G B

Well said Klars! And mentioning how newer modern radars have use for SAR mapping (which they really do) versus what old mech scan radars can do is not a worthwhile discussion. The newer ones are really useful. Do not take that to mean that older ones are/were useful. Basically, what Klars said!

Agree with Chicken. Furthermore, each individual mission is such a perishable skill that the division of time to train to them matches what Klarsnow was saying. These skills are much much more perishable than the general community realizes. Hence training to just one or two, really makes a very huge impact.

Agree with Creepy. It’s bad, but not a divert.

Oh they train to that alright. Sorry to have bursted your bubble. Enjoy the blobs!

Strike/AI....still not using it.

Do you really want to do CAS, by definition close to friendlies, and drop on a radar designation? Drop on a blob?

Don’t get your hopes too high.

Relying on knowledge of the Super Hornet to infer how things are in the Hornet can cause trouble. Many many little differences like this one exist.

Point of order: TGP AMPCD DTC Acronyms never used in the real Hornet community (USN). Never even seen #1 or #3. I do understand that they stem from other platforms. What I have seen are: TPOD MPCD AMU (several different acronyms actually, depending on which generation Mission Card). Just for those interested in maximum authenticity :).

The Ford has overcome many of those issues lately. A number of CQ events have taken place aboard the Ford recently. It's not perfect, but it's not the old stories of doom and gloom anymore either.

Agree with all.

I can't and won't get into any details of any tactical systems or tactics. Respectfully, however, I can tell you that your logic is mistaken. Think about when the Navy put these features in. Also, comparing what modern A/G modes can do compared to old mech-scanned is far beyond apples to oranges. People here just seem way more excited than they should be about this. Won't say any more.

Having read through all these pages....seeing people’s thoughts here on the AG radar is very interesting.

I’ve bitten my tongue for a while, but Airhunter is onto something....

While changing the target wire is uncommon, there’s a number of reasons to do so: 1) Aircraft malfunction. For example, red launch bar warning light. Procedure requires stripping 2 wires. Changing the target wire in that case is appropriate and required. 2) Stripped wires. While we usually don’t change the target wire when wires are stripped, sometimes we change it. Also included in this category are busted arresting gear engines and other such issues. LSO grading for a stripped wire includes the “circle” where the LSO writes the number of the wire the hook would have caught and circles it, before writing the number of the actual caught wire. 3) Very rarely, I’ve seen it to help a struggling pilot who has had a hard time getting aboard. There are a couple of other reasons but those are the big ones.

Remember guys: it’s not about the wire. There are plenty of lousy 3-wires, and some really pretty 2-wires and 4-wires. While the 3 normally is the target wire, LSOs do NOT grade the wire. They grade the pass, of which where the hook touches down is just one part of it.

You know, there’s a bunch of people that are in that camp, just like the author. I am not one of them. In fact, I’ve never understood it. To me the pitch black, moonless cat shots were not a big deal because I pretty much was 100% sure of the outcome. The experience would be like all the other night shots. But the trap...that was downright scary and I had to do all the hard work, unlike on the catapult. What I will say regarding the article is that he is completely right about the darkness. There is no darkness like a moonless night in the middle of the ocean. You could stand in the middle of a cave at night with your eyes closed and blindfolded, and it wouldn’t approximate the darkness we’re talking about.

TACAN BRC is not used during case 3. You use Final Bearing. BRC won’t be aligned with the ICLS.

Enjoy https://medium.com/@JECurtis/darkness-4588997166f2

Reading these past couple of pages makes me realize there’s a large misconception by the community to both the mechanics of how BITs/BLINs/Resets/etc. work, and the mentality and mechanics of troubleshooting systems on deck and in the air. Klarsnow did allude to some of this earlier.

This.

Nuggets don’t use ATC. After getting experience and no longer being a nugget, ATC is authorized. Of those more experienced aviators, many (but not all) use ATC. Some mix it up (ATC during case 3 but not case 1/2, etc) . Not frowned upon in the least And yes.

Not uncommon.

When I mentioned lag with a high VSI I wasn't referring to the instrument itself. I was describing that the higher momentum will take longer to overcome. For the second one, on a perfectly smooth day, maybe not "continuous" as in every single moment, but continuous as in a regularly occurring and frequent amount. Again, IRL there's no oscillations as you described, but the pilot is managing the straight and level flight. It is just subconscious and easy when trimmed out. edit: It won't oscillate around 0 VSI while its trimmed out. But it's possible through small corrections a very minor PIO may cause what appear to be "oscillations"

Walking the throttles is a very common technique. But it is technique. Not ALL pilots use it.