That has to be a joke right?....

He says he is a UPT Sq DO. I’m too lazy to search the global.

He sure as hell kicked over the hornets nest on that one. While he might have had good intentions in asking the guys at TPN cause he knew he’d get some responses. I don’t think he was expecting that kind of response. He needs to take that info right to the general and tell him he’s about to see all his IP’s bail ASAP. 

 

Speaking on the retention problem did any of you all happen to see the results of the second part of the aircrew crisis survey about money?? 

28 minutes ago, cragspider said:

He sure as hell kicked over the hornets nest on that one. While he might have had good intentions in asking the guys at TPN cause he knew he’d get some responses. I don’t think he was expecting that kind of response. He needs to take that info right to the general and tell him he’s about to see all his IP’s bail ASAP. 

 

Speaking on the retention problem did any of you all happen to see the results of the second part of the aircrew crisis survey about money?? 

But he won't.

He’s already said they’ve been ordered by 19th AF proceed on this idea. Also he readily admits the only people “involved” was “200 UPT IPs”, OG/CCs, AETC staff, Altus and IFF, no reach out to Ops units or even FTUs as a whole. Also he’s at 500+ comments and counting, most of which are telling him it’s a horrible idea.

It's not great right now as it is, we are thin all around but we are really missing experienced IPs. The few that are left from the RIFs/VSPs or those that bailed for Airlines are heading to staff/school and the year groups behind those have been decimated by years of Non-vols.

I saw that thread on TPN. Knowing how the MAF works, they'll take a bunch of half-trained zero airmanship copilots and throw them with brand new "99% of my hours are in the desert" aircraft commanders, and class A a few more jets before figuring out it's a bad idea.
At least I can personally be my own safety margin, so Team Joe is taken care of.... but I feel sorry for the sweaties constantly having to deal with the blind leading the blind.

It's okay. At least their augmenting pilot will be a 200hr copilot. I'm sure they'll be fine in the seat together while the going AC takes a nap at cruise...

Go talk to an FTU IP and see what they say about the products coming from UPT.   There are guys that can't fly an ILS or hold altitude.   Talking on the radio seems to be a foreign concept as well.v

16 minutes ago, snoopyeast said:

Go talk to an FTU IP and see what they say about the products coming from UPT.   There are guys that can't fly an ILS or hold altitude.   Talking on the radio seems to be a foreign concept as well.v

Yes yes yes, but flying ability aside, does their mere existence help turn manning PowerPoint slides green? Or maybe yellow at least? 

We need to focus on what's important here. 

2 hours ago, jazzdude said:

8 hours ago, joe1234 said:

I saw that thread on TPN. Knowing how the MAF works, they'll take a bunch of half-trained zero airmanship copilots and throw them with brand new "99% of my hours are in the desert" aircraft commanders, and class A a few more jets before figuring out it's a bad idea.
At least I can personally be my own safety margin, so Team Joe is taken care of.... but I feel sorry for the sweaties constantly having to deal with the blind leading the blind.

It's okay. At least their augmenting pilot will be a 200hr copilot. I'm sure they'll be fine in the seat together while the going AC takes a nap at cruise...

We had to kick back a mission because the only people available was an IP and two less than 200 hr copilots. The IP brought this up and we turned down the mission.

13 hours ago, cragspider said:

Speaking on the retention problem did any of you all happen to see the results of the second part of the aircrew crisis survey about money?? 

Read that this morning. I think the O-6 coordinating it was trying to be subtle, but I still interpreted the preface as "we're not really going to try and improve compensation, just work on additional duties. "

 

The AF would rather spend $20M and waste years to create a new IP than spend $100K to retain one. 

 

My prediction is we'll see no increase to flight pay or an introduced professional pay like docs. The bonus amounts/structures will essentially go unchanged. 

Edited March 12, 20187 yr by Hunter Rose

We had to kick back a mission because the only people available was an IP and two less than 200 hr copilots. The IP brought this up and we turned down the mission.

Wait, explain this to me...either they are qualified to be copilots or not, correct?

Why would the mission get rejected?

36 minutes ago, di1630 said:

Wait, explain this to me...either they are qualified to be copilots or not, correct?

Why would the mission get rejected?

I'm assuming the mission required an augmented crew, meaning 3 pilots for up to a 24 hr flight duty period (C-17 world). I believe the original intent was to have 2 ACs and one FP (first pilot), but there isn't enough ACs. Solution was to allow an experience FP serve as the augmenting pilot with Sq/CC approval.  Anyone with an ounce of integrity wouldn't allow a 200 hr pilot to serve as an augmenting FP.

edit: typos corrected

Edited March 12, 20187 yr by Dogs-N-Guns

Maybe we can just wing kids after they solo the T-6.

