CFI-to-CFI Newsletter - Volume 11 Issue 4 - 10

ASI MESSAGE
The crux of the issue in the air-to-air dogfighting arena was a redefining of " mutual
support " and the latitude wingmen could (and should) exercise in aerial engagement.
In the beginning of aerial warfare, wingmen had authority to shoot an adversary
who was a threat to the flight lead, but otherwise, their initiative was curtailed. The
status of wingmen is revealed in an old joke: " Hey, number two, the only things I want
to hear out of you are: 'two' (a wingman's acknowledgment of a flight lead order);
'Lead, you're on fire' (a wingman's responsibility to tell lead if the lead aircraft has a
problem); and 'Sir, may I buy you another drink?' "
The introduction of fourth-generation fighter aircraft and ceding substantial
numerical superiority to the enemy mandated a change. Wingmen needed to have
more latitude in offensive employment and more responsibility. To some in the
older generation, this was tantamount to aerial anarchy. They predicted chaos, large
numbers of friendly-on-friendly attrition, and gross misapplication of force. They
were wrong. Their refusal to evolve resulted in their demise as effective leaders. The
most successful in this era were the veterans who embraced new technologies and
modified tactics based on their experience.
I sometimes see the same problem in general aviation. Recently, I was cornered by
an experienced CFI grousing about new students and their fascination with the
gizmo (he meant GPS). " I make them turn it off and we don't fly with it, " he boasted.
He also had a limited view of autopilots and aligning glass panel displays to optimize
situational awareness on approaches. All he could see were the hazards, the potential

distraction. Part of his aversion-so often the case-was because of unfamiliarity.
He didn't fully understand the equipment and had not taken the time to get effective
training in the buttonology. The new technology intimidated him.
Giving wingmen too much authority could result in air-to-air chaos, and paying too
much attention to new cockpit technology could result in dangerous distraction. But
technology is one of the keys to the substantial and impressive advances we've made
in GA safety. We must embrace new technologies and use our experience to fully
adapt them into our modern flying. Our continuous march to be safer pilots demands
this. Go fly.

Richard G. McSpadden, Jr.
Senior Vice President, AOPA Air Safety Institute
Richard McSpadden is a commercial pilot and CFI with more than 4,500 hours in 30
years of flying a variety of civilian and military aircraft. He is a former F-15 pilot and
Thunderbirds leader for the U.S. Air Force, and he has extensive experience in aviation
safety, including ground, flight, and special event operations.
Email: richard.mcspadden@aopa.org

Educating pilots on improving their skills and enhancing GA safety is a core tenet of AOPA's Air Safety Institute
and its educational programs. Your contribution funds these activities and ensures we continue to address the
needs of pilots everywhere. Show your support with a donation today. www.aopafoundation.org/donate

http://www.aopafoundation.org/donate

CFI-to-CFI Newsletter - Volume 11 Issue 4

Table of Contents for the Digital Edition of CFI-to-CFI Newsletter - Volume 11 Issue 4