B-1B, Ellsworth, all eject

[35 AoA]

LeMay was a household name in he late 40's and early 50's. you do not have to be in your 90's to remember him.

My point was that if this guy is his current boss, who began service right after LeMay's retirement (1965), he is 80+ yrs old now. And that is assuming the guy was only a boot Lt at that point. So yes, I might have been a decade or two off, but not a lot of us have bosses that are so old

My actual point was that it sounds like the boss is telling tall stories, unless he is actually that old

 

[geezer]

35 AoA, your first post, the second on this thread, assumed the B1 was a badly crippled bird, for this crash to happen. No, in clear hindsight, it had a fatally crippled crew. The final report makes that clear.

This is a rant.

As far as over 90 to know of LeMay as a commanding officer, the Geezer served when Eisenhower was in my chain of command. No officer that I even saw in service was a bloated over 200 pounds. His commanding officer had to know that man was beyond physically fit for piloting a B1 but retained him, with disastrous results. This and the other retention of pilots who were not ready for combat cost an incredible amount of money, and weakened the strength of the USA.

For those that claim that you cannot stay qualified without flying sorties, That is why simulators were created, to assure pilots were familiar with every aspect of flying their assigned equipment.

As a lowly Private Pilot, Instrument rating, when I am about to do a flight that MAY include instrument conditions, and had any doubt that I was prepared. I either flew with an instructor, or did simulator time to get personally satisfied that I could "Fly the mission".

Before the FAA invented the Biennial Flight Review, the small club that I was a member of had Annual requalification, with designated instructors, to assure that our members stayed skilled. Failing the review grounded you until you had enough retraining to pass the list of required performances. If the club members felt that you were not retaining your training from year to year, you were invited to resign. Only one resisted the request.

The Airforce should be similar, if a man is not keeping up to his duty requirements, he should be employed elsewhere. If he feels that the miitary is not giving him enough flight time, go to the airlines, they offer loads of flight time, and good pay to boot. If you are in fact skilled, and trainable.


RE chain of command, my first Sargent in basic training was George Jones, in Signal school was Stroud, overseas, Eiceman.

This week, I trashed my notes from my time in service. It had no names in it, just what we needed to know to be effective soldiers, and stay alive. small stuff, like what the colors on grenades meant, which canister on the gas mask for each gas, and the identifying smell or color of each one. Field adapted camo, using dirt, coffee, tea, shoe polish, and vegetation. Steps to field strip the M1 rifle, and BMG 50 cal. Page after page in that little 2X5 inch spiral notebook. We were less than hour from the nearest Communist airport, 6 hours from the border by tank, and had atomic capable missiles to draw early enemy fire.

I was sufficiently skilled that not only the Company Exec tried to keep me in, but the Major who headed the Missile Command Signal Office personally attempted to get me to stay, as I assisted him in his most difficult technical duties.

Back to flying, I have no problem with them landing on a fog covered runway, I have done that, but I made my decision of divert or land based on my personally known skills at that time, and familiarity with the terrain around the runway. I do not think that I ever made an ILS approach where the fly up by more than 2 dots occurred.

I realize that requesting a lot of extra simulator time to remain in my comfort zone for my flight safety might be career slowing, but that is not the only goal in the military. For Mr. 265#, what if the ejection seat had failed to get him clear of the B1? Bluntly, he would have burned to death.

This was posted after reading the pertinent points of the Final Report, and a resulting poorly slept night. That B1 base scares me.

Rant over.

 

[Velocity173]

35 AoA, your first post, the second on this thread, assumed the B1 was a badly crippled bird, for this crash to happen. No, in clear hindsight, it had a fatally crippled crew. The final report makes that clear.

This is a rant.

As far as over 90 to know of LeMay as a commanding officer, the Geezer served when Eisenhower was in my chain of command. No officer that I even saw in service was a bloated over 200 pounds. His commanding officer had to know that man was beyond physically fit for piloting a B1 but retained him, with disastrous results. This and the other retention of pilots who were not ready for combat cost an incredible amount of money, and weakened the strength of the USA.

For those that claim that you cannot stay qualified without flying sorties, That is why simulators were created, to assure pilots were familiar with every aspect of flying their assigned equipment.

As a lowly Private Pilot, Instrument rating, when I am about to do a flight that MAY include instrument conditions, and had any doubt that I was prepared. I either flew with an instructor, or did simulator time to get personally satisfied that I could "Fly the mission".

Before the FAA invented the Biennial Flight Review, the small club that I was a member of had Annual requalification, with designated instructors, to assure that our members stayed skilled. Failing the review grounded you until you had enough retraining to pass the list of required performances. If the club members felt that you were not retaining your training from year to year, you were invited to resign. Only one resisted the request.

