Jump to content

LookieRookie

Supreme User
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    734

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    8

 Content Type 

Posts posted by LookieRookie

    Degradation of SUPT

    in General Discussion

    Posted

    2 hours ago, zachbar said:

    I’ll somewhat reverse what I said earlier based off an experience I had today. Student cross-country. He shows up with a beautiful VFR plan. Amazingly marked VFR chart. Even wants to pick up an IFR for some instrument approaches after. He briefs me that at 1100L the weather will be SKC, 9999 RVR.

    The problem is it was 1050L and it was still misty and overcast less than a thousand. The epiphany I had is that if we teach the students based off 1s and 0s in a sim and cut out too much flying, all we’re going to get is really good canned environment pilots. I know correlation doesn’t equal causation, but I have started to notice a severe lack of common sense amongst my T-6 students, and part of that is probably because we are taking away their opportunities to see real world flying. 

    Besides T-6 SQ/CCs going waiver crazy on T-1 tracked students, how have you taken away opportunities for real world flying? ASD/AMD has increased for T-6 flights to counter the decreased sortie count. SPs have the opportunity to fly more complex sorties due to the greater programmed mission duration.

    Degradation of SUPT

    in General Discussion

    Posted

    8 hours ago, ThreeHoler said:

    People in AMC training (at the MAJCOM level) are of the opinion that the product coming out of UPT is not quality for MAF operations. It probably doesn’t help that 19 AF is of the opinion that UPT Phase III can be taught in much larger more expensive airframes.


    Sent from my iPhone using Baseops Network mobile app

    Well, AMC better be ready for in the next decade:

    1. Pilots that only fly the T-6

    2. Pilots that fly the T-6 and minimal T-7

    or

    3. Pilots that only fly the T-6 and sim in legacy T-1 sims for Phase III top off

     

     

    On another note, 2.5 is only supposed to be producing T-38 trained pilots. 

    Aviation Continuation Pay (ACP - The Bonus)

    in General Discussion

    Posted

    1 hour ago, brawnie said:

    Real question.  Why should a part timer get the same bonus as someone on AD?  Or is this just arguing for rate (pay/day) to be the same?

    Because they are locked into a service commitment and no longer are at will and can quit. It makes managing force structure a lot easier when you know people can’t walk.

    • Like 2

    Degradation of SUPT

    in General Discussion

    Posted

    1 hour ago, Bender said:

    Rumor has it a “Innovation Syllabus” is in its final stretch to reaching the 19AF this month. From what I’ve heard so far it will increase T-6 sorties for T-1s and hold for T-38s...single track perhaps. All kinds of flashy VR and 360 Video included to augment the training...rather than replace.

    I mean, it was already into the bone with OBOGS. Maybe they can at least get back to the skin if more sorties aren’t cut.

    Moles in place...stand by for more!

    ~Bendy

    It’s the UPT 2.5 syllabus that will be executed at Randolph. It’s not particularly a secret

    Track Selects and Assignment Nights

    in General Discussion

    Posted

    38 minutes ago, elvis said:

    My apologies, I worded that poorly. Following UPT, I've noticed a lot of TBD to figure out where they're going for B-Course. Was curious if that delay was to figure out where they're going for B-course and if there was a backup.

    AFPC for the most part just hands the drop list for F-16s under the TBD box. There are still boxes for Luke, Holloman, Kelly, Tucson, but they usually are 0 slots.

    I think it’s because AETC/A1 & AFPC/DP2OR just do a faces in spaces after assignment night for SERE/IFF/B-course after and it’s easier to not assign a location until everything else can be flowed.

    • Like 2

    Mattis to the rescue?

    in General Discussion

    Posted

    5 hours ago, Sua Sponte said:

    Turnover is normal, however this amount of members is not.

    https://www.brookings.edu/research/tracking-turnover-in-the-trump-administration/

    And the House doesn’t have to do an impeachment inquiry. Technically they just start articles of impeachment now. No where in the Constitution does require them to have an inquiry, call witnesses, etc. Of course it’ll never be approved by the Senate. But even being impeached, though not approved, has collateral consequences. Clinton was disbarred by the Arkansas Bar for being impeached due to lying under oath and obstruction, though it wasn’t approved.

    The House impeaches and the Senate tries, convicts, and removes; there is no “approved.”

    • Downvote 1

    Degradation of SUPT

    in General Discussion

    Posted

    18 minutes ago, dannoc said:

    Thanks for that answer.  So if I understand your reply, even a guy who goes T-38s could be assigned a C-17?  Didn't know about the 'universelly' catch all.

