...isn't Owen Wilson's character the GIB, RIO, WSO or whatever you want to call him? Why does he get referred to as a pilot?
I guess he may well be a pilot too but if that's the case, why is he sitting in the back and not at the sharp end of his own crew?
Thanks
0918
Yes, he's an NFO (Naval Flight Officer) in an F/A-18F, making him the WSO of the aircraft, not the pilot. I don't believe he is ever referred to as a "pilot" in the film. He even says something like, "they shot my pilot!" at one point.
shareHiya Kenobi,
I thought Hackman was asking him if he was headed for the airlines, and I wondered what he was expected to do when he got there...maybe I misheard...I also recall Owen's character telling his boss that he joined up to be a Navy Fighter Pilot and he was boring flying sorties to take photo's etc.
I guess he could well have joined up hoping to be a pilot and got sidetracked into being a WSO but I just thought the whole script made it seem a vague distinction between the two crew members.
Heigh ho, thanks for the reply.
0918
Airlines need navigators too.
shareWSO is an Air Force term for Weapon System Officer.
Since this is the Navy, RIO is the proper term Radar Intercept Officer.
RIO and WSO are dependent on the service branch.
I joined the Navy to see the world, only to discover the world is 2/3 water!
He is referred to as the navigator.
If you remember the scene when Stackhouse found out that Burnett was leaving the Navy, he said "you mean I have to go out and find myself a new navigator..."
The only time Burnett was referred to as a pilot was during an argument between Riegart and Piquet. Riegart says "All I know, Admiral, is that the American people want their pilot back. Piquet says "Exactly... Americans, all you care about are all your stupid pilots".
Navigator or pilot... BOTH are wrong.
The Fighter shown is the F/A-18F model.
The F/A-18 comes in several models:
A/B Models
of which the B is a two-seat trainer version of the A model
C/D models
of which the D is s two-seat trainer version of the C model
and the E/F Models
of which the F is a two-seat trainer version of the E model.
The E/F hornet is the Superhornet and has several physical differences
http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/systems/aircraft/f-18-schem.htm
but regardless, the B/D/F models are all TRAINERS. The backseater would be an instructor pilot. these are not found in operational deployment but back stateside in training squadrons like at NAS Lemoore. So Navigator/WSO/RIO is a moot point.
in an operational F/A-18 there would not be a backseater at all.
Photo recon flights by fighters would have been done by F-14 Tomcats with TARPS pods.
The only operational two-seat variant of the Hornet is just now becoming operational and that is the EA-18G, known as the Growler. It is the fleet replacement for the aging EA-6B Prowler Electronic Warfare aircraft.
I joined the Navy to see the world, only to discover the world is 2/3 water!
Aren't F-14s retired? F-18s replaced them, didn't they...
shareAren't F-14s retired? F-18s replaced them, didn't they...NOW.. yes.
The movie is SET during the time of the Wars in Kosovo which was in the late 1990's (96 thru 98)
Not that it undermines your point in anyway
The movie is based (albeit very loosely) on the downing of Scott O'Grady's F-16 over Bosnia in 1995.
I should have just said the Balkan region, or the Territories of the former Yugoslavia.
Shoot me for being off by ONE year... LOL.
but there is absolutely zero similarities between the real and fictional shootdowns to ever be considered "Based on".
I was not being thin skinned, I was joking around, hence the LOL at the end.
I did take your comments as just friendly advice.
now to the Shootdown similarities:
Here are your similarities word for word and my comments on them in red. I reordered two of yours as they both are the same category and have the same response.
Really? I count several:
-A USAF fighter jet went down over Bosnia.
the movie was a USN fighter jet. not USAF.
O'Grady flew an Air Force F-16 Falcon, the Movie portrayed a Navy F/A-18F Superhornet
-It was attacked by Serbian paramilitaries.
-Serbian Paramilitaries hunted down both pilots after ejection.
Since the shootdown took place over the same territory, this is a no-brainer. Thats like saying Flight of the Intruders is based on the shootdown of Lt. Col. Iceal "Ham" Hambleton. after all they both had pilots on the ground in Vietnam being chased by the Vietnamese. But that would be wrong. Bat*21 would be based on the shootdown of Lt. Col. Hambleton, Not Flight of the Intruders.
Basically, your similarity here is too overgeneralized to be considered BASED ON rather than INSPIRED BY
-The SA-13 Gopher portrayed in the movie is fairly similar to the SA-6 that shot down O'Grady's plane. (In that both are ex-Soviet, SAR-Homing, Intermediate Range, Self-Propelled S-2-A systems).
