Leaderboard

I finally get to contribute! Interview Dec 2017 Hired Dec 2017 ..and the paperwork begins...

Of course they get the cush deal being out of Austin. On a serious note if retention is an issue for officers, why would an enlisted getting paid pittance in comparison with a shorter commitment not jump ship to the airlines immediately? If the idea is to show non college grads are capable of flying the answer is, yes of course they are. Flying isn't something black magic skill that you learn by going to a college or through rotc/ots/academy. The odds of success in a tough pipeline, however, are increased by a degree in my opinion because you're more likely to have the study skills, work ethic, etc. you develop through those processes. More importantly, when you're the aircraft commander you better be an officer (or warrant). Can you imagine how much flak we would take if 20 yearold airman snuffy crashed and killed a civilian in the process? If you send them to ots before/after, make them a warrant officer, etc. I think it could work. But even then why take the risk and not do it how it is now? Ots first then upt. This is another shitty bandaid to the problem. They have their fingers in their ears shouting "lala lala I can't hear you lalalalala" while the entire community is saying here is how you can make me stay. They're not willing to make any changes to those areas such as salaries, job locations, time home with family, etc. you, the mission comes first not the people. I know we'll make the enlisted do it for less pay! Solved the budget and manning issue at once! Because a ssgt pilot is basically the same as the majors we're desperately hurting for.

Selected: February 2017 MEPS: March 2017 FC1: June 2017 NGB Approval: November 2017 OTS: January 2018 UPT: June 2018

I think what we have here is AETC trying to put in their own solutions when the root cause (and solution) is in AFPC.

What problem are they fixing though? Like @AZwildcat said, there's no shortage of pilot candidates. The problem is still training capabilities and retention of seasoned guys...

Sortofish. What I am saying (which deserves its own post), is that the Air Force (as is true with any very large enterprise) needs a bureaucratic means (which it currently has) of selecting from a group of highly qualified and highly motivated individuals to select for their most difficult training pipeline. This ensures a higher probability of success which is vital with extraordinarily expensive training. Requiring someone to have a college degree (any college degree) is in NO WAY too high a bar to preclude someone from competing for pilot training - READ: those people who can't (or don't) make it through 'X' State University, very likely, have ZERO business flying a fighter aircraft, let alone any aircraft in the USAF. This, by definition, precludes much of the enlisted force. The above is in no way saying their are enlisted individuals who "couldn't" 'fly' a fighter or heavy aircraft - lord knows. I know there are many individuals around the world flying fighters who are less than capable. I feel ardently about this because I feel that our national advantage isn't grounded in our Army. It's grounded in our Air Force. And when we give up that advantage, we're asking for F$@%ing trouble. What I see this as is grasping at straws and a mediocre "attempt" to solve a problem. Ultimately the AF needs to stand up and tell the Army to do it's job (another post). This, of course, requires national-level leadership buy-in to a strategy (hasn't seemed like we've had one of those for a while), but why else are these people wearing stars?

Maintainers made the worst Boom students with the “I fix the jet, I know how everything works.” This will be a terrible idea.

Sarcastic post aside, I'll answer the questions literally (for sarcastic fun): They won't. Enlisted pilot retention will likely be lower than officer pilot retention. Nail on Cranium, though I will say that it's not so much the 'process' that the academy/rotc/ots puts "you" through (capable people are capable people); rather, the pool of candidates that make it through the other end of those said training pipelines have shown they have the metal to handle the USAF UPT pipeline. This 'cheaper' process enables the USAF to select (from an already select group) individuals who are likely to succeed in a challenging program (which is extraordinarily expensive), which is, arguably, the point of those accession processes. My point is, the whole purpose of accession programs is to save tax payer money by sending the people most likely to graduate through the most expensive training known to man...having a "college degree" and 90 days of marching is not too high a bar to granting that privilege, IMHO. Interesting point, made me think. What does OTS cost relative to the Academy? A penny on the dollar? It costs next to effing nothing to send a bro through OTS, commission a bitch after 90-days, staple a gold bar on his shoulder and proudly salute. What I (cynically) think is that now the leadership is looking for more control. Can't control Capts/Majs/Lt Cols who don't give a F$#% what a two-star says because they realize that that guy is effectively their peer with a few years more experience. Better to have a SSgt F-35 pilot or C-17 pilot who just CAN"T say no, and who can't (legitimately) scoff your ideas. Control. Read Catch-22.

<air force> "oh yeah...hold my beer"

There is no way a current upt stud out of phase 2 could go directly to the B course. Unless they're a prior atp or what have you. They can barely read an approach plate much less fly a multi leg mission. They're used to a very responsive and forgiving plane that it's easy to get back from mistakes in. And if it's into Fighters they've got less than 20 hours of formation flying under their belt before being shipped to iff. There is something to be said for time in the seat and I don't think there is anyway that you can effectively shorten it to 6 months in the Texan without severely handicapping the end product.

I was flying outbound from the sandbox, and I called my wife who informed me that my Son had just soloed in his Cessna 152! I was on cloud nine the rest of the flight.

Just wanted to give a shout out to any of the MARS guys who might see this. I've used them many times over the years for both official and morale purposes and I am so grateful these guys are around. My favorite MARS story of all was calling home from just off the west coast Italy to wish someone a happy birthday. HF propogation is an amazing thing!

They are called missles, not hittles

We should have bought only A and C models. The B is terrible. On behalf of the Marine Corps - I'm sorry.

I like where his mind is at, but an 12,000lb fighter with the ability to supercruise and spend that amount of time airborne seems a bit fanciful to me. I do like the idea of flying 30+ hours a month though. I'd not be trying to knock out my ATP if that were the case. The 8 or 9 hours a month I've AVERAGED since flying Hornets don't give me much of a choice, however.

Growing up we had a family friend who flew P-38’s in WW2. He said the requirement when he signed up was 2 yrs of college to become a pilot. I understand at one point they also had enlisted “flight officer” pilots. I’m guessing requirements shifted as the needs increased. Why not try dropping the requirement to two years of college to get a commission before doing away with the requirement all together. Other than money, and the few who really want to lead the paperwork war,... why would anyone want to become an officer? It’s my understanding that O’s who are pilots in the Army get stuck as paper pushers, while the WO’s are the combat leaders in the plane/helo. I think we have a few people on this forum that could speak to the validity/invalidity of that. At the end of the day, this is just another way for the Air Force to fix the problem by not addressing the real problem.