I love that fact that Ward never dumbs down any dialogue on these interviews.

I was a Navy Air Traffic Controller from 78 to 86. Two WestPacs, 4 years at NAS Whidbey (4 year sea-shore rotations). This video makes me think of a past experience, while not completely related, interesting nonetheless. At Whidbey a good friend ran the EA6-B and A6 simulators. He asked me to help with a pilot tour group on my day off. 10 Canadian commercial airline pilots. Each received two passes at the deck in the A6 night carrier landing simulator. Started at 6+ miles to a PAR (precision approach radar) approach called by me. Zero sea state, wind @ 10 down the deck. 1 pilot managed to trap…1 time! Their lack of performance was not a knock on their abilities, rather an illustration of the difficulties inherent to US Naval aviation.

As a guy who has been through it, there is NO replacement for time in the jet. Do I wish we did more simulator training? Do I wish we had VR? Absolutely. More. In no way should we be removing syllabus flight events and replacing them with sims. When I got to the fleet, sims were an afterthought. But the smart students would grab extra sim time (if they could find it) and rehearse SFWT events in it. THAT is what we need more of.

As always, very informative, Ward. You two made it clear, the VR simulator training will not be replacing real-life flight training, but rather it will enhance overall aviator training. Saving time, money, and in the end, naval aviator lives.

Sounds like justification to bring back dedicated training carrier , I guess FCLP is the next best thing. This is why Navy used to operate the USS Lexington CVT-16 Essex-Class Carrier for training new naval aviators from 1962-1990.

OMG...!!! Ward...!!! I love this kind of interview with the guys that are on the "bleeding edge" of what is coming. To hear how they are getting objective data on performance and proficiency is so exciting. He talks so fast and has such an in-depth knowledge of his subject I was giggling trying to keep up. I spent a lot of time on flight simulator (primitive as it was) when I was training for my private. It helped me greatly. Can't imagine how much these new ones with the help of AI, eye tracking, response time recording, etc. are going to improve training. Just so great to have the kind of access you provide. Thanks again Ward for what you do.

Simulators are so useful in learning. The plane can only do so much before is runs out of fuel ...... simulator not the case. I'm retired from American (1988-2018) and I love the full motion sims of the Boeing and Airbus fleet ....... thanks for the sharing Ward.

It's a bit like F1 today IMHO. Simulators have hugely impacted how drivers approach a weekend, especially for tracks they've never been at. They are now good enough that they get the driver really close to the real item so that when they turn up they already know the layout, where to brake, accelerate, etc. Same with simulator training - make use of it to get the pilot to that 95%+ region, so you can make full use of the real deal to find that last 5%.

So basically if you are somewhat proficient in DCS you have effectively made it through stage 1 and or 2 of flight school

Great vid! Sims are fantastic...long ago when dinosaurs roamed the earth, I was type rated in the Lear 45. Never even sat in one previously. Did the whole 2 week course at Tucson in the sim plus classroom instruction. Did the entire flight check (4 hours...2 left seat, 2 right seat) in the sim, passed, then the next day got in the jet and flew it to Lancaster, California to have dinner with my chief pilot's buddy, then flew back to TUC the next morning to meet up with our company's VP and flew him to DCA. Before the Lancaster flight, never flew the actual aircraft. Seemed amazing to me!

Thanks Ward, wonderful interview, very informative and exciting things ahead for Naval Aviation and the aviators sitting in the seats! Can't wait to watch cutting edge technology and AI incorporated together to improve the system. Although, even with aircraft becoming easy to fly, and bring aboard the ship, it still comes down to "Meatball, Lineup, and AOA", data management control, and some great stick and throttle skills. High tech simulation and repetition will certainly prepare our aviators to a readiness level well beyond what we were In the F-14 FRS's, but I still would like to see 10 and 6 on a FRS Naval Aviator prior to sending him to the fleet!

A simulator will never replace time in the cockpit flying.

The next next Navy Flight School will be in Mooch’s attic.😉

19:28 this does indeed sound pretty amazing, and kind of reminds me of the "everyone has an optic now" issue with Marine marksmanship. The new tools are probably going to be robust enough that people can just take them for granted 99.9% of the time, but for that 0.1% of the time something doesn't turn on, it's still nice to be able to plink a target with irons. I'm guessing pilots will (for a long time to come) still get training to grab a wire the old fashioned way.

My oh my how technology is changing everything ! I’m not a pilot but I done what I think is the best next thing and worked at VT-7 and VT-19. Prior to that I worked on the Abraham Lincoln on the flight deck but mostly at McCain field in meridian. For a total of 24 years and the changes I’ve seen are mind blowing. The things I got to see are now obsolete. When I stared I’m meridian it was the ole T-2 Buckeyes and the A-4 Skyhawks. Sure miss those jets even if you smelled like you just had a long soothing bath in JP5 at the end of the day. I’ve always wondered Mr.Ward if I’ve ever launched and recovered your aircraft in meridian. I’d be willing to bet I have. I sure miss those days ! Fly Navy !

