Cadet Mentors
-
@Red:
Candidate type
C. A minority is ready to invest time and study. are positive at debrief and learn from their mistakes. They practice and keep on getting better day by day, week by weekI agree, these pilots are awesome compared to the many new pilots that come for the “wham, bam…”.
@Red:
Different mentors
Having one guy doing all the teaching is impossible and probably doomed to failureI beg to differ here but(after reading) I understand why you may thinks so.
Our method seems to work extremely well and our latest qualified pilots are testament to that.I don’t say that to be nit-picky mate, purely my opinion
-
the main point about that is twofold:
1. It’s too much work for one man - on the long term. Eventually that someone will burn out
2. I think it’s great for cadets to learn the same thing from different people. It adds a different approach. the trick is that all différents IP, must follow the same structure. You don’t want them to teach different things obviouslyOur method seems to work extremely well and our latest qualified pilots are testament to that.
I have no doubt of that. matter of fact, I always wondered how you guys do it
-
Took some time to read Red Dogs post, thanks friend, great comments and very very true and shared experience there. To reply to some comments:
"The question is do VFW impose limits and what to do then when the limit is reached? "
Well not really: But in practise we have the same experience. So I do two things to be able to have some sort of limit improsed in the process:-
PQT: Pre-IQT tasks and requirements. The entry level benchmark basically:
A PDF which will be sent that has the Cadet perform several things before starting IQT. Dealing with port forwarding, trackir, static IP, 3 trainingn missions + ACMI, and the tech stuff basically.
The evidence (ACMI, screenshots) needs to be sent in for review: have the Cadet do this and if not, you know you’re dealing with a type B. Which is fine, but needs to be adressed and needs more and more time. I just adjust to curriculum to this to do 1 thing, not 5 in a flight. I’ll get him/her through IQT but on a grade D level. -
Attendance: enforce a rule which has them showing up, and if not, you go into the doghouse so to speak. This is more to protect the type C pilots in the squadron, more than anything else. If you’re behind of the jet on the tarmac and keep asking the same question because soccer is on in the background: don’t waste my time please… A great analogy is; do that to the wife and you’ll sort of know how I feel. A bit weird but there it is: trying to make it personal because my time is valuable I’d like to think. But overall: Type A and B are difficult.
On the feedback and positivity: Type A can be a proud Cadet and touchy on these subjects. In my experience they make the best dogfighters though, so there’s merit to this type of Cadet. But I just debrief not by showing what went wrong, but by showing (in ACMI/teamviewer) what went wrong and asking them ‘what was your thinking at this point, what we’re you doing’. That evades the pos/neg aspect and works really well. When they open up and tell you, then you can understand and maybe advise (ask first, again, touchy people). If you ask the proud/high ego type student if they want help, instead of giving it straight away, usually they reply positively at which point you will have achieved a common base to start working from.
we start by getting IQT in from the bottom-up: based on the type B level pilot (as per your post’s description: I’m type C)
When the pilot turns out to be type C, we go through IQT in a flash, or in some rare cases, just go straight to the exam flight. The course is build for the novice pilot. Then we enroll them in AQT which is our advanced course (post IQT training) and has them working on intercepts, VRP/VIP to PIP, FAC work and so on.On the ‘1 teacher versus many’ comment: I am the 1 teacher, but on specific topics I like to host a guest teacher who does a specific part of the brief at that time. Takes a bit of the load off and having it being told in a different voice does help a lot.
-
-
Our method seems to work extremely well and our latest qualified pilots are testament to that.
+1: I am working to structure the course into classes and have the Cadets working together more and also have more senior pilots participate in a non teaching role, to create a studying, more lively atmosphere versus the 1-on-1 training which is not optimal for both IP and Cadet.
-
- PQT: Pre-IQT tasks and requirements. The entry level benchmark basically:
A PDF which will be sent that has the Cadet perform several things before starting IQT. Dealing with port forwarding, trackir, static IP, 3 trainingn missions + ACMI, and the tech stuff basically.
The evidence (ACMI, screenshots) needs to be sent in for review: have the Cadet do this and if not, you know you’re dealing with a type B. Which is fine, but needs to be adressed and needs more and more time. I just adjust to curriculum to this to do 1 thing, not 5 in a flight. I’ll get him/her through IQT but on a grade D level.