The Airforce should be similar, if a man is not keeping up to his duty requirements, he should be employed elsewhere. If he feels that the miitary is not giving him enough flight time, go to the airlines, they offer loads of flight time, and good pay to boot. If you are in fact skilled, and trainable.


RE chain of command, my first Sargent in basic training was George Jones, in Signal school was Stroud, overseas, Eiceman.

This week, I trashed my notes from my time in service. It had no names in it, just what we needed to know to be effective soldiers, and stay alive. small stuff, like what the colors on grenades meant, which canister on the gas mask for each gas, and the identifying smell or color of each one. Field adapted camo, using dirt, coffee, tea, shoe polish, and vegetation. Steps to field strip the M1 rifle, and BMG 50 cal. Page after page in that little 2X5 inch spiral notebook. We were less than hour from the nearest Communist airport, 6 hours from the border by tank, and had atomic capable missiles to draw early enemy fire.

I was sufficiently skilled that not only the Company Exec tried to keep me in, but the Major who headed the Missile Command Signal Office personally attempted to get me to stay, as I assisted him in his most difficult technical duties.

Back to flying, I have no problem with them landing on a fog covered runway, I have done that, but I made my decision of divert or land based on my personally known skills at that time, and familiarity with the terrain around the runway. I do not think that I ever made an ILS approach where the fly up by more than 2 dots occurred.

I realize that requesting a lot of extra simulator time to remain in my comfort zone for my flight safety might be career slowing, but that is not the only goal in the military. For Mr. 265#, what if the ejection seat had failed to get him clear of the B1? Bluntly, he would have burned to death.

This was posted after reading the pertinent points of the Final Report, and a resulting poorly slept night. That B1 base scares me.

Rant over.

Currency is a combination of both flying hours and simulator. Simulator alone doesn’t equate to currency. That’s why they have a flying hour program.

The aircraft commander’s 300 hrs of simulator over 20 years of flying isn’t anything to brag about either. Then there’s the 2,000 hrs over 20 years. Now I get it, B-1s are incredibly expensive to operate and I’d imagine they have an abysmal readiness rate but that’s a lot of non flying time. I hope he’s a scratch golfer with that much time out of the cockpit.

 

[DaleB]

For those of us without the ex-AF secret decoder ring... what's a "patchwearer"?

 

[geezer]

I have owned stock in a pure aviation simulator company, and much later in Boeing, which packages simulators with their sales of actual aircraft. The prediction of half the flight training, and most of the proficiency training in simulators would be the norm makes safety and financial sense. Recurrent training in simulators allows equipment failures and emergencies possible with no hazard to actual aircraft, and they may be repeated until the student/pilot gets it right.

Landing in conditions of no visible runway until wheels on the ground is perfectly safe in the sim.. and is the place to reinforce your scan, over and over. 15 hours a year will not scratch the surface for true readiness. That pilot and his commanding officers have to have known that, and I wonder how many of the other pilots in our ready response forces are in the same condition? Zero zero landings should only be practiced in the sim, so they may be "Rewound, and played again".

Running to the plane, and getting in the air before the missiles arrive is the only task that is not simulate able.

My last years at my career employer was as senior training supervisor. I am well aware of the relative cost of using simulators, rather than the high risk of training in the actual environment of 14,000 volts and higher. My students learned how to safely work on equipment that had up to 230,000 volts on it when they entered the substation. Proper procedures ALWAYS followed, separate life from death.

An average of 15 hours a year implies a serious avoidance of the process. Possibly he feared the instructor would find him unqualified? Present history makes that a valid question.

At my employer, I was scheduled for fire school at Maryland University, and I declined. Reason? I had already survived fighting fires in 3 buildings, including one the firemen would not enter due to smoke so dense they could not see the floor with a big beam spotlight. I knew the place, borrowed an airpack, and went to work doing the switching required before restoring customers could begin. It took all the air in 2 airpacks to complete the work. Airpack in a smoke filled room was something I did not have any desire to repeat. I did read all their lesson plans and handouts. Knowing what they are going to teach is important, and I did learn a lot of small stuff, I also knew from previous employees sent, that doing the smoke filled room was enforced.

 

[TCABM]

For those of us without the ex-AF secret decoder ring... what's a "patchwearer"?

USAF Weapons School graduate.

