Sponsor Message:
Military Aviation & Space Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Choppers Or Fighter Jets?  
User currently offlineLongbow From United States of America, joined Jan 2006, 23 posts, RR: 0
Posted (8 years 6 months 1 week 3 days 17 hours ago) and read 2867 times:

I recently had an argument with a buddy of mine about which would be "cooler" to fly, a chopper or a fighter jet. We didn't go into specifics about which helicopter or which fighter, we just stayed general. So I was just wondering if some people who have actually flown both could share their experiences. Which did they think was "cooler" to fly?

13 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlineSlamClick From United States of America, joined Nov 2003, 10062 posts, RR: 68
Reply 1, posted (8 years 6 months 1 week 3 days 14 hours ago) and read 2825 times:

Navy friend of mine told me about an A-7 squadron aboard the ship on a WestPac cruise. One day they had some kind of formation where uniform of the day included "all awards and decorations." One of his squadron mates showed up with a silver star, DFC with oak leaf clusters, purple heart, beaucoup air medals etc. The rest of them are resplendent in their NDSM "geedunk medal" Turned out he'd been an Army helicopter pilot in Vietnam who'd gotten out, finished college then went in the Navy.

In this context the helo guy was absolutely Fonzie!

Interesting thing about "cool" as it relates to flying. There are about a thousand things to have in your past that are totally cool. I have a handful of these achievements but any time I get to thinking I am the original dunghill rooster I meet someone who was a Blue Angel, or a POW or an astronaut or owns a P-51 or any of a catalog of things I cannot lay claim to.

What works in the end is respect for the things we have all done.

(fighters are still pretty cool!)

edit: Some further thought as an outsider to both these things.

Peacetime fighter pilot is still pretty cool. Peacetime Army helicopter pilot maybe not quite so much. Combat fighter pilot - way cool, but combat helicopter pilot maybe just a little bit more studly. Fighter pilots like to refer to combat as a "knife fight" but I think the helicopter pilot is a bit closer to that.

I'm not a VHPA member. I flew helicopters and I flew in Vietnam but I didn't fly helicopters in Vietnam. I am well aware that I am not worthy.

[Edited 2006-01-20 20:08:45]


Happiness is not seeing another trite Ste. Maarten photo all week long.
User currently offlineLongbow From United States of America, joined Jan 2006, 23 posts, RR: 0
Reply 2, posted (8 years 6 months 1 week 3 days 12 hours ago) and read 2803 times:

Thanks SlamClick. We always agreed that it would be awesome to fly either one, and just wanted to hear from some people who actually have. Thanks again.

Keep the stories coming!


User currently offlineUH60FtRucker From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 3, posted (8 years 6 months 1 week 3 days 10 hours ago) and read 2772 times:

Well I'm bias to helicopters... but I've logged some fixed-wing hours, and this is true:

On a standard weather day (29.92 pressure, 15 degrees C, calm winds, 15+ vis) Take a person, who has never flown an airplane, up the air in a Cessna 172, fly around for an hour or so and show them how to fly straight and level, descend/ascend, turn, and land. Then give them the controls and pretend like you were not there. 8/10 people could probably land that airplane. (it wouldn't be pretty, but they would make it down).

Now do the same in a helicopter. Same conditions, same person, same weather, etc... And give them the controls and ask them to land... I promise you that you will have a very expensive lawn dart in about 20 seconds.

Helicopter flight takes far more skill than fixed wing. Add in night conditions, poor weather, enemy threats, close ship formation, very low altitudes... and you've made it 100x harder. And then add in emergencies such as LTE (loss of tailrotor thrust) or any emergency requiring an autorotation, and airplanes look far more easier. Hell, a fighter has an ejection seat. Like it or not, in a helicopter you're strapped in for the ride!

We've got to know navigation just as a fighter does (even more so, considering that you're ground reference points are usually not seen until you're 50ft above them!) We've got to know ordinance delivery. We've got to avoid SAMs/AAA, (and lower altitudes means less response time and more threats) we've got endure long flights (an 8+hour flight in a UH60 will cause you to piss blood from the low level vibrations effecting your kidneys), and so on...

Fixed wing aircraft are awesome, and invaluable assets to the battlefield. It takes skill, maturity and a keen mind to fly an airplane into a hostile environment. But when it comes down to it, helicopter flying is more challenging on countless dimensions.