Ex-Soviet: Most SAM systems exported around to thirdworld countries ARE! They are NOT both SAR homing. The SA-13 is IR homing. It is also short ranged whereas the SA-6 is an intermediate ranged SAM. Basically the only similarities is that they were both shot down by SAM's but that is again an obvious generalization in that MOST planes are shot down by some form of SAM rather than AA. And lets not forget the Shootdown shown in the movie was right out of Wile E. Coyote rather than any similarity to the physical reality of any SAM's capabilities.
-An enormous Search & Rescue Op was initiated by a Marine Expeditionary Unit.
Just like your USAF plane and SAM system similarities, this too is not a similarity because the Movies does NOT have an "enormous Search & Rescue Op initiated by an MEU". After they finally broke the rules and went to get him anyway, a SMALL rescue attempt was made by the embarked Marine Detatchment assigned to the Carrier itself, not the MEU.
-It took O'Grady several days before he was able to successfully radio for help and make contact with Allied Forces.
Another overgeneralized similarity that does not require one to be "based on" the other. Most shootdown rescues are made within minutes or hours of the shootdown. The US Military has made SAR into an artform. We are the best at it and have whole forces dedicated to just that mission. But most of those don't make great movies because being picked up 5 minutes after being on the ground and hiding in a bush makes for a boring film. The Similarity here has more to do with what makes a great movie rather than being based on any actual event. Again, it supports an "inspired by" rather than "based on" premise
Sorry but your similarities that you used to support the film actually being BASED ON a specific event is seriously lacking and in most cases are outright wrong (USAF vs USN, SAM Systems, MEU) and the rest are overgeneralizations that really support nothing.
I agree that there is a relationship between the film and O'Grady's shootdown. My argument is that it is not Based on the real event, but just a film inspired by the real event. Now if you want to argue the difference or no difference between my distictions of Inspired vs based on, I can't really help you there as that would just devolve into a 'poTAYto/poTAHto' semantic arguement. But I do see it as a distinct difference. Otherwise I would not have debated it.
I joined the Navy to see the world, only to discover the world is 2/3 water!
Although only tangently related to this point, once I heard about this during an AMC viewing of the movie last night and researched it today, I have totally lost respect for Scott O'Grady. What a noob!
http://www.eonline.com/news/46666/behind-enemy-lines-suit-settled
Burnett is a navigational flight officer, an NFO
shareI just love all the so called experts here. Its laughable my cousin and brother in law are fighter pilots one for 10yrs the other for 20+yrs. One is in the Navy and the other in the USAF. My cousin in the Navy flies the F-18 and my brother n law the 2 seat F-15E I reluctantly showed em this and they both laughed and told my never to read posers on the internet.
Yes I do know that but I really hate you know it alls. Both aircraft have flight controls both crew are pilots and or have flight training. So its obvious most if not all of you either read books or get stuff off the internet. In the navy they now call the backseat pilot a ECMO and in the AF a WSO or Wizzo. So its again is obvious YOU ARE NOT AN PILOT.
Shame the one thing I hate are POSERS and FAKES again you people are disrespectful and a shame to the real service.
Dr.Nichole MD. Oh and Nicky was here. :D
I never revisit posts. Too busy and way above arguing.
Both aircraft have dual sets of flight controls, but the GIB (Guy in the back) in the F15E is a WSO (Weapons Systems Officer) pronounced "whizzo" and the GIB in the F18 is a RIO (which is a Radar Intercept Officer). Both GIB get some flight training during their initial training, but they aren't actually PILOTS. They would require more additional training if they wanted to fly civilian aircraft after resigning their commision, compared to a pilot.
Burnett (Owen Wilson) is a NFO - Naval Flight Officer, whilst Stackhouse (Gabrial Macht) is a Naval Aviator. NFO's are NOT pilots. Only Naval Aviators are pilots in the navy (you can hear Tom Cruise/Maverick say the phrase "Naval Aviator" with great pride in the bar-scene in Top Gun)
Kill the boer!
NFO, navigation flight officer.........
shareHe gets called a pilot, because most laymen watching movies are dumb (ignorant?) and don't know the difference between a Naval Aviator and NFO. They assume anyone in a jet is a pilot, plus I'm sure the "sexy" factor is in play for a movie. No, NFOs aren't pilots and get no FAA certifications with their training, so he wouldn't be doing any sort of flying in the civilian world unless he pursued ratings in his free time.
