Jump to content
Baseops Forums

HerkDriver87

Registered User
  • Content Count

    4
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

3 Neutral

About HerkDriver87

  • Rank
    SNAP

Recent Profile Visitors

296 profile views
  1. Boeing T-X it is... https://www.defensenews.com/breaking-news/2018/09/27/reuters-air-force-awards-9b-contract-to-boeing-for-next-training-jet/ ....pending a GAO complaint...
  2. Well this has caused quite of bit of stir amongst the thread... They received between 70-80 hours in the T-6. I'm not implying that this alleviates all the concerns voiced about these folks having in-air experience (versus the 160-200 that a normal UPT stud might get through Phase II & III), but experience at 30hrs vs experience at 80hrs is a non-linear increase in experience level. As far as the CAF folks, they did get specific "IFF Type" instruction in the T-6 from instructors with experience in such. There was a point in their syllabus when the class "tracked" and the training syllabi diverged to accomplish an end result tailored to either CAF or MAF/SOF. I'm not making excuses for these folks not attending IFF but it does show the program has a process to produce a desired end result.
  3. Pilot Training Next (PTN) Drop CAF- 2 x F-35 4 x F-16 MAF- 3 x C-17 2 x KC-10 1 x MC-130J 1 x C-146 1 x U-28
  4. AFAIK they're all folks who at a minimum flew 38's while they attended UPT. I graduated from DLF (Phase III 38's) last December and at the time there were about 10 non Fighter/Bomber/FAIP T-38 IPs in the squadron. They all few 38s while they were in UPT and the number of non-CAF IPs seemed to be steadily increasing as well. I can't speak to whether or not it's a straight "no" for non-38 UPT folks to jump into that game, but just a data point for consumption.
×
×
  • Create New...