Jump to content
Baseops Forums

Dapper Dan Man

Registered User
  • Content Count

    25
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

25 Excellent

About Dapper Dan Man

  • Rank
    SNAP

Recent Profile Visitors

1,907 profile views
  1. Negative. Those documents are what your MAJCOM demands of you, and the distinction is important. Are we to seriously believe that AMC is on the cutting edge of organizing, equipping, and...to the point, training its people? There is significant empirical data that shows AMC crews are not up to standard. Performance in exercises and downrange for one, or the MAJCOM’s love affair with the Q-3 another. I think it’s quite apparent we do have a training problem in the MAF, despite “meeting the minimums.” As IPs, we have the choice. Accept what the bobs have written down as gospel. Or we can look at it, acknowledge the rules are for what they are, and still make the choice to be better. I’d also argue that pursuing excellence is procedure and not a technique, as you seem to imply. But i’ll spare the philosophical for now. Sent from my iPhone using Baseops Network mobile app
  2. Quoted because it’s so accurate that it hurts. Like Chuck said, it’s a guerrilla movement in the MAF to change this line of thinking, but it is a significant uphill battle. Personally, I don’t think we’ll see what “right” looks like until either enough of the current senior CGO’s or young FGO’s who are leading this movement are put into significant leadership positions to really drive the fight. Or, AMC eventually fails hard enough in a non-AMC exercise (singling out Mobility Guardian because the MAJCOM will always find a way to debrief it through rose colored lenses) or op so that they are forced by the customers/the CAF/the AF/Joint leadership to change the way they look at things. Sent from my iPhone using Baseops Network mobile app
  3. https://www.forbes.com/sites/tedreed/2020/01/22/american-airlines-philadelphia-pilots-call-for-ceos-removal/ Any folks at AAL have some insight to offer? Sent from my iPhone using Baseops Network mobile app
  4. Brother, I am in full agreement that students shouldn’t be hooking rides for that sort of stuff. My beef is with instructors who dismiss things that have solid training value. Whoever is making the choice to hook stan for the transgressions you mentioned doesn’t understand what the point of the pattern is anyway, and also, probably doesn’t understand CTS. Sure, there are some unforgivable offenses that can occur, but your examples are debriefable at the most. I’m with ya man. It’s a classic case of missing the forest for the trees. If instructors don’t recognize the value, they’re not going grade valuable things. That’s what I was going for; it raises concerns about where the IPs are at. Not where the students are at. Sent from my iPhone using Baseops Network mobile app
  5. One former UPT IP opinion: your post speaks more to the state of the UPT instructor corps than it does to challenge “why” the RSU pattern is a part of primary flight training. You are 100% correct, the RSU is the only way to support the number of sorties generated at a UPT base. What you should consider is that it also enables students to get much-needed reps which they might not get in a “real world” situation. If there’s one common theme from this thread, it’s that the syllabus is taking away too many reps already. Also, if we want to keep solos, you gotta keep the RSU pattern. The RSU will take way better care of that student than A1C Snuffy tower controller ever will. I think it’s interesting that you suggest pattern “intricacies” should be reserved for IP knowledge and not expected of students, but then go on to say that IPs can’t find the ground references anyway. If that’s where the IP cadre is at, easy to understand why the students are struggling. I agree that Stan shouldn’t hook a ride for it, but I would wager that the IP’s need some more CT. The IPs need to be good enough to communicate to Stan that while the RSU pattern isn’t “real,” it’s not about training them for real world pattern work, that is what phase III is for. The RSU pattern is simply about teaching them to fly an airplane. It forces you into a congested and SA-tasking environment, while making you look outside, understand your position with reference to the earth, clear for other aircraft, think critically, talk on the radio, maintain a cross check, understand and fly a contract, and, oh yeah...land the plane. That pattern will teach a dude way more than droning in the MOA ever will. Yes, you are sacrificing “reality” for some RSU rules, but that pattern is where the foundation is laid to make good pilots. If a dude can hack it in that pattern with 11 other planes , then you can build that student up to be a good product for phase III. Taking him single ship to the local civ field will not develop the skills that the RSU pattern will. Though, that has a time and a place too, the IP has to know when to use it. If all the IPs can muster to teach is, “this isn’t real and it’s a bunch of nonsense,” I would argue that you’re missing out on the real training objective, and a quality training opportunity. Sent from my iPhone using Baseops Network mobile app
  6. This seems to be the AF’s official position on the pilot shortage. I have never understood it. Guardian nailed it with “best way to fill a bucket with holes is to pour more water in.” Looking at this from a money standpoint, I don’t see how the AF gets away with it. They’re going to spend millions over 2-3 years to make a single rookie pilot, but they can’t spend more than 35K a year to retain an experienced one. If I was in the CSAF’s shoes, I would march straight to the hill and demand a revision to the law to let me pay my people more. “I’m going to dial down production, and use the extra resources to retain. This is a money allocation problem, not an ‘I need more money problem.’ It makes no sense to spend 50 times the money to make a product than you could spend to retain one with 10 times as much experience.” If that could be realized, a six figure bonus would be reasonable. Make that an option, I bet you’ll see a lot more folks consider staying in. Sent from my iPhone using Baseops Network mobile app
