Clark Griswold

That’s a good point (high capability sims) An ACE aircraft program could have a ground based training element with the aircraft and ideally link them for LVC training

Probably but I hope AMC could make the argument to not have to get into a problem and just lead the turn with a replacement before we get to fatigue life issues My druthers would be to separate out how much lift really needs to be capable of expeditionary / austere delivery and how much just needs to be conventional (air land to at least modest length / width / load bearing prepared runways) Buy commercial freighters for probably half the lift and half having military airlift capability

The War ZoneC-17 Will Fly Until 80 Years Old Under New USAF Airlifter...The Air Force does not expect to have fully transitioned to its Next-Generation Airlift aircraft until 2075.Family of systems, new engines for C-17s, etc… lotta ideas in the article. Family of systems is a buzz phrase but probably the best COA. Crewed / Unmanned fleet

McPeak was not everybody’s favorite CSAF but I agree with his point here from the AFA’s magazine: America’s Air Force today is smaller and older than it or age is just how ready we are to fly, fight, and win in a future war. I graduated from flying school and got my wings in January 1959. From then until I left Vietnam in November 1969, I logged 3,138.4flying hours in the two principal types of aircraft I flew, the F-100 and F-104—an average of 23.9 hours per month. It is true that this 131-month period included a two-year tour with the Thunderbirds and 11 months in combat, both high-in-tensity flying jobs. But it also included 16 months on the staff of the Third Air Force, the momentum lost in transitioning back-and-forth between the two aircraft types four times, downtime associated with six PCS moves, and time spent in various schools—jump school, half a dozen survival schools, forward air controller school—as well as leave and so forth. In those days, we aimed to get 20 hours a month, and I was able to beat that average. For me, the end result was remarkable. For one thing, I loved the life; I decided to make the Air Force a career. More importantly, you could say I felt quite at home in the air. There is a certain attitude that goes with being a combat pilot. The fight starts at the bottom of the ladder. From then until the forms are filled out, nobody is better than you—no team is better than you and your wingman. It’s the other guy—the whole other side—that’s in trouble. In my opinion, this is a winning attitude. The seed for it is planted during checkout, in academics, and daily briefings. It can be cultivated in the simulator, watered at beer call, and nourished during time spent hanging around the ops desk hoping someone else will cancel. But the combat pilot attitude matures into a way of life in the cockpit—flying real hours in a real airplane, face-to-face, with real things that happen in real air. I am worried about today’s force. We’re not flying enough. Increasing flying hours for combat pilots should be a top priority. Maybe today’s fighter jock is better than my generation and no longer needs 20 hours in the cockpit every month. Maybe. But I don’t think single-digit flying hours per month is the right answer for anybody.We used to ridicule our Soviet-era opposition when they were flying at about our present rate. Grapes, waiting to be plucked.In my view, increasing flying hours for combat pilots should be a top priority. I can’t say it’s number one, or number two, or number six, or whatever, because we need to fix some other very urgent problems, particularly air base hardening and defense. But the flying hour program must surely be among the handful of highest priority matters our Air Force should fix quickly. If all else fails, we can use our imaginations to help solve the problem. If the F-22 or the F-35 simply cannot produce enough hours, buy and assign gliders or train ers like the T-6 to each fighter squadron. Do aerobatics, do spin training, hooded takeoffs, and landings. Timespent in the air flying anything builds airmanship and confidence. Better still, it’s fun. It glues people to the organization, as it did me.I’m all for increasing the number of pilots coming out of flying school. But this is an example of how competing priorities should be ranked: First, produce a flying hour program that ensures the excellence of the existing force. Then let’s talk about increasing pilot production. Better a small Air Force that can be relied on than a big one that cannot. Gen. Merrill A. “Tony” McPeak There are affordable platforms, programs and COAs out there, just prioritize flying vs queep for at least O1 to O3s.

T-7 offered with local assembly for the RAF The War ZoneT-7 Red Hawk Jet Trainer Offer To United Kingdom Includes...The Royal Air Force needs a replacement for its Hawk T1s, flown by the Red Arrows aerobatic team, and its Hawks T2s, used for advanced training. The Royal Air Force needs a replacement for its Hawk T1

That’s awesome On and on and on, keep on rocking baby till the money’s gone.

Army Aviation changing up flight training also https://breakingdefense.com/2025/11/inside-six-helo-companies-gunning-for-the-armys-flight-school-next-program/

I know, you’d have to get a contractor and I’m sure there would be some mods, Viperjet proposed a mil trainer version, it probably could be done relatively cheaply.

Don’t want to veer off topic too much and fantasize this plane or that one but…. this jet, yes it’s a kit plane, could be the basis for what could be a great ACE CT aircraft https://www.kitplanes.com/viperjet-redux/ Like a modern Folland Gnat, small light quick nimble and cheap in jet aircraft terms. It would be modified some for sure if adopted for an ACE or CT aircraft but the basics I think are handled.

Really? That’s at least one thing possibly moving in the right direction Probably so but if the Bobs get a win they don’t lose face and the Line gets the flying it needs, so be it. I think if the staff wanted to approach the Hill and justify they could with fairly defensible points: - Delays in delivery of new MWS platforms causing excessive waits / BITs - UPT production is high, no corresponding increase in FTU capacity hence low flying time for newly winged aviators - Need for proficiency and experience building prior to and during MWS training with tasks / general flying that are cross platform reinforcing - Fewer MWSs now than historically per pilot in the Air Force hence there is a need for an affordable, capable training aircraft(s) or program(s) to achieve flying experience targets

I’m not arguing against OHWS, if this prevents injury / promotes pilot health I’m for it. I’m arguing that there is enough money in all the different areas of the AF, cobbled together, to provide a decent, equitable level of training, if it can’t be in a resurrected Phase 3 then a resurrected ACE. Baffling that if one institution (AETC) is unable, unwilling or indifferent to that which should be done, arguing for an alternate method implemented by other institutions (AMC, AFSOC, AFGSC) to achieve the same effect?

I get it but assigned to each squadron and somehow we managed to not collapse wheezing on the way to jet prior to these? Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

All true and all good points. This has a very low probability of execution but you advocate for what you think ought to be done. Boomer, how in the ever living fornication is a squadron strength / happy ending coach being justified. Unless said coach in a 20 year female intern who also models lingerie then there is no saving the AF …

I get it, the death of Phase 3 in SUPT for heavy tracked pilots (for now) and the deleterious effects of that policy choice causes discussion that really shouldn’t happen but here we are. This is only serious on Base Ops and in this thread. AMC, AFSOC, AFGSC should combine resources and resurrect this program IMHO, the inevitable protest of AETC be damned. Contracting out is likely the easiest way to do this. Contractor based COA, 3 course ACE program: COs first report to their assignment, fly one contractor based ACE program then attend FTU, remaining two ACE courses after FTU. 1st course: Multi-engine experience course, simple piston twin based. 2 weeks basic training in aircraft, 4 training trips, fly through multiple Class B & C airports. FTU 2nd course: Tailwheel, STOL / backcountry flying program, about 6 weeks; return to base, fly there another 3 or so months. 3rd course: Tailwheel based acro aircraft, solo acro & form, about 6 weeks; return to base, complete. Just my opinion and looking at the present state of the training enterprise, this seems to be a way to get training & experience despite the course AETC has set and the delays Boeing is delivering.