hindsight2020

Direct to Viper (Kelly). Feedback so far is not good. But this is third hand RUMINT so don't quote me.

BTW, this goes beyond gossipy drama, the DoD wastes tons of talent every year on preventable retention losses over point blank basing/PCS decisions. It's not like there is a shortage of middle managers....oh wait a minute. But you warrior monks keep talking about personal moral bankruptcy being the problem. lol

Spoken like a RND baby.

My bad, hard to decipher inflection by pictures.

Indeed. The Department of State is our real daddy, and they certainly remind us who is the pitcher and who is the catcher in that relationship. I think the Taliban extended us more deference in the field than the rank and file DoS suitcase warrior.

Ah yes, "the military should only be staffed by childless people/garrison people shouldn't be allowed to serve in uniform" canard. Couldn't find my salt shaker for lunch today, thanks for the glove save! LOL

@ 0kts 0AGL maybe, if my students are any indication....otherwise there wouldn't be CR/CAP/FEB. I digress.

Oh, ok, I assumed you were informed since you posted on the PIT thread. I don't know why you put proposal in quotes. BL, you're not getting rid of ME internationals from regular UPT. ENJJPT won't have them by charter, and if PIT were to change to intl UPT only they're not the demographic slated for it, per AETC's proposal.

I don't condone the practice, as I find it part of the reason the AFRC has gone to hell in the aggregate imo. TRs these days don't seem to care as they're too busy gloating about the part time life. They really should care though, as it affects them by proxy. Specifically, lack of discrimination when it comes to vetting these candidates, many horrid AD sycophants have been allowed to come in and ruin the place. That said, I have peers and coworkers who belong to the direct hire demographic, some are good people, others are terrible hiring mistakes. So I know I'm in mixed company. It's nothing personal, I just find it a bad practice in the collective. At any rate, doesn't seem to bother units much anymore due to the hiring dynamics at the airlines. So go fetch and good luck.

But that's not at all what the international UPT being proposed is actually about. This is a very niche good-fairy initiative not related to the international populations currently being trained at non-ENJJPT locations. This proposal relates to adding a different demographic altogether. As such, you could just tell the current participating countries that we can't take the load (sts) at UPT bases, and still attain the supposed efficiencies you calculated on the back of your napkin. Of course, we know that's not gonna happen since the DoS treats us DoD folks like the booger-eating uneducated help. So what's more likely to transpire is the Moody UPT re-opening and finally actually doing more with more (much to the AF chagrin). RND would still be in a position to only be able to serve a niche program in terms of yearly volume, much like it currently does with PIT. RND really doesn't effect efficiencies in terms of pilot production regardless of what mission is based here. Airspace and mx (read: OPM civilian obstructionism) cap the ability of RND to take on a UPT base level of production. Moody can though, and probably will. This isn't an argument for keeping PIT here from me btw; I'd much prefer to fly RCP with a UPT stud, if I could do it at this location. But I recognize the production volume isn't in the cards in this slice of Central TX, so the production value would be of limited use versus a traditional non-HQ, UPT base.

word

It's an old buddhist martial art called 'edging' bro. Read up on it when you're ready to step up the smash game. BL, when it comes times to (and I quote the legendary Dio here) ride the Tiger, you are inside (not sts) the slam-mat's TC the entire time. They always come back for more. It's the real sport of kings afaic.

All I can say is that the way I was treated during TI at the UPT base was absolute garbage. No shit I think it took 2.5 months. Literally, getting on the schedule once a week. I had plenty to do at my own squadron; if it's not a priority for them it wasn't gonna be for me either as a hired gun. Complete afterthought. But I was absolutely shocked, I almost went back to the -6 in disgust (which is funny, went through 38 PIT so quick I was still current for a local checkout in the 6 if I had wanted to LOL). It was not a priority at all to get the TI guys through. OTOH, I certed at PIT in two weeks to include inprocessing. I always found that ironic in the context of the accusation of PIT being a halfway house for rent-seekers. Plenty of people hussling when I got here. Granted, a lot of running around in the VR side of the squadron, but that wasn't their fault. Those were just the marching orders of the month. I'm not defending the merits of in-house PIT versus not. I really could give zero fvcks about that, as the "help". Is it really about this though? Or is it like @Lifer sugests, that this is really about a "good location schadenfreude" type of thing? Fwiw, I'd have no quarrel teaching UPT at RND. i enjoyed the mission set. If it wasn't for the location, I would have kept doing it. The idea of getting to do it here is actually something I may look forward to. Intl UPT would suck only because I don't agree with many of our political alliances, so I feel my talent would be wasted/would be half-hearted. I'm not saying I'd turn into an Oskar Schindler, but you know, "consider the effort you're gonna put into this oligarchic, misogynist chain smoking POS" type of thing LOL. At any rate, I'd much prefer life in the RCP to be completely honest.