He's the backseater in an F/A-18F, so it's not inaccurate to call him a "WSO" since he is operating a weapons system. "RIO" is more of a term for the F-14, and isn't really applicable to the differently employed F/A-18.
There are MANY inaccuracies with respect to military protocol, evasion techniques and SOP, and Naval Aviation in general. For example, pilots aren't paired up with a SPECIFIC NFO. You fly with whoever OPS puts you on the schedule with. It could be the same guy 5 days in a row, or a different guy every day. You also don't get your name on a jet, until you're most likely a senior LT at least, and you don't fly your "own" jet with your name on the side. You fly any jet that's up for flight which may have any combination of names written on it for the Pilot, NFO and crew chief/Plane Captain(s).
I don't recall if it applies in this movie or not, but I've seen it elsewhere (JAG etc): Naval Officers in flight suits wear sewn rank on our flight suits. It wasn't always this way, but I'm pretty sure it was at least during the time-frame of this movie.
I could go on and on, but you get the idea.
-Whirly-bird Naval Aviator
He's the backseater in an F/A-18F, so it's not inaccurate to call him a "WSO" since he is operating a weapons system. "RIO" is more of a term for the F-14, and isn't really applicable to the differently employed F/A-18.
You are right in that the Plane was an F/A-18F variant of the Superhornet.
The problem with that is the F variant is a TRAINER, not a fleet deployed unit.
Both the single seat E and two-seat F models convert quickly from one mission type to the next with the flip of a switch to provide consistent air dominance:
Day/night strikes with precision-guided weapons
Anti-air warfare
Fighter escort
Close air support
Suppression of enemy air defense
Maritime strike
Reconnaissance
Forward air control
Tanker
Both the single seat E and two-seat F models convert quickly from one mission type to the next with the flip of a switch
Introduction of the F/A-18 E/F aircraft on the East Coast of the United States was initially projected began in 2004 for completion by 2008. In fact, the transition from the F-14 Tomcat to Super Hornet reached the halfway point in 2004 and the process was completed in 2006. To minimize the impact on the operational mission, older model F/A-18 and F-14 squadrons transitioned to an F/A-18 E/F squadron upon return from deployment. Typically, aircraft squadrons deployed to a carrier for approximately 6 months through the year. When the squadrons are not deployed, they are stationed at their home airfield, and perform a sequence of training exercises to prepare for carrier deployment. Each aircraft squadron rotates through this training and deployment cycle, which would allow for full introduction of the F/A-18 E/F aircraft over a four-year period.
In 2005 CVW-5 added a second squadron of Super Hornets in Strike Fighter Squadron (VFA) 27. The VFA-27 "Royal Maces" replaced their older C and D model Hornets with the new one-seat Super Hornet E model this winter to increase the air wing's complement of Super Hornets that were introduced last year by the VFA-102 "Diamondbacks." VFA-102 flies the two-seat Super Hornet F model.
The Naval Air Sysytems Command (NAVAIR) F/A-18 Program signed a second multi-year procurement contract for the F/A-18E/F Super Hornet and a contract for system design and development (SD&D) of the EA-18G airborne electronic attack aircraft with the Boeing Company 29 December 2003. The multi-year contract, valued at approximately $8.5 billion, includes a total of 210 aircraft over five years. Under the terms of the contract, the Navy will purchase 42 aircraft in fiscal years 2005 through 2009. Deliveries for aircraft purchased will begin in fiscal year 2007. By signing a multi-year contract, the Navy will save more than $1.1 billion, and deliver cost-wise readiness and dominant maritime combat ability to the U.S. Naval Fleet.
By the end of 2010, 10 F/A-18E/F squadrons -- five F/A-18 E squadrons and five F/A-18 F squadrons -- were to operate on aircraft carriers in the Atlantic Fleet area of responsibility. Each squadron will consist of 12 or 14 aircraft, depending on whether the squadron comprises the single-seat version (F/A-18E) or the two-seat version (F/A-18F). In addition, the Navy will introduce one Fleet Replacement Squadron (FRS), which does not deploy but is used to train replacement aircrew for the fleet squadrons. The F/A-18E/F FRS squadron will consist of 32 aircraft. The net result of the transition will be a decrease in the number of personnel and fighter aircraft assigned to the Atlantic Fleet.
UPDATE:
OK so the F variants ARE deployed in active (non-training) squadrons. I found proof of that.
I was wrong. You were right.