  7. A point worth noting, as well as LookieRookie’s point about PRANG’s reputation. There is something to be said for a serious culture problem down there. Excerpts from the AIB that highlight this. (pages 33-34). “Of the senior leadership that were available for interview, including the 156 OG Commander, 198 AS Commander, and the 156 MXS commander, none of them could accurately describe the mission of the unit.” “Most of the members of the maintenance team who were interviewed could not say whether they had attended Maintenance Resource Management training and/or were not sure what the training included.” “Additionally, the Propulsion Shop Lead did not know the difference between back shop manuals and on-aircraft manuals, neither MM1 nor MM2 realized there were troubleshooting guides in the on-aircraft manuals and relied on a back-shop manual” “MM3 could not define his role and responsibilities during a maintenance engine run.” Food for thought. There seems to be a lot more going on down there other than the mishap crew’s failure to handle an engine-out herk. Sent from my iPhone using Baseops Network mobile app
  8. Left the UPT world about a year and a half ago, but I believe the idea of FAIPing more graduates was in it’s infancy around that time. SQ/CC heard from the white jet functional that they were kicking around the idea. Reason being was that since MWS FTUs are a bottleneck, more FAIPs could mean an increase in “pilot production” without clogging up the FTUs. Reasonably sure there was no plan for what to do three years later when all those FAIPs have to go somewhere to the same clogged up FTUs. Because Air Force. Sent from my iPhone using Baseops Network mobile app
  9. You laugh, but a real life student at CBM pressed to test on this a few years ago. Not even the third ride in T-6s, pre-mission brief: IP: “So let’s get to what we wanted to work on from the last ride. Did you study up on on the stuff we talked about?” Stan: “No sir.” IP: “No? Everything alright at home?” Stan: “Oh yeah that’s fine, I just got wasted in Memphis all weekend.” Might still be the record for fastest ground hook. Stunningly the system actually worked, and got this student eventually removed from UPT. Stan is still out is out there somewhere in big blue, no idea where. It ain’t rocket surgery. Put the study time in, care enough to want to do well, and chairfly. Flying well is a bonus, but even if you aren’t, we can get you there if you’re putting the ground time in. Sent from my iPhone using Baseops Network mobile app
  10. Prior T-6 Flight Commander here...about 3/4s of this is reasonable, but the FAIP portion sounds sketchy. Do you know which base? We have had very good guard and reserve students who were destined for a heavy unit that we fought to get T-38s for. In each case they were at the top of the class and had fantastic attitudes. A lot has to line up for this to work. So, just to manage everyone’s expectations: 1) The gaining guard/reserve unit has to like the idea. 2) They have to like it enough that they would bug the NGB/AFRC about it to get the slot and get it paid for. 3) NGB/AFRC has to approve it. 4) The T-38 squadron also may have a say...as far as I know they are maxing out what they can take already. 5) Assuming that all this happens, it is almost certain you will still fly what you were hired to fly...you just will have gone through T-38s instead. 5.1) The only exception was an outstanding dude who was going to fly KC-135s in HI...HI ANG approved the switch to T-38s and a chance at the F-22, in HI. Not many other places where this sort of opportunity is even an option, so this was more like a one-in-million. “So you’re saying there’s a chance...” Lastly, we will approach you if we think the opportunity is there and if we think you can hack it. Just like everything else in UPT, keep your head down, do your best, and take care of others. Chairfly, study hard, cya.
  11. Big picture difference: ALP (only offered at CBM) students attend on a scholarship, i.e. we pay for it. T-6s only, they do all the same checkrides (just at different intervals) plus a nav check at the end. Takes a little under a year. It’s administered by the AF security assistance team for the reasons Motofalcon talked about. “International” students attend as part of the foreign military sales program. They pay for their own slots...and subsequent extra hours if they need them. Other than that, exact same UPT syllabus as an American just on their country’s own dime.
  12. Except for that it kind of does man. You get what hopefully is your dream job and you can’t be bothered to spend 3-4 days on the road to go make it happen? College graduate, sure. Adult and Officer? Questionable. Grow up dude. Also, nickel’s worth of free advice. Probably not the best move to ask folks in this line of work, who traverse the country and the world every 3 or so years, about how you don’t have the desire to take a little road trip. I mean really. Also, what was your plan for after UPT and/or every time you move for the rest of your life?
  13. Word dude. Definitely don't stay on base. Most folks going through PIT get some arrangement off base anyway. I think there's some good gouge on PIT pads on here in some thread somewhere. Basically they'll charge you the on-base rate and most take the GTC too, all owned by folks out in the bro network and they're in the business of making things as easy as possible. Furnished apartment is an option too, plenty in San Antonio that are solidly priced. Side note on those: I remember some issues dudes had if they put their spouse's name on the lease with theirs. Some combination of Texas law merged with finance/JTR rules, and boom all of a sudden finance would not reimburse lodging expenses. If others know the story refer to appropriate thread or correct me as required please. Good luck brother, enjoy PIT! "Stay as long as you can, for the love of god cherish it." Sent from my iPhone using Baseops Network Forums
  14. Call back later, don't mention "pet." Profit? Are you concerned about getting a good place to stay or more just curious if you can snag a non-a letter for the TDY? If the concern is no-kidding obtaining acceptable living conditions, there are way better ways to do PIT than living on RND. PIT pads (I think some are pet friendly too), furnished apartments, you name it. But, hopefully that's not new information. Good luck to ya, them folks at RND seem to be sticklers on the non-a thing. Fight the good fight man. Sent from my iPhone using Baseops Network Forums
×
×
  • Create New...