Our way of screening is a guest flight.
We open our doors to possible candidates and we organize a guest flight. We provide our SOP and we make sure the guest knows what we will do. The guest has to prepare on his own for that guest flight.
After the guest flight, depending on the material we provided we know if the guy prepared the flight or didn’t care. We decide to open a slot in our training if
a. the guy is interested (because the candidate also has the right to see if the VFW is the good one for him
b. we are satisfied that the guy has prepared to this guest flight, have a basic understanding of our SOP and was aware of what would happen during the flight. He’s obvioulsy in a wingman position.
That step also takes care of the PreIQT stuff, like setting up, Hotas, connection tests etc etcI love that primary screening and most of the time it works pretty well and tells the VFW a lot of things about the candidate (and inversely). But you can’t always really see if he might be a type B as this is obviously not deep training enough to realise. You might screen a few - and you have to let a chance to the real new guys as well too.
Most of the type B I encountered, was way later when starting to do much more complicated things. Let’s face it, in the early days of joining a VFW, the motivation is there and most of the guys are gung ho. It’s after that motivation and the need to study and train decreases.- Attendance: enforce a rule which has them showing up, and if not, you go into the doghouse so to speak. This is more to protect the type C pilots in the squadron, more than anything else. If you’re behind of the jet on the tarmac and keep asking the same question because soccer is on in the background: don’t waste my time please… A great analogy is; do that to the wife and you’ll sort of know how I feel. A bit weird but there it is: trying to make it personal because my time is valuable I’d like to think. But overall: Type A and B are difficult.
Well watching Soccer and being inattentive during the MP flight is not even typeB These guys would never be part of our VFW for long. I’d refuse to fly with them. Simple as that.
Type B is much more difficult, because they are there, they are not distracted but as you say they do ask the same questions ever again. Although they were told many times the answer. They just might have forgotten and didn’t cross the T and pointed the i. So they ask again and that indeed disrupt the enjoyment of the other pilots (type A or C) in the Multiplayer flight.
They need more training, but you never know if that extra effort will pay off. I would like to spend the extra time on these guys, but it’s often done at the expense of the training of the other candidate or the enjoyment of type C pilots….On the feedback and positivity: Type A can be a proud Cadet and touchy on these subjects. In my experience they make the best dogfighters though, so there’s merit to this type of Cadet.
Agreed
But I just debrief not by showing what went wrong, but by showing (in ACMI/teamviewer) what went wrong and asking them ‘what was your thinking at this point, what we’re you doing’. That evades the pos/neg aspect and works really well. When they open up and tell you, then you can understand and maybe advise (ask first, again, touchy people). If you ask the proud/high ego type student if they want help, instead of giving it straight away, usually they reply positively at which point you will have achieved a common base to start working from.
Again, dépends on the individual, but what you say indeed make sense
- PQT: Pre-IQT tasks and requirements. The entry level benchmark basically:
-
@Red:
the main point about that is twofold:
1. It’s too much work for one man - on the long term. Eventually that someone will burn out
2. I think it’s great for cadets to learn the same thing from different people. It adds a different approach. the trick is that all différents IP, must follow the same structure. You don’t want them to teach different things obviouslyI have no doubt of that. matter of fact, I always wondered how you guys do it
I agree there can/could be value from having one cadet work with more that one instructor. In BMS practical considerations sometimes make this more difficult than in RL situation (i.e. single pipeline, time-zones vs co-location, etc.)
One the other hand, we don’t have ‘one guy doing it all’. We have several IP’s going through the training cycle with their students every 45 to 60 days. Some administration is shared. Changes to improve our program, plus changes to BMS (which necessitates add’l changes to our program), keeps things fresher.
One of the OP’s questions had to do with dealing with different levels of experience or expertise among recruits. If the v-Wing is going to accept candidates with a range of experience, the IP staff have to be able to 1.) recognize when and where those differences occur, 2.) adapt their teaching content and style to accommodate them, and 3.) insure a constant focus on pre-defined minimum learning objectives and/or procedural compliance.
