Leaderboard

I don't have a dog in this fight. However, the above sounds like "Normalization of Deviance." Lots of stuff out there on the web. From one link: https://pressblog.uchicago.edu/2016/01/07/the-normalization-of-deviance.html The sociologist Diane Vaughan coined the phrase the normalization of deviance to describe a cultural drift in which circumstances classified as “not okay” are slowly reclassified as “okay.” In the case of the Challenger space-shuttle disaster—the subject of a landmark study by Vaughan—damage to the crucial O‑rings had been observed after previous shuttle launches. Each observed instance of damage, she found, was followed by a sequence “in which the technical deviation of the [O‑rings] from performance predictions was redefined as an acceptable risk.” Repeated over time, this behavior became routinized into what organizational psychologists call a “script.” Engineers and managers “developed a definition of the situation that allowed them to carry on as if nothing was wrong.” To clarify: They were not merely acting as if nothing was wrong. They believed it, bringing to mind Orwell’s concept of doublethink, the method by which a bureaucracy conceals evil not only from the public but from itself.

This is 100% accurate. Worth the read. https://www.aviationbull.com/2018/feb/26/airline-pilot-second-year-review

How many of those other planes that fly around unpressurized without supplemental O2 (the T-6 is actually pressurized) do so with a CFS system and/or ejection seats or do so at altitudes where O2 is required by the FARs? Have you seen what someone looks like who had the CFS fire with them in the aircraft still? I have and while I never really flew around with my mask down routinely, after seeing what it did to them, I never flew with it down again. So aside from the O2 standpoint, it does provide protection for a CFS fire. Also, I did then and still do think it's a bad idea to fly around with the mask down. Some still do, but I personally feel like it's a big mistake should stuff go bad. In addition, even though the T-6 is pressurized, flying around in the mid 20s xc or for whatever reason you end up that high (think high MOA blocks), what happens if you have to punch? That pressurization environment disappears very quickly and you are now in an unpressurized situation where those other unpressurized a/c aren't flying around without O2. I personally think dudes would rather have their mask on with the immediate emergency oxygen vs a flailing mask hanging down (if it doesn't get ripped off) and no oxygen with limited time of consciousness. After 1500+hrs in the T-6 as an IP, I can promise you I would not be flying around with a mask down breathing ambient air. If this current "good idea fairy's" plan of a connection to allow the mask up and breathing ambient air takes hold and becomes the current norm while they work the OBOGS issue, I can see a high percentage chance that the AF will see more ejections or worse in the future. Just reattach to the OBOGS...you may go hypoxic but whatever take the chance. No thanks...then again I am out of AD and AF flying all together now and see a much bigger picture of life than I ever had when I was in. I'd personally be much more apt these days to say, "ya not doing that" and walking away. So please explain what the fix is for wearing a mask for CFS protection alone? There's more reasons for it than just that, but I'd be interested in what you think would fix that.

Okay, I see my joke didn’t land. If AFSOC wants to buy a $20 mil jet to do FID then Godspeed. If the CAF wants to buy a Brazilian turboprop to do what they’ve had B-1’s doing for a decade and a half, then Godspeed. Just pick something FFS. And don’t ask me to do another survey about it.

This. This is what I hear from a lot of my buddies. It's one thing for us to fly with something broken, but the fact that leadership has continued to for years to operate with no effort to fix things and keeps piling on more broken things and saying everything is ok is the problem.

Good reply. I didn't know the compounding nature of risk acceptance you guys were dealing with. Thanks for a legit answer. That said, accept risk and execute seems like the MLCOA forward until one of the potential catastrophes actually plays out in reality. Yes the stories you quoted me on came from a bud at Vance within the last month.

