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

[YoungnDumb]

1 hour ago, Standby said:

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. 

Fair enough, but by getting rid of ELP's you also cut something like 2/3's of the boldface.  So the bigger issue for me is the AF"s lack of give $hit in regards to emergencies.  EP sims are now basically pointless as you're just having the student fly up initial/do a straight in.  This is basically telling them, "just fly normal, EP's aren't that big of a deal."  Standup for instance- SP loses engine, ejects.  That's it.  Why bother analyzing or doing anything else when they can just eject (and that's what they're told to do)?    And because of this I foresee EP training at large falling  by the wayside, because if the AF isn't taking it seriously why should the future IP's?  If they take the stance of "it's not that big of a deal" with them as students, it will come back when they come back as IP's.  So again my main issue is that it downplays the importance of emergency training. 

Define great return on instructional investment.  I always saw them as great instructional moments in regards to energy management that I could then apply to later lessons whether it be aerobatics or regular patterns.  If your point is that I walked away from a SP sortie going "yup, he's going to WIC becuase of that ELP" then sure there isn't a return.  What is a great return on instructional investment to you?

The thing you're missing is that they weren't cut because students weren't learning or that they weren't making them better pilots, they were cut to help the timeline, nothing more nothing less.  And to think otherwise is folly.  I know this because I was at the meetings where they told us this, they want quantity not quality.

Thanks for blowing some sunshine up my a$$, was having a bad day but your last remark totally brightened it!

[LookieRookie]

I can't believe A3F took ELP stalls out as a MIF item 5 years ago in the syllabus! What are solo students going to do when they stall doing a HAPL! The SSR demo isn't enough!

Let's be honest, solo students were never expected to recover a forced landing and were restricted to where they could attempt it.

This just took the reliability of the PT-6A and cut out the smoke and mirror.

 

Sure it would be great to teach ELPs still, but production is a goal and that ASD can be reallocated to other items. With the increased ASD SPs are still getting very similar total hours but the focus has changed.

[di1630]

I gotta know....How did pilots ever get trained before the T-6?

I mean for 40+ years many pilots only flew -37/-38 in UPT, never seeing an ELP.

Or again, we are resisting change because change is scary.


Sent from my iPhone using Baseops Network mobile app

[YoungnDumb]

But they still did simulated engine failure training if I remember correctly.

[SurelySerious]

29 minutes ago, di1630 said:

I gotta know....How did pilots ever get trained before the T-6?

I mean for 40+ years many pilots only flew -37/-38 in UPT, never seeing an ELP.

Or again, we are resisting change because change is scary.


Sent from my iPhone using Baseops Network mobile app

Plenty of single engine patterns are practiced in the 38 before sending kids solo. 

[di1630]

Plenty of single engine patterns are practiced in the 38 before sending kids solo. 

100% of pre solo T-6 training is single engine. Joking but true..., I was referring to sending people to F-16’s without having ever done an SFO in T-6’s which is now being questioned as a discriminator.

I don’t think it’s a big deal.




Sent from my iPhone using Baseops Network mobile app

[SurelySerious]

1 minute ago, di1630 said:

100% of pre solo T-6 training is single engine. Joking but true..., I was referring to sending people to F-16’s without having ever done an SFO in T-6’s which is now being questioned as a discriminator.

I don’t think it’s a big deal.




Sent from my iPhone using Baseops Network mobile app

Gotcha; I think the bigger issue is sending a dude solo without the training. But that’s me. 

[YoungnDumb]

54 minutes ago, SurelySerious said:

Gotcha; I think the bigger issue is sending a dude solo without the training. But that’s me. 

2

[LookieRookie]

2 hours ago, SurelySerious said:

Gotcha; I think the bigger issue is sending a dude solo without the training. But that’s me. 

They are being trained. If you have an engine malf, return and land. If your engine fails, get out of the jet.

 

SPs were never expected to recover an FL.

Edited September 14, 2018 by LookieRookie

[SurelySerious]

1 hour ago, LookieRookie said:

SPs were never expected to recover an FL.

Then there was a lot of turn, climb, clean, and check talk for nothing. 🙄

 

[LookieRookie]

6 minutes ago, SurelySerious said:

Then there was a lot of turn, climb, clean, and check talk for nothing. 🙄

 

Glad you understand.

[Day Man]

I'm probably remembering wrong (10+ yrs ago), but I thought that (as a student) in the event of total loss of thrust, you either had to make high-key at home base (CBM) or punch. If it was a PEL, you could do that at any field long enough.

[SurelySerious]

55 minutes ago, LookieRookie said:

Glad you understand.

As mentioned, we were briefed to make it to the field if we had the energy. 

[Boomer6]

Just because a slide built by an exec who was told to find a way to cut the syllabus says it takes 30% of the instructional time doesn't make it so. 

Didn't a viper student have an eng issue a few months ago and have to apply some of these procedures?

When it was decided to kick the can to the FTU was the amount of additional time it would take b-course students with no prior SFO knowledge to master these skills in 4th/5th Gen jets computed? Brain bytes/study time could be better spent elsewhere. Also, sounds like a cheaper/safer option in a T-6.

Edited September 15, 2018 by Boomer6

[Danger41]

5 hours ago, di1630 said:

100% of pre solo T-6 training is single engine. Joking but true..., I was referring to sending people to F-16’s without having ever done an SFO in T-6’s which is now being questioned as a discriminator.

I don’t think it’s a big deal.