For instance, one cadet cannot (or is poor at) air refuel and one cadet is very good. In the first case the IP will need to be a coach and cheerleader, providing tips and technique to help the student become proficient, while maintaining wing/squad AAR procedures. In the second case, the IP and student are more focused on wing procedure and the act of AAR is merely an operational objective.
-
Ok so that’s clear: but how do you manage a ‘class’ of students with different levels? Can you divide the attention during the flight or do you gly, then go in debrief to each and inform?
SOP’s do shape a clear framework to start off from, that is a big help. Especially when in you’re in IQT3 (3rd mission) so the Cadet can get used to doing things in a specific way each time, adds to the ‘extra brain capacity’ so to speak to put in new information. Whether it be switches or systems, or basic flight manoevers or weapons delivery.
I’d say the first things are SOP’s, then SA, the formation, then navigation and build on that going forward to weapons employment. I noticed copying R/L courses to BMS doesn’t work very well and having more than 1 Cadet in a IQT flight is very difficult. Do you guys have any experience on how to set that up (properly)?
And the 1 guy doing it all, well that has its pros and cons. Guess it depends on the size of the squadron?
-
Ok so that’s clear: but how do you manage a ‘class’ of students with different levels? ….
And the 1 guy doing it all, well that has its pros and cons. Guess it depends on the size of the squadron?
We do 1:1 …. one student and one IP, not by ‘class’; i.e. not as a group with one IP.
We do have quite a few IP’s … 5 or 6?
-
Hi Agave_Blue,
Just wondering and interested: if you have a couple of instructor pilots, how do you, or your CTO, keep track of progress: How do you ‘manage’ the whole thing with all these moving parts. Top down changes in a squadron need to be implemented (if applicable), what are some of the methods you use, or your IP use, to maintain a quality level and also a comfort level for the Cadets that are on the receiving end of this course?
And who teaches the teacher? That is another question. Maybe we might be looking at an IP platform here where IP’s can work together and make our own separate squadrons better?
Allow me a little daydream: Having IP’s work together on tools, form, process and communication to lift the BMS community up and provide a platform and resource for future IP’s to add to?
Regardless of the individual SOP’s and squadrons we might be tied to. Inner workings of a VFS are specific and VFW internal:
I mean specifically the IP’s. Build a knowledge + experience base…. -
Hi Agave_Blue,
Just wondering and interested: if you have a couple of instructor pilots, how do you, or your CTO, keep track of progress: How do you ‘manage’ the whole thing with all these moving parts. Top down changes in a squadron need to be implemented (if applicable), what are some of the methods you use, or your IP use, to maintain a quality level and also a comfort level for the Cadets that are on the receiving end of this course?
And who teaches the teacher? That is another question. Maybe we might be looking at an IP platform here where IP’s can work together and make our own separate squadrons better?
Allow me a little daydream: Having IP’s work together on tools, form, process and communication to lift the BMS community up and provide a platform and resource for future IP’s to add to?
Regardless of the individual SOP’s and squadrons we might be tied to. Inner workings of a VFS are specific and VFW internal:
I mean specifically the IP’s. Build a knowledge + experience base….We have an entire squadron within the wing dedicated to IP’s and training new cadets. There is a training syllabus that all IP’s adhere to and DLO’s (desired learning objectives) that every student going through IQT needs to meet to progress through their training. All cadets are tracked amd reports are filed within the wing to keep track of progress.
Sent from my SM-G920W8 using Tapatalk
-
Hi Agave_Blue,
Just wondering and interested: if you have a couple of instructor pilots, how do you, or your CTO, keep track of progress: How do you ‘manage’ the whole thing with all these moving parts. Top down changes in a squadron need to be implemented (if applicable), what are some of the methods you use, or your IP use, to maintain a quality level and also a comfort level for the Cadets that are on the receiving end of this course? ….
Over time the wing has built up infrastructure to support it. Standard training docs, TE’s, DLO’s, etc. We have a roster where we keep track of progress. We write up each training mission, post and discuss them on the forum. If we need to change a training objective, we discuss it on the forum and put it in place via the docs and/or TE’s. I don’t know that this any different that what many other wings do.