Apples to oranges comparison there. Those guys have very little need to go above 10k. Their airplanes are built to do their stuff low, and their experience levels require less of a safety pad altitude-wise. Even then, to work the airshow circuit, they are getting vetted multiple times by the FAA in order to lower their min altitude for aerobatics. UPT airspace puts you up above 10k regularly for area work. Plus spins aren't authorized below 10k in the T-6. That's a pretty common event in contact. There also wouldn't be much room to do aerobatics in the MOAs, our extended trail, so that stuff would need to be pared down, especially since you're available MOAs got cut in half. You can make an argument for breathing cabin air, but that's also being pulled off the engine. And they don't know what's causing the problem. With that, you could just leave seat pins installed and leave the mask hanging, and breathe ambient air. But then ejection becomes a slow process. Hopefully Stan doesn't do anything stupid or you take a bird/have an engine failure on the final turn. Having that mask up protects your face from CFS. Then again, it's not like getting blasted in the face (so to speak) by molten plastic is that bad-not like burns on the face are life threatening or anything. There is increased risk doing all of this, and the can is getting kicked down the road. Meanwhile, the line IP sees all their safety mitigations being taken away (you don't need external CFS so someone can pull you out; your seat sequencer probably works now; I know you're tired, but we need to increase production so we're doing weekend ops). These IPs see that their safety nets being eroded, and this just add to the laundry list of problems they see with AF, pushing them to punch out of the AF after their commitment (at least that ejection handle still works, for now...) Let's bring back the mighty Turbomentor! No OBOGS, do everything below 10k, open that cockpit window in flight to fight smoke/fumes, no ejection seat to maintain-just tuck and roll, and beta. I don't know what I'd do if I was still flying the T-6. The biggest problem I see is that they don't have a root cause for the issue, and are just putting a bandaid on the problem in order to solve their production problem (which in turn, is their bandaid for solving the retention problem).

Never, ever, ever believe the glossy brochure.

Caveat that I'm not 100% sure what's up with the external CFS issues. However, I could certainly see someone flying in this proposed config and ending up with either smoke and fumes leading to use of OBOGS or just (since the actual cause is still undetermined) getting hypoxia symptoms off of engine bleed air which is being fed into the cockpit as part of the pressurization system. Maybe they are afraid to punch out without a mask to help protect their face from burning shards of glass, or maybe they are just making poor decisions based on just being hypoxic (Ace of Spades...Ace of Spades...) So, they decide to try to the land the thing and end up porking it away due to lack of available instruments (smoke & fumes) combined with weather, or just lack of athleticism/experience (hmm...this IS the first USAF aircraft most people will fly solo) say they land short/long/sideways or just roll off the runway and stick with it. Even if the pilot is conscious at this point to try to egress themselves, they're again driven to use the CFS which will result in severe face-mangling without any mask to protect. Worse, they could be unconscious and (from the sounds of the current MX status?) the fire crews will have to resort to the axe to get them out. Standby, yeah people do dumb stuff on their own time and put themselves in risky situations. For your example, the difference is most people will choose to actually ride a bike that is fully functional. The similarity is that the most dangerous thing in both scenarios is the other people on the road, or the leadership in the T-6 scenario, who are making stupid decisions which impact your life. And at least on the motorcycle you get a vote of how to react. Hopefully anyone uncomfortable enough with the situation in T-6 land has the balls to realize they have a vote. But will the student with 6-9 hours who doesn't have any better clue really have the airmanship to do so? Or will they just accept whatever the USAF hands them and trust it's in their best interest, not realizing it's just a Band-Aid fix of the USAF in order to preserve the USAF's timeline interests? Especially for a young eager aviator who just wants a chance to fly. They don't have the SA to realize the risk. They have to trust what their IP's tell them, and if the IP's hands are tied, and they are forced to fly...well, bottom line is it falls in line with AF's desire to produce but not retain

Any cyclist out there?

I was interviewed and hired in September 2017, I got my ots and upt dates in January and I'm non-prior. I think it really depends on your unit and how on top they are of things.

Not a chance in hell. I still can't believe a superpower would abdicate logistics control to another nation. If we buy A-29 I hope our politics never run afoul of Brazil.

