What's wrong with the Air Force?

[busdriver]

I like pissing contests...... I remember Rainman talking about "keystaffing" a Herc dude in the A-10 saying the guy was good enough that we'd take him into combat as a wingman. I also read George Marrett's book and he mentioned the heavy dudes being terrible wingman in the A-1. I also know I'd have to do a lot of chair flying to get used to not having a crew, and I can also say I have no fucking idea how any fighter except the A-10 visually acquires anything on the ground, but they do; I swear you assholes are keeping secrets from the rest of us, admit it, you have an easy button and you're not sharing. Fuckers.

[ClearedHot]

In other words...its not your fault you are not as good as us...Christ.

Edited March 5, 2014 by ClearedHot

[busdriver]

To be fair I did say fighter, not slow ass airplane that flies a turn around the target at a constant turn radius with multiple sensors and marking capabilities and something like 69 crew members all voting on if they shoot. Oh, I also train to actually pull the trigger and not as a contingency when multiple systems have failed but rather as a primary game plan. What is this "us" you speak of, I thought this was a MAF/CAF pissing contest, when did we let AFSOC into the bathroom?

BTW: This just got really fun, bring it old man.

[tac airlifter]

......(although the bomber community is a somewhat close relative) ......

All that said, thoughts on making bomber dudes into fighter guys and MAF guys to bombers for their backfill? This whole shortage/overage issue seems like a surmountable obstacle.

[pawnman]

If you go back and read about it, you'll find that there is not a lot of enthusiasm surrounding the previous crossflow program, mostly because of the results compared to the costs the last time it was done. I don't have all the numbers in front of me, but I was going through IFF/FTU at the time that previous wave of crossflows was going through the pipeline ('99 timeframe) and on into their first tours in ops squadrons.

The fact is, many crossflow pilots didn't end up performing as well as hoped at all stages of follow-on training (IFF. FTU, squadron MQT, etc). Some of them did great, of course (I know a couple that went on to perform well above average in the F-15E community), but statistically they did "worse" (in terms of pipeline training washouts and issues in operational units).

Most of the crossflow pilots that were my classmates and squadronmates were superb officers with fantastic officer performance records (and extremely good dudes to boot), but that didn't always continue into performance in the cockpit. It wasn't a "talent" issue with the crossflow pilots so much as it was an "experience" issue; one has to acknowledge, weather it is politically correct to or not, that there are significant cultural differences between the fighter community and other flying communities (although the bomber community is a somewhat close relative) that translate to differences in skills/airmanship in the pilots that come from those communities. What makes an aviator great in the MAF isn't the same thing that makes an aviator great in the CAF.

On the most basic level, the crossflow pilots, for the most part, were not used to being single-seat decisionmakers at much higher speeds, and much higher Gs, while hand-flying significantly more aggressive/dynamic maneuvers. Many times the core airmanship just wasn't operating well at 400 knots and pilots were just behind the jet (sound judgment, just not fast enough); sometimes a thousand hours on autopilot in the flight levels did not translate to having hands good enough for even basic admin formation work, much less more complex BFM or surface attack. This isn't unique to the crossflow folks, though; this is the same thing seen many times with ANG/Reserve fighter units that hire non-fighter guys and send them through IFF and fighter FTUs. There was a big wave of those guys about 8 or 9 years ago (mostly A-10 units at the time, but I don't remember why), and they had an unusually high washout rate, too, with some guys who did superb being the exception rather than the rule.

None the less, the end result was that there was higher attrition of the crossflow guys compared to straight pipeline students, and the fighter brass largely decided it wasn't that much of a benefit. Again, not that the crossflow pilots were idiots or anything (in fact, quite the opposite -- most of them had impressive OPRs/jobs/awards, seemed to have been superb pilots in their previous lives, and were really great dudes), but their previous flying time had given them habits and airmanship that did not dovetail into success in fighters.

All that being said, when Lorenz made the T-38 track at UPT "universally assignable" several years ago, one of the rationalizations that I heard discussed numerous times amongst AETC staff dudes was the future crossflow potential. Specifically, I heard a lot of folks talking about how F-35 was going to ramp up at some point in the mid-future, and the AF needed a T-38 trained pool of pilots who could quickly move over to train for that (remember, this is the same time period when the numbers of students going to fighters had been choked off to a mere trickle).

