DirtyFlightSuit
-
Posts
136 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
3
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Gallery
Blogs
Downloads
Wiki
Posts posted by DirtyFlightSuit
-
-
On 10/2/2018 at 8:41 PM, Orbit said:
At least we stay in the right country.
Uh I know of at least 2 instances where 135 crews were Q3'd for this, soooo ya.
-
1
-
-
Says the 135 blitzing across the boulevard missing the center line for AR by 4 miles =P
-
I'm sure he still goes to sleep each night hoping that the next morning his dream will come true =P Haters gona hate.
-
9 hours ago, Yoda said:
Maybe it's just my home setup and software settings, but I have one of the higher resolution VR setups (Samsung Odyssey), but text on an FMS/GPS is unreadable due to not enough resolution unless it is in the "sweet spot" and I "lean in" a bit. For everything outside the cockpit it is awesome and way better than the bubble projectors outside a physical cockpit for immersion and perspective. Does the AF setup work better? If not then it might not be as good of a procedure trainer as hoped as even reading switch labels can be a chore.
Still not sure what the long term impact of 100s of hours of that light being blasted right in my eye would be either, that and something weird with the focusing makes my eyes feel weird for about 10 minutes after taking the contraption off. I have the PD set to the same value measured on my last 5 flight physicals and all that...
This issue (and of MFD refresh rates) is a current problem especially with the T-38s. It adds a considerable amount of time to the production of videos currently to overcome it. For T-6s we have not gotten far enough yet but this will be an even higher hurdle as we don't have tapes to pull to grab and re display all that information easily enough. I do however think the resolution will solve itself as the VR devices continue to improve on their resolution, with 4K VR headsets etc. That however is completely outside AF ability to correct until the hardware vendors can catch up to that need/ability. 4K for computers is hard enough, throw that with VR and compiling time's for videos the hardware requirement is going to be fairly insane. Mr. Com Nazi above failed to understand AETC/A6 and Com squadrons completely failed the squadrons from the onset and said "No no no no no" to every request to support these initiatives. So as much as I am angry the squadrons are pushing this crap on our backs, the A6 and Com Squadrons did nothing to help and in most cases helped create this mess. But I guess at least you can say you are not finance so small victories.
-
1
-
-
4 hours ago, pawnman said:
They've moved people back to our FTU after they refused to take the additional ADSC for a PCS. So, my guess is that if they need you somewhere, they'll take a year and a half of someone filling the position over zero time of someone filling the position.
I can totally see this occurring.
-
-
It's cool still fly with your mask down, because ejections are sOOOo rare. Oh wait.... The Air Force found the OBOGS problem and has a solution... just enjoy it in 4 years.... Nothing to see here.
Off Topic: VR takes about 3-4 hours per 1 min of instructional video. This work has been dumped on no less than 5 Active Duty members in my squadron alone, the other squadrons are also jumping on the band wagon. So not only are we innovating like rabbits breed, but we are duplicating effort and shared information is spotty at best. But that's cool innovate gets you hard.
-
1
-
2
-
-
1 hour ago, YoungnDumb said:
Wonder if this will speed up the seat cartridge fixes, glad they're okay
Are your's not all updated yet? Thankfully at RND ours are... and apparently just in time. Sounds like a perfect example of why flying with your mask down due to OBOGs should not be an acceptable "fix", had their masks been down they both would have some serious scar face going on likely now.
-
2
-
-
1 minute ago, Bobsan said:
Those track selecting to T-1 no longer do most aerobatics or "advanced" form.
Dammit beat me to the punch =|
-
19 minutes ago, war007afa said:
How is an hours waiver even a thing? Doesn’t the community train IPs with exactly ZERO hours outside of the training pipeline?
Seriously. The things we do to ourselves.