If a cadet needs a re-fly, they know it before they leave a debrief. It’s not a penalty. It’s a recognition that to move to the next flight, we need to do this one better. Students need to study and practice between flights. It becomes obvious who does and who doesn’t. Wash-outs among those less experienced in BMS Multiplayer are high if they can’t commit the prep and practice time. It’s a steep learning curve (as we all know).
The underlying purpose is what will drive the training content. Our objective is NOT to teach BMS system button pushing, nor to graduate Weapon School Flight Leads. We expect new members to know the basics around radar use, weapon employment, T/O and landing, Ramp start, etc. at the time they join. Our objective is for the cadet to demonstrate a basic level of competence with regard to AA/AG/Form aspects of flying, demonstrated adherence to wing SOPs (comms procedure, MP connection procedure, AAR procedure, STTO, etc.) and competence employing basic weapon and/or team tactics. We want to bring them far enough that they can integrate into wing-wide flights where their competence in BMS will increase. Other wings go further …. some much further.
-
Maybe we might be looking at an IP platform here where IP’s can work together and make our own separate squadrons better?
Allow me a little daydream: Having IP’s work together on tools, form, process and communication to lift the BMS community up and provide a platform and resource for future IP’s to add to?
Regardless of the individual SOP’s and squadrons we might be tied to. Inner workings of a VFS are specific and VFW internal:
I mean specifically the IP’s. Build a knowledge + experience base….There was a project called TCM, or Training Community Management in full, a few years ago. The idea was to have a TLP-like setting, in which squadrons would send some of their pilots to the TCM-programme, where they would be taught all sorts of things, which they could then take back to their own squadrons. Although not necessarily the purpose of TCM, our expectation was that IP’s would be the first to come over before sending in their trainees, at which point it would have been a two-way street in terms of shared feedback and experience.
We got pretty far in the preparations, actually, with 8-10 IPs ready to go, a complete theatre adjusted to our needs, (most of) the R&R and entry requirements settled, decided what was (not) important to be taught, IP/Student SOPs and flight manuals written etc.
IIRC, we were actually very close to launching a first private small scale trial before we went live publicly, but unfortunately, we ran into a few major setbacks, such as real life and/or own squadron needs reducing available time for many, technical issues, … Mainly the sudden exodus of IP’s was a problem, as it left only 2 or 3 guys, which obviously would not have been nearly enough to keep the programme running, so the project slowly faded away. I’m fairly certain though, that some IP/staff still hope it would someday lift off as intended. -
Its not just your IPs and staff that hold that hope.
-
@Red:
I have no doubt of that. matter of fact, I always wondered how you guys do it
+1: without revealing inner workings or secrets, I am curious what the difference is in this particular method.
Does anyone have any experience in other methods than 1:1 training in an IQT course? I am trying to expand the method part of our course but not sure on the how and what (nuts&bolts) I need to get the wanted result (very good pilots, happy and motivated).
-
+1: without revealing inner workings or secrets, I am curious what the difference is in this particular method.
Does anyone have any experience in other methods than 1:1 training in an IQT course? I am trying to expand the method part of our course but not sure on the how and what (nuts&bolts) I need to get the wanted result (very good pilots, happy and motivated).
If you want to learn the tactics, techniques, and procedures the right way, that is the only way. That’s the way it’s done in real life and if you want to get to a high level of proficiency that’s how it’s going to work in Falcon too. It takes tremendous study, almost a mini college degree in a sense to master all the techniques you can bring to bear in the F-16. You need to build upon previous lessons to get to the top. For example in our wing the first thing we study is aircraft handling characteristics and formation handling. So that includes basic ramp and airfield SOPs, or the local area orientation flights, then onto HARTS to learn the flight envelope of the F-16 while learning how to recover from various airspeeds and attitudes, then followed by aerobatics, which isn’t designed to make you an airshow pilot, but polish up handling skills and make your flying “cleaner.” From there you goto formation training where you get good at recognizing the visual sight pictures, formation limits, and contracts of both domestic and tactical formation. Domestic formation is used for general ATC navigation/transit and is a “default” and tactical formation is used to maintain element integrity in combat while engaging threats as a unit. These are the very basic building blocks to a fighter pilot.