Remember that even in the 98/99 crossflow, only T-38 trained pilots were eligible. I don't think T-38 trained MAF pilots would be a "starting point"; I think they would be the only ones eligible.

Fair enough. Maybe we can start re-classifying some of those "fighter only" staff billets to let bomber and MAF guys take them. Point being, we have a large overage of one flavor of pilots, and a large shortage of another flavor of pilots...seems like we could use the pilots we have an overage of in some useful manner, rather than showing a couple hundred of them the door, while doubling the bonuses for the fighter guys in the hopes that they will stay.

[jazzdude]

You cannot take a C-17 EP and train him in 1 year how to effectively employ a Mudhen. Likewise, I could take Hacker and he could *easily* be an IP in the C-17 within a year.

Didn't most of the c-17 shenanigans involve cross flow guys, some of who were rushed to AC/IP?

[Warrior]

Didn't most of the c-17 shenanigans involve cross flow guys, some of who were rushed to AC/IP?

I know some of them did.

I'll throw gasoline on the pissing contest-how's that intra-amc cross flow working out? I don't know how the tanker guys view the herk/17 dudes but I know that the tanker dudes don't do so great in the herk. I mean, they do great enough that they don't die, get upgraded, get promoted and then get to be the wg/cc for a wing flying airplanes they know dick about. But they suck in the plane.

Generally speaking.

[Gravedigger]

All of you are retarded. Any CAP pilot could be trained to effectively employ Spec Ops fighters within a month.

[Butters]

So who is better? MAF pilots or CAF pilots?

[TarHeelPilot]

So who is better? MAF pilots or CAF pilots?

Airline pilots!

[Majestik Møøse]

...we have a large overage of one flavor of pilots, and a large shortage of another flavor of pilots...seems like we could use the pilots we have an overage of in some useful manner, rather than showing a couple hundred of them the door, while doubling the bonuses for the fighter guys in the hopes that they will stay.

This is the crux of our manning problems. There are plenty of creative solutions that could be tested immediately, but none of the guys who would actually be able to implement this are able/willing to do so. Start some experiments and see how they go. Start tomorrow.

[WAG]

What makes the top -17 driver? Landing at the right airfield, with current TOLD, and the gear down?

Don't get ahead of yourself. For starters, you need to at least ensure you don't suck at UPT so you're not left with the remains of the Herc/Tanker community.

[FlyinGrunt]

Well, if AFSOC's gonna enter the fray on this one, let's do this . . .

1. Caveat: I am a T-44 guy, all gunships since then. Got quite a bit of experience in the inter-gunship crossflow bit. But no fighters.

2. I second that a decent crew can carry a weak AC. I've also seen ACs who can almost be an instructor to an entire crew of 13 newbies, all while getting the mission done and having hands of gold.

3. The former can't fly fighters. The latter . . . very well might be able to. Which makes we wonder if this pipe dream might be able to help the 11F problem:

- Hold tryouts, more or less. T-38 requal/TX at base X, whereas every bomber/AFSOC/AMC gets a few slots to start.

- No "officership" considerations allowed. Candidates must have the balls to put their hands up for consideration, then IP/EPs in the MWS get copies of their FEFs/training folders and take a vote.

- Make it through 38s? IFF. Make it through that? RTU. Make it that far, and you get to be a wingman. And by "make it", I do not mean after 69 R-rides. I mean a strong performance.

- Given what Toro and others have said, surely the gradual attrition along the line would save a lot of cash while assuring a quality end product.

- CRITICAL: This can't be successful if we don't have a waiver to the normal FEB rules. Only the Robin Olds of the C-17, or the cockiest SOBs in the MAF would attempt such a gamble knowing they were going all-in with their wings on the table, and I don't think that would help the AF.

Like I said, I'm gunship guy. Please let me know where I'm going wrong here.

[BitteEinBit]

People's lives are on the line. We need to be smart about how we do this, and that starts with making the right quality cuts.

...and this is where the AF is missing the mark in my opinion.

[hindsight2020]

There's no fighter pilot shortage, never will. There's plenty of qualified heavy drivers who simply didn't get a shot (timing and luck). In the Navy this isn't blasphemy, in the Air Force it is. Who knows the fuck why.