United States Air Force Weapons School

MissionThe U.S. Air Force Weapons School trains tactical experts and leaders to control and exploit air, space and cyber on behalf of the joint force. Every six months, the Weapons School graduates

www.nellis.af.mil

Highly selective, low output graduate level instructor course. Graduate assignments are ‘managed’ to fill certain billets many of which are specially designated so that only a USAFWS graduate can fill, are high visibility, and generally allow a grad to write their own career path, despite a checkered background like having 3x on-base DUIs or other stupid human tricks on the record.

The credo is Humble, Approachable, Credible, yet the first thing taught is how to present while ensuring the left shoulder patch is always visible, reminding everyone the presenter is authoritative in their commentary.

Where it’s applicable in this particular incident is the Offensive Systems Officer (OSO) - one of the guys in back, with a tiny side window - is a patchwearer. The OSO apparently willfully chose not to wear his helmet or gloves as required and suffered injuries during the ejection because of that.

Ironically, that same OSO was the only guy even half-attempting his cross-check duties during the craptastic approach. He made the mandatory MDA/DH call, but then decided to not call a go-around as soon as the conditions demanded it.

This is on top of half the crew having known and documented substandard performance during instrument approaches.

 

[Velocity173]

Was the approach hand flown or on AP?

 

[TCABM]

Was the approach hand flown or on AP?

Hand flown.

The MP was a qualified B-1B Pilot who began flying the B-1B on 29 November 2021 and has accumulated 257.8 flight hours, 63 sorties, and 151.1 simulator hours (Tab G-13). The MP achieved the Pilot rating on 22 January 2021…
The MP’s most recent flight prior to the mishap was 13 December 2023 (Tab GMQT, several instructor comments from different flights indicate the MP had a history of unstable approaches, an early transition to visual from an ILS, shifting aim points, and excessive power pulls during crosswind landings…

Among other things, the bold items were all things the MP did during the approach while the MIP and pretty much the rest of the crew were out to lunch.

 

[kyleb]

Hand flown.

Among other things, the bold items were all things the MP did during the approach while the MIP and pretty much the rest of the crew were out to lunch.

MP? MIP?

Mission Pilot?
Mission Instructor Pilot?

 

[DaleB]

MP? MIP?

Mission Pilot?
Mission Instructor Pilot?

Mishap Pilot
Mishap Instructor Pilot

I found that stuff in the report, pages iv-v. It's military, so one expects a ton and a half of abbreviations and acronyms. It's the other terms that are difficult to get if you don't have specific experience/exposure... patchwearer, ring-knocker, that sort of thing.

 

[35 AoA]

35 AoA, your first post, the second on this thread, assumed the B1 was a badly crippled bird, for this crash to happen. No, in clear hindsight, it had a fatally crippled crew. The final report makes that clear.

This is a rant.

As far as over 90 to know of LeMay as a commanding officer, the Geezer served when Eisenhower was in my chain of command.

Rant over.

100% agree. To use a term from my generation's lexicon, this sortie was a dumpster fire from start to finish, which resulted in a half billion dollar smoking hole in the ground that could have easily been avoided. And the bolded part is why you are "geezer" My mom loves to tell the story about how Gen Ike made a visit to the Fitzsimmons hospital right after she was born in 1946. My grandpa was the Major charged with organizing the event. Anyway, somehow he convinced Ike to hold my mom for a photo op. She says it was probably because she was the fattest baby. On the subject of old guys, that grandpa once had a commanding general named Billy Mitchell, during WWI, during his enlisted days prior to commissioning. So I'm not saying you're that old

 

[35 AoA]

Currency is a combination of both flying hours and simulator. Simulator alone doesn’t equate to currency. That’s why they have a flying hour program.

The aircraft commander’s 300 hrs of simulator over 20 years of flying isn’t anything to brag about either. Then there’s the 2,000 hrs over 20 years. Now I get it, B-1s are incredibly expensive to operate and I’d imagine they have an abysmal readiness rate but that’s a lot of non flying time. I hope he’s a scratch golfer with that much time out of the cockpit.

There is a reason that the B-2 community maintains the T-38 as their currency horse. In the context of an instrument approach to mins, like many have said, it is that scan, or breakdown thereof that is important. I can not fly a 737 for a couple months, but the navy flying I've been doing in the meantime is more than enough to keep me proficient in that basic scan. Even if it looks totally different.

 

[Velocity173]

There is a reason that the B-2 community maintains the T-38 as their currency horse. In the context of an instrument approach to mins, like many have said, it is that scan, or breakdown thereof that is important. I can not fly a 737 for a couple months, but the navy flying I've been doing in the meantime is more than enough to keep me proficient in that basic scan. Even if it looks totally different.