That’s overboard. I haven’t seen that in my neck of the T-6 woods and if so that’s insane. The biggest issue is all the risk leadership has signed off on our behalf. Half of our fleets ejections systems don’t function properly. We have a known issue with instruments flying to fail and filling our cockpit with smoke and fumes. Oh, and we have no way of knowing when this will happen. Our CFS may or may not work, and heaven forbid we get damage to the canopy and pass out. The fire crew is going to chipping for a while because we no longer have an exterior CFS handle. Our oxygen system isn’t working as advertised, and they are going to cap us at 8k cabin altitude. Cool I can live with that. But our pressurization system isn’t the greatest after being left in the cold and not flying for a prolonged amount of time. What could possibly go wrong? People are upset about the amount of risk being accepted for them. And the pressure to keep progressing the timeline. We’ll also see what these mods do to the syllabus. And if we are altitude capped we lose half of our training ability. It’s a lot of crap piled into one aircraft. I haven’t seen this level of risk acceptance to an aircrafts core functions in my career. But I could be wrong.

I'm not an AETC guy, but listening to my buds out there I have a similar impression. What am I missing about the T-6 systems? This seems like no big deal-- fly unpressurized and get done what you can breathing ambient air... sure there's a possibility of an instrument catching fire. Life is risk, flying more so. Not an optimal situation, but is the risk factor really higher than what other platforms accept? I'm genuinely asking, never flew a T-6. And the stories of FAIPs yelling at SQ/CCs during all calls, demanding the WG/CC contact POTUS to resolve this... does the T-6 situation warrant the level of unprofessionalism we're hearing about?

I’m already at Laughlin, dual qual sounds great as long as my beans will be prorated. None of the points made have changed my mind. If I was an IP in T-6 land this would be a non-issue for me. Flew a single engine turboprop without ejection seats, with a 10 minute supply of emergency oxygen and no smoke goggles well outside of glide from any suitable landing site and somehow still managed just fine. Sure, the possibility of some anomalous in-flight breakup of a T-6 at high altitude is statistically possible...but how likely? Same goes for smoke and fumes event incidents given the amount of daily flying that occurs. Not saying things can’t happen but the pervasive unwillingness to fly is almost comical. Go spend some time with Army rotary wing, I’m sure that group will empathize.

Sounds like we have a volunteer to fly the T-6 in its current configuration. He ain’t scared of no CFS burns to the face or high altitude ejections with no O2. He doesn’t mind breathing in acrid smoke and fumes. Dude I’m sure we could get you orders soon and we need the help. Sack up. Great line by the way. You sure you’re not leadership?

With that many retired GO's involved, the 10% rule is definitely in play.

https://www.defensenews.com/global/europe/2018/02/20/nato-command-change-to-address-deficiencies/ Part of me said: "Wow, NATO is going to make a logistics command? Cool!" Then I realized that the last sentence addressed the timeline: "NATO is still fleshing out the details of the changes." ...right after a coffee break.

"In reportedly deploying T-50s, the Kremlin is outright gambling with precious prototypes and their pilots’ lives. It has sent into an active combat zone two supposedly “stealth” fighters that are anything but stealthy, that possess inadequate and incomplete sensors, incomplete fire-control systems and self-protection suites, no operational integrated avionics and are powered by unreliable engines. They have undertaken hardly any weapons-separation testing except for two types of free-fall dumb bombs and lack any other operational weapons bar their 30-millimeter internal cannons." ...yeah, but does the OBOGS work? Seriously, who's running this place? Monkeys?

Open architecture sells the scorpion for me, but it already seems to be out. I think a-29 would fit the bill well too, better if they adopt open architecture. For the AT-6, after perusing the OBOGS thread, I can't fathom it being considered for combat.

Please go on and tell us about your vast experience in the T-6...

same timeline Light Attack has been on amazing we went to the moon 8 years after kennedy made it the goal. these days we can't get shit done: Light attack, T-38 replacement, new tanker. too much red tape, leaders with no sack. SAD!

