Jump to content

Changing/Switching airframes


Guest whairdhugo?

Recommended Posts

31 minutes ago, faipmafiaofficial said:

Everybody I've ever asked says the b courses are easy. That's all I'm basing that off of.  Maybe they are just full of shit

 

ill bet a bottle if you called up Kelly and Tucson and had them run the DGs you'd get a high percentage of faips

Do me a favor and PM me your name and USAF email address.  I'll talk to some of my bros at the Viper RTU and make sure everyone gets the data we need to sort this out.

  • Upvote 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 475
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

She isn’t worth it.

Believe it or not, I have an Atta-Boy for AFPC with a big personal victory. I dropped RPAs by choice out of UPT 9 years ago and re-categorized as an RPA dude in 2016. I've loved the mission and people

I left AD this year so I can't give you an up-to-the-minute update on what's happening in any community, but if it were me, and I was a herbivore wanting to fly something that can blow shit up, my con

Posted Images

16 minutes ago, faipmafiaofficial said:

Ya and the regional guys or prior WSOs walk into T-6s for UPT with the same about of time flying T-6s as everyone else...using your logic, you say they don't have an advantage?

Except we are talking about very different disciplines and required skillsets here.

WSOs and regional pilots have experience that is directly related to the basic skills being taught in the T-6 program.

The only one who has relevant experience when it comes to IFF and the FTUs are former WSOs, and most IFF FTU IPs will tell you former WSOs come in the same flavor as former FAIPs: those who STFU and understand they're a student and use their experience for good and excel, and the rest who don't.

Which, by the way, is also the same recipe for success that those regional FOs and former WSOs have in T-6s, too.

I think the thing you're missing here is how large the gap is between the skills required of a T-38 UPT graduate and the skills required to succeed as an IFF student.  Unless something substantial has changed, a fresh T-38 graduate doesn't have the skill or proficiency required to walk across the street and demo pro the formation phase in IFF.  There is still a substantial learning curve for a student in those short 4 sorties.  I have personally busted former T-38 FAIPs on IFF F-4 because they couldn't fly tactical to the IFF standard.

So, if UPT T-38 grads have a challenge...and T-38 FAIPs have a challenge...where do you think that leaves someone who has never had to be a single-seat decisionmaker in a fast jet?

Link to post
Share on other sites

I may have missed the answer to this question in earlier posts, but when someone from a fighter switches over to another fighter (F-16 to F-35 for example) what does that do to their progression?  If they left the Viper as an IP what do they enter the F-35 as?  Also, if someone goes fighters then teaches IFF, how do they come back into their community progression wise, i.e. former 4 ship lead comes back with same quals?  Thanks

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, YoungnDumb said:

I may have missed the answer to this question in earlier posts, but when someone from a fighter switches over to another fighter (F-16 to F-35 for example) what does that do to their progression?  If they left the Viper as an IP what do they enter the F-35 as?  Also, if someone goes fighters then teaches IFF, how do they come back into their community progression wise, i.e. former 4 ship lead comes back with same quals?  Thanks

Everybody goes back to the bottom at the new job, theoretically.

That being said, DOs and CCs in the new units can incorporate FLUGs and IPUGs into "MQT" if it is appropriate.  When I went back to the F-15E after having been an IFF IP, my MQT was dovetailed right into a 4-ship FLUG program.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Definitely not.
My entire point this am was the "must have flown 38s in UPT" is bullshit and there are many many pilots out there who are more capable but not eligible. Especially faips who did not fly the 38 in UPT.
 
 


10+ years ago I was assigned to get a never-had-flown T-38 former C-130 with 2000+ hours, ready for IFF as he was transitioning to a new guard unit.

He made it...barely thru IFF, struggled in the B-course and I personally spent a shit-ton of spare time helping with extra sims, instruction etc and that's because the guy had a great attitude.

A lot of time is spent breaking habits, teaching quick, solo thinking. It's just a different flying mindset.

It can be done, he proved it, but it wasn't easy or efficient and nothing comparable to taking a 23 year old and pushing them thru with the right skills and mindset from day 1.




