USAF Proposes Single-Operator MQ-9 Cockpit

[Loachman]

We had a bunch of fighter guys dumped into 10 TAG in the eighties. I've been trying to think of any who were not complete thuds. So far, I've not been able to.

Roles and machines are different.

Learning how to fly a given machine is not particularly difficult. Learning to employ it effectively certainly can be.

And I'll bet that the Kiowa job was more demanding than any fighter guy's job. Most of the fighter retreads in 10 TAG went to Twin Hueys. Only one, of which I personally knew, did a Kiowa tour. He did not once, in his two years as the absolute worst CO that I have ever seen, fly a single tactical mission on an exercise.

 

[dimsum]

I don't believe that 2-seat always increase capabilities.  It can, in some cases decrease your capabilities in half, having 1 guy dedicating half of his brain to sorting the other person out and the other half to doing his job.  A well coordinated crew can indeed be a force multiplier but it is definitely not a given.  Your training bill will decrease as you only put half the people through the pipe and some items that would be duplicated in both syllabi could be omitted. 

Serious question:  If 2-seaters don't increase capabilities, then why do Strike Eagles, Super Hornet Fs and Growlers have a CSO/WSO in the back at all?

 

[Eye In The Sky]

If you make it single seat vs two then there will be a decrease in capability and/or an increase in training bill, no matter how you cut it.

I can see it working for the roles nearer strike.  For the roles nearer ISR collection, I'm not so sure.

Fast jet guys are selected to be very good at what they do.  They aren't any better, or even as good, as what some others do; like multi mission long endurance and surveillance and attack, or long endurance ISR collection and analysis.  You would be hard pressed to do what a Cyclone does with less than four; heck, managing the radar completely can eat up one (although EITS can correct me).

Nothing to correct, RADAR is/can be a very busy seat to sit in.  No matter the mission, we (NASOs, dry sensor types) rotate periodically.  I've sat one seat for entire missions when it was beneficial to not switch out for even a momentarily loss of SA; 11 hours is a LONG time on EO/IR except for visits to the Stanley Cup.

There is also the aspect of flying low in IMC, close to land/hazards, etc.  Nothing will ruin your day like bumping into a rock/rig/iceberg at 220 kts.  If you can't handle the responsibility for XX lives being in your hands, you have no business warming the RADAR seat.  :2c:

 

[SupersonicMax]

That is exactly what a TACCO on an MH or TACNAV on an Aurora does. 

Seeing as RPAs are pretty much done with the "hands and feet" part (automatic takeoff/landing, flying via keyboard/mouse/trackpad or waypoints), arguably ACSOs are ideal RPA Pilots.

I don't think they are required to do it (make the correct decision fast, etc) to the level that a fighter pilot needs to be doing it (sts).  I have been on a P-3 a couple of times before and I have seen what guys do at their stations.  It is, for the most part, a rather focused task rather than a multitude of tasks (which is a lot more like what you'd do flying an RPA). I think the Hornet is by far the easiest plane I have flown.  It's the dozens of other tasks that are difficult to manage. Very much like an RPA?(Easy to fly, lots of sensors and things to manage?).

As far as the 2-crew concept, I said that it is not a given that you double the manpower in the cockpit.  I did not say it never or rarely does.  I work with F/A-18F pilots and they seem to agree with me....  Put the wrong combination of people/personalities in a cockpit and you reduce your capabilities vs a single seat aircraft.

 

[Humphrey Bogart]

As I said, I know.  And I don't really care.  It is what I believe.

Not quite.  A lot of people fail along the way.  Some will do other jobs, like ACSO.  I have never heard of an ACSO failing off a course and being re-mustered to pilot and making it to Hornets.

I think, in general, you could shorten most courses and lower some of the experience requirements for upgrades.  We have 500 hours Captains (with 2-3 years on squadron) qualified as Mission Commanders, leading multi-national packages.  I don't think it's far stretched to believe they could upgrade to a Crew Commander in a short amount of time.

I have not said you (or anybody else) are not good (or very good) at what you do.  What I am saying is most fighter pilots would be good in any technical trade, and that the opposite is not necessarily true.

Ironically, I also knew that was exactly what you were going to say.  And you don't even realize that what you are saying is you think you are better than me.  In your mind even though I just retired with 26 years service, you know more about all of the military than I do.

I don't discredit your experience or how good you are at what you do (did).  I do believe though that in order to make it in a single seat fighter/attack aircraft, you need abilities (cognitive and technical) that other technical trades do not need that could help in those other trades.  A fighter pilot will fly an aircraft, manage a formation, talk to multiple external agencies (tactical & ATC), manage multiple sensors, fuse information, collect information, manage/employ weapons. And I can't really take a break for 5 minutes (and perhaps clear my head) and handoff some of my responsibilities while I take a piss.  I still need to do all of the above while taking a piss.  You do this for 6-9 hours at a time.

I am not saying I do all these individual tasks as good as the guys in the P-3 from my Hornet (after all, I am task-managing and prioritizing).  What I am saying is that if I was to dedicated 100% of my time to one or two of the tasks (like it happens in a multi-crew environment), I would be able to do as well or better.

Max, you sound like such a pompous *******.  You may be a good fighter pilot but that's all you'll ever be.  With an attitude like yours, you wouldn't cut it in any Army unit, actually you'd probably wake up one day with some Naphtha in your coffee.

It's attitudes like yours that are the reason our whole military is so dysfunctional, there is no I in team, get over yourself already.  Stick to flying planes and let others that have proper social skills make the big boy decisions.