-UH60


User currently offlineLongbowPilot From United States of America, joined Jan 2005, 577 posts, RR: 4
Reply 4, posted (8 years 6 months 1 week 3 days 10 hours ago) and read 2762 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting UH60FtRucker (Reply 3):
Helicopter flight takes far more skill than fixed wing. Add in night conditions, poor weather, enemy threats, close ship formation, very low altitudes... and you've made it 100x harder. And then add in emergencies such as LTE (loss of tailrotor thrust) or any emergency requiring an autorotation, and airplanes look far more easier. Hell, a fighter has an ejection seat. Like it or not, in a helicopter you're strapped in for the ride!

He is merely showing the 60's side of the house, and sorry I would be out of character to not interject here an support the Attack side of the house. What he said and add the fact we are in the fight for 2 hour blocks receiving the same small arms, and RPG fire as the ground guys do. Granted that is what Apache guys are for, the fighting. It is something entirely different when you have been in the fight for 8 hours and a 60 comes into a hot LZ to do a cas-evac. I'm brave and stupid, but with guns and rockets to support and destroy. Those 60 guys are flat out NUTS coming into a LZ that was rocketd not more than 30 seconds before with a set of pee shooters and a prayer. Granted the 64 covering but still one stray bullet and you just saw a helicopter have a mid air with itself.


User currently offlineUH60FtRucker From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 5, posted (8 years 6 months 1 week 3 days 10 hours ago) and read 2746 times:

Quoting LongbowPilot (Reply 4):

The longbow guys really are in an odd situation at the moment. Their raison-d'etre... tank busting... doesn't exist in Iraq. So they're being tasked with going after the terrorists. Ever see what a Hellfire does to a tank? It's not any nicer when it gets turned on an insurgent instead!

****

In regards to taking fire in a -60... we've got a lot of safety features that make us fairly well protected. You want to see courage under fire... talk to a Huey pilot from Vietnam. Now those are true aviators!

-UH60


User currently offlineLongbowPilot From United States of America, joined Jan 2005, 577 posts, RR: 4
Reply 6, posted (8 years 6 months 1 week 3 days 9 hours ago) and read 2742 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting UH60FtRucker (Reply 5):
In regards to taking fire in a -60... we've got a lot of safety features that make us fairly well protected. You want to see courage under fire... talk to a Huey pilot from Vietnam. Now those are true aviators!

TRUE THAT UH, TRUE THAT!


User currently offlineSlamClick From United States of America, joined Nov 2003, 10062 posts, RR: 68
Reply 7, posted (8 years 6 months 1 week 3 days 9 hours ago) and read 2726 times:

Quoting UH60FtRucker (Reply 5):
... talk to a Huey pilot from Vietnam. Now those are true aviators!

I remember talking to a Special Forces major once. He said he was being taken into a small and quite hot LZ somewhere along the fence (didn't say which side) and the pilot was scrunching down into his seat armor as tight as he could and the major thought: Hey you coward, I'm sitting out here in just a shirt! Then on a little more reflection (a) If the pilot got hit he, the major, would have had a great view of the crash and (b) the insertion was probably the most dangerous part of the major's mission and the pilot had to fly back out and repeat it several more times that day.

When you've earned the kind of respect I heard from that major - from a Sneaky Pete, you've earned some serious respect.



Happiness is not seeing another trite Ste. Maarten photo all week long.
User currently offlineCTR From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 303 posts, RR: 0
Reply 8, posted (8 years 6 months 1 week 3 days 5 hours ago) and read 2702 times:

Longbow,

I am an engineer not a pilot. I have flown fighter jet, helicopter and tiltrotor simulators (real training simulators, not a PC). With no one shooting at me and no one shooting back, I found tiltrotors, helicopters and fighter jets most exciting to fly, in that order. However the F-18 was the most exciting to land (on a pitching carrier).

From an engineering stand point, the same order holds. Except maybe for those engineers working on the F-35 STOVL.

Take care,

CTR



Aircraft design is just one big compromise,,,
User currently offlinePaveLowDriver From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 9, posted (8 years 6 months 1 week 2 days 22 hours ago) and read 2670 times:

I've flown both supersonic aircraft and Robinson R-22s...and lots in between.