Sent from my iPhone using Baseops Network Forums
  • Upvote 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, faipmafiaofficial said:

Everybody I've ever asked says the b courses are easy. That's all I'm basing that off of.  Maybe they are just full of shit

 

ill bet a bottle if you called up Kelly and Tucson and had them run the DGs you'd get a high percentage of faips

Don't mind what these guys are saying, you just go to that B-course with that FAIP chip on a shoulder attitude. I am sure the IPs are going to be super impressed with you and please keep us all informed on the outcome. We could use the laugh in this day of stop loss

  • Upvote 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

So I was a FAIP, have been through a fighter FTU, and am wrapping up five and a half years as a FTU instructor.  Anybody with prior experience (95% of the time FAIPs but sometimes WSOs) typically excels in the 6-9 rides prior to their Inst/Qual check.  After that it is a wash.  Have FAIPs been DG?  Absolutely, but so have the dudes who pin on 1st Lt during the b-course and with zero time in airplanes outside formal training.  Not to mention, the fighter world puts a lot of weight into attitude.  For most people we can get you there tactically with a lot of effort from the student but a student with good hands and a bad attitude is destined to be one fighter assignment and done.  The culture shift is what I anticipate being the greatest challenge with crossflow and I'm not talking so to speak, elbow pointing, etc.  I am talking about the single seat, your best is never good enough, every action in the jet is put under a microscope mindset that may be difficult to transition to after 1000+ hours of operating much differently.  Like Hacker mentioned, the AF is simply hedging their bets for IFF success based on historical data.  

  • Upvote 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

Well .  I hope they open it to T-1 guys, but I get why they wouldn't...  Sucks though, there was nothing in the world like my T-6 solos, and if I got another chance at my childhood dream...  Even if I got there I'd get that I'd be the red headed step child of the squadron but to me it'd be worth it to have a shot again at getting that fighter.

Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, faipmafiaofficial said:

Don't bother dreaming man. As a T-1 UPT graduate you are automatically a worse pilot than ANYONE who flew the 38 in UPT. For the rest of your career too. Might as well get used to it. 

I can't wait for you to go back and look at this post maybe 5 or 10 years down the road -- you know, when you have some actual real-world ops experience under your belt -- so you can see how truly ignorant it is, even as sarcasm.

At some point you're probably going to have the opportunity to do an IEP either with an IFF squadron or a fighter FTU.  I highly recommend you take that opportunity to see what is lurking on the other side of the UPT base fence.

Edited by Hacker
Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, faipmafiaofficial said:

Don't bother dreaming man. As a T-1 UPT graduate you are automatically a worse pilot than ANYONE who flew the 38 in UPT. For the rest of your career too. Might as well get used to it. 

Well below slightly below average.

  • Upvote 6
Link to post
Share on other sites

Lol at the gatekeeper mentality here. I don't have a dog in this fight, but if it's important to the Air Force to have dudes cross flow from certain year groups, just start them in phase 3 of UPT. Proficiency advance from there as necessary. You can't pretend like only the "chosen few" with "the right stuff" in T-6's come track select time have a hope at making it. I know nobody is saying that exactly, but that's how it comes across to me as I've been lurking on these boards the past few years.

4 years after UPT as a C-17 or C-130 guy I don't see how it matters if you flew 38's in the past or not. We all know getting one in the first place is 50% skill, 50% luck, and 50% timing. I think just about every Saudi who has ever graduated UPT is proof that anyone can be taught to fly a fighter. It's just a matter of how long he syllabus should be for cross flow guys. 

 

Not that it matters because you all wish you were AFSOC anyways. 

  • Like 1
  • Upvote 5
  • Downvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Best-22 said:

I think just about every Saudi who has ever graduated UPT is proof that anyone can be taught to fly a fighter. It's just a matter of how long he syllabus should be for cross flow guys.

We don't fly fighters in upt.

  • Downvote 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Best-22 said:

So we're in agreement then? 

Your assertion that graduating a Saudi is equivalent to proving anyone can be taught to fly a fighter is invalid.

