[Nrsolis]

On my boat, we still did firing solutions for torpedoes using a slide ruler.

The military is quick to embrace new technology but slow to completely rely on it to the exclusion of other methods. The great fear is that technology will let you down at a critical moment via failure or damage. That's why they teach the old methods alongside the new ones.

[chiph]

Agree. When I was in the USAF, we had micro-processor controlled communication systems, but also still had the 1950's Teletypes as backups. Running a war at 75 baud...

One time we bolted some backpack straps to one, painted it camo, and called it our Tactical Teletype. The joke was that it was 350 pounds of steel parts and electric motor...

[knodi123]

I wonder if modern fighter pilots still need to learn old NDB and ADF radio beacon navigation? In a modern jet, I assume that if your computer-aided nav systems are non-functional, the plane is probably non-functional as well?

[chiph]

In a fighter, the cockpit is too cramped and the weight/balance figures too tight to allow for backup nav systems, other than a compass. With it, they could drop down and follow a road or power-line home (at the expense of greater fuel consumption and exposure to hostile ground fire). But if they still have an operating radio, they'd probably call air traffic control or an E-3 Sentry for directions. Larger planes like the B-52 might still have their radio beacon equipment installed.

[knodi123]

What I was asking, though, was do the pilots still have to learn it? Considering the limitations we both pointed out, I wonder if it has been removed from ground school and basic pilot instruction.

[Nrsolis]

You always learn the basics. I've not been USAF but you're always taught the "hard" way or "old" way before they teach you the "new" or "easy gizmo" way.

How long you spend on the topic and whether you have to prove proficiency is a different question.