Yeah I remember the SR-71 and F-117 guys did that a lot as well because they flew so few hours in the actual aircraft.

I’m surprised the IP only had 300 total sim hours after 20 years. I had over 400 sim hrs only 12 yrs and I avoided the sim like the plague.

 

[orca64]

Was the approach hand flown or on AP?

The B-1 never had an approach mode on autopilot, nor did it have autothrottles. It did have an auto speed lock-up feature that kept the core rpm above 95% during low level operations.

This is not the first approach accident involving an Ellsworth B-1 flying a non-precision approach at Ellsworth. The first accident was also survived by all 4 crew members when one of the backseaters punched everyone out after a hit and a bounce on the infamous “interstate lighting approach”, circa late 1988 (?).

That bad weather approach was occasioned because at the time, the B-1 did not have a usable ILS.

As a result of that accident, each B-1 base received a portable PAR (army, as I recall) unit to use in lieu of the ILS. The entire crew force had to requalify using the PAR exclusively until software changes were made to provide an ILS capability to the jet (what we called it, pre-bone).

 

[geezer]

Velocity, I think you are describing the difference between a real, dedicated pilot, and a seat filler with an eye on the top.

I have been very fortunate that I had outstanding instructors for my first 4 flights, flew only once with my first dunce, and finished up with another above and beyond instructor. He required all my PPL training to be flown to IFR standards. He was Instrument rated, but not CFII, so when we did my annual check rides, we did instrument training, but not logged as such. I stuck with his rules when we did 800 nm plus vacation trips twice a year, and if the enroute fuel stops had an ILS, I flew it to get familiar with the depiction in VFR conditions. I usually used Flight following, so dealing with ATC was natural when I became rated. Getting my Instrument rating was a breeze.

 

[geezer]

Orca64, I have a high regard for PAR approaches. With my CFI, I made 2 at Andrews AFB, to 20 feet, at night. I flipped up the hood, to see runway centerline lights going on 'Forever' from the viewpoint of a Cessna 150! My instructor, meanwhile, pushed throttle to firewall, keyed the mike to announce missed, and requested a second one.

As we climbed out, he asked what would the result have been if I had not done anything until the plane hit the runway? A hard landing, was my response.

He explained that if I got trapped on top, ask ATC for vectors to the nearest airport with PAR, and follow instructions until I hit the runway. Request "The equipment" on standby, just in case. No matter if the plane flies again, if we walked away, it was a good landing. I did several more PAR approaches, some at other fields, and considered that skill a major ace in the hole. If I walked away, and the FAA took my licence forever, still a win, I and my family are alive.

It is hard to believe the B1 did not come with ILS originally, and the home base did not have PAR.

 

[orca64]

Orca64, I have a high regard for PAR approaches. With my CFI, I made 2 at Andrews AFB, to 20 feet, at night. I flipped up the hood, to see runway centerline lights going on 'Forever' from the viewpoint of a Cessna 150! My instructor, meanwhile, pushed throttle to firewall, keyed the mike to announce missed, and requested a second one.

As we climbed out, he asked what would the result have been if I had not done anything until the plane hit the runway? A hard landing, was my response.

He explained that if I got trapped on top, ask ATC for vectors to the nearest airport with PAR, and follow instructions until I hit the runway. Request "The equipment" on standby, just in case. No matter if the plane flies again, if we walked away, it was a good landing. I did several more PAR approaches, some at other fields, and considered that skill a major ace in the hole. If I walked away, and the FAA took my licence forever, still a win, I and my family are alive.

It is hard to believe the B1 did not come with ILS originally, and the home base did not have PAR.

The B-1 did have an ILS, just not an ILS that was usable. I had to wx divert to Edwards early on because of low ceilings at Dyess; it was the only other base we could take the jet at that time, unless a serious emergency. The ILS used too much computer, with too slow a refresh rate, so it tended to wander. It was also not a typical “fly the jet to the cursors” arrangement. Instead, we flew a hollow cross to the center of “the box”, which some engineer or another decided was a representation of the “beam”. This often resulted in the Anaconda approach.

As for PAR’s, they had been discontinued at many bases by the late 1980’s due to cost. Dyess still had one, and many military aircraft came there to use it, often on weekends, partly because the female controller had a particularly pleasant voice. The O club was often very busy on Friday night.

 

[Velocity173]

The B-1 never had an approach mode on autopilot, nor did it have autothrottles. It did have an auto speed lock-up feature that kept the core rpm above 95% during low level operations.

This is not the first approach accident involving an Ellsworth B-1 flying a non-precision approach at Ellsworth. The first accident was also survived by all 4 crew members when one of the backseaters punched everyone out after a hit and a bounce on the infamous “interstate lighting approach”, circa late 1988 (?).