After that it’s time for air-to-air phase. You learn very crucial offensive BFM concepts including turn circle entry, the control zone (4,000-6,000 feet) countering a constant turn rate and constant turn radius defense, exploitation of defender errors, and how to accelerate the jet into the WEZ for a kill. After you learn how to control and kill the bandit, you then learn how to defend yourself against the bandit using tactics such as the jink, reversing at the correct time based on visual cues, and other tactics such as the high/low man stacks, rolling tuckunder, ect. Finally BFM training is culminated in high aspect where it is a demonstration of all skills learned to take the bandit from an extremely high HCA at the merge to where you’re seeing tailpipe sending 20 MM as a parting gift. Once that is complete you will be taught how to fight as an element in ACM training where you learn the very specific tactics and contracts to killing a bandit as a team within the shortest time possible with either role establishment or a shot of opportunity (SOO). Obviously similar concepts are taught in the BVR arena with some other considerations and tactics.
At that point our pilots are then somewhat capable, they’ve been through approximately 10 sorties and are starting to get good at the basic SOPs and typically good at air-to-air. Now the next step is basic surface attack, low-altitude training, and surface attack tactics, which a former F-16 jockey and good friend of the 8th’s vice commander (Col Nuts) said, “you can’t drop a bomb if you can’t BFM.” It is absolutely true. During BSA, LASDT, and SAT the pilots will then learn how to employ unguided, IAMs, LGB, and later various tactics to employ a weapon against a hostile target including the LGB loft (a very demanding event to learn). We also do low altitude certification down to 300 feet (CAT II) and later on if pilots elect so down to 100 feet for certification. Those are the training altitudes, in combat you are allowed all the way to the deck.
Once a pilot has mastered all these subjects in our wing they’re still only BAQ status. They then go into MQT training where they learn even more advanced squadron specific training and get certified either BMC or CMR depending on their individual performance. But training doesn’t stop there, that is just a qualified and capable pilot in our wing. They then are entered into the Ready Aircrew Program (RAP) where they will continually hone the skills learned during IQT/MQT or go into specialized training (ST) where they learn even more advanced skills including FLUG (flight lead upgrade), IPUG (IP upgrade), SEAD training (though I do believe some of this can be taught at MQT levels in some squadrons), or FAC(A). As you can see if you want to get really good, this is what it takes. A near dedication to it (approximately 6 flights per month will get you there) and constant study. As RedDog mentioned you have three types of candidates, the ones who are pretty good, but can’t take debriefing well or criticism to perfect their craft (i.e. the guy was riding 10-20 degrees aft the whole time in line abreast instead of striving for 0 degrees). Then you have the great attitude types who always are behind the jet and struggle to learn, and then you have my favorite type, they guys who study their ass off and work to become the greatest they can be, doing they best they can in everything. That is the razors difference between the types of pilots you’ll find in BMS.
In our wing we are trying to capture the competitive process of just getting to the Viper, that it’s a priveledge to learn what’s contained in our course, and that’s just making it here, we still have to get through the sorties and training. Our course is about 4 months long, 60 hours on instruction total, 19 sorties, and every one of them is an evaluation. Our instructors first and foremost teach each member everything there is to know about the Viper, but also evaluate and make sure they have the ability to perform at the highest levels that our wing calls for. That’s what we are all about, I really hope this gives you a better sense of “what it takes.”
Good luck!
-
…how do you train them to tank?
-
…how do you train them to tank?
Same way you train any formation flight. Its not actually part of the USAF B-course, because pilots at that stage are already expected to be able to do it.
Im still firmly of the opinion BMS pilots should be rock steady on formation before they go anywhere near a tanker. Or a virtual F-16 for that matter, but thats another topic entirely.
-
…how do you train them to tank?
Same way you teach Navy pilots to swim …. you eject them in the deep end.
-
Same way you teach Navy pilots to swim …. you eject them in the deep end.
…yeah, but they hold them under too.
-
…how do you train them to tank?
For the beginning of IQT they tank on nearly every single sortie and we have a chapter dedicated to it that the IPs can use optionally to focus just on tanking. As Blu3 mentioned RW they would already be proficient in this, just need to do it in the Viper. We train to get contact within 60 seconds (most get it in under 20) and once you learn the visual cues of formation it is much much easier.