Also,  the heavy guys that have come back as - 38 instructors are below average so your statement about it not mattering after 4 years of c17 is also invalid.

There are 1 or 2 mc12 guys that are decent so I'll give you that. 

  • Upvote 1
  • Downvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Best-22 said:

Lol at the gatekeeper mentality here. I don't have a dog in this fight, but if it's important to the Air Force to have dudes cross flow from certain year groups, just start them in phase 3 of UPT. Proficiency advance from there as necessary. You can't pretend like only the "chosen few" with "the right stuff" in T-6's come track select time have a hope at making it. I know nobody is saying that exactly, but that's how it comes across to me as I've been lurking on these boards the past few years.

4 years after UPT as a C-17 or C-130 guy I don't see how it matters if you flew 38's in the past or not. We all know getting one in the first place is 50% skill, 50% luck, and 50% timing. I think just about every Saudi who has ever graduated UPT is proof that anyone can be taught to fly a fighter. It's just a matter of how long he syllabus should be for cross flow guys.

"fly a fighter" being the operable phrase - there is a large difference between "flying a fighter" and "being a fighter pilot" - Saudi "F-15 pilots" are not equivalent to US F-15 fighter pilots. Yuuuuuuuge difference. So I guess I agree with you?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hate to generalize, even though that's what this whole thread is predicated on. The heavy guys who are coming back as T-38 guys are a completely mixed bag based off when they went through UPT and were they kicked out of their community to AETC for a reason. I know of several guys who went through T-38s during the time we had too many fighter pilots (lol) who are not in AETC because their community values them. Let's be honest here AETC is a 2nd or 3rd tier assignment for every community.


Sent from my iPhone using Baseops Network Forums

Link to post
Share on other sites

We're talking about cross flow from heavies. It sounds like we're saying the same thing, that even off you flew -38's in UPT if you spend 4 years off in heavy land you still need nearly the full up phase 3 to be on equal footing with the UPT direct folks. Give the T-1 guys the same training/spin up and you get the same product. 

 

As for your other point, I'm too lazy to quote everyone but in the last 2-3 pages I've read people say: 

"copilot experience won't mean anything when you get to fighters" (so you need T-38 experience? I agree)

"companion trainer ops aren't the same or as good of training as UPT ops" (ok, I'll buy that)

"T-38 faip experience means nothing when you get to the B-course" (meaning any extra experience in the T-38 beyond 6 months in UPT is all you need to be successful for your follow on? If so I agree)

"when it comes to saudi's, graduating the T-38 doesn't mean anything about fighters" (T-38 doesnt = fighters? Got it)

and now you say, in the same post: "C-17 guys who came back to Instruct weren't as good" (so now T-38 DOES = fighters?)

dont throw your back out moving those goal posts. 

Edited by Best-22
  • Upvote 1
  • Downvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, ViperMan said:

"fly a fighter" being the operable phrase - there is a large difference between "flying a fighter" and "being a fighter pilot" - Saudi "F-15 pilots" are not equivalent to US F-15 fighter pilots. Yuuuuuuuge difference. So I guess I agree with you?

So what is the difference between being a fighter pilot and flying a fighter? Smells like the old "no true scotsman" logical fallacy to me.

 

To to be clear though I agree our pilots are much higher quality. All I'm saying is if you give a dude the same training and he passes all the same check rides, he is no different than a late to rate dude direct from UPT. (I imagine being a wingman as a captain/major might be a little weird but it's not like it's never been done before) People who want to cross flow need to realize they are starting from the bottom again, but that doesn't mean they can't do the job. Additionally, no one should expect to be given a short cut. Including those that flew the T-38 in a past life, so why is that a requirement to cross flow?

Edited by Best-22
  • Upvote 1
  • Downvote 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
So what is the difference between being a fighter pilot and flying a fighter? Smells the old "no true scotsman" logical fallacy to me.


From the History Friday thread because I can't figure out how to link to a post in mobile. From the man himself.






https://www.flyingsquadron.com/forums/index.php?/topic/11649-History-Friday/page__view__findpost__p__422070
Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, pawnman said:

We're getting our first AMC guys to the B-1 pretty soon.  The BUFF guys were pretty good performers through the B-course, I see no reason the AMC guys won't do just as well.