That bad weather approach was occasioned because at the time, the B-1 did not have a usable ILS.

As a result of that accident, each B-1 base received a portable PAR (army, as I recall) unit to use in lieu of the ILS. The entire crew force had to requalify using the PAR exclusively until software changes were made to provide an ILS capability to the jet (what we called it, pre-bone).

I was wondering about that. I brought up months ago the fact that there are a lot of military aircraft with either no AP or it’s just an AP with heading / altitude hold and no approach modes. 3,840 hrs in the Army and all my instrument flying was hand flown.

 

[Velocity173]

Velocity, I think you are describing the difference between a real, dedicated pilot, and a seat filler with an eye on the top.

I have been very fortunate that I had outstanding instructors for my first 4 flights, flew only once with my first dunce, and finished up with another above and beyond instructor. He required all my PPL training to be flown to IFR standards. He was Instrument rated, but not CFII, so when we did my annual check rides, we did instrument training, but not logged as such. I stuck with his rules when we did 800 nm plus vacation trips twice a year, and if the enroute fuel stops had an ILS, I flew it to get familiar with the depiction in VFR conditions. I usually used Flight following, so dealing with ATC was natural when I became rated. Getting my Instrument rating was a breeze.

Well the guy has the quals. He’s no rookie. Outside of the military, 2,000 hrs would be a joke. Airline guys probably get that in 3 years on the line. But 2,000 hrs is pretty good for a military pilot no matter what the airframe. Now, 2,000 hrs in 20 years though? That’s not too impressive. Especially since the guy is an IP. Not sure he had the proficiency to be in that position.

A lot comes down to the airframe though. B-1s are just too expensive and readiness is in the drink compared to smaller, cheaper airframes. My brother worked ATC at ABI and said the B-1s rarely flew while the C-130s were always up. He loved working the BONE though. He used to try and talk them into approaches at ABI just to see them.

It’s still a viable airframe even during GWOT. I worked with them in Afghanistan on an Op (Strong Eagle) and had one overhead. JTACs love them because of on scene loiter times and a variety of ordnance to choose from. A bit of over kill waiting an hour for the Bone to drop a 500 lb JDAM though.

 

[geezer]

Orca64, the PAR at Andrews was decommissioned, and moved to Davison, in Virginia, so I did PAR there. Dulles had PAR, but the controllers hated staying qualified. When it was removed, they had the contractor just drop the cables into the conduit, making it impossible to replace them.

Twice at Andrews, they asked if we could hold until a controller that needed to log one could be put in place to renew his qualification. In a small Cessna, that was not very costly, we were fine with that.

 

[Tools]

Navy flight school 1990-1994, Navy Advanced Strike (jets). No ILS, no VHF radio, no R-nav, no autopilot, no flight director, no CDI. A single tacan and an uhf ndb with a RMI. Lots of PARs and ASRs, even no gyro versions. Shot point to points, essentially manual R-nav.

S-3 in the fleet… had an autopilot and autothrottles, I never used them, too many horror stories. The ILS was UHF, so only good at the boat and San Clemente Island. That was non precision, the precision approach was functionally the same, only based on a fire control radar and a data link. Still no VHF, CDI or flight director.

Was common to shoot a “self contained” approach to the boat to 200’, using TACAN and the RADALT. Multiply DME by three, that’s your altitude, keep the needle on the base recovery course (final) using head falls tail rises, offset for winds.

Of course didn’t have to worry about that pesky flare thingy… literally could do it to the ground, safely. We literally didn’t have minimums at the boat and you NEVER take your own wave off… EVER. Scared and ****in your pants, you keep it coming until THEY say otherwise.

The frontal lobes hadn’t fused yet.

 

[Velocity173]

Just reading the NOTAMs for KRCA. The FMQ-19 ceilometer for rwy 13 is inop. Unbelievable.

 

[35 AoA]

Navy flight school 1990-1994, Navy Advanced Strike (jets). No ILS, no VHF radio, no R-nav, no autopilot, no flight director, no CDI. A single tacan and an uhf ndb with a RMI. Lots of PARs and ASRs, even no gyro versions. Shot point to points, essentially manual R-nav.

S-3 in the fleet… had an autopilot and autothrottles, I never used them, too many horror stories. The ILS was UHF, so only good at the boat and San Clemente Island. That was non precision, the precision approach was functionally the same, only based on a fire control radar and a data link. Still no VHF, CDI or flight director.

