Jump to content
Baseops Forums
Merle Dixon

Degradation of SUPT

Recommended Posts

8 hours ago, zachbar said:

Like I said earlier, better is the enemy of good. UPT as it was seems have served the Air Force pretty well throughout history, convoluted airspace and all. Maybe “big Air Force” knew all along they were sacrificing quality for quantity and just never told us. 

 

6 hours ago, Sprkt69 said:

Having discussed this with the Generals over various AFSCs, I consistently heard “I never said to lower the standard!” Maybe they were lying to me, maybe they were lying to themselves to feel better about the future losses, either way I’m guessing they believe you will accept all the risk.

After the conclusion of the first iteration of the Syllabus Slashing Conference of Justice our previous sq/cc told us just the opposite when announcing the changes. He said the Bobs know they’re sacrificing quality for quantity and they’re accepting the risk (by they he meant us/the CAF) due to the crisis. Huge shock there was mixed messaging.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Do you guys think theres a correlation between student success and coming in with flight time, good or bad?
When I went through T-6's 16 some odd years ago, my class had 5 dudes with CPL/IFR/CFII ratings with 400-1,000 hours of flight time (to include myself) and we were ranked 1 thru 5 in the class. Coincidence? Definitely not, BUT, and this is a big BUT, we were all willing to forget a lot of what life was like in an a GA aircraft flying under FAR's and use our seasoned basic airmanship to our advantage (and not have a chip on the shoulder acting like we knew it all). Being able to free up brain cells from having to worry about flying straight and level allowed us to learn new things more quickly. By the time some of the less experienced dudes started to "get it", it was too late. I felt I had a huge advantage when it came to the instrument phase, because most of that phase contained the same principles as instrument flying in a 172, but things just happened much faster. The playing field starts to even out once you get to the T-1 or T-38. Overall, dudes/dudets with more flight time, in theory, should be more confident in any new airplane.

I used my CFII experience to my advantage outside the airplane and took one of my bros in the class having a hard time during instruments to the cockpit trainer a few times to help him with basic course intercepts, holding patterns and approaches.

My advice to anyone with any extensive flying experience going to UPT is 1. Never pass up the opportunity to keep your mouth shut even if you know something from your prior experience (don't act like a know-it-all). 2. Don't be an individual with your experience and help your bro's. 3. Don't get cocky, because the margin of getting into a humbling experience is probably a bit tighter than you are use to.
  • Like 3
  • Upvote 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Question for the group.

I have seen lots of posts about students shouldn't be hooking rides for the pattern-isms that are relatively small mistakes that can be corrected with table talk with their IP. 

What would you all say to the student who is faced with this situation? What is the most appropriate way to address this? Is it even worth addressing?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
48 minutes ago, JustHangingOut said:

Question for the group.

I have seen lots of posts about students shouldn't be hooking rides for the pattern-isms that are relatively small mistakes that can be corrected with table talk with their IP. 

What would you all say to the student who is faced with this situation? What is the most appropriate way to address this? Is it even worth addressing?

Shut up and color. 

Take your lumps and learn. 

If you quibble, and it is quibbling, you may win the battle...but you may also lose the war. 

 

And of course, the obvious answer, don’t fuck up the pattern and you won’t face this issue. 

Edited by HossHarris
  • Like 3
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
33 minutes ago, HossHarris said:

Shut up and color. 

Take your lumps and learn. 

If you quibble, and it is quibbling, you may win the battle...but you may also lose the war. 

 

And of course, the obvious answer, don’t fuck up the pattern and you won’t face this issue. 

pass me the crayons!

Thanks for the response. My plan is and has been to go and be a sponge. Adsorb as much as i can, put my best foot forward everyday, and help the folks around me succeed as well.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, JustHangingOut said:

pass me the crayons!

Thanks for the response. My plan is and has been to go and be a sponge. Adsorb as much as i can, put my best foot forward everyday, and help the folks around me succeed as well.

Being a sponge didn't take me very far at Rucker... "you can only have X number of penguins on an iceberg. One jumps on, another jumps off"

Related image

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, CharlieHotel47 said:

Being a sponge didn't take me very far at Rucker... "you can only have X number of penguins on an iceberg. One jumps on, another jumps off"

Related image

haha! i'm sure ill get smarter and dumber at the same time 😉

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

On the original topic of this thread, has the Navy started to experiment with shortening their pilot training syllabus and/or introduce technology to compensate for less flight training time?