The difference between a student/IP trainee that has substantial AC time and those that got the AC rubber stamp is very stark. So not only are their hand flying skills atrophied due to HUD/Autopilot, but they also lack the decision making ability and confidence required to manage a student. A student making a bunch of small mistakes in a short span of time can have a dramatic effect on your ability to cope with your own degrading SA bubble. Now throw in a guy/gal whom never has had to be the one in charge, and they are even more gun shy on making decisions and have a harder time seeing PIT IP's as "stan" and hoping we come out of role to give them a bone. Very recently I was able to effect a students SA so much that they attempted to land gear up, granted C-17 standard, is not acceptable here, and all it took was one WAE aka Navy Landing to shake him up and effect their "demo"
Oh yah, forgot to mention. FAIPs get away with it easier because they generally don't spend nearly as much time re-learning basic hand flying skills and their recency of experience lets us devote more time earlier in the program to that SA/Decision making problem.
-
Why do you need to separate male and female service members? Is this like grade school instruction on birds and bees?
-
13 minutes ago, JRBac said:
Any of the AETC types on here know what these 19 AF-directed mandatory meetings this week are about?
Stoploss
-
The funny thing is we are at the point (or near) where the majority of T-6 PIT are 2x2 IPs. Sooo all this hot air about young bloods being the answer, and old passed over O-4s/O-5 Roads being the root of all sin is a straw man. (If I am using that term correctly). So these are Captains who at most will pin on Major as they PCS out of here and have direct UPT experience and instruction.
-
37 minutes ago, Merle Dixon said:
As Laxer69 typed on page 13... Eliminating PIT at RND and doing it all in-house would be fantastic! How many UIPs go through PIT at RND every year? 300? 400? Eliminating all those 4+ month TDYs (lodging expenses, per diem, mileage, etc) would save mucho dinero for the AF and save the TDY ass-pain for UIPs.
I think training UIPs in house at the SUPT bases would also reduce the PIT UIP sortie count. You, the UIP, could sit in on countless SUPT stud briefs and debriefs, with, gasp, actual students. You could sandbag numerous formation sorties in the trunk of an IP (yes, we direct support student sorties quite often), with an actual student on the wing, not some PIT IP make-believe student. An in-house PIT would also eliminate the 6 to 9 MQT sorties every PIT grad has to go through. Your MQT would be your UIP since you are going through PIT in-house. Eliminating hundreds of MQT sorties per year at each of the 3 SUPT bases would also save mucho dinero.
Finally, in-house PIT would eliminate the passed over O-4 and ROAD O-5s that do next to nothing at RND. These lazy SOBs (I don’t see all RND IPs as lazy tools, but many of them are), would all be sent to the SUPT bases and actually have to work for a living. Finally, for real finally, how many PIT IPs at RND have not flown with an actual student pilot in many years? When I was at T-38 PIT, there were numerous IPs that had never been SUPT IPs or hadn’t flown at a SUPT base in 10+ years.
BOOYAH!!
-
1
-
-
^This. Our recent OG meeting it was stated and I quote "This will need to be done on all our backs otherwise it wont happen" Apparently he didn't get the look on my face of "then don't let it $#$%^ happen...
-
1
-
-
1 hour ago, Laxer69 said:
I fail to see an argument here for why PIT should remain the school house for UPT IP's. You say you're getting a worse product of UIP and PIT IP, I read that as UPT bases already have a corps of young and motivated IP's used to teaching to a brand new student. Would I rather be taught by someone with receny flying with a student vs a PIT IP whos flown with a student maybe a handful of times in the last year for a re-blue?
PIT is loaded with people on their last assignment that dont give a shit, which you admit to. Why would I want people to go through a program where thats the majority of people they interact with? What kind of tone does that set for how business gets done in UPT? I would much rather them go to a UPT base with the young O-3's and faips that actually give a shit to inculcate the new IP's with the pace and attitude of that base.
SPS has proven it can work. Make RND another UPT base and the production problem gets much easier to solve.
