F35 question

[Dr Jekyll]

Why is there no two seater dual control F35?

It seems odd that the Typhoon has a trainer version but not the F35, which would seem to need rather more conversion training.

[essayer]

Essentially because the simulators are so sophisticated they don’t need to train so much using the actual aircraft.

[frodo_monkey]

Dr Jekyll said:

Why is there no two seater dual control F35?

It seems odd that the Typhoon has a trainer version but not the F35, which would seem to need rather more conversion training.

^ What he said. Plus most of the Typhoon ‘tubs’ are being parted out as part of the Reduce to Produce (RTP) scheme.

[Tony1963]

There wasn’t a trainer/twin-stick version of the Buccaneer. They converted some hunters to sort of replicate the Bucc cockpit, but it must’ve been a heart in mouth moment for those first carrier deck landings!

[MB140]

Dr Jekyll said:

Why is there no two seater dual control F35?

It seems odd that the Typhoon has a trainer version but not the F35, which would seem to need rather more conversion training.

I’m RAF aircrew (not a pilot), simple answer is the simulators are so realistic and accurately model the real world these days there is just no need.

Also the type of people your training to fly these things tend to be the best of the best, and they don’t just Chuck you in an F35. They will have achieved quite a lot in there flying careers already and will have shown that they have the required aptitude and skill set to pass the course.

Having said that I did know one tornado pilot that tried to convert to harriers twice. Second time he nearly piled one in and was told it’s not for you.

Whilst he was a very competent tornado pilot. When he suddenly had to go from just flying the tornado with the guy in the back doing all the nav, weapons, comms backup etc etc etc to having to fly the harrier and do everything else he just want up to it.

[Unbusy]

“Also the type of people your training to fly these things tend to be the best of the best“
Yep, in my time they were referred to as ‘the double wing master race’ or something similar.
Some quite outstanding guys. Sadly I only had one wing and flew around in circles!

[LukeBrown66]

There is a reason why some planes are twin seat and some single, and that also means you need different skills as a driver.

having watched a lot of interviews with retired guys from the 80'sa nd 90's the single seat guys do come across differently.

I will leave it at that!

[essayer]

I converted to a SZD-51 which was only ever made as a single seater. Am I a cut above?

[hidetheelephants]

Tony1963 said:

There wasn’t a trainer/twin-stick version of the Buccaneer. They converted some hunters to sort of replicate the Bucc cockpit, but it must’ve been a heart in mouth moment for those first carrier deck landings!

It's the most 'exciting' part of being a naval aviator; no doubt endless practice landings on a concrete 'carrier deck' at Yeovilton or wherever will have built up muscle memory for it.

[Tony1963]

Yeah, a stationary runway, not rising and falling, loads of runway just in case. Horrible and not my idea of fun at all.

[some bloke]

Years ago I met an old chap who was a friend of a friend - I knew my friend through paragliding and asked the old chap if he'd done any flying.
'yes, during the war'
'really, what did you fly?'
'Spitfires mostly, then seafires for a bit'
Turns out he'd been with the British Pacific Fleet, that narrow landing gear must have been hellish on a pitching deck.

[hidetheelephants]

some bloke said:

Years ago I met an old chap who was a friend of a friend - I knew my friend through paragliding and asked the old chap if he'd done any flying.
'yes, during the war'
'really, what did you fly?'
'Spitfires mostly, then seafires for a bit'
Turns out he'd been with the British Pacific Fleet, that narrow landing gear must have been hellish on a pitching deck.

Landing accidents and damage wrecked more than enemy action did.