Senior Pilot and Command pilot ratings

Try night dive bombing or a night low level. By
yourself.

Try your 4th A/R at night 28 hours into a 33.5 hour mission, in the weather,
with no divert options....

No matter how many pilots on board, the above scenario would challenge anyone.

Try a 5-minute scramble to a night low altitude intercept a
hundred miles out over the ocean on an unknown bogie running
blacked-out.

Try night 3-ship Harpoon training (involves flying at 500' ASL for hours at a
time, deconflicting yourself with 2 other bombers while copying targeting
messages and programming weapons)....

And how
often have multi-engine crews ever flown their airplane to its design
operational limits?

Damn near every BUFF guy, or at a minimum the B-52 Weapons School Grads.

How many times have they ever fought vertigo?

Several, and what I learned in a jet with two pilots, if one guys got it,
chances are the second guy has it, or will develop it shortly after taking
control...

One
'hood' ride to show proficiency in the 'unusual attitude' instrument
recoveries would turn most (not all) multi pilots' hair stark white.

Why?

Quite a bit
different from a canned computerized flight plan

That may be up to 4 pages long.....

a nice leisurely takeoff

At 1200 RVR with the single seat fighter guys behind them taxiing back to the
chocks....


and an autopilot cruise at a fixed altitude to a destination
with never a bank over 30 degrees

For 30 + hours with 4 or 5 A/Rs.....

Coffee at hand, you can
get up and walk around

Like the Hunchback of Notre Dame...

doze while the other guy 'flies' the
autopilot

Or hand "flies" for 20 + hours because your autopilot gave up after 3 hours....

and even have a meal

Yeah, the same one the fighter guys eating...

And most multi crews have basically
only one mission

Glad you said you "most", although I'd argue that is true now a days for only
tankers...

Oh, yes, refueling day and
night

Uhh, *every* multi-place aircraft does this......

Now and then a nice long deployment where you could log lots of
hours between takeoff and landing.

You're kidding right? We've got AWACS crews flying 12 hour VULs and BUFF crews
flying 17 hour sorties *every day* since OCT 01. Not to mention the cargo guys
flying from one end of the Arabian Gulf to the other....on the same day.

Professionalism is easy to profess - the proof is in how well you do a
complex job. Now, which job is more complex?

This is a ridiculous thread........


BUFDRVR

"Stay on the bomb run boys, I'm gonna get those bomb doors open if it harelips
everyone on Bear Creek"

"BUFDRVR" wrote in message
This is a ridiculous thread........


BUFDRVR

The children have been allowed to stay up too late again.

Jealousy has reared it's ugly head.

"Phineas Pinkham" wrote:


"BUFDRVR" wrote in message
This is a ridiculous thread........


BUFDRVR

The children have been allowed to stay up too late again.

Jealousy has reared it's ugly head.


More like 'lack of knowledge by fighter jocks' has reared it's
ugly head I'd say...

It's quite amazing to me that a supposedly intelligent pilot like
Ed would show his bare ass so badly in public .

Can he really not know the excellent reason for all that "Crew
Cooperation" that he so scornfully knocks has it's rightful place
in the cockpit of a machine that's carrying maybe 400 or 500
innocent humans at ~600 MPH and several miles above the earth?.

Let me tell you Ed, there's an excellent reason.

It's called SAFETY.

Catch some clues mister.
--

-Gord.

there's an excellent reason for all that "Crew
Cooperation."
It's called SAFETY.

The old adage is: Don't communicate so you can be understood--communicate so
that it is impossible to be misunderstood.



Chris Mark

ost (Chris Mark) wrote:

there's an excellent reason for all that "Crew
Cooperation."
It's called SAFETY.

The old adage is: Don't communicate so you can be understood--communicate so
that it is impossible to be misunderstood.

Chris Mark

Excellent advice Mark, I hadn't heard that but it sure makes
sense...
--

-Gord.

"Gord Beaman" ) wrote:

More like 'lack of knowledge by fighter jocks' has reared it's
ugly head I'd say...

Say what you will, but one thing's for sure is that Ed certainly isn't
lacking in the "knowledge"department.

It's quite amazing to me that a supposedly intelligent pilot like
Ed would show his bare ass so badly in public .

Oh don't be such a wet blanket Gord. Jeezus, anyone with a
*functioning* sense of humor thought Ed's "fighter pilot perspective"
WRT multi-engine flying and the concept of CRM was actually pretty
damn funny.

Can he really not know the excellent reason for all that "Crew
Cooperation" that he so scornfully knocks has it's rightful place
in the cockpit of a machine that's carrying maybe 400 or 500
innocent humans at ~600 MPH and several miles above the earth?.

Of course he knows that (see above). Granted, there are some
instances when CRM and multiple hands on deck has saved the
day (the DC-10 that crash landed in Sioux City back in 1989, for
example). But let's face it, the vast majority of co-pilots (pilots
too, for that matter!) are simply eye-candy for the unwashed
masses and needed only in extreme emergency situations.
(You've heard all those jokes about dogs in the cockpit to keep
the pilots from touching the controls, no?)

Let me tell you Ed, there's an excellent reason.

It's called SAFETY.

As a former Part 135 single-pilot IFR jockey, rather than
enhancing safety I can tell you that having an extra guy
(or gal) in the cockpit mucking up the works can, and has,
lead to disaster instead of adding to safety. Too many cooks
spoil the soup and all that and if a PIC has his authority diluted
and/or is over-dependant on a co-pilot reading off a checklist
by rote it can be a formula for disaster.

Catch some clues mister.