I saw that two Navy guys went thru PTN but as far as changing their program, is the Navy looking to this also?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Clark Griswold said:

On the original topic of this thread, has the Navy started to experiment with shortening their pilot training syllabus and/or introduce technology to compensate for less flight training time?

I saw that two Navy guys went thru PTN but as far as changing their program, is the Navy looking to this also?

 

If they have, it’s not widely known. I’ll ask a few of my bros down at Whiting and see what they say.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
45 minutes ago, Bigred said:

If they have, it’s not widely known. I’ll ask a few of my bros down at Whiting and see what they say.

Cool, interested to hear.

On a sidebar issue and idea:

So they wanna shorten the time in SUPT to produce pilots faster then why not begin training pilots sooner once selected for pilot and deemed medically qualified?

That is at the Academy or ROTC, once selected for Pilot and passed an initial medical screening, start flight training sooner (prior to commissioning) to get training started so that either IFS is now skipped or is just a quick quality check prior to reporting to SUPT?

IIRC, we were selected for Pilot/Nav at the end of Junior year and depending on your school's academic calendar, initial flight training could start the summer following Jr year, intensive 2.5 months to get PPL + some hours then Sr. year, you would work towards instrument certification.  IFS is a quality check and off you go to SUPT with around 100 hours.

This would involve the AF having to risk some money as some cadets would not either complete initial flight training, medically disqualifie or choose not to continue but I think they would be a manageable number.

SUPT graduates arrive more prepared, more likely to succeed in an abbreviated SUPT syllabus (would argue for replacement of those flight hours but that is another fight) and the cost/risk is very affordable.

For OTS cadets, a separate program for the approximately 100 hours unless they already have flight time.

Edited by Clark Griswold
  • Like 2
  • Upvote 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 9/10/2019 at 1:52 PM, JustHangingOut said:

pass me the crayons!

Thanks for the response. My plan is and has been to go and be a sponge. Adsorb as much as i can, put my best foot forward everyday, and help the folks around me succeed as well.

That last part is the most important.  Please don’t ever forget that in your career! 

  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Did any of you guys know that there are dudes in the USAF currently who’s first solo was in the T-6 and second solo ride was in the F-35? I heard today they are doing fine. Granted they got 12 dual F-16 flights but zero T-38/IFF. Next batch will go T-6 direct to F-35 without the F-16 based on this success.

New world...embrace it.


Sent from my iPhone using Baseops Network mobile app

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, di1630 said:

Did any of you guys know that there are dudes in the USAF currently who’s first solo was in the T-6 and second solo ride was in the F-35? I heard today they are doing fine. Granted they got 12 dual F-16 flights but zero T-38/IFF. Next batch will go T-6 direct to F-35 without the F-16 based on this success.

New world...embrace it.


Sent from my iPhone using Baseops Network mobile app

New F-35 standard: Rejoin to sensor line abreast?

Edited by Inertia17
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, di1630 said:

Did any of you guys know that there are dudes in the USAF currently who’s first solo was in the T-6 and second solo ride was in the F-35? I heard today they are doing fine. Granted they got 12 dual F-16 flights but zero T-38/IFF. Next batch will go T-6 direct to F-35 without the F-16 based on this success.

New world...embrace it.


Sent from my iPhone using Baseops Network mobile app

I’d be curious to hear from the F-35 bros just how “successful” they are compared to the guys who earned their wings the “real” way. I know, I know...a little jab at PTN. No offense to these guys who went through that program, it’s totally not their fault. And I hope they truly do well for the sake of our lethality/dominance over our peer adversaries. This whole PTN thing is just yet another one of the AF’s weird social experiments, brought to you by the Kwastinite gang. By the way, what happened to that guy? 😏

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, di1630 said:

Did any of you guys know that there are dudes in the USAF currently who’s first solo was in the T-6 and second solo ride was in the F-35? I heard today they are doing fine. Granted they got 12 dual F-16 flights but zero T-38/IFF. Next batch will go T-6 direct to F-35 without the F-16 based on this success.

New world...embrace it.


Sent from my iPhone using Baseops Network mobile app

That’s “successful” from big Air Force, not the B course IPs. Also, those guys were all hand picked because the Air Force knew they would do well in UPT due to prior experience. They didn’t allow standard students into that round of PTN. Nothing can replace time in a jet. If something could we wouldn’t require hour limits for upgrades. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, di1630 said:

New world...embrace it.


Sent from my iPhone using Baseops Network mobile app

I mean, if our national interests depend on it for like... ever shouldn’t we be saying: “it’s a new world, I can prove it!” ? I mean really prove, beyond a shadow of a doubt, that we can guarantee the same lethality of the Force through short pipeline initiatives?