I was sitting at the DFAC enjoying my 69th egg meal in a row (thanks night flying), when a heated conversation at an adjoining table started. These old timer reservist were going into detail about the numerous broken jets they were being asked to take with increasing regularity. The conversation was a life saver as it informed younger inexperienced AC's like myself at some of the possible issues with accepting these aircraft and becoming normalized in the new standard that was continuous creeping in. Back then generals and commanders all made plea's about the importance of our mission, the utter vital need for our aircraft and its mission etc. These old timers were derided by commanders and a few of the younger folks as being checked out, in it for themselves and angry that their flying club was interrupted by deployments and the war. Fast forward nearly 10 years later, and I am seeing the same #$%, and amazingly for the same War that back then was already well into its 7th year. We are being asked to do more with less, fly aircraft with faulty ejection systems, suspect o2 systems, electronics that have KNOWN common place failures that have resulted in substantial fumes. B1's recently had their own enjoyment with their system, KC-10s with egress rafts/slides and much more.
But that is cool, your a brand new IP Captain that knows every thing has done every thing, and was raised up in this system that long ago normalized this bull #$% and now you don't know how otherwise to operate. You look at those fleeing for the Airlines or the Exits and either are reacting out of jealousy or anger that it wont be you any time soon, and rather than thank them for their service as they leave and perhaps learn something of their time in, you try to find fault with their decisions and pin every thing that is wrong on them and their attitude. Understand that those old timers at PIT have seen this same crap 3-4 times already, the revolving door of innovation, the joke being that there has been no innovation.
I and every other PIT IP would LOVE to have UPT production done at Randolph, it would be a dream come true. My favorite assignment was my UPT base, the comrade and joy of teaching new pilots how to fly is the best. I hope you are right just for that reason alone. PIT isn't some magical beast, you can absolutely do the training elsewhere, but PIT acts as a geographical fence, on manning, sorties, support etc. Tearing down that fence (ask the 135 guys) never has produced anything short of a backlog and further capacity loss in the pipeline. If you think somehow you'll be able to produce an IP at a UPT base faster than at PIT your insane, especially once scaled up. Perhaps one or two you can jam through, but at some point very quickly you start to have to weigh UPT PFT vs your in house PIT, and those calculations always get jacked up.
At any rate, don't take our lack of #$%^'s given for a literal statement. If they(we) really didn't care we wouldn't be complaining on this forum for one, wouldn't be pushing for better accountability of T-6 nation maintenance issues, and wouldn't be fighting (and failing =\) the reduction in syllabus and emphasis on production over retention. We are tired, and exasperated at how things are looking for all of our futures.
-
1
-
5
-
-
27 minutes ago, flyusaf83 said:
PIT is getting guys with less and less experience as the AF bleeds experience. Unless you make PIT longer, guys are not going to be as good as they would if they had more experience. Believe it or not, leadership above the 559th recently believed that we were “overtraining” UIs and pushed us to PA guys as soon as they got up to MIF. The guys in the 559th fought hard against that BS and got it overturned.
^This. Plus not only this but more Q3s, more PIT IPs with ZERO prior T-6 instruction experience (though some of them actually have been our stronger IPs but for others its a challenge) and to top it all off we have CUT our syllabus by a substantial number.
8 hours ago, Laxer69 said:Dude I would much rather have PIT in house rather than the sham that is the flying club at PIT. Ive literally heard from guys coming back from PIT that some ips won't fly with Wx <030 due to their EFIS concerns. Or that some refuse to double turn due to being worried about obogs. issues. Meanwhile ips are trip turning at the upt bases and students are going solo on the reg. What a strange disconnect...
On top of that I would much rather be able to shape our IP corps from the get go in-house by instilling a culture of excellence and transferable skills in regards to briefing, instructing, and debriefing rather than have them get negatively shaped by the cess pool that is PIT. Plus there's all the time saved of no TDY travel, the faips at least are already familiar with the LAO, and TI can be drastically shortened.
Since the t-6 stand down my squadron has literally had brand new dudes from PIT that have doubled the TI syllabus due to lack of flying proficiency. Things like not being able to consistently land safely, not knowing the switchology of the GPS, and no concept of how to run an instructional brief or debrief. It's inexcusable.