Some people would argue that allowing comm to touch it would be the one sure fire way of ensuring any implementation fails. It is beyond ironic that the viability of development of the VR suites unashamedly relies on its decoupling from the AF net systems (wireless or otherwise) in order to not screech to a halt. The very systems being used as monikers for the AF tech innovation mind you.

I told you cotton-pickers Massa is not in the business of bartering with his human property. That's not rhetorical; they literally mean that. That's why the CSAF guidance feels like double-speak to you all. The point of the ADSC is to utilize labor at-will, in ways the civilian support structure has the legal ability to say no to. And they do, which is why our mx is broken and can't surge with the whims of the ops side, while we spear chuck at each other pointlessly. Labor surge-demands such as the VR implementation is but one of a thousands of examples how regAF burns through its human capital, exacerbating the retention problem regAF doesn't consider a bona fide problem in the first place. You guys think of middle managament retention woes as the bug, they consider it the feature! It's called the devil's money for a reason. Are we all new here or something?...

Is this dude for real? Look @katdude, you're not special. Wanna check back with TAMI-21, or BRAC 05 folks (for us AFRC brethren), to see how that worked? Newsflash: the fighter pilot shortage is an illusion. It's not cockpits they're short bodies for, it's 11F rated staff weenies (that's O4 and above generally) that they're short on, while calling it an 11F shortage. That makes late-to-the-party dreamers like you get the false impression you're in some sort of buyer's market for your services in a fighter cockpit, when it comes to stomping and demanding your fighter dream. You've been misled if that is your understanding of the dynamics of present hiring. If I was a heavy unit, I wouldn't want you taking the trash out for my unit. If you don't want to fly heavies, don't fly heavies. Go duke it out at the regionals or go to medical school and pay for your own L-39 on your own dime. Otherwise, STFU and get in before you get slammed out. Timing and luck, there is no justice. Nobody is gonna jump over their own ass to get some nobody UPT candidate an ETP to go fly fighters. Unless you're a legacy case or a woman, that's just not the market environment we're in. And by going Active Duty, you risk the chance of sucking at UPT (I can just see the quibbling), or at the very least not hitting the right class in the FY, and not getting a fighter anyways regardless of performance. Yes, even in this so-called shortage environment. Here's the bottom line truth: You had your fighter epiphany too late. Time to own up to that fact. There's people who start at 18 and all they want to do is fly fighters, and never get it. Ask me how I know. And you rolled out of bed at 29 and said "fighters or go home", plus cop an attitude about the fact the ETP process is not more forgiving, based on no-shit bad gouge/read regarding the hiring market for USAF pilots in the first place? GTFO here with that shit.

Northrop had it pegged at 8k hours iirc. We're circa 18K in most of the PIT/UPT fleet. IFF as mentioned before, are bent to sH@t. About the only thing that appeases me about my career airframe, is that seat.

None related to the crashes. That's making fvck all difference in the timeline. Yeah we saw the AFOTEC slides. Selection decision this year (they're already late), prob turn of the fiscal. As to IOC? LOL. Dude, 2023 at the earliest.This entire thing can shift right with a single call for arbitration. Boeing ) being the usual whiny bitch, is one of the participants so that probably means this thing will get stonewalled to the right. BL, the cavalry ain't coming bud. The T-X canard at this point is like posterity...the fvck has it done for me lately?