My (obviously biased) two cents -

Mach 2 at 35000 feet may be fast, but doing 150 knots at 50 feet is way faster!


User currently offlineSlamClick From United States of America, joined Nov 2003, 10062 posts, RR: 68
Reply 10, posted (8 years 6 months 1 week 2 days 18 hours ago) and read 2639 times:

Quoting PaveLowDriver (Reply 9):
Mach 2 at 35000 feet may be fast, but doing 150 knots at 50 feet is way faster!

In the ground school for our "nap of the Earth flying" training at Fort Rucker they made a statement to that effect. Having to do with the rate that the scenery "refreshes" and the time you have to respond after seeing something. The word was; 110 knots at treetop level was equal to mach one at maybe a thousand feet. So I believe that unless you are an F-111 guy, you probably never see anything like that.

But cool is as cool does. C-47 is no glamour queen but a C-47 crewman grabbing a magnesium flare that was ignited by groundfire and throwing it out the door, saving the aircraft and all aboard, and earning the Medal of Honor - that is cool in my book.

Taking off two timezones from the target and firing some standoff weapon then landing at home - less cool.



Happiness is not seeing another trite Ste. Maarten photo all week long.
User currently offlineColumba From Germany, joined Dec 2004, 7057 posts, RR: 4
Reply 11, posted (8 years 6 months 1 week 2 days 16 hours ago) and read 2615 times:

Quoting SlamClick (Reply 10):
So I believe that unless you are an F-111 guy, you probably never see anything like that.

Ask a German/British/Italian Tornado pilot he also can add something to low level flying.........



It will forever be a McDonnell Douglas MD 80 , Boeing MD 80 sounds so wrong
User currently offlineGary2880 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 12, posted (8 years 6 months 1 week 1 day 20 hours ago) and read 2565 times:

I think helicopters rule the lot, low, fast, pop in and out of where they like, and most importantly they can land where ever they like which I think is the main thing that makes them most special to me.

User currently offlineLongbow From United States of America, joined Jan 2006, 23 posts, RR: 0
Reply 13, posted (8 years 6 months 1 week 16 hours ago) and read 2484 times:

I'm an engineer also, but I do get to work with a lot Army Aviation people, and many of them are ex-pilots. My favorite quote of all time came in a meeting down at Redstone, talking about the primary missions of the different aircraft.

The Apache guy said (in a Southern accent), "The primary mission of the Apache is to LAY METAL ON THE TARGET!"


Top Of Page
Forum Index

Reply To This Topic Choppers Or Fighter Jets?
Username:
No username? Sign up now!
Password: 


Forgot Password? Be reminded.
Remember me on this computer (uses cookies)
  • Military aviation related posts only!
  • Not military related? Use the other forums
  • No adverts of any kind. This includes web pages.
  • No hostile language or criticizing of others.
  • Do not post copyright protected material.
  • Use relevant and describing topics.
  • Check if your post already been discussed.
  • Check your spelling!
  • DETAILED RULES
Add Images Add SmiliesPosting Help

Please check your spelling (press "Check Spelling" above)


Similar topics:More similar topics...
Fighter Jets Over Chicago Today? posted Thu Aug 17 2006 19:25:25 by WNCrew
Fighter Jets: Max Speed Without Afterburners posted Mon Sep 20 2004 17:07:08 by LY744
Why Do Fighter Jets Land At Commercial Airports posted Thu Feb 12 2004 02:54:17 by TriJetFan1
Russian Fighter Jets: "Sighting Device" posted Sun Feb 8 2004 20:49:02 by LY744
US Fighter Jets posted Wed Sep 18 2002 08:28:09 by Aio86
Whose 3 Fighter Jets Flew Directly Over DCA Today? posted Wed Aug 21 2002 21:55:04 by Bobcat
Favorite Prototype Fighter Or X-plane posted Sun Oct 31 2004 01:03:52 by Dl757md
Favorite Fighter Or Attack Aircraft? posted Mon Apr 26 2004 22:43:14 by PilotNtrng
Fighter With The Highest Landing Speed. Which One? posted Thu Nov 9 2006 22:29:05 by Art
Fighter Jet Fly-by Question posted Mon Nov 6 2006 05:37:12 by Chi-town

Sponsor Message:
Printer friendly format