It can't be that tough, I've done it at 90 degrees of bank and even inverted in the weather...

Oh...well...I meant I THOUGHT I was in 90 degrees of bank. The ADI must have been broke, because every cell in my body said that dumbass tanker pilot wanted to do the entire AR in a knife edge pass. No idea why he did it that way, but the AR wasn't the toughest part. The hard part was going BACK to the observation position on the wing flying the knife edge for the next 20 minutes.

These days when the flying gets tough I just go back to the galley and get a fresh cup of coffee. Sometimes getting old ain't all bad. I do not miss night IMC tanker ops.

 

Nothing like being on the wing and realize you can't see the engine pod. Are you f'ing kidding me? We're going lost wingman from the tanker!?!?.

Guy on the boom must have had extreme vertigo.

Everyone hung in there but it wasn't fun.

 

Finding the clouds is part of the KC-135 TTPs, which consist of;

1.) If there is a cloud in the sky...fly through it!

2.) Once the fighters are setting up their rejoining...turn into them!

These are found in the attachments. The main body of their TTPs consist of finding the highest per diem/ best party spots throughout the world, and above all else...get their tail number.

I guess this depends on what you're flying. This is exactly what my airframe does. Granted, my aircraft is much more responsive. I got two day and one night AAR in training (almost everyone graduates with a note of the many unaccomplished tasks for AAR). <5 before I was CMR.


This is valid, there is a reason they were sent to an aircraft requiring two pilots...

Maybe in your airframe, but I would not consider it hard at all. Dangerous? Having aircraft that close together can be considering dangerous I guess. It's briefed as admin, and usually consists of tanker ops standard...questions?

In all fairness, I think i've read that, the takeoff and land phase of flight are the most dangerous.

 

This is how it is done in the F-15E FTU.

It is actually just an "also..." during a syllabus sortie in which something else is the primary mission. That first AAR is just something you do on the way to or from the real learning point on that day.

 

Hacker,

Is it designed that way or just implemented that way by the FTU...for instance in the F/A-18 syllabus day/night IFR are separate sorties and solely dedicated to tanking. I was curious if they are separate events on paper for y'all and you just combine them in flight or if a particular flight or group of flights in the syllabus call for the 'add on'. Just curious...

Bdger

 

I realize this was over a week and 40 posts ago, but there was an important point you both seem to have missed or forgotten. For your review:




AR in a heavy is not close trail in a T-38.

I would certainly hope that it's easier to maneuver a fighter on the boom than a heavy.



==================================================

Ehh, didn't take long, did it? Attempt to elevate yourself by putting others down.

Sweet ...






.

 

Great picture, but "whales" are B-747s.






.

 

Actually, everybody does not do it. I guess that blows your definition.



They don't use the Life Support building at Castle for life support anymore, either. Does that mean you fly without oxygen and parachutes?

The ARPTT was built when standard simulators could not replicate the task. Today, the full-motion simulators with life-like visuals are up to the task. The task of air refueling is still taught in the same way, just in a different device.




Can't argue that statement, but it's not an answer to my question.

The answer is that the task is not so dadgum easy in a heavy, and if you put a brand new pilot in the seat with no prior simulator training, he might never get the first contact. Every refueling track has an exit, and they cost a ton of money. That's the same reason you train landings in the sim before you train them in the jet.




That doesn't prove it's easy. It only shows that we're good at it.




Those life support folks have a great union, don't they! They get to decide what's critical and what's not.




Your opinion, and the supporting rationale, is noted. Also noted is the best part of your argument with which you closed:



That must make you feel swell to try to put others down.

I am now absolutely convinced of your superiority.






.

 

Oh come on Tony, you had to have known that was a joke!

 

It's been coming up on 3 years since I retired, but the BUFF WST was not sim certed for AR, even with the upgraded visuals that were added circa 2010. Although FOV was expanded, no visuals were added to support the #6 (eyebrow) window.

Agreed

Yup, seen it happen in a few cases, although most BUFF co-pilots get exposure to AR before upgrading. At one point, AC's could be checked out to supervise their co-pilot during AR, including contacts. IIRC, they did away with that at some point and co-pilot AR can now only be supervised by an instructor.


Of definite value with a Class D simulator, much less so in the B-52 WST (I'm referring to the old visuals). The WST was never sim certed for landings before the visuals were upgraded, and for a good reason IMO. I do not know if they sim certed it for landings with new visuals.