Was common to shoot a “self contained” approach to the boat to 200’, using TACAN and the RADALT. Multiply DME by three, that’s your altitude, keep the needle on the base recovery course (final) using head falls tail rises, offset for winds.

Of course didn’t have to worry about that pesky flare thingy… literally could do it to the ground, safely. We literally didn’t have minimums at the boat and you NEVER take your own wave off… EVER. Scared and ****in your pants, you keep it coming until THEY say otherwise.

The frontal lobes hadn’t fused yet.

Almost all of this was true for the F/A-18 fleet until just a few years ago (2017 is when we got LNAV IIRC, though no vertical guidance and no AP approach functionality), save the RMI part. Boat only ICLS and ACLS. No coupling up the autopilot other than for a boat mode III (which I never did)..still no ILS to this day, other than a few Growler exped squadrons that have the civilian boxes in lieu of the ICLS boxes. PARs for all my friends. I do love a good PAR though.

 

[35 AoA]

I’m surprised the IP only had 300 total sim hours after 20 years. I had over 400 sim hrs only 12 yrs and I avoided the sim like the plague.

I'd wonder if that was just a "failure to log it" type of scenario. Until I became a reservist, I didn't ever log sims other than the mandatory logging of my annual NATOPS and instrument check rides as 1.0's in whatever box they happened in. Now I do because they count as up to 50% of our annual 100 hrs requirement. Never came close to bumping up against that min on active duty, but I normally use a few sim hours each year now to get over the hump. Of course our typical airplane sortie duration is around a 1.0

 

[Velocity173]

Almost all of this was true for the F/A-18 fleet until just a few years ago (2017 is when we got LNAV IIRC, though no vertical guidance and no AP approach functionality), save the RMI part. Boat only ICLS and ACLS. No coupling up the autopilot other than for a boat mode III (which I never did)..still no ILS to this day, other than a few Growler exped squadrons that have the civilian boxes in lieu of the ICLS boxes. PARs for all my friends. I do love a good PAR though.

They always told us you all had a self contained “Hornet Approach” mode as well. Basically sounded like auto throttles and followed a 3 degree glide path or something. I remember with Hornets, if you nailed the “begin descent” call on the PAR, they would stick on glide path like they were on rails. Hardly any deviation.

 

[Sluggo63]

Well the guy has the quals. He’s no rookie. Outside of the military, 2,000 hrs would be a joke. Airline guys probably get that in 3 years on the line. But 2,000 hrs is pretty good for a military pilot no matter what the airframe. Now, 2,000 hrs in 20 years though? That’s not too impressive. Especially since the guy is an IP. Not sure he had the proficiency to be in that position.

A lot comes down to the airframe though. B-1s are just too expensive and readiness is in the drink compared to smaller, cheaper airframes. My brother worked ATC at ABI and said the B-1s rarely flew while the C-130s were always up. He loved working the BONE though. He used to try and talk them into approaches at ABI just to see them.

It’s still a viable airframe even during GWOT. I worked with them in Afghanistan on an Op (Strong Eagle) and had one overhead. JTACs love them because of on scene loiter times and a variety of ordnance to choose from. A bit of over kill waiting an hour for the Bone to drop a 500 lb JDAM though.

I did 25 years and was lucky enough to be in the cockpit the entire time (no big schools in residence or staff tours). This thread made me curious how my hours shook out per year during my time in. Electronic logbook makes that easy.

Total.......5,387.1
Average/year..215.5

Now, I understand the realities of AD flying. If I had staying AD, there would have been a school in residence, a staff tour, more desk, less jet. Having said that, I always looked sideways at pilots late in their career rocking a 1,500 hour tab. Especially the heavy guys.

What I thought was interesting was my biggest hour years was when I was a T-37 instructor (420-ish/year). Our average sortie duration was around 1.2-1.3. That's a lot of flights to rack up those numbers. Basically 340 sorties/year working mostly M-F.

 

[Velocity173]

I did 25 years and was lucky enough to be in the cockpit the entire time (no big schools in residence or staff tours). This thread made me curious how my hours shook out per year during my time in. Electronic logbook makes that easy.

Total.......5,387.1
Average/year..215.5

Now, I understand the realities of AD flying. If I had staying AD, there would have been a school in residence, a staff tour, more desk, less jet. Having said that, I always looked sideways at pilots late in their career rocking a 1,500 hour tab. Especially the heavy guys.

What I thought was interesting was my biggest hour years was when I was a T-37 instructor (420-ish/year). Our average sortie duration was around 1.2-1.3. That's a lot of flights to rack up those numbers. Basically 340 sorties/year working mostly M-F.