[Azimuth]

I've seen two A-10 guys (one even hooked is INIT MSN checkride) and a F-16 guy do very poorly in the -135 FTU.

On the flip side I've seen a prior A-10 and Eagle driver do very well. All the T-38 grads we got a few years ago we're hit or miss. I think a lot of it obviously is your background/previous training, however a majority of it is the person trying to get better in their identified deficient areas.

I know some of them did.

I'll throw gasoline on the pissing contest-how's that intra-amc cross flow working out? I don't know how the tanker guys view the herk/17 dudes but I know that the tanker dudes don't do so great in the herk. I mean, they do great enough that they don't die, get upgraded, get promoted and then get to be the wg/cc for a wing flying airplanes they know dick about. But they suck in the plane.

Generally speaking.

He's not a tanker guy.

[Gravedigger]

The problem is how to determine who's in Group 1, especially because a lot of people in Group 3 really believe they're in Group 1.

Check out this motha fucka! Possibly the truest words ever posted to this forum. Second only to the whorish tendencies of BQZip's mom.

[Right Seat Driver]

I know some of them did.

I'll throw gasoline on the pissing contest-how's that intra-amc cross flow working out? I don't know how the tanker guys view the herk/17 dudes but I know that the tanker dudes don't do so great in the herk. I mean, they do great enough that they don't die, get upgraded, get promoted and then get to be the wg/cc for a wing flying airplanes they know dick about. But they suck in the plane.

Generally speaking.

The MAF doesn't value flying like they should (reference the post that states flying is the #18 priority on a Wing slide-show).

Most of the cross-flow guys are good dudes, but the problem is they show up to the unit as a new AC in their new MAF airframe, fly for awhile, and do an in-house IP upgrade. Their office jobs don't allow them to focus on the in-house IP upgrade. After they become IPs, the office doesn't let them fly enough to be proficient instructors.

With that being said, I am sick and tired of the heavy versus fighter argument...and the C-17 jokes are getting old. It doesn't matter what the fvck you fly, fly your damn jet and hack the mission.

Like Hoss said, "what happens to guys that wash out of a fighter FTU?" They go heavies. Get over it. Granted, some dudes may have had issues in UPT and that they are now crushing their current MWS, but overall the UPT system seems to work well. Timing and luck are definite players in what you drop out of UPT, but tracking -38s and graduating at the top of the class definitely increases your chances.

Now, I'll go back to flying my KC-135 auto-pilot off, into the sun driving directly towards my receiver while shark-finning the tail in IMC.

[sputnik]

I so used to love this thread.

I'm sad

[Danny Noonin]

There's no fighter pilot shortage, never will. There's plenty of qualified heavy drivers who simply didn't get a shot (timing and luck). In the Navy this isn't blasphemy, in the Air Force it is. Who knows the fuck why.

No, there is a fighter pilot shortage--a severe one--but it has nothing to do with heavy pilots, crossflow, number of qualified dudes, or any of the reasons dudes are spouting off about here.

It's about two things--training capacity in the FTUs and absorption capacity in the ops squadrons.

We could take every one of our "overage" heavy pilots and try to cross flow them, but we physically can't. There isn't enough FTU capacity to train them and I can't slam my ops squadrons with new wingmen beyond the level they are already slammed.

That's why we have the heavy overage to begin with...we closed about 5 fighter FTU squadrons, closed about another half dozen or more fighter ops squadrons so we were maxed out with what the squadrons that were left could take. There was no place to put any more so they sent more UPT grads into to heavies.

[Danny Noonin]

There are only two real things that could help (not solve) the projected ~1,100 11F shortage. (For perspective, that's about ~1,100 short out of <4,000 actual 11F billets, so it's significant)

1). Retain current 11Fs. Thus the targeted bonus and all the attention in this regard.

2). Increase absorbtion capacity. We aren't standing up new fighter squadrons or FTUs, so the only way to do this is via TFI active associations with guard or reserve squadrons (formerly TFAP). Sounds easy, just send a couple young RegAF fighter pilots to each ARC squadron. But unfortunately, it's a bit more complicated than it seems because they don't have the full time maintenance to generate enough sorties to support additive RegAF bodies (with a higher RegAF RAP requirement). And the RegAF maintenance community is ~80% manned so it's pretty painful to have to cough up that many mx bodies to go and support...it requires roughly 10 maintainers per pilot. But expect to see this kind of thing slowly increasing over the next couple years (as FTU production and mx can support) until virtually every ARC fighter squadron has a small RegAF det associated.

