The running joke about the Super Hornet is that it is a “jack of all trades, and master of none”. The truth is that the Hornet and specifically the Super Hornet has been required to replace the F-14 Tomcat, the S-3 Viking and the A-6 Intruder. That required the Super Hornet to effectively satisfy the mission sets of three aircraft. Boeing was responsible for ensuring that the airframe could handle that challenge, and succeeded in most cases. What Boeing was not contracted to solve, however, was how to ensure aircrew maintained proficiency in the required mission sets. Exacerbating the issue are the resource and hour limitations that fleet squadrons are currently experiencing. Hazard Reports (HAZREPs) and Safety Investigation Reports (SIRs)
…show more content…
The issue arises, however, when the entirety of the brief is considered in conjunction with our ability to absorb the intent of the brief. Proficiency is most lacking in the tactical phase of flight. F-18 aircrew are usually proficient when it comes to Admin and Tac Admin because we perform those procedures on every flight. If we are not proficient in Admin, a currency flight is required and the brief rightly focuses solely on those procedures. The focus of this article is on the inability to remain proficient in every mission set in a resource limited environment. In those cases, it is the tactical aspects of the flight which must be thoroughly briefed in order to not only benefit tactically but also to operate safely. However, research illustrates that the human attention-span peaks at 10-18 minutes and then decreases exponentially beyond that time. That research led the developers of the TED talk to limit their lectures to 18 minutes and is the same reason the standard TOPGUN lecture is limited to 45 minute sections. In the case of a flight brief, that means that the audience is lost right around the time that the tactical portion of the brief begins. Another possibility is that aircrew tune out during the Admin / Tac Admin brief and tune back in upon hearing the term mission planning factors”. Fortunately, the fix for both scenarios is the same; brief all procedures that are included in an SOP or TACSOP as …show more content…
This couldn’t be further from the truth as it forces the briefer to perform an ORM analysis utilizing a NATOPS briefing guide as the structure. Instead of ORM being only a cursory consideration at the end of Admin, it is more effectively utilized to build the entire Admin brief. Aircrew would be required to think through elements of the flight that could lead to potential mishaps rather than pulling the NATOPS briefing guide out of one’s helmet bag and briefing with common mantras. Imagine how much a squadron could benefit from actually discussing a different emergency procedure each flight instead of the standard emergency procedures spiel that comes at the end of most NATOPS briefs. If aircrew learn one technique, TOPGUN recommendation or skill each flight they will become exceptional aviators as their careers progress. The same mindset should be applied to every brief, and that begins with a missionized Admin and Tac Admin
The issue arises, however, when the entirety of the brief is considered in conjunction with our ability to absorb the intent of the brief. Proficiency is most lacking in the tactical phase of flight. F-18 aircrew are usually proficient when it comes to Admin and Tac Admin because we perform those procedures on every flight. If we are not proficient in Admin, a currency flight is required and the brief rightly focuses solely on those procedures. The focus of this article is on the inability to remain proficient in every mission set in a resource limited environment. In those cases, it is the tactical aspects of the flight which must be thoroughly briefed in order to not only benefit tactically but also to operate safely. However, research illustrates that the human attention-span peaks at 10-18 minutes and then decreases exponentially beyond that time. That research led the developers of the TED talk to limit their lectures to 18 minutes and is the same reason the standard TOPGUN lecture is limited to 45 minute sections. In the case of a flight brief, that means that the audience is lost right around the time that the tactical portion of the brief begins. Another possibility is that aircrew tune out during the Admin / Tac Admin brief and tune back in upon hearing the term mission planning factors”. Fortunately, the fix for both scenarios is the same; brief all procedures that are included in an SOP or TACSOP as …show more content…
This couldn’t be further from the truth as it forces the briefer to perform an ORM analysis utilizing a NATOPS briefing guide as the structure. Instead of ORM being only a cursory consideration at the end of Admin, it is more effectively utilized to build the entire Admin brief. Aircrew would be required to think through elements of the flight that could lead to potential mishaps rather than pulling the NATOPS briefing guide out of one’s helmet bag and briefing with common mantras. Imagine how much a squadron could benefit from actually discussing a different emergency procedure each flight instead of the standard emergency procedures spiel that comes at the end of most NATOPS briefs. If aircrew learn one technique, TOPGUN recommendation or skill each flight they will become exceptional aviators as their careers progress. The same mindset should be applied to every brief, and that begins with a missionized Admin and Tac Admin