed aircraft. So there is no training on emergencies altogether? What about troubleshooting? I guess I'm trying to see both sides of the picture. It doesn't sound as easy to perform an off field landing in a t-6 as it does a Cirrus...
When a dead stick does happen, wherever, wouldn't a couple lessons be beneficial if it means that a plane/pilot was saved versus another that didn't quite make it due to lack of decision making training in the situation?

Relax young’en, there is plenty of emphasis on emergencies and troubleshooting in UPT.

Chances are that a student with




Sent from my iPhone using Baseops Network mobile app

[Standby]

17 minutes ago, YoungnDumb said:

30% of the instruction is ELP's?  Damn, my average was way lower then, didn't know I needed to spend 30 minutes per flt teaching ELP's, all that waster time teaching instruments or formation, should have been teaching ELP's...

For the record I think the max ELP's I ever did on a sortie with a student was 5-6.  And seeing as how each only takes 3 or so minutes it's not a very big time waster.  But hey let's not teach appreciation for emergency handling early on, I'm sure they'll pay attention on a Friday afternoon before a long weekend to some sim instructor tell stories from the Tweet about proper EP handling, yup that'll be a worthwhile replacement.

I never instructed the T-6 so I have no clue what a standard student sortie looks like anymore. What I do know is that 30% of your instruction doesn’t equate to 30% of your flight time. Lack of ELP should not correlate to lack of EP training. If that is what happened, that falls squarely on the individual squadrons and the IP corps. 

What if...ELPs were such a great return on instructional investment they would have not been cut?

You’re clearly the expert in the handling of emergencies, particularly loss of thrust and OBOGS, so I’ll ensure I pay proper respect to your future posts. 

Edited September 14, 2018 by Standby

[Standby]

54 minutes ago, brabus said:

Agreed, but it is near term if said stud goes to a SE aircraft. There's a lot of young guys flying the viper and lightning who either wasted a lot of time in FTU learning something they should have in UPT or worse, never really did well at it (but got pushed along in FTU) and are an engine failure away from killing themselves and/or destroying a multi-million $ asset. Obviously a problem for U-28s as well, but I'm hoping there's an AC in there who knows how to do an engine out landing (until 5 years from now like you mentioned, then that is out the window)

If SFO is taught at the FTU for applicable aircraft, how will that skill ever disappear if it’s a mandatory, graded item?