Wow very interesting. I was not a pilot but aircrew, so I have spent lots of time in training flights, touch and goes. Some fun, lots were boring, and some were scary. I really enjoy your channel. Thanks

This is how my flight school runs, Shadowlands Online Flying Training, based on DCS but also community centric. It was always coming to this as aircraft developed into weapons and information distribution platforms.

This seems like a pretty natural evolution since the Navy adopted the Microsim (FS2002/EPS) in about 2002. Then EPS became Prepar3D and "microsim" took a leap forward. Now with these capabilities and fidelity that's both visual and behavioral fidelity; the plane becomes a testing tool. When my youngest was flying at 12, we practiced the planned and just taken lessons in FSX. We used the same plane as she was flying at the school, with accurate scenery. The first time out, she taxied with the instructor simply pointing and took off unassisted. I looked over from the back and the instructor was covering but not touching anything. Some perfectly coordinated turns and landing almost unassisted demonstrated her ability to apply what she learned on the desktop. She always said it was easier in real life. So I can see all of the "bugs" being worked out before the aviator student ever sits a plane and their being practically qualified already. Certainly, both the microsim and the Level D sims have proven over and over again that the in air training curve is significantly flattened. Personally I'm both scared of the exponential growth of AI and related tech while being completely enthralled with its applications here. Talk about conflicted. 🙄

As a retired airline pilot we spent a great deal of time in simulator training and the first time we ever flew the actual plane was with a check pilot It worked out really well well NoI would never compare myself to a fighter pilot and their skills and youthful reactions They are amazing

It's nice to see new generation simulators and a new training methodology. I’m probably already an old guy too, if I still found old, ancient, “lamp” simulators, not FFS. Great interview! 👍

Fascinating! Love this video Mooch. Interesting, factual, and even entertaining. Thanks for sharing.

Having spend hundreds of hours in F-15, 727, MD-88 simulators, there is great value to simulators. Getting lots of reps and being able to reset to a point where you made the mistake is invaluable. But in the end, you have to put it into practice in the jet. I remember feeling pretty confident in the MD-88 sim, but visual cues from that 18" before touching down was impossible to simulate. My first landing was rough!

Old guy here too…And, currently an instructor for a major civilian aviation trng company. Pilot trng in both the military and civilian is going thru a major change in the skill set(s) required. I suspect that it is going to continue to evolve with more UAS and AI entering the flying world.

Self deprecation and humility on the part of a distinguished career naval aviator is admirable and refreshing. If that can be transferred to young aviators in the fleet, the true checking of the egos walking through the threshold of the (de)briefing rooms, will contribute enormously to mission readiness and individual competence. That is easier said than done in an environment awash in testosterone (and now estrogen too!). In order to meet the growing global threat in a time of constricted budgets, this new training philosophy and technical capability is essential to a robust nationaldefense!

Good sims are a good thing, but there is no replacement for full motion and feeling the G forces.

What an engaging conversation. Both of you gentleman showed such a grasp of the subject.

Thanks! Fantastic interview Ward! Explanation of PLM was very enlightening.

Thanks Ward, for another timely video about what's going on with the new technology coming out and the potential changes in training. I hope aviators and aircrew will still get enough flying hours.

This is a natural follow-on from "The Navy Budget is Dangerously Low"...

Should take a carrier out of deployment rotations and use it as a training vessel for recent graduates to rotate through. They could leave port but keep close to the US coasts on very short cruises. This could serve as an initial sea duty for everyone in the Navy, making sure that no one gets stuck on shore in maintenance for their entire initial contract without ever going to sea any more.

As a pilot who was apart of project avenger and utilizing VRs and having an IP there with you teaching(not evaluating) was extremely valuable. There is no substitute for actual X’s with real world consequences. We had live ATC in the VR who was a qualified controller in the virtual world and that was extremely valuable as well. The only thing I would say is, the VR is not good for switchology. I would submit that AR in a cockpit that has buttons and switches that you can actually manipulate would be the best. Get with Microsoft and video game designers and make a step by step tutorial similar to a video game to help walk you through each thing without needing an instructor to teach you. Make enough of them that they are always available for students to go in and do again with enough instructors that help not a crusty sim instructor that doesn’t like their job and only there because it pays well. Making things easier like flying the AC is a benefit not a detriment. The more things that you can make simple or easier will produce more pilots and free up brain power. I didn’t say lower standards. Legacy AC were designed and built by engineers not UI And UX designers. Which is why you had to be “smart” to be a pilot. Because you have all these unintuitive systems to manage. We should be simplifying every possible thing we can. More pilots, faster training, simpler systems equal more bang for the buck and more pilots.