 

[SupersonicMax]

Thank you Humphrey, I appreciate your insight.  Thanks for telling me what I'll be and won't be.

 

[Humphrey Bogart]

Thank you Humphrey, I appreciate your insight.  Thanks for telling me what I'll be and won't be.

No problem Max, my pleasure! You sort of remind me of Sheldon from Big Bang Theory, only you have a god complex.

 

[SupersonicMax]

It's too bad I don't believe in god...

 

[Humphrey Bogart]

It's too bad I don't believe in god...

Well of course not, why would you need to believe in yourself?

 

[SupersonicMax]

We had a bunch of fighter guys dumped into 10 TAG in the eighties. I've been trying to think of any who were not complete thuds. So far, I've not been able to.

Roles and machines are different.

Learning how to fly a given machine is not particularly difficult. Learning to employ it effectively certainly can be.

And I'll bet that the Kiowa job was more demanding than any fighter guy's job. Most of the fighter retreads in 10 TAG went to Twin Hueys. Only one, of which I personally knew, did a Kiowa tour. He did not once, in his two years as the absolute worst CO that I have ever seen, fly a single tactical mission on an exercise.

I'll backtrack slightly, flying helicopters is one thing most of us would have problems with.  Not impossible, but a lot of habbit patterns, translating in muscle memory, to unlearn. 

 

[SeaKingTacco]

It's good your job requires arrogance to be truly aggressive,  because you have lots of it.

We had one of your's at 443 quite a while back.  Barely made crew commander and almost flew a crew into the water.  And here's what your community says: we only let him go because he was weak (but he made Major) and we were biased against him (cause as you say haters got to hate).

Actually, the way I remember it- that particular ex-fighter pilot did fly it into the water. Rather more to the point- his poor decision making and incomplete aircraft systems knowledge allowed the aircraft to settle itself on the water.

But hey- he was the product of "superior selection" and "superior training"  :

 

[SeaKingTacco]

I'll backtrack slightly, flying helicopters is one thing most of us would have problems with.  Not impossible, but a lot of habbit patterns, translating in muscle memory, to unlearn.

Stop being a douche, Max.

There is different types of military flying in the CF- no one type of flying is inherently superior.

MH is not superior to Fighters; fighters are not superior to MPAs; etc. I have been around long enough to recognize that different roles call for different skill sets. I have met awesome operators in every community; just as each community produces thuds. You may be a great pilot Max, but you are trending perilously close to the Thud line, in my books, for your uneducated attitude towards everything not 3 or 4 Wing...

 

[Humphrey Bogart]

Actually, the way I remember it- that particular ex-fighter pilot did fly it into the water. Rather more to the point- his poor decision making and incomplete aircraft systems knowledge allowed the aircraft to settle itself on the water.

But hey- he was the product of "superior selection" and "superior training"  :

What you're basically telling me is fighter pilots are Spartans?  ;D ... That's ok we all know what happened to them.  >

 

[SupersonicMax]

SKT,

I have never said other communities don't have exceptionnal performers.  In fact, I have met with a couple of P-3 guys that flew in my package that did an exceptionnal job pre-strike to provide information that shaped how we did (or did not) conduct the strike.  They went, as a crew, beyond what I or the theater had asked from them and maximized their presence and sensors to do it.  And this, the general population will never get the good news stories of those because they are largely boring to the genral populace (no sensionalism or finger pointing possible).

What I really said (perhaps in a very clumsy way) is that the attributes the fighter community looks for can translate into pretty much all other communities (helicopter pilot is the only aircrew position I can think of that would be the exception), because we do a lot of the tasks others do, by ourselve all at once.  The opposite is not necessarily true.  Given that these attributes are tested on a daily basis both objectively and subjectively during training to a fairly high standard, I believe most fighter pilot could successfully complete other's training.  Thuds happen in every community, I agree.  This is normally the exception, not the norm.

 

[Eye In The Sky]

fighters are not superior to MPAs

Damn right they're not. op:

Holy fuck, is this what the average Officers mess on a Wing is like?  ;D

P-3 = American.  CP-140 (or, the Sleek Greyhound of DEATH...aka SGOD) = Canadian. 

 

[SupersonicMax]

Damn right they're not. op:

Holy frig, is this what the average Officers mess on a Wing is like?  ;D

Mess?  What is this place you are talking about?

 

[Humphrey Bogart]

SKT,

I have never said other communities don't have exceptionnal performers.  In fact, I have met with a couple of P-3 guys that flew in my package that did an exceptionnal job pre-strike to provide information that shaped how we did (or did not) conduct the strike.  They went, as a crew, beyond what I or the theater had asked from them and maximized their presence and sensors to do it.

What I really said (perhaps in a very clumsy way) is that the attributes the fighter community looks for can translate into pretty much all other communities (helicopter pilot is the only aircrew position I can think of that would be the exception), because we do a lot of the tasks others do, by ourselve all at once.  The opposite is not necessarily true.  Given that these attributes are tested on a daily basis both objectively and subjectively during training to a fairly high standard, I believe most fighter pilot could successfully complete other's training.  Thuds happen in every community, I agree.  This is normally the exception, not the norm.

There is no "perhaps" about it.  It's not what you're saying that's the problem, it's the way you say it.  Tact is an important quality, especially for an officer.  You should try and develop some. 

 

[Eye In The Sky]

Holy fuck man.  Give it up.

:deadhorse:

 

[SupersonicMax]

Thanks again Humphrey, you are invaluable to this discussion and my career development.

 

[Humphrey Bogart]

Holy frig man.  Give it up.

:deadhorse:

8)