(Note: did not say lethality of the individual aircrew. I think most have a sense, without science, that losses would increase, but there’s likely a crossover point for end results in a choice between more aircrew and better aircrew. I’m sure RAND has done the math on it...? Sucks to suck or have your training suck. Likely not a conversation anybody is willing to have in public until a big war.) 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Hawg15 said:

That’s “successful” from big Air Force, not the B course IPs. Also, those guys were all hand picked because the Air Force knew they would do well in UPT due to prior experience.

Maybe that's the way we should pick potential students from now on.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You can't use outliers and call it a success. There's not enough sample size density to ascertain they're not gonna start lawndarting expensive 5th gen toys in the course of one ops assignment or deployment cycle/fighter drag. Establish a more robust sample size, undiluted by classically attained (aka more expensive) personnel in the same batch, then we can talk about whether the T-6 to 11F direct is or is not a false economy. This isn't a Luddite argument, it's a truth in advertisement one. Statistics are fungible.

7 hours ago, WheelsOff said:

, brought to you by the Kwastinite gang. By the way, what happened to that guy? 😏

Airlines I think? The hiring is robust at the airlines so far,  so not much disincentive for being a Blue Falcon in military life the way it would have been during the Lost Decade.

2 hours ago, joe1234 said:

Maybe that's the way we should pick potential students from now on.

Indeed, but they don't have that luxury, in order to meet the production targets. Our innovation antics torpedoed our production numbers at PIT last year. We've spent the last year surging on the classic syllabus just to catch up. Which is another way of saying we fell short of the increased target for another FY in a row. No free lunch in this sausage factory....

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, joe1234 said:

Maybe that's the way we should pick potential students from now on.

It’s not. That is unrealistic and unsustainable.  What we need to do is realize that it takes time and money to train people, and no amount of academics/sims/VR/video games will replace air sense and experience developed in the jet. There’s a reason every thousand hour airline guy who joins the guard smokes all of his UPT classmates, and it’s not because he catches on any faster than a normal person. Either fully commit to training these pilots or stop being yes men to the guy above you and pretending we can increase numbers without increasing money, time, instructors. 

  • Like 1
  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, WheelsOff said:

I’d be curious to hear from the F-35 bros just how “successful” they are compared to the guys who earned their wings the “real” way. I know, I know...a little jab at PTN. No offense to these guys who went through that program, it’s totally not their fault. And I hope they truly do well for the sake of our lethality/dominance over our peer adversaries. This whole PTN thing is just yet another one of the AF’s weird social experiments, brought to you by the Kwastinite gang. By the way, what happened to that guy? 😏

Probably in the holding pattern for CSAF...next up, virtual BMT!!

  • Like 1
  • Haha 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
You can't use outliers and call it a success.
 

I agree it’s probably too early to draw conclusions but given the number of people in this board who are opposed to change, I find it interesting that there are guys making it through. By the way, that info was from a LM instructor, not a VR proponent.

Technology is changing tactics the way INS/GPS changed navigation. I think we should train to that and also face some unpopular realities about what legacy airframes will do mission-wise in the future. With PGMs and evolving roles, we can cut some training in some areas and shift that to other places.




Sent from my iPhone using Baseops Network mobile app
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, di1630 said:

that info was from a LM instructor,

If I had a buck for every time an LM employee fed me bullshit, I’d be retired with a couple airplanes in a hangar next to my 1000 yd shooting range.

Technology is changing tactics the way INS/GPS changed navigation. I think we should train to that and also face some unpopular realities about what legacy airframes will do mission-wise in the future. With PGMs and evolving roles, we can cut some training in some areas and shift that to other places.

Agree. However, still good and bad ways to do that. 

Edited by brabus
  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

well, she’s got a name:

T-7 Red Hawk

9A3DC638-21B3-4976-9810-564AE9C699FA.jpeg

Edited by 12xu2a3x3
.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I was gonna suggest this should go in the WTF thread, but it fits here I guess.

So, in time honored tradition (BUFF, Warthog, Viper), now that Big Blue has proudly stamped their nerd moniker on this thing, what are we actually going to call it?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I was gonna suggest this should go in the WTF thread, but it fits here I guess.
So, in time honored tradition (BUFF, Warthog, Viper), now that Big Blue has proudly stamped their nerd moniker on this thing, what are we actually going to call it?
Well with that paintjob, The Tampon seems appropriate.
  • Like 1
  • Haha 6
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.




×
×
  • Create New...