My base (-135's) just sent one to the B-1 and one to the B-52.

Link to post
Share on other sites
29 minutes ago, Best-22 said:

So what is the difference between being a fighter pilot and flying a fighter? Smells the old "no true scotsman" logical fallacy to me.

To to be clear though I agree our pilots are much higher quality. All I'm saying is if you give a dude the same training and he passes all the same check rides, he is no different than a late to rate dude direct from UPT. (I imagine being a wingman as a captain/major might be a little weird but it's not like it's never been done before) People who want to cross flow need to realize they are starting from the bottom again, but that doesn't mean they can't do the job. 

Well in any case, there is a big difference. Fly along side different "fighter pilots" who come from different cultures and backgrounds, i.e. people who may have drastically different ideas about what "fighter pilot" means (it's not just flying a pointy nosed jet), and you'll start to grasp the difference I'm talking about. In a sentence, it's about your attitude towards yourself and own flying skills, rather than a self-aggrandizing projection you put out towards the world and other people. Many pilots from other cultures don't have the right attitude towards their J.O.B., and it reflects in their Air Force's capability. Our Air Force isn't immune to those attitudes, but in general they are far less prevalent. Further, the community has a way of making those types your "one and done" crowd - of course, this all exists within the constraints of "needs of the AF" and "luck and timing are everything." Hell, you can plunk down $2K and "fly a fighter" (http://aircombat.com/flight-programs/combat-flight-programs/advanced-air-combat-tactics-maneuvering/) - I don't think anyone would argue that experience doesn't make you a fighter pilot.

3 hours ago, Best-22 said:

Lol at the gatekeeper mentality here. I don't have a dog in this fight, but if it's important to the Air Force to have dudes cross flow from certain year groups, just start them in phase 3 of UPT. Proficiency advance from there as necessary. You can't pretend like only the "chosen few" with "the right stuff" in T-6's come track select time have a hope at making it. I know nobody is saying that exactly, but that's how it comes across to me as I've been lurking on these boards the past few years.

4 years after UPT as a C-17 or C-130 guy I don't see how it matters if you flew 38's in the past or not. We all know getting one in the first place is 50% skill, 50% luck, and 50% timing. I think just about every Saudi who has ever graduated UPT is proof that anyone can be taught to fly a fighter. It's just a matter of how long he syllabus should be for cross flow guys.

Lol, I don't think anyone is 'gatekeeping' as you put it, and also agree that plenty of "heavy" dudes could hack it if given the opportunity. I think the main objection to your original post was that you seemed to imply that four years spent flying C-17s/130s would somehow translate to walking right into a fighter FTU...most people's objection was to that implication.

Finally, the only real question here is if the USAF does need to pull from the MAF to staff fighter cockpits, why shouldn't they pull from those who have already spent six months flying something (T-38s) that builds the core skill set that translates directly to flying something else fast? You'll likely have greater success than if you roll the dice on those who haven't. It's a numbers game here, right? Of course there are exceptions, but if you are making decisions at an institutional level, you've got to draw the line somewhere. At the end of SUPT is probably the appropriate place to do that.

Edited by ViperMan
  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Problem with all of this is UPT isn't just full, it's overloaded and getting a mid-level Capt with only 4ish years left on his ADSC isn't as good of an investment as a 10 year slave (Lt), probably only a late rate would be better cuz you know those dudes are vested to 20 (maybe).

This battle was lost a long time ago with TAMI-21, horrible drops from 09-12ish and the VSP.

In my BA opinion, a cross flow would only work with a light strike/AT-6ish platform and call those guys 11Fs. You could grab the T-38 turned heavy guys and previous T-6/T-38 IPs. Then abuse the living hell out of them after one assignment by sending them to all those jobs the real 11Fs don't want to do, keeping them in cockpits, etc. Then replace those guys with the next batch of dudes that you don't want to send to Vipers, Eagles, etc.

Step 3: profit.

Sent from my iPhone using Baseops Network Forums

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...