Sent from my iPhone using Baseops Network mobile app

Do you Viper guys land out of SFO’s? Just curious.

[ToHoldShort]

5 minutes ago, Danger41 said:

Do you Viper guys land out of SFO’s? Just curious.

Viper Guy currently in the B Course. We train to it and it's on the Form 8 check.  Can't land out of it per the regs but low approach to 50-100 feet.

[ARAMP1]

9 hours ago, ayz33 said:

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?

If there's not a runway in the range of your airplane falling out of the sky, ejection is the go-to method of getting on the ground.  You would only "perform and off field landing" if you couldn't eject.   

[raimius]

It used to be "make it to a runway or taxiway via ELP or eject.". T-6 students were told they would likely be booted from UPT if they made an off field landing.  

IMO, if you fly something, you should practice engine out procedures...and if you only have one...

[ARAMP1]

The Navy still teaches ELPs.  However, there are a lot of airports under the Pensacola North MOA.  You have your choice to PEL down to 3 or 4 of them at all times depending on your altitude and position in the MOA. 

[Duck]

The real reason it was took out was that the highest bust item on the C4 check was due to ELPs. So with a typical C4 bust... two 87 rides then the IPC. If everything went perfect, the stud ended up just being about 5 days behind. Or we can just not make ELPs be on the checkride=0 busts. So it has less to do with the time spent “teaching ELPs” and more to do with making T-6s a 6 month program directly to wings and the B course. Streamlined and as quick and “easy” as possible. It’s coming guys so just be ready for it. The AF said they were gonna grow out of the pilot shortage and they damn sure meant it.

[YoungnDumb]

6 hours ago, LookieRookie said:

SPs were never expected to recover an FL.

This attitude kills me.  So when are they expected to recover the aircraft with a serious EP?  T-6's?   T-38's?  F-16's?  When does it become "real"? 

I love how farmer bob getting his PPL has a higher expectation of emergency landings than USAF pilot training.

Edited September 15, 2018 by YoungnDumb

[di1630]

This attitude kills me.  So when are they expected to recover the aircraft with a serious EP?  T-6's?   T-38's?  F-16's?  When does it become "real"? 
I love how farmer bob getting his PPL has a higher expectation of emergency landings than USAF pilot training.

Farmer Bob flies a plane that can land at 50 knots without an ejection seat.

Again, how many lives/jets have been saved by ELP’s in T-6’s vs how much time/$ has the USAF spent in training?

This is simple risk/reward, input/output, cost/benefit etc.


Sent from my iPhone using Baseops Network mobile app

[brabus]

Quote

I

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

Honestly its more about the larger issue of kicking non tactical training to the FTU, which means either the basic skill is ball washed quickly so they can learn the tactics (which is the primary reason they're at FTU), or a lot of time is spent on the basics and the new kid is shit at the tactics. Either way is a significant burden on the CAF.

I had to FO through the weather as a young guy, and it was not perfect, but it worked out. Many years later I did it in combat with a running, but significantly reduced thrust engine. There were a couple other precautionary ones also.  So in 10 years, I've had two no shitters in worse than VFR around the flagpole training and a couple less serious ones.  The risk is only rising as the viper gets older, so i dont buy the "but what are the chances!" argument. Looking back I'm glad I had all of that baseline training that undoubtedly helped me get through that. While unmeasurable, I know there would have been an increased chance of death or forced ejection (due to fucked up FO pattern) if I had the reduced level of training received by young guys today.

 

Edited September 15, 2018 by brabus

[Sprkt69]

56 minutes ago, brabus said:

Honestly its more about the larger issue of kicking non tactical training to the FTU, which means either the basic skill is ball washed quickly so they can learn the tactics (which is the primary reason they're at FTU), or a lot of time is spent on the basics and the new kid is shit at the tactics. Either way is a significant burden on the CAF.

I had to FO through the weather as a young guy, and it was not perfect, but it worked out. Many years later I did it in combat with a running, but significantly reduced thrust engine. There were a couple other precautionary ones also.  So in 10 years, I've had two no shitters in worse than VFR around the flagpole training and a couple less serious ones.  The risk is only rising as the viper gets older, so i dont buy the "but what are the chances!" argument. Looking back I'm glad I had all of that baseline training that undoubtedly helped me get through that. While unmeasurable, I know there would have been an increased chance of death or forced ejection (due to fucked up FO pattern) if I had the reduced level of training received by young guys today.

 

It’s funny how much even a worn out F-16 is worth these days. We can’t exactly afford to lose a bunch more to stupid mistakes and lack of baseline training. 

[jazzdude]

Farmer Bob flies a plane that can land at 50 knots without an ejection seat.

Again, how many lives/jets have been saved by ELP’s in T-6’s vs how much time/$ has the USAF spent in training?

This is simple risk/reward, input/output, cost/benefit etc.


Sent from my iPhone using Baseops Network mobile app

Cool. Lets also cut aerobatics and formation too, since most pilots won't use those skills in their MWS. Also about half of the instrument phase, just add a couple more sims in place. Nav block can go away too, lets save money on TDY costs, just fly airways in the sim. On the heavy track? No need to solo.

Landing at 50kts vs 200 is irrelevant, it's the mentality of being prepared to handle an emergency, especially since most will go on to aircraft where they won't have the option to eject/bailout.

Take away ELPs, and in-jet EP training is practically nil (used to be 2 SSRs to do a non engine emergency, once in late contact and once in instruments).

Sent from my SM-N920V using Tapatalk