Chief of Safety is designed to be a Sq CC/DO or a former Sq CC. The AF did this on purpose because they wanted someone who wouldn't go ROAD running the Safety program/have someone who is a peer with the flying Sq CCs. AFI91-202 2.1.1.1. Active duty military COS will be selected from a current or previous Squadron Commander/Director of Operations/Chief of Safety list; or be a former Squadron Commander. MAJCOM/CV or above has waiver authority for this requirement. (T-2)

FIFY

It really doesn’t matter in the long run. The left and the right are going to be pissed about something all the time and “boycott” something. When it comes down to it with air travel, the person will buy the cheapest and most advantageous ticket with no regard to the airline they’re flying on.

the ugly ones fück the best

It's ugly.

Just posting links to sing the praises of the Scorpion Jet: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LLWlh5aZ8ks https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fdv_hqmemEs Brett Pierson explaining the concept and design of the jet, at the 1:15 mark (first video) he explains how the basic avionics and mission systems are completely separate allowing very easy modification, customization or update without affecting the basic systems that certify the aircraft as airworthy, genius... Again, I can't believe the AF is not selecting this aircraft for LAAR or at least further evaluation in LAE...

Not so sure, maybe the protection is too old; it looks like the whole region from WI to NY to OH is getting creamed.

If you want to be a pilot, don't settle for anything less (if you can help it). Once you go nav or ABM, your chances of ever becoming a pilot are extremely small. It happens, but it will be even more competitive. Getting a PPL will help in a lot of ways. It'll give you insight into whether or not you actually want to be a pilot, it shows that you want to be a pilot, and in UPT it will give you confidence on the radios.

Ditto. I don't know if this generation of AF "leaders" / other public officials (very last boomers / oldest Gen X'ers) desperately trying to seem cool realizes that Millenials can smell their cheesy lame attempts at "connection" a mile away. My oldest is amongst those oh so ironic sensing cohort and I may be naive but I have her respect by not attempting to be just like them, you know young kids, but I act like an adult, reasonably mature and not ham handily trying to emulate their idioms, mannerisms, humor or fads. Unsurprisingly, I am treated well by her and her friends because more than anything people respect honesty. This goes not just for AF leadership but other public officials: people (especially young people and those serving in a defined hierarchy) want to respect the person in charge more than they want to identify with them on a personal level. You can't respect someone that is not genuine and honest, you may not like someone but if they can have your respect and loyalty if they are honest, capable and moral. Give them reasons to respect you rather than reasons to like you.

The 345th Bomb Squadron at Dyess AFB, TX is happy to announce that we are having a Summer hiring board to select applicants to join the “Desperados.” Applications will be accepted through 22 June 2018 and interviews for those invited will be held on 27 July 2018. This board will be to hire both off the street and rated aviators to become B-1 Pilots. Attached you will find the requirements to help you assemble your application package. Questions can be sent to 345BS.Hiring@gmail.com. Good luck to all that apply! 345th Bomb Squadron Request for Applications_2018 Summer Pilot.docx

This is the week, or so we hope. Can we get some confirmation from the board as to the likelihood that we find out this week? I'm not suggesting anyone call since they've said they don't want us to: but if anyone has/does please report what was conveyed.

Ground aborting for what? If the guys flying air races or Extra 300s don’t need supplemental oxygen, I’m fairly certain the average T-6 sortie doesn’t either. Sack up.

There I was, in the shit, as a UPT student. End of story. I am just reading a lot of complaints about an issue that seems pretty minor. Plenty of other airplanes out there fly pressurized without the required wear of a mask for the purpose of supplemental oxygen. I hear plenty of stories about guys flying with their mask down in the T-6...why now is there an uproar? If you wear your mask for CFS protection and that’s the sole reason, there’s a fix for that. There are a ton of risky things involved with aviation but breathing cockpit air with an emergency oxygen reserve just doesn’t seem to be one of those to me.