Navy Flight School vs. JSUPT

[talondriver]

Just wondering what some of you Navy guys think of the SUPT concept...mainly concerning the quality of product Vance is producing for the Navy. Also, do Navy guys see a significant difference in mentality between Navy trained and Air Force trained warriors? Thanks

 

[MercuryPilot]

Let me first preface my comments by stating, I was NOT a T-37 guy. My experiences w/JSUPT were only in the T-1 while enroute to the Navy E-6A/B. Hopefully some T-37 trained folks will comment on that part of the program. I have no idea how the Navy T-37 guys fair in the T-44, T-2, T-45, or TH-57. One obstacle for them would be their lack of knowledge of the Navy OPNAV3710 regs which the T-34 guys are loosely familiar with.

Overall, I'm very happy w/my T-1 training. Not only is it a modern jet but it handles a lot like a Heavy a/c due to it's swept wings, slow rate of roll (spoilers vice ailerons), etc. Prior to JSUPT the E-6 guys trained in the T-44. It's slower, not a jet, doesn't handle like a heavy, doesn't have glass instrumentation, etc. Also, running endless iterations of the T-1 performance charts really helped prepare us for the E-6 performance manual.

The T-1 program had other benefits as well. We had to learn all about the AF regs and operations. At the time, it was VERY painful. Looking back, it was helpful since we operated out of an AFB and stood alert at plenty of others.-Even though we used Navy guidlines, just being familiar w/the AF mentality behind the scenes improved your SA. Unfortunately we had to unlearn all the Navy regs while at Vance and then relearn them at the RAG.

The Navy students trained in the Tanker vice Airdrop mission track. Since we receive fuel from AF tankers in the E-6 it was extremely helpful to have a thorough background and understanding of tanker operations when flying the AR tracks.

The biggest difference in mentality between the AF/Navy training boils down to the number of rules. It's really true when people say that the AF tells pilots what they CAN do while the Navy only tells us what we CAN'T. Our IPs were kept on a pretty short leash up at Vance. In Navy training we IPs are given as much rope as we want. Everyone expects you to be a Pilot and make your own decisions based on the regs, wx, your quals & abilities, etc. NO ONE will tell you to "ask the SOF."

Pilots like T1bubba and HoursHore should comment on this thread. Hope this gets the discussion started and provided some useful info.

 

[T1bubba]

I'd agree with everything that MercuryPilot said. I know that the folks at the E-6 RAG were happy with the T-1 product. Most of what we taught in the T-1 led directly into E-6 training and the handling characteristics were similar. It was a much bigger jump from the T-44 to the E-6; I know from experience.

As for the T-37 grads, I know the T-44 folks had to work pretty hard to get the students from Vance to study the Navy way. What I mean by that is that the Air Force tends to spoon-feed everything to the students; in the Navy they hand you a big stack of books and say "show up ready to fly." At one point several years ago they flunked out several Vance students in a row who couldn't adapt, but I don't think they've had any problems since.

As for the other pipelines what I've heard third or fourth-hand is that the T-37 grads flying skills are great but that it takes a little while for them to adapt to the Navy regs and philosophy. Any T-45 or TH-57 IP's want to chime in?