Flyer0001

Why did I not see that video before? I must have looked at 100. One thing this post or thread or whatever you call it has done for me is give me great advice to achieve AAR. I would still vote for some way to get fuel in the air during a mission if I was unable to hook up to the refueler. Since no one seems to be flipping their position and since I read that ED is reading these posts, perhaps a poll would be appropriate. Perhaps it is a dumb idea but if this post has run its course - perhaps it would be a nice way to wrap up. I vote easy AAR. I think easy AAR is a bad label and this vote has nothing to do with setting priority. I also am not going into my concern of not wanting this to turn into an arcade game. This is simply to give ED an idea of how many who are reading this post are on which side of the fence.

Good analogy. However, I won't go into what happened to me when I was 5 and my older brother was the one running behind me holding on to the back fender. Hopefully the developers would provide much better helpers. Learning AAR is like riding a bike is exactly what I wanted to know. The question now is - does learning AAR carry over to other planes? I have managed to refuel with AAR with the F/A-18c though I still need more practice. I immediately went over to the AV-8B and tried it. It was like starting over from square one. After a couple of days of about 1/2 to 1 hour per day things have not gotten much better. My other planes are air force which means a boom and not drogue and basket. I do recognize that the Harrier seems more "unstable" than the Hornet. Please tell me there is not a whole new learning curve for each plane.

The message 2 above hit on some of the basic points being brought up so I would like to address them in turn. The message above also has a good point. What you are describing was how I remember the Jane's F/A-18E software handled easy AAR which came out in 1999. Get close to the refueling plane, push a button and AI takes over. You watched your plane hookup and get fuel and then break away releasing control back to the pilot. I can't argue your point about priorities. F-16 needs mavericks, harms, etc. An Apache helicopter and F-15E Strike Eagle with fully functional cockpit would be a sure buy for me. And that is just the beginning. It has been discussed whether unlimited fuel is a worthy substitute. For some the answer is no. Some pilots want the experience of having to watch their fuel and have enough to get to the refueler, use the TACAN to find the refueler, communicate with the refueler but as yet can't hook up and/or stay with the refueler to refuel. An hour of practice and you are already hooking up to the basket for short periods of time is remarkable. This is well beyond what many of us are experiencing and as for me I am quite certain the hours of practice are in the double digits. That being said - about 10 pages ago I got some good suggestions and I too am hooking up for short periods of time. Very exhilarating even at my age. I am almost glad there is no easy AAR forcing me to learn AAR. (But then I am retired with no children and very independent wife.) AAR may become my favorite part of the mission. I find that I need to refuel on a significant number of missions. Certainly the design of the Harrier makes it a must. But even the F/A-18c only has so many hardpoints. (Another priority would be the F/A-18E with more.) And I always seem to end up in the wrong place and have to dodge missiles which may mean afterburners which consumes fuel. Of course this may be indicative of poor mission planning and execution. I am curious about something and perhaps it is a mistake to ask because using it may induce some bad habits. I keep hearing how some pilots are using trim and autopilot to help them hook up to the basket. Would some one explain how this is done.

There is an issue that may make an easy AAR option perhaps more tolerable is the marketing aspect. It appears to me that having these options tend to bring in more buyers because they address the desires of more people. Of course an argument could be made in the opposite direction but without making this message too long I believe the more people they appeal to the more money they make. The more money they make the more developers they can pay and the sooner we get things.

This is all good advice. And it is nice to know that others have experienced what I am experiencing. Making AAR part of a mission sounds like a good idea. I am tired of fly - miss - fly again - miss. I have gotten to a point where I seem so close and yet can't get any farther. Hence the "drop back and punt" attitude for an easier AAR option. I can actually move right up to the basket and yet every time the basket suddenly drops out of site going right through the end of the refueling probe. Hence I think I do need to look at this issue of pitch control using the throttle. I remember a movie with Tom Selleck called "Mr. Baseball". Where he went from the winning attitude of "knock it out of the park" to "just don't miss" and ended up going from the Yankees to a Japanese league.

It sounds to me like some of you believe that if someone is committed they will make it happen no matter what their capabilities are. I do agree about the bad habits. The issue there is I have been through about 10 or 15 tutorials and I have gotten or surmised all kinds of advice. One said to put auto pilot on and that even though it disengages it still does something. Someone else recommended extending the air brake part way. Watching some people it appears they "lunge" at the basket in the final 10 feet and they are going so fast the refueling plane starts yelling break away. Much of this certainly is personal preference but at this point I am not sure what ends up a bad habit. Perhaps I should be diagnosing more along with the practice.

Thank you for the response. Wow. I think I have spent a lot more than that. I think I am starting to understand why some pilots are wondering what is the problem. 5 to 10 hours is a fair amount of hours to learn a specific skill but hardly unreasonable. I think I am going to give it a couple more hours per your recommendations for how to spread them out and make sure I keep close tabs on the time spent. If don't see some real improvement it's unlimited fuel.

Interesting. I am curious as to how long some of you think is an average amount of time pilots have spent practicing air to air refueling. I am only talking about hooking up to the basket, not learning TACAN to find the refueling plane or learning the proper way to communicate with the refueling plane. I am not asking what it took you personally but a reasonable average amount. Some of you must know several pilots who have this skill. I would like to know because if most of you come up with a time amount which is significantly less than the time I have already spent then perhaps I need rethink whether or not I have the coordination to accomplish this.

In some ways we do have easy air to air refueling. The elimination of the fear of death is a big one. On the other hand we don't have certain sensory inputs: our bodies do not experience our "plane" moving around and we don't have the same depth perception looking at a screen versus a 3D environment. I applaud those who can achieve a "hookup" every time. Some of us though are getting on in years and/or just don't have the necessary coordination for the required intricate moves no matter how much we practice. And there are those who just don't have the time to practice this one skill but still want more than an arcade experience. If we can't refuel in the air we lose the whole fuel management experience because the only other option is unlimited fuel. It seems to me that an option for refueling with no oscillation of plane and basket could be made available for newer or less coordinated pilots. I have noticed when I hook up to the catapult that if my plane is not perfectly aligned it magically aligns itself. No one expects me to make a U turn and try again. When learning something like skiing you are not just shoved done the expert slope the first time out. You work up to it. Of course there are about 1000 things the programmers need to work on that are as important or more important than an easier option to refueling.