Bergman

"Land a little slow and you'll drop out of the sky and pound onto the concrete" Gee, I bet NONE of us have ever done that! haha I've played "I hate the runway" more than once! In contrast, the -135 is between 20-30% above stall speed in landing configuration, which is a very good thing. Getting back to topic... There were defintely a couple of guys in our class that shouldn't have made it through. My only hope now is that a few years as a copilot will bring them up to speed. Fortunately, the weaker guys are usually identified pretty quickly and are paired up with "strong A/Cs" until they get their feces consolidated. The problems start occuring when you have a "weak copilot" with a "weak A/C" (due to scheduling, DNIF, or whatever)...now what? The fact that most squadrons try to schedule around people that shouldn't have made it through UPT in the first place worries me - because, inevitably, that sort of 'safety scheduling' will break down and someone might get hurt. I'm sure the heavy world isn't alone in this - you fighter types see a lot of this? Lastly - Metalhead...you're right on target. Couldn't agree more. Guess they AF figures that by the time you're in T-1s it's better to get a bad copilot out of the deal rather than spending $1M and getting nothing. [ 20 February 2004, 02:46: Message edited by: Bergman ]

Seems that inability to monitor airspeed in the final turn, not clearing for traffic (up to 12 Tweets in the pattern at once!), or being so focused on airspeed/altitude that other things start falling out of your crosscheck (radio calls, correct checklist page, etc). That sort of thing. I know that might sound far-fetched (it did to me when all i had was 70 hours in PA-28s/C-172s), but there is a world of difference between a T-37 at 200 knots and a -172. The IPs hold you to a much higher standard. I distinctly remember a "conversation" I had with an Autstralian IP: Him: "What airspeed are we supposed to be at?" Me: "200 KNots" Him: "What airspeed are we at?" Me: "202 knots" Him (literally screaming) "Why aren't you *ucking fixing it then!?!!" Also keep in mind that 10% is about the going rate for washouts, so the vast majority of people are able to get it figured out and succeed. Hopefully an IP will respond to this thread, as they are the ones who actually know what they're talking about...

My class of 28 people had 2 washout in T-37s, one pre-solo the other pre-midphase (the checkride that determines if you can go solo to the MOA). Both of them washed out due to "basic aircraft control" - they couldn't maintain the proper airspeed in the final turn, would overshoot the runway every approach, and couldn't maintain airspeed or alitutde while enroute to/from the MOA. It was very frustrating to me personally because I spent quite a bit of time chair flying with both of these guys...but it comes to the point where they have to fly the jet alone, and if your brain just doesn't process information fast enough (cross checking a/s, alt, VVI, etc) no amount of preparation will help. With enough time, I believe both of those guys could have flown fine, but UPT isn't very forgiving to slow learners. [ 16 February 2004, 21:12: Message edited by: Bergman ]

You can look up the length of any AF formal school in AFI 36-2223. I would have looked it up, but my IP was blocked (probably a .mil only link). If you're a T-6 student, you would almost certainly be a T-6 FAIP. Reason being that by the time you finish UPT, PIT, then survival, the base you are at will have finished its conversion to T-6s. Other than going to Moody, if you FAIP you now stay at the base where you went to UPT. It's a matter of opinion, but a FAIP tour probably would be a good time to start a family. 3 years with no OCONUS TDY! And when you are TDY it's only 2-3 days at a time.

IMHO the "no follow-on" policy has got to be the #1 reason to NOT be a FAIP. You get to work like a dog, in competition with all of your friends and peers, for an entire year at pilot training. Then, once you've graduated, you find out you get 3 more years of that competition. Of course, everyone wants to get their top pick after their FAIP tour, so they work their asses off for "the man" during that 3 years, then end up getting screwed (potentially) with a crappy assignment anyway. Hell, you could get your last choice of assignment without busting your ass for 3 years. (seems to me that UPT IPs work WAAYY harder (STS) and longer days than your average line-squadron aviator).

I will ditto what AG mentioned about letters of recommendation. The letters do weigh into the decision. I had three - from current and former commanders and my -172 flight instructor (who happened to be OGV/CC at the time). My unit called all of them after my interview, before the final decision. Some units may not call, but just prepare the people you get letters from so they're not surprised if/when they get a call.

I Palace Chase'd about 18 months ago. I've got a few points for you to ponder: 1) The functional manager will most likely NOT recommend Palace Chase. I talked to mine directly and he made no qualms about telling me that. Of course, this was in a rated career field. It might be easier for non-rated types to leave. The bottom line is, I was approved for Palace Chase even though my functional manager and his boss both recommended disapproval. 2) Before your package (STS) gets to the functional manager/AFPC, it has to leave the Wing. In my interview with the WG/CC (he met with anyone applying for this sort of thing), he told me that he was only supporting my application because I already had an ANG UPT slot arranged (and a letter from my ANG WG/CC to prove it). If you're just trying to leave with no cross over to the ANG, it might be difficult if not impossible. 3) Even though I did get the Palace Chase, it was only for 6 months early release (kinda like from prison!). I was told by the Palace Chase people at AFPC that 4-6 months is the longest time to request with any hope of getting approved. Of course, individual results may vary. You know the AF - as the people change every 2 years, the policies change!

There was a girl in the class in front of us that had hair below her waist. Obviously very straight hair, but she was able to wrap it up into some turban-like contrivance and made it work.

Toro's percentages looked right to me. Don't forget that the 10% academics includes all of your EPQs (we took 18 in tweets and 16 in T-1s), so it's not ALL about tests. I will try to dig out my syllabus and see if it breaks down what percentage EPQs are of that 10% overall.

We were told at the 1/2 way point in tweets, 1/2 way through T-1s, and the day before graduation (although the results of assignment night give you a pretty good clue before that). In my experience, the top and bottom of our class were pretty well settled by performance. The middle was the area of contention, and I believe that's where the Flt/CC ranking had the most impact. There were people who got great assignments when their flying skills didn't justify it - but their good attitude and work ethic did. The other intangible is 'group attitude'. As a class/flight, if you have a good work ethic and positive can-do attitude, the flight commander is going to be more willing to make trades and go to bat on your behalf. If you're a bunch of whiners that think everything should be handed to them, then you're at the mercy of AFPC (or perhaps your flt/cc will trade away your good assignments.) Our flt/cc made some great trades - getting 9 of 12 active duty one of their top 3 choices. It would have been only 4 or 5 of 12 if he hadn't done anything.

Just finished at Laughlin. My wife was there with me, and we don't have any kids yet. In my experience, it seemed each class had only one or two families with kids. Our class had only 7 of 28 that were married. The wives got along for the most part, although from what I hear from other classes (and ours at times) there is a bit of soap opera drama to be had - who's doing what, how well so-and-so is doing, etc. Guess it will depend on your particular class. As for family life...here was a typical day for me. This schedule is fairly close for at least 5 days a week - refused to study on Friday night or at all on Saturday - and probably went like this for every week except the first 4 (T-37 academics), the 3 weeks of T-1 academics, and the last 3 weeks of the year (I finished flying 14 days before assignment night). Anyway, here goes: 0600 - Report to flight room 1800 - Leave Flight room 1815-1930 - Eat dinner and spend time with wife 1930-2230 - Study and chair fly 2230-0500 - Sleep I don't think I was a workaholic, but I definitely put some time in. Anyone else have an opinion? PAB?