AOPA Pilot Magazine - August 2020 - 26

SAFETY SPOTLIGHT

Turn and face the change

BY RICHARD MCSPADDEN
Executive Director
AOPA Air Safety Institute

Embracing new technologies and new ideas

AOPA Air Safety
Institute Executive
Director RICHARD
MCSPADDEN

is a former
F-15 pilot and
Thunderbirds
leader for the U.S.
Air Force.

26 | AOPA PILOT August 2020

IN THE DEBRIEF following a victorious training sortie,
my mood should have been gleeful. My flight had dominated. We protected a high-value asset and devastated
a numerically superior red air force that kept attacking,
but couldn't penetrate our defense and paid heavily
for trying. This was the war the F-15 was built for, and
we had employed the airplane masterfully against an
onslaught of "enemy." Across the room, though, our
squadronmates had not fared nearly as well. Red forces
had snuck around them to harass the assets, and blue
force losses were heavy.
The mood was somber. Leading the defeated
blue force flight was a pilot who was an icon to me
and squadron pilots of my generation. A veteran F-4
pilot of the Vietnam era, he represented what we, the
new generation of fighter pilots, aspired to be: skilled,
tough, dependable under pressure. This was a milestone moment. The arena this experienced fighter pilot
dominated had changed and passed him by. Or more
accurately, he had allowed it to pass him by.
That debrief was a seminal moment in my life, not
just my aviation career. I watched with sadness as an
icon defended a mindset and tactics that were made
obsolete by new technologies and advanced capability.
Clinging to old ways had resulted in an embarrassing
performance for his flight. He seemed unable to accept
and to recognize that the arena had changed.
By contrast, our flight lead, also an F-4 alumnus,
embraced the new paradigm and adapted his vast
experience to it. For the younger generation, no such
adaptation was needed. We'd arrived in a pivotal era
in the Cold War. U.S. Air Force leaders determined we
would concede numerical superiority and defeat our
adversaries through technical dominance and better
training. We would defeat numbers by being better
pilots in better aircraft. My generation of fighter pilots
trained for scenarios where we expected to be outnumbered by four to one, or more. It was the only air
warfare paradigm we knew. In adapting to the newer
air warfare mindset, we had the law of primacy on our
side, which holds that the first exposure to new material has greater influence on behavior than subsequent
encounters with similar material. Good certificated
flight instructors are well aware of the law of primacy,
knowing it's easier to develop and learn new skills and
strategies than it is to adapt and modify old ones.

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 acknowledgement 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. A
OPA
EMAIL richard.mcspadden@aopa.org

AOPA Pilot Magazine - August 2020

Table of Contents for the Digital Edition of AOPA Pilot Magazine - August 2020