This one super-bugs me...

See this pictu

http://www.airliners.net/open.file/624542/L/

I've never seen a picture or movie of a Tomcat doing a display without a
RIO. To my knowledge, there is nothing physical that mandates the RIO in
there for the Turkey to be flown in a demo - take off, do some aerobatics,
land...

Now, I've seen quite a few photos of operational F/A-18Fs doing demos
without the WSO.

So, what gives? Is the Tomcat such a difficult bird to fly that it requires
a RIO with a NATOPS on his lap, or is the Super-Bug so underpowered that
200lb of weight make a difference in the demo?

And if the WSO isn't there just because he is not needed, how does it affect
the morale of the WSO community?

Just curious...

José

From: "José Herculano"
Date: 7/20/2004 15:04 Pacific Daylight Time

See this pictu

http://www.airliners.net/open.file/624542/L/

I've never seen a picture or movie of a Tomcat doing a display without a
RIO. To my knowledge, there is nothing physical that mandates the RIO in
there for the Turkey to be flown in a demo - take off, do some aerobatics,
land...

Could be wrong, but it's my understanding that the Tom requires a RIO.

Now, I've seen quite a few photos of operational F/A-18Fs doing demos
without the WSO.

As did the Blue Angels with the F-4J ...

So, what gives? Is the Tomcat such a difficult bird to fly that it requires
a RIO with a NATOPS on his lap, or is the Super-Bug so underpowered that
200lb of weight make a difference in the demo?

And if the WSO isn't there just because he is not needed, how does it affect
the morale of the WSO community?

Perhaps not needed it would seem for just a short demo flight by Boeing company
pilot Ricardo Traven.

MW

On 7/20/04 5:04 PM, in article ,
"José Herculano" wrote:

See this pictu

http://www.airliners.net/open.file/624542/L/

I've never seen a picture or movie of a Tomcat doing a display without a
RIO. To my knowledge, there is nothing physical that mandates the RIO in
there for the Turkey to be flown in a demo - take off, do some aerobatics,
land...


There were systems failure emergency action procedures steps in the Tomcat
(and Intruder for that matter) that required a back (or right)-seater to
perform. Both of those aircraft are crew-served weapons systems.

Now, I've seen quite a few photos of operational F/A-18Fs doing demos
without the WSO.

So, what gives? Is the Tomcat such a difficult bird to fly that it requires
a RIO with a NATOPS on his lap, or is the Super-Bug so underpowered that
200lb of weight make a difference in the demo?


Could be that the 6 AMRAAMs were just too much for it...

Seriously, given that the picture was taken at Farnborough, I'd bet 50/50
that the pilot was a Boeing guy borrowing a VFA-2 jet--although I've been
wrong before.

And if the WSO isn't there just because he is not needed, how does it affect
the morale of the WSO community?


I'm sure that they're not happy (justifiably).

--Woody

There were systems failure emergency action procedures steps in the Tomcat
(and Intruder for that matter) that required a back (or right)-seater to
perform. Both of those aircraft are crew-served weapons systems.

For the F-14 none that I recall, but it's been a long time. OTOH, the IFF
is back there and the post start BITS (which are a prerequisite for flight)
are initiated from the back seat.

A-6 and F-14 were designed for crew integration to a greater degree than the
F-4 (which you could fly solo). Needless to say none of the three gave the
pilot any significant control of the radar.

R / John

On 20 Jul 2004 23:51:36 GMT, ojunk (Mike Weeks) wrote:

From: "José Herculano"
Date: 7/20/2004 15:04 Pacific Daylight Time

See this pictu

http://www.airliners.net/open.file/624542/L/

I've never seen a picture or movie of a Tomcat doing a display without a
RIO. To my knowledge, there is nothing physical that mandates the RIO in
there for the Turkey to be flown in a demo - take off, do some aerobatics,
land...

Could be wrong, but it's my understanding that the Tom requires a RIO.

It has been a while, but my understanding, from a friend that used to
be a F-14 RIO, was that the controls to align the INS was in the back.
Makes it difficult to fly without one.
--Rolf

From: Rolf Kappe
Date: 7/21/2004 08:53 Pacific Daylight Time

On 20 Jul 2004 23:51:36 GMT, ojunk (Mike Weeks) wrote:

From: "José Herculano"
Date: 7/20/2004 15:04 Pacific Daylight Time

See this pictu

http://www.airliners.net/open.file/624542/L/

I've never seen a picture or movie of a Tomcat doing a display without a
RIO. To my knowledge, there is nothing physical that mandates the RIO in
there for the Turkey to be flown in a demo - take off, do some aerobatics,
land...

Could be wrong, but it's my understanding that the Tom requires a RIO.

It has been a while, but my understanding, from a friend that used to
be a F-14 RIO, was that the controls to align the INS was in the back.
Makes it difficult to fly without one.

My understanding also came from a former F-4/F-14 RIO -- but couldn't recall
what was the requirements in the Tomcat.

MW

The only reason I recall for the Intruder was that the pilot couldn't reach
the trim breakers in case of runaway trim.

Rick

"John Carrier" wrote in message
...
There were systems failure emergency action procedures steps in the
Tomcat
(and Intruder for that matter) that required a back (or right)-seater to
perform. Both of those aircraft are crew-served weapons systems.

For the F-14 none that I recall, but it's been a long time. OTOH, the IFF
is back there and the post start BITS (which are a prerequisite for
flight)
are initiated from the back seat.

A-6 and F-14 were designed for crew integration to a greater degree than
the
F-4 (which you could fly solo). Needless to say none of the three gave
the
pilot any significant control of the radar.

R / John

I recall that incentive rides with civies in the back aren't really
RIOs.

BTW, I recall speaking to a person from "down under" in which he works
with aircraft all day and that SH demo with stores onboard, were just
dummies - empty.

On 7/21/04 1:31 PM, in article , "Yofuri"
wrote:

The only reason I recall for the Intruder was that the pilot couldn't reach
the trim breakers in case of runaway trim.

Rick

For the Intruder, every time you moved a bleed air switch or the "gang bar"
the B/N had to check the Bleed Air Circuit Breaker -- IN.

--Woody


"John Carrier" wrote in message
...
There were systems failure emergency action procedures steps in the
Tomcat
(and Intruder for that matter) that required a back (or right)-seater to
perform. Both of those aircraft are crew-served weapons systems.

For the F-14 none that I recall, but it's been a long time. OTOH, the IFF
is back there and the post start BITS (which are a prerequisite for
flight)
are initiated from the back seat.

A-6 and F-14 were designed for crew integration to a greater degree than
the
F-4 (which you could fly solo). Needless to say none of the three gave
the
pilot any significant control of the radar.

R / John

On 7/21/04 5:31 AM, in article , "John
Carrier" wrote:

There were systems failure emergency action procedures steps in the Tomcat
(and Intruder for that matter) that required a back (or right)-seater to
perform. Both of those aircraft are crew-served weapons systems.

For the F-14 none that I recall, but it's been a long time. OTOH, the IFF
is back there and the post start BITS (which are a prerequisite for flight)
are initiated from the back seat.

A-6 and F-14 were designed for crew integration to a greater degree than the
F-4 (which you could fly solo). Needless to say none of the three gave the
pilot any significant control of the radar.

R / John



I stand corrected. I thought I had heard in a past life that you had the
same bleed air C/B in the back that we had on the right side (in case of
bleed air leaks or fires).

--Woody