But...
You were not right for the reasons you stated. I still stand by that the Boeing citation you gave is not proof the F's are active deployed. It is only proof that the F's can do the same missions as the E's (and of course they can if they are trainer versions of the E's.)
OK, so then post the correct evidence of it rather than post evidence that proves nothing.
That was MY point.
Thats like when asked to provide proof that 2+2=4, you answer 42, rather than 4-2=2.
I joined the Navy to see the world, only to discover the world is 2/3 water!
The burden of proof should be on the person attempting to disprove a statement made by someone in the know. Especially when that person (you) is wrong. :)
Thanks for letting me know I'm right. I may not fly Superhornets, but being a Navy pilot I have many friends who have/are/will make that selection in the jet pipeline. Much of the consideration is determining whether they would like to select "single seat" or not....
OK, so then post the correct evidence of it rather than post evidence that proves nothing.
That was MY point.
Thats like when asked to provide proof that 2+2=4, you answer 42, rather than 4-2=2.
gee Sailor...I WAS enjoying this volley. Sad to say it's just a p!ssing match. Have you ALWAYS been a "right-fighter"?
shareI am soooo sorry that my 3 year old comment ruined your current conversation.
I joined the Navy to see the world, only to discover the world is 2/3 water!
at least you're still paying attention.
shareCGSailor, TY for all the info! I don't understand why anyone would give you a hard time! When you found out that your info changed in the mid 2000's, you actually admitted it. I thought the whole thread was interesting.
*NEVERMIND*
Sheesh. You're like a caricature of defensiveness, condescension and ignorance. Let's examine just a couple notes:
"'He's the backseater in an F/A-18F, so it's not inaccurate to call him a "WSO" since he is operating a weapons system. "RIO" is more of a term for the F-14, and isn't really applicable to the differently employed F/A-18.'
MOOT POINT and dead wrong. "
So let's see, he says the character's not a WSO or RIO and so do you. But somehow he's dead wrong.
And your whole "well you're right, but not for the reasons you said, so I'm still right". Pay attention: the guy *asked* if they were for sure not operational and quoted a piece of information that caused him to ask that. He was right, you've been dead wrong this entire thread. But that didn't stop you from spouting your ignorance with venom and condescension. No one likes you. It's true, isn't it?
He gets called a pilot, because most laymen watching movies are dumb (ignorant?) and don't know the difference between a Naval Aviator and NFO.
Not only laymen watching but sadly often the writers who haven't a clue
and don't bother checking it out before it becomes part of a film
I see this in other series too, e.g. once they were calling a petty officer, a Navy officer, in NCIS. In SGA there were glaring errors too.
I point these inaccuracies out and people yell about nitpicking.
I guess the years I spent in the military and earlier as a Navy brat
leave me wanting more from films and tv series, ie accuracy
Burnett is the NFO..a navigational flight officer, back seat
NFOs are NOT pilots...even though they perform many of same duties as
a co-pilot might.
This thread was fun to read, but just to clear things up for any future readers:
GIB = slang for Guy/Gal In Back
WSO (commonly pronounced 'Wizzo') = Weapon Systems Officer
RIO = Radar Intercept Officer
WSO was the term used for US Air Force F-4 Phantom back seat pilots.
RIO was the term used for US Navy F-4 Phantom and F-14 Tomcat back seat pilots.
The F/A-18E Super Hornet is a single seat strike fighter that was first operationally deployed on an aircraft carrier in 2002. The F/A-18F Super Hornet is a two seat strike fighter first operationally deployed on a carrier in 2003. Both types of Super Hornets effectively phased out the F-14 Tomcats from the US Navy fleet from 2001-2006.
"Behind Enemy Lines" was ahead of its time and was showing our heroes in an F/A-18F Super Hornet a couple years before it actually deployed on a carrier. The aircraft obviously was in existence at the time, but it just hadn't been deployed yet in an active squadron.
The back seat pilot on the F/A-18F Super Hornet is NOT known as a RIO like in the F-14 Tomcats, but is known as a WSO. You can even see PILOT/WSO in the film on the scheduling board when Owen Wilson finds out he's scheduled to fly on Xmas day.
And yes, Owen Wilson's character is an NFO, or Naval Flight Officer, and is not technically a pilot flying the aircraft, but he is a part of the crew and a co-pilot who controls the radar and weapon systems, so to refer to NFO's as back seat pilots is not incorrect. Like Naval Aviators, NFO's also get gold wings, just with different insignia.