Think of how high annual pilot production could be then!

1 hour ago, Dogs-N-Guns said:

I'm assuming the mission required an augmented crew, meaning 3 pilots for up to a 24 hr flight duty period (C-17 world). I believe the original intent was to have 2 ACs and one FP (first pilot), but there isn't enough ACs. Solution was to allow an experience FP serve as the augmenting pilot with Sq/CC approval.  Anyone with an ounce of integrity wouldn't allow a 200 hr pilot to serve as an augmenting FP.

edit: typos corrected

This is correct. We structure our crew with an AC, an Experienced Copilot (>400 hrs & 6 mo CMR), and a junior Copilot. Both guys in the previously mentioned story had crossed an ocean less than 4 times between them with about the same number of missions. Leaving those two guys in the seat while you sleep during an ocean crossing is a bad idea. Mainly because anything that happens (reroutes, procedure changes etc) they don't have experience or knowledge to make those decisions which means they'll have to wake up the AC. An experienced copilot can handle 90% of those things on their own. Franky I wouldn't trust them anyways to even go to the bunk in the first place. There's qualified and then there's proficient.

2 hours ago, Hacker said:

Maybe we can just wing kids after they solo the T-6.

Think of how high annual pilot production could be then!

There is actually talk of that.  Our DO today informed us that they are talking about a T-6 direct C-130 pipeline

Also, new T-6 syllabus was briefed today.  Here's the short version of what UPT (at least T-6 side), also I am merely the messenger.

Phase 1

-Academics and 20 sims with a sim check ride.  Rumor/hope is that a green suiter will administer the check ride and that more mil sim IP's will help bridge the sim/flt lint gap.

Phase 2

-20 Transition sorties which will be a combination Instrument/Contact.  1 check ride and 1 solo.

-8 Nav sorties (can be done XC)

-8 form sorties with 1 form solo

Track Select

-If going T-1/Helo the stud will go do 6 more Nav sorties.  If helo the sorties will be VFR/NTA/Low Level focused

-If going T-38 the stud will do 3 advanced aero rides, 6 advanced form rides, and 4 tac form/2-ship low level sorties.

Then they go to Phase 3.

 

According to the slides it will save 17k sorties per year and shorten UPT by ~6 weeks (3 of that occurring in T-6's).  Also, they are getting rid of teaching students EP patterns.  Basically if the kid has an engine problem they want him to fly home normally, and if it gets bad just eject.  So ya...

No more ELP downgrades. Lol

I give it a solid well below slightly above average.

Ya, concerning the lack of ELP's, apparently the rationale was "that's not how they do it in the Viper so let's can it."  Though lest we forget the prime T-X contenders are single engine, or the Viper, of the F-35, but hey whatever.

10 minutes ago, YoungnDumb said:

Ya, concerning the lack of ELP's, apparently the rationale was "that's not how they do it in the Viper so let's can it."  Though lest we forget the prime T-X contenders are single engine, or the Viper, of the F-35, but hey whatever.

I know, let’s just let the FTU instructors just deal with it! It will make our numbers look good too!

1 hour ago, YoungnDumb said:

Also, they are getting rid of teaching students EP patterns.  Basically if the kid has an engine problem they want him to fly home normally, and if it gets bad just eject.  So ya...

Realizing you’re the messenger, so: If they can’t recover the jet, why are we sending them solo?

Edited March 12, 20187 yr by SurelySerious

Wow that’s going to produce a great pilot product that the ops squadrons will have to fix. Thanks AETC and Big AF for trying to produce your way out vs trying to retain us. 

2 hours ago, YoungnDumb said:

There is actually talk of that.  Our DO today informed us that they are talking about a T-6 direct C-130 pipeline

You should look to pilot network to see just how well the community at large regards your DO.  He is a special child. 

Edited March 12, 20187 yr by DirtyFlightSuit
I dont write so good...

32 minutes ago, SurelySerious said:

Realizing you’re the messenger, so: If they can’t recover the jet, why are we sending them solo?

From what I saw there is only one contact solo and one form solo. So, cost/benefit till someone drives one into the dirt I guess. 

3 hours ago, YoungnDumb said:

  Also, they are getting rid of teaching students EP patterns.  Basically if the kid has an engine problem they want him to fly home normally, and if it gets bad just eject.  So ya...

Standups are going to get a lot easier...

Your engine fails on takeoff---Boldface applies:  EJECTION HANDLE - PULL

You have an oil overtemp---Boldface applies:  EJECTION HANDLE - PULL

You have a gen fail---Boldface applies:  EJECTION HANDLE - PULL

etc...

Or, we could continue to teach airmanship and a PIC mentality.