I do appreciate the value of simulators in training pilots to include the reduced cost. With that said simulators do not replace in cockpit experience. So interviewing a simulator salesman doesn’t give me any confidence.

Never knew a conversation I barely understood could be so interesting

Great information Ward. Thanks

Great video as usual. However, whenever I watch one of these videos about the newest and greatest technological advancement in military hardware, I am reminded of a line of dialogue from the movie "Star Trek II: The Wrath of Kahn" where Scotty, after removing a handful of critical components from the newest, greatest, fastest starship says, "The more they overthink the plumbing, the easier it is to stop up the drain."

I agree with you Ward, a great explanation. Thanks again. Doug

Wow! Pro as always, thank you both!

Excellent interview! Thank you gentlemen!

Good thing I made it through when I did... Not sure I would have squeak by in the new syllabus!!

He went from fleet aviator to selling a product, happens I suppose. Good on Mooch for asking the detail questions

What he's saying makes sense to a certain extent. My UAV unit came to the same conclusions about training and simulators about 15 years ago. However, those decisions were made due to rather intense budgetary and time constraints. While a certain amount of sim time is mandated, we went well beyond that minimal time because we had no choice. Our unit's budget for flight training was capped at the minimal aircrew training program proficiency requirements set by the Army. Sim time, however, was free so we did the best we could do to make sure the new guys were ready before we put them behind the controls of a real bird. We were able to get it done, but if we had the choice we would have preferred to get them spooled up with real flight hours instead of sim time. Now, to counter the inevitable argument that these new jets are more about systems management than stick and rudder flight training and because of this sim time is more effective than actual flight hours, you need to bear in mind that operating a modern UAV is NOTHING BUT systems management. There is so such thing a "stick and rudder" in the UAV world, you are managing an autopilot from launch to recovery. Despite this, you reach a point of diminishing returns with a sim. Nothing replaces real flight hours, even in the UAV world. I wonder if the Navy would make these same decisions with training if they had a budget appropriately sized to the op tempo that they are being told they need to perform at.

"No airplane ever"... Guessing Mr. Kindley never flew the L-1011 with Direct Lift Control.....

Wow, great interview!

We learned these lessons years ago. Bean counters replaced experienced people. Now were re-learning old lessons. Cycle continues. Better equipped bean counters run the show. We train new staff to be robots and kill individual thinking. Everyone trying to justify their positions by repeating history. Crazy shit. Chuck Yeager said that during WW2, 11% of our pilots shot down 90% of the enemy planes. Those 11% were from the country. They grew up as country boys, they hunted, fished, repaired their farm equipment. They knew how to fend for themselves, think as individuals and naturally knew how to shoot, lead the targets, etc. They learned to fly & fight in the air. They didn't have sims.

Very informative ! Thank You !

Fascinating conversation. So many new concepts and interesting training aids.

Another great video. Ward your channel never disappoints keep up the great content!

Great information!

Awesome interview and a very interesting topic. I’d love to hear you two talking about the PLM stuff, too!

fascinating and instructive discussion

I find this interesting and I'm not a military pilot, but love hearing these interviews as I enjoy learning about how these projects are developing especially with A.I.

The way he describes it makes indeed a lot more sense. When I was in ENJJPT we had a fixed syllabus, but no way to deviate from that. So weak areas were just as much touched as strong areas. This way of training could produce better results, but indeed never replaces aircraft time. There is a huge difference between flying a simulator and flying a real plane, cannot compare it at all. I would call a simulator more a procedural trainer, so that you know what to do in the plane when it gets that far. I know that, in order to cut cost on the F35 flying, they also will have more simulator hours in order to prepare for a mission. Hearing the PLM story was extremely interesting. Changing the camber of the wings ? Never would have thought about doing that in order to control pitch, but it makes a lot of sense. Very interesting developments and great interview.

Great discussion.Very informative

Im in the navy flight pipeline currently. We are seeing this real-time the development adaptation of new tech being used in training. In primary, and intermediate although some are greeting it with open arms many instructors and admin are pushing back. Its creating a divide that can be counterintuitive with what to practice; prepare for sim vs flight time.

Fantastic discussion.

I worked at BMH with Ed Harvey and Jack McGinn in the NASMP days and and early Navy Continuous Training Environment development and the odd R&D thing on the side. A famous MIG insulter (Pig Checcio) worked with us from time to time. It's interesting to hear how our work has evolved and use of LVC has worked its way into core pilot training. Some sort of training management was rattling around at the time. Apparently it has grown up into something that can effectively guide pilot advancement through the syllabus. Good to see one's work live on and evolve. Good episode.

Another first rate interview! Damn good show Ward !!

Great episode, as usual.