T-37s must have been like ground hog day. Mon-Fri flying every day. One of the reasons why I didn’t go back to Rucker as a civilian IP is, I’d go insane teaching the same thing every day. I could vary it with days, nights, instruments, tactics, etc but it would still be monotonous work.

 

[35 AoA]

They always told us you all had a self contained “Hornet Approach” mode as well. Basically sounded like auto throttles and followed a 3 degree glide path or something. I remember with Hornets, if you nailed the “begin descent” call on the PAR, they would stick on glide path like they were on rails. Hardly any deviation.

Not exactly. The "Hornet 1" was a procedure rather than an actual approach or mode (essentially an emergency procedure.....in a few thousand hours, I've never had to rely on it as my only source of a letdown). You just used the A/G mode of the radar to map the end of the runway, designated it, and then manually flew a generally 3 deg G/S using the HUD, velocity vector, and the designation diamond (depicted in the HUD)......ie put the diamond at ~ 3 deg down on the HUD pitch ladder, and keep it there by putting the VV on top of it, and you're pretty much on the money. You could use auto throttles like any other approach, certainly, but there wasn't any dedicated guidance, and it wasn't really ever a sanctioned procedure for that matter, just a good technique. During my 2 seat training O tour, I always trained the new WSOs to make a radar map as a habit anytime we were approaching the field, just in case. It saved my bacon a couple times in bad weather at min fuel in Oceana when a PAR was going sideways due to controller scope interpretation ("no, we aren't left of course, we are actually right of course and their corrections are only making the deviation worse"). The last part is pretty true, other than with weird wind shifting as you descend. It's a very stable platform configured for landing......you trim to on speed, and especially on an approach to a field that is not moving itself, you can make small VSI adjustments pretty easily. It is quite a bit more "rails" now with PLM approach mode. PLM shouldn't be confused with a type of approach, or specific approach guidance, it is just a mod to the flight control computer software to invoke direct lift control by manipulating the leading and trailing edge flaps, when selected for use. It does have slightly different symbology in the HUD, but you could use it in conjunction with any type of approach. One thing we don't have is FD's or an FMC. The closest thing we have to FD's is the ACLS approach mode symbology (used at the boat only), which functions in a similar manner to transport category FDs, though the symbology is far different looking. Traditional ILS needles for an ICLS, lateral deviation guidance for TACAN or the newer RNAV approach capability, and of course nothing at all for a PAR or ASR.

 

[JScarry]

This guy has a long video reading through the report and explaining all the military terms.

 

[Sluggo63]

T-37s must have been like ground hog day. Mon-Fri flying every day. One of the reasons why I didn’t go back to Rucker as a civilian IP is, I’d go insane teaching the same thing every day. I could vary it with days, nights, instruments, tactics, etc but it would still be monotonous work.

It was a bit like that. The one saving grace is that once you started getting a little bored with it, the students would move to a new phase. Contact turned into instrument into navigation and low level then formation. Then repeat over and over again. I'd go back in a heartbeat now, but I was pretty burnt out at the end of my 3 years there.

 

[Velocity173]

Mover- “you don’t wanna be the fatty.”

 

[Velocity173]

Not exactly. The "Hornet 1" was a procedure rather than an actual approach or mode (essentially an emergency procedure.....in a few thousand hours, I've never had to rely on it as my only source of a letdown). You just used the A/G mode of the radar to map the end of the runway, designated it, and then manually flew a generally 3 deg G/S using the HUD, velocity vector, and the designation diamond (depicted in the HUD)......ie put the diamond at ~ 3 deg down on the HUD pitch ladder, and keep it there by putting the VV on top of it, and you're pretty much on the money. You could use auto throttles like any other approach, certainly, but there wasn't any dedicated guidance, and it wasn't really ever a sanctioned procedure for that matter, just a good technique. During my 2 seat training O tour, I always trained the new WSOs to make a radar map as a habit anytime we were approaching the field, just in case. It saved my bacon a couple times in bad weather at min fuel in Oceana when a PAR was going sideways due to controller scope interpretation ("no, we aren't left of course, we are actually right of course and their corrections are only making the deviation worse"). The last part is pretty true, other than with weird wind shifting as you descend. It's a very stable platform configured for landing......you trim to on speed, and especially on an approach to a field that is not moving itself, you can make small VSI adjustments pretty easily. It is quite a bit more "rails" now with PLM approach mode. PLM shouldn't be confused with a type of approach, or specific approach guidance, it is just a mod to the flight control computer software to invoke direct lift control by manipulating the leading and trailing edge flaps, when selected for use. It does have slightly different symbology in the HUD, but you could use it in conjunction with any type of approach. One thing we don't have is FD's or an FMC. The closest thing we have to FD's is the ACLS approach mode symbology (used at the boat only), which functions in a similar manner to transport category FDs, though the symbology is far different looking. Traditional ILS needles for an ICLS, lateral deviation guidance for TACAN or the newer RNAV approach capability, and of course nothing at all for a PAR or ASR.