    Yes that’s possible, although unlikely. A T-38 stud is most likely to get fighters, FAIP, then bombers, and finally a CAF heavy ISR asset.

    ADS-B

    in General Discussion

    Posted

    16 hours ago, HuggyU2 said:

    Which of the single-pilot airframes have ADS-B now?

    T-38C?  T-6?  Any fighters?  

    If not, what are the plans?

    Separate question:  If the T-6 doesn't have ADS-B, does it have some sort system to identify squawking traffic?  

    The T-6A added ADS-B out that integrates with existing avionics. Nothing else was updated. T-6As have all been modded for years with TAS (TA only, no RA) which displays on the VVI instrument display. NACWS went the way of the DODO.

    T-38Cs are being modded with ADS-B with a WAAS GPS that is additive to the EGI solution. No idea if Boeing will add LPV capes. As for the hardware though, it isn’t certified by the FAA yet so they currently are required to be turned off.

     

     

    Degradation of SUPT

    in General Discussion

    Posted · Edited by LookieRookie

    1 hour ago, Harambe said:

    Do you need a waiver to go to T-38 PIT as a non 11F/B? What reg is that in?

    Yes you do. It’s on the course entry requirements for the T-38 PIT syllabus. The only exception is if you are a T-6 IP.

    T-38 SUPT/ENJJPT/FWQ graduate and have fighter / bomber experience or have previous T-38 IP experience.
    (a) Single pilot aircraft candidates must have achieved mission-qualified and certified as at least a two-
    ship lead in that aircraft. Note: Candidates with a previous T-6A UPT/PIT IP tour meet this requirement.
    (b) Those candidates from other aircraft must have achieved aircraft commander (AC) status with a minimum 
    of 100 hours as primary AC. Note: Candidates with a previous T-6A UPT/PIT IP tour meet this requirement.

     

     

    Degradation of SUPT

    in General Discussion

    Posted

    3 hours ago, EvilEagle said:

    I'm sending kids to UPT as fast as I can inprocess them.  I have 5 in the pipeline right now and 3 waiting to go with another hiring board in a few months.  I try to email their flt/cc's as they go through the pipeline to hear how they are doing.  It's rare that they don't hit a snag somewhere.  About 6-9 months ago I was talking to a T-6 sq/cc, he told me that it's near impossible to wash people out - especially after they solo.  (I think that's always been a milestone)  One thing that came out of our conversation was that if kids are making MIF early in a block, they are advancing them through the block (i.e. not getting all the flying time we got as students).  

     

    For the UPT IPs here - are you seeing this often?  

     

    One of my guys nearly washed out of IFF for UPT-style stuff.  Basic SA, pattern references, etc.  All stuff that should've (IMO) been caught in UPT.  When I talked to the IFF SQ/CC he said (after gradebook review) the student in question had been prof-adv'd through several of the contact blocks in SUPT because he'd been doing well.  This came back to bite him later and almost cost him the fighter slot.  Would those sorties have made a difference?  I don't know for sure - I doubt they would've hurt him though.  I'm a way down the line customer in the process but IF this is commonplace it seems like it's going to hurt more than help.  

     

    Anyone else get stories like this?  Was this a one-off?  

    I don't PA my students in T-38s, I know T-6s waive/PA post T-38 track select formation sorties all the time. Even then, we still get the studs late.

    Degradation of SUPT

    in General Discussion

    Posted

    5 hours ago, Bender said:

     


    Not sure about the aircraft (I’d guess borrow is the answer with the Navy student(s), if they fly them at all) but I know their contractor is finishing up work on the T-6B model for their VR sim...it may be just that change alone that is being referenced.

    ~Bendy

     

    Randolph has B models for Det 24. The AF borrowed them saying they would fix them.

    • Like 1

    OPRs for dummies

    in General Discussion

    Posted

    42 minutes ago, soupafly06 said:

    Anyone here refuse to sign their OPR because they disagreed with the strat (or lack of one) and job push recommendations? If so, how’d that work out for you? Asking for a friend....

    It won't. There's a drop-down for your rater to sign for you that says member refused to sign 

    Degradation of SUPT

    in General Discussion

    Posted

    1 hour ago, Danger41 said:

    What’s the story of the rumor I heard that a Bob at 19AF said only 11F/11B in 38’s?

    Yes. They are denying waivers for non-fighter/bomber now. It's happened to at least one person who was pulled after starting sims 

×
×
  • Create New...