[NKAWTG]

&nbsp;

No, there is a fighter pilot shortage--a severe one--but it has nothing to do with heavy pilots, crossflow, number of qualified dudes, or any of the reasons dudes are spouting off about here.

It's about two things--training capacity in the FTUs and absorption capacity in the ops squadrons.

We could take every one of our "overage" heavy pilots and try to cross flow them, but we physically can't. There isn't enough FTU capacity to train them and I can't slam my ops squadrons with new wingmen beyond the level they are already slammed.

That's why we have the heavy overage to begin with...we closed about 5 fighter FTU squadrons, closed about another half dozen or more fighter ops squadrons so we were maxed out with what the squadrons that were left could take. There was no place to put any more so they sent more UPT grads into to heavies.

I'd argue it is all about the absorption capacity. The UPT/FTU pipeline can be cranked up if you needed to. You wouldn't even have to up the throughput out of pilot training, just give more fighter than heavy drops. Where the Air Force is short is in the experienced 11F patch wearing crowd. They them need in the ops squadrons, and sprinkled across the MAJCOM and joint staffs to bring that particular brand of expertise. Problem is the fighter community does not have enough cockpits and hours to crank out the type of experienced pilots needed. And that is before they start standing up new F-35 squadrons.

Even if they captured every 11F coming up on his commitment and locked him in till 20, they will still be short of what they think they need.

[justajob]

I remember talking to a cross-flow type a few years ago that did quite well after going to the viper. He said it would never happen again as many other communities gutted their best to fill fighter slots. Much like chopping 25,000 people in a year, you can't fix a decade+ worth of mismanagement with the flick of a pen. How big blue shapes its manning over the next 5 years will truly tell us whether or not our leaders are earning their pay.

[Danny Noonin]

&nbsp;

I'd argue it is all about the absorption capacity. The UPT/FTU pipeline can be cranked up if you needed to.

No, FTU throughput is still an issue. If it wasn't, we'd have about half a dozen other active associations right now but we couldn't produce enough fighter pilots to man both the associations and the RegAF ops squadrons.

Yes, you could theoretically crank it up, but much easier said than done and the impact is severe. FTUs are maxed out right now. To crank it up, I'd need to raid ops squadrons of IPs (they don't have enough now and stealing them drastically reduces my absorption capacity for MQT, FLUG, etc.) or IP-ready guys (again, not enough, plus I reduce my experience in the squadrons and buy an enormous IP upgrade training bill in terms of sorties). Then I need to add mx to produce more sorties....by raiding ops squadrons that are 80% mx manned and who don't have enough to produce RAP sorties now so it becomes a readiness nightmare. Then I need to add jets because I still can't squeeze enough UTE out of the jets they have no matter how much mx I throw at it. Which means I have to--you guessed it--steal from the ops squadrons and they have DOC statements to meet and RAP requirements.

So yes, it could be theoretically done but the costs/impact are far reaching and create bigger problems than the one problem it only very partially solves.

Edited March 6, 2014 by Danny Noonin

[Vprdrvr69]

This whole conversation makes me laugh uncontrollably!

...so I'm guessing leadership is now frowning at the 300~ish fighter pilots that they raped with bigfoots dick (TAMI) circa 2007. What about the numerous chapters in VSP/RIF shit-showery that we have had, and are currently experiencing? How bout the guys like me that watched those 157 Majors get screwed a few years ago- that sure weighs into my decision making calculus regarding the best way forward as I approach my ADSC expiration! We can max out training, create guard tenet units, ramp up FTU production or even crossflow the geniuses at AFPC to come fly jets- that ain't gonna fix shit when folks on the retainment end are jumping off the sinking ship in droves! It's like filling up a bathtub with the drain wide open. It's going to get a lot worse before it gets better. For those 11F's still hanging around, get your ATP done because rumor has it Southwest is opening another window in the fall.

Now back to your regular scheduled program, "What's wrong with the Air Force?"