I get that's a common sentiment in order to show gratitude to the departed, but that's not at all how it went down in reality. It's also not the first time I've buried a co-worker where the folk tale gets pressed that there was a heroic suicide for the sake of the people on the ground, later to reveal a more simple and less flamboyant answer (spatial D and mental unwillingness to get out, as was the case with my UPT SRO and his Hornet crash). You don't have to rub it in the surviving's faces at the funeral. But for us who still remain and do the job tomorrow, damn right we owe the departed some roasting, if we are to honor the legacy of his sacrifice, and learn a god damn thing or two instead of repeating it. The conversation about collateral damage in the jet was to me, simply ancillary to a suspension of disbelief that stemmed from the fact they (and I am also not above reproach in that fallibility) did not immediately internalize the absolute nature of loss of control once dual hydraulic failure ensues. The common urban legend is that you can steer with windmilling hydro when the engine fails but windmills. First of all, not true enough to warrant consideration. BUT, this is worse than merely windmilling hydraulics, because the gearboxes were severed and thus there would have been actual zero input to the pumps. That means no shit, other than the engines effecting pitching moments of little consequence as they throttle jockeyed, the aircraft was immediately ballistic. The decision to delay ejection was neither the correct one nor one that saved lives on the ground. It may have actually killed the deceased, if one is to conjecture that he would have had extra time to gather enough presence of mind to get his sh*t together, un-f*ck his own seat from the way he left it on takeoff, and punch. But this is conjecture since we will never know if he failed to punch himself out due to incapacitation (due to the incorrect sequence selected, and the FCP seat blasting him with the rocket) or inappropriate reaction to stress (aka frozen by panicking). As to the latter, the SIB had some insights into that question which now the AIB sort of refutes, and paints the survivor in a not so positive light. I'm a little bit disappointed by this reversal in findings, but that's for the survivor to live with. Never miss an opportunity to STFU when it comes to USAF interviews is all I got to say about that one. I also don't trust the safety process enough to open my trap, but that's my bias. Exactly. And you're being kinder than I. Generally the checklist now allows for anywhere before takeoff. Most people either stow them in the hammerhead, or all the way back before pulling chocks. I do the latter, but sometimes I break order and do it in the hammerhead. And I'll challenge anybody here who flies these things come and assert they've never forgotten to arm their seat until they get to the MOA and go "..oooh shit...*muffled cllllllick* ". I only say that so people don't misinterpret my criticism for the complacent CRM in the conduct of a requal sortie that was conducted with a CT atmosphere (they all are) as some sort of gratuitous aspersion, when in reality we have all been guilty of it at one point or another. The lesson learned for me is exactly that: treat CT rides with respect. And treat requal guys like idiot UPT students. Sure, don't verbalize that to them, but treat them with the same skepticism. The fact is, we don't as a collective. I also don't agree with the shortened "feed the fight" figther-centric thing we got going on at the schoolhouse, with shortening the callouts. Not so much because it's somehow blasphemy, but rather because the UPT bases, Red Bulls in particular, are actually going the opposite direction, precisely because of this accident. But I'm preaching to the choir here. Stay safe out there.

Especially tougher to read when you're asked to keep doing it like everything's been fixed......

AIB is out. Cliffnotes for the AIB challenged. Nothing new learned for those of us close to the vest on this one, but the gallery might be interested.

i just wanna know if @scoobs ever got hired by the Reserves LOL. I want that guy to come to my retirement ceremony and give me airline advice.

I suppose you mean RegAF. For some of us there's a canyon of difference between a primary AFSC deployment, and an AFCENT rent-seeking, combat desk, operation deny family, green slide warrior, congressional pork barrel jobs program nonner 179. It may be a distinction without difference for those who entered the military with a high level of price inelasticity relative to what their income potential on the civil sector is. For those of us who have options on the outside however, it's anything but the same difference; it's a non-starter of a difference. I've left quite a bit of money on the table over that so-called non-difference over the last 12 years. And I have point blank asked my family that question: in my household's case, the consensus is that if they are to involuntarily be without my company for 200 days out of the year, they prefer the sentence to be served out on a 3-on-4-off basis, vice a 200-on-165-off. Gee I wonder what that looks like? I digress. To each their own.

Depends on which one you're asking about. There's PTN (Austin), UPT-Next, PIT-Next. I don't feel comfortable expanding on the implementation realities in this political climate, but I can tell you the end game is a combination of both propositions: e.g. VR-aided/integrated self-study, AI-led VR syllabus events, and IP-led VR syllabus events. On a personal note, this wouldn't be the first time we get people killed in the name of innovation and shiny doo-dads. I've seen it in my former MWS. Nobody likes talking about it and I can understand the sensitivity. But it's a real opportunity cost nonetheless. Brings a whole new meaning to that tired "service before self" trope, that's for sure.

There is a difference between cutting chairflying time via VR technology (implementation which I support btw) and bypassing phase III in an equalizer type airframe like the white rocket; an animal much more unforgiving of airmanship deficiencies than a viper via severe underpowering and no flight control automation of consequence. People are straight up playing with fire going from t6 straight to a big mouth burner jet, on the rails of VR potato. I'm balls deep in VR implementation at work; its a very immature development right now imo. And that's for guys with standard upt and a heck of a lot more hours under their belt. We are currently not making any cuts to the flying sortie count, which I think is a much more honest approach to VR validation than the PTN boondoggle. My issue is that the PTN thing has "too visible to fail" written all over it. That's not honest brokering in the least, especially when sold as an experiment. Do not construe this criticism of the implementation timeline as some sort of luddite argument.