Is it true with Magic Carpet that it’s so accurate that they had to modify the software so it wouldn’t land at the exact point every time? Heard a rumor that the hook impacts were so precise it was actually rubbing a hole in the deck.

Heard some of these retired fighter pilots on YT who aren’t too big on it. Basically no point in a Greenie Board if you get perfect three wires every time.

 

[Tools]

That’s what Spot Galanie told us… apparently was a test guy.

 

[Sluggo63]

Mover- “you don’t wanna be the fatty.”

I'm feeling a little attacked...

 

[hindsight2020]

It was a bit like that. The one saving grace is that once you started getting a little bored with it, the students would move to a new phase. Contact turned into instrument into navigation and low level then formation. Then repeat over and over again. I'd go back in a heartbeat now, but I was pretty burnt out at the end of my 3 years there.

The problem with Active Duty is that they make you pull 2 sorties a day, plus weekend cross countries, but then they also expect you to do all the other 6-9 qweep jobs on top of it, so 12 hour days become the norm and people burn out. We're keenly aware of that dynamic, which is why we don't have that issue on the Reserve side (we couldn't staff the place if we did). Certainly the reason I've been able to do 13+ consecutive years of this job (granted, with a change in MDS 4 years into the gig) without significant burnout. The way regAF runs their show, yeah no way I'd be able to do it.

The only burnout I'm currently experiencing is due to my choice to geobachelor; losing the airplane in a time of overinflated market put me into a rough weekly driving commute.

 

[35 AoA]

Is it true with Magic Carpet that it’s so accurate that they had to modify the software so it wouldn’t land at the exact point every time? Heard a rumor that the hook impacts were so precise it was actually rubbing a hole in the deck.

Heard some of these retired fighter pilots on YT who aren’t too big on it. Basically no point in a Greenie Board if you get perfect three wires every time.

I don't think the first part is true. On deployment the "target wire" definitely needed to be changed out in a shorter amount of time, because people were that much more accurate. I don't think the old retired guys understand what it is, much less how it works (and I have yet to see a fighter pilot YT channel that wasn't just cringeworthy). Still a "manual" pass, and you can definitely still bolter, or fly a no grade (or even a cut). It just takes a lot of the effort we paid towards managing glideslope away, since the corrections are so efficient (no more "3 part power corrections"), thus leaving more time to look at other equally important things like lineup. But to be clear, you are still 100% still manually "flying the ball" with PLM, it's just a lot easier than a manual pass used to be, which of course the old guys would scoff at because "baaaaaahhhh the Hornet was so easy to land"......

Boarding rates are much higher with PLM, which is what should matter to anyone. And the average individual GPA in a line period is silly.....I think average was clocking in at around 3.6 or so. So much that our LSOs actually started changing their grading criteria a little bit to introduce some competition. Technique comments that would have previously been "little" started becoming "full". Like "high start, fly through down in the middle, flat at the ramp, fair 3" when the same pass would have previously been "little high start, little fly through down in the middle, little too much power in close, ok 3".....or something like that.....

 

[Sierra_Hotel]

This forum isn't suited for long stories, but I got a chapter earmarked in my post retirement memoirs to the story of how Bent Spear and the Lost Decade shaped my military career, which I consider Honorable but remarkably stunted by bad timing. There's a lot to unpack to say the least. Will have to wait for the audiobook lol.

I feel like that's most military careers, and the ones that don't conform to that mantra are exceptions to the rule.

 

[35 AoA]

I feel like that's most military careers, and the ones that don't conform to that mantra are exceptions to the rule.

Yeah I mean I think they generally call those "General" or "Admiral"

Most of us have neither the desire, nor the luck interest in ruining our family lives by being beholden to a job 24/7 for that many decades, required.

 

[Tools]

With no guarantee it’s gonna happen anyway…

 

[35 AoA]

With no guarantee it’s gonna happen anyway…

Bingo. And I'm sure that all of us have seen enough of our peers or squadron mattes put it all on the line for years, neglecting everything else, taking the "hard jobs", just to be told in some FITREP debrief Thank You For Your Service, but USS BOAT Needs an Air Boss, have fun with 3 years of hard (non-flying) sea duty.