Perhaps you should take your own advice and catch a sense
of humor. In your haste to put Ed "in his place" you've taken
what he wrote completely out of context and failed to see the
humor that he was obviously attempting to convey. Besides,
you're preaching to the best of the best and no offense, but I'd
feel infinitely safer flying with Ed (or most any other fighter
pilot) in control of *any* airplane than I would flying with YOU.


-Mike Marron

Subject: Senior Pilot and Command pilot ratings
From: (Walt BJ)
Date: 9/4/03 10:41 PM Pacific Daylight Time
Message-id:

"Phineas Pinkham" wrote:
SNIP:Reflects the mentality of single seat numb-nuts versus the
professionalism
of multi-engine Pilots.
SNIP:

You write from ignorance, old man. It takes a lot of sorties to rack
up 1300 and 3000 hours in single-seat single-engine jets at 1:30 per
sortie. A lot of my classmates had to go TDY to the AEW 121s to get
enough time to qualify. I was lucky; I made it the hard way. As for
professionalism, a single-seat pilot has to do everything a multi crew
does - by himself. When I was picking up tired aging fighters from the
ANG for the Boneyard and taking the ANG new ones from North American
(LAX) I was operating in high density IFR areas - LAX, of course, and
then up in the New England area. No one changed my radio channels for
me, no one copied clearances for me, no one navigated for me or
figured out new ETAs for me when my route was changed by ATC. No one
backed me up on an IFR approach to a strange field. Oh, by the way our
minimums for these flights were USAF minimums. And nope, I didn't have
an autopilot.
Professionalism? Try night dive bombing or a night low level. By
yourself. Try a 5-minute scramble to a night low altitude intercept a
hundred miles out over the ocean on an unknown bogie running
blacked-out. Fly 250 miles north of Thule on a single engine. And how
often have multi-engine crews ever flown their airplane to its design
operational limits? How many times have they ever fought vertigo? One
'hood' ride to show proficiency in the 'unusual attitude' instrument
recoveries would turn most (not all) multi pilots' hair stark white.
(I knew a few who went from B52s to F4s and loved it.) Quite a bit
different from a canned computerized flight plan, a nice leisurely
takeoff and an autopilot cruise at a fixed altitude to a destination
with never a bank over 30 degrees, if that. Coffee at hand, you can
get up and walk around, doze while the other guy 'flies' the
autopilot, and even have a meal! And most multi crews have basically
only one mission - in the F4 we had air defense, air superiority, nuke
strike, close air support and interdiction. Oh, yes, refueling day and
night, not to mention side lines like formation flying in night and
weather (flying wing at night in the weather is one long battle with
vertigo!), missile/gunnery target tow, and for a few lucky ones test
hops. Now and then a nice long deployment where you could log lots of
hours between takeoff and landing.
Professionalism is easy to profess - the proof is in how well you do a
complex job. Now, which job is more complex?
Walt BJ


GREAT POST. REALITY AT LAST. THANK YOU. THANK YOU.



Arthur Kramer
344th BG 494th BS
England, France, Belgium, Holland, Germany
Visit my WW II B-26 website at:
http://www.coastcomp.com/artkramer

To all:

You know, after reading most of this stuff about who did more, or who
was best, or whether fighter jocks were better than multi-engine pukes,
I got these thoughts:

Most of my USAF and subsequent contractor flying career was in single
place aircraft (or trainers with me in the back seat). I always thought
that this was the easy job. I didn't have to coordinate my decisions
with anyone else in my aircraft (I never flew an aircraft with a WSO).
My decision was final. I was in total control of the situation. I lived
or died on my call, and (except for instructing, or in formation) didn't
have to worry about anyone's ass but mine.

I believe that, because of the USAF selection process, the best pilots
mostly get assigned to fighters. That's a good thing. But I'll tell you
what: I have nothing but respect for the many-engine guys (and gals) who
have to put up with crew coordination and whatever else makes good
things happen to big airplanes. This is a big job.

I don't understand their job. But my hat is off to them.

Jim Thomas

"Gord Beaman" wrote in message
...
Mike Marron wrote:


Perhaps you should take your own advice and catch a sense
of humor. In your haste to put Ed "in his place" you've taken
what he wrote completely out of context and failed to see the
humor that he was obviously attempting to convey. Besides,
you're preaching to the best of the best and no offense, but I'd
feel infinitely safer flying with Ed (or most any other fighter
pilot) in control of *any* airplane than I would flying with YOU.


-Mike Marron

Of course I see the humour Mike...he writes very well, my point
was to let the unwashed, as you call them, know that there's a
damned good reason for all that 'standardization' and 'rote' when
dealing with cockpit communications.

As Chris M. mentioned ~'Make damned sure that everyone knows
what's going on'. And I'll even forgive you for knocking CRM
(because it's comparatively new) the biggest addition overall to
a/c safety that's happened in a long time. That opinion has been
gleaned from having logged about 13 thousand hours in multi
engined - multi place a/c

Not to change topice, but, out of curiousity, gord....
How many of those 13M were pilot-in-command?

Thanks, and
Cheers.

for over 25 years plus the strong
opinion of the NTSB and the AIB in Canada and the UK.

To argue against 'those' is merely to show _your_ bare ass in
public sir.
--

-Gord.

"ArtKramr" wrote in message
Subject: Senior Pilot and Command pilot ratings

GREAT POST. REALITY AT LAST. THANK YOU. THANK YOU.
Arthur Kramer
Might have expected this from a bomb aimer, who believes Compass Deviation
is always found at the bottom of an Aeronautical Chart! :-)