They've come a long way since I was a yellow shirt,on the,USS RANGER 75/78

Flying in a sim is different than an aircraft. Buck fever in the real bird is a thing. The idea of having virtually no flight time in the aircaft before going up in the actual bird for a check ride sounds terrifying. It sounds like they are trying to reduce flight school to multiple sim periods and a check ride. I don't see this ending with confident capable Aviators coming out of flight school. Aircrews will be mission capable, but lack confidence in their aircraft.

I operate in the simulator space for a different platform, but these interviews provide great takeaways that improve my abilities as an instructor.

Interesting aspect - an engineering solution to extending aircraft service life through making the forces on the airframe less stressful in descent, and hopefully, touchdown. And it makes landings easier.

More effective training than the Singer built Link trainer we did IFR training in? Wow, that’s Cool…. lol

Great info

More that great, this is an outstanding video in terms of content and direction, and direct application. If it works well, can easily see this approach taken up by other career fields.

Interesting discussion. It's hard to beat clean data driven analysis. It's implementation and use in training are the keys to making it an outstanding tool, or a swamp of misery for all involved. Thanks for bringing us along to the fair.

Very interesting subject matter, thanks

Excellent video... top 10%!

That was fascinating.

Ward, Thanks.

Thanks!

Cool information.

What a great, nuanced breakdown of 21st century naval aviation! With today’s massive information overload, the aircraft have to be simpler to land. Ward, thanks again.

I get the whole carrier landing thing, CVN's today are very expensive to operate and over tasked so to have them tasked just so new students can get that check in the block is outdated. I grew up in the USS Lexington era where the student both initial and RAG got their traps there. I don't know what the real answer is, but I get it.

Thanks

Amazing how far we have come with IT. The 1st time I ever saw a carrier deck was in the T2C. I envy the guys now but wouldn’t trade the freedoms we had then to what seems to be a more restrictive military culture now.

Wait!!! PLM sidebar!?!?!? I’d (WE) would love to hear that sidebar conversation!!!

Training command PLM could also result in narrowed lateral wave-off-window ... reducing the impact of off-nominals (e.g., gear versus tie-down point, gear versus deck light). Extend that to the fleet nets even better FLE savings.

You have to get DW on in the future and do a Deep Dive:tm: on PLM, how they put it on the F/A-18 and maybe some good insight on how it works.

Here is a thought. Calculate the amount of hours saved on Airframe alone.

Wow! Huge change from tailhooks

Great interview Mooch. NAVAIR (and CNATRA specifically) is definitely moving into the next generation!

I would suggest a hybrid model where a pilot who is lagging in proficiency can do the extra time in the sim to catch up with his or her classmates. That would be the ideal carrot for the student who is driven to both achieve and be a part of the team. Maybe that is already part of the training model. Hope so.

The sims better be REALLY GOOD !

I especially like these insider interviews that Ward's background brings to the channel. Chats like this and interviews with admirals are always most special, which we don't get to see too often.

Fascinating (I'm an English major!). Also encouraging that people with such smarts are working to make our armed forces better.

ARE THEY STILL GOING TO NEED CRAZY SAILORS WHO JUMP OUT OF HELICOPTERS INTO ANY DANGER

Now they need to do the same for combat vehicle crew men

They’ll pay for it in the Fleet.

Good stuff, I like what I am hearing. Should positively augment traditional training and I’d widely implement it.

What's the process for pipeline selection? Fixed v Rotating wing? Is it grades, aptitude, preference or the dreaded "Needs of the Navy". I always figured most want to be fighter jocks. Who wants to be a COD driver?

I get what is being said, but is there a problem that needs correction? Besides money and time lost, are the pilots coming out of the training command, not the required level? How many flights does it take to get used to positive g's, negatives, bad weather, formation flying, etc? I would say sims certainly help to a degree, but this is not always civilian, straight, and level flying. Is this just about money? I'm obviously old-school Naval Aviator trained. I also believe the more looks at the boat, the better. I know the Magic carpet helps quite a bit but more to the dynamics of the boat, IMO of course.

As a trainer, I find this very interesting.

So apparently AB just announced the permanent ending of CNATRA Strike CQ! RIP.

What an idea. When ya don't have a.carrier available just omit the training requirement for carrier qualification.

JoJo going at it, while the two talk business.

As usual very interesting. at 1:43 how is it that CDR Boyle has x7 3 wire but avg is 4.0? And some 1 wire is yellow and some red. maybe red is close to the stern. some 2 are grey other green. B I assume is Bolter.

Don’t you want to have two engines when you’re flying over the ocean just in case one goes down?

@7:20 This is the what I wished we did 40 years ago, and is probably going to be the future now that AI is so well embedded in modern technology. Good for them to be the leading edge, I hope they have fantastic results with future students.

Oh! Why didn't someone say that PLM was just Direct Lift Control. In DCS in the F-14 I'll just trim the nose for angle of attack and use DLC and throttle to get the glide slope. Neat.