As for this tirade of utter crap, Read the above quote for why your getting a shittier product point the blame at big blue for inability to retain any one worth a damn. As for IPs deciding to limit their risk due to OBOGs / Smoking in the cockpit with some common sense restrictions versus tone deaf UPT bases deciding the meat packing must continue regardless of risk well you just showed your naivety and youthful ignorance there. I have had both smoke in my cockpit from our EFIS issue as well as OGOGs reduce my cognitive ability in half (Granted half of near zero isn't much). Just because you special education students (some of you not all I suspect) at the UPT base are willing to take the risk doesn't mean we are dumb enough too. Since the recent SIB release however alot more confidence has returned into the system and more importantly confidence that the issue has a resolution in sight, I suspect our restrictions will be removed shortly.
says the current PIT IP working 6 hour days...
KIDDING (not really)
^Don't hate. Good deal police watch out here! To be honest for my first couple of years here at PIT I worked just as hard if not harder than at my UPT base. Now that I am nearing the end I've made the conscious decision to give minimal #$%^ and limit my day to the max extent possible.
-
3
-
2
-
-
Pushing PIT in house UPT has been an "idea" for years. I heard it when I first went through PIT in 2012, again while at UPT, and again now. I won't be holding my breath. How does shifting IP production from one base to all the UPT bases, help those bases? They now need more manning / sorties / metal to support the increased sortie requirement to fly their IP upgrades as well as their current UPT students. Where does that come from unless you actually completely kill PIT. I'd LOVE to have UPT students here instead of PIT UIs honestly, but I cant find a rational that would provide any kind of timeline efficiency, infact it would be a net loss as far as I can tell. This is just antsy new commanders getting all uppity with the new word of the day "Innovation" push and instead of innovating they are pulling deep into the dirty ass crack of ideas already tried / failed and polishing a giant turd to get some love.
-
1
-
-
If any one believes that this will stay in effect long term is in denial. It is possible they keep it volunteer only, but I wouldn't bet a nickle on it. Let alone bet my family and future career choices based on it. If you take the devils money he will come to collect.
-
-
My money is on absolutely no action. Or perhaps even better defense of the change as some how "better"
-
I love all the badass PT bubba's here. I get it your fit, you pass the test no problem. Not every one is like you nor should the be because honestly that would suck. I also never struggle with the test, but I am also blessed with a small waste and can eat Pizza every day and likely not see much of a change in my overall body composition. I am lucky and I know it. I hate running, I dont have a bum knee, I don't have a problem with my back, I don't particularly have any reason to not excel beyond the fact that I to this day have yet to set foot into a gym other than for a PT test (okay not 100% true but close enough). Should I be working out? Sure, but you know life. I spend that extra time with my family, with my kids, and more importantly posting bull$S#$ on this forum. If the AF truly gave two craps about our physical fitness they would mandate time out of the duty day for it, period. The few locations were I had it scheduled for me I gladly spent that time at the gym. But when you ask me to knock out 12 hour days and then ask me to find my own time to work out then your full of it. Granted now I do not have that issue, my days are generally max 10 hour, with many closer to a what I would consider acceptable 8 hour day I have less of a time crunch to lean back on. But still if it is part of my employment it likely should be part of my expected work day and build into it as such.
-
5
-
-
26 minutes ago, MooseAg03 said:
I don’t understand how this helps the retention issue at all, because this will be the result from a lot of people. All I can think is that so many people will 7 day opt now that it gives them more ammunition with Congress for stop loss.I'm amazed people still think they are trying to work on retention! Never once have I seen any indication of it, and every thing I've seen is contrary to greater retention. Beyond talking points that is, plenty of talk about improving QoL and retention but as we've all seen no action.
-
Also with PIT being so far behind enjoy the extra ADSC per note 5 "5. Extensions of training (beyond original approved completion date) will incur ½ year ADSC for each ½ year extension or portion thereof."
Is the KC-10 going to be cut?
in General Discussion
Posted