HuggyU2 Posted May 8, 2021 Share Posted May 8, 2021 I may be incorrect but I believe these pilots are Civil Service employees, not contractors. How it works is a squadron converts a military IP slot to civilian. It is advertised on USAjobs, interview, and selection. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WheelsOff Posted May 8, 2021 Share Posted May 8, 2021 3 hours ago, HuggyU2 said: I may be incorrect but I believe these pilots are Civil Service employees, not contractors. How it works is a squadron converts a military IP slot to civilian. It is advertised on USAjobs, interview, and selection. That’s technically correct, actually. “Contractor” is a loose term…I’m still learning about the civilian side of DoD employment. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sua Sponte Posted May 8, 2021 Share Posted May 8, 2021 2 hours ago, WheelsOff said: That’s technically correct, actually. “Contractor” is a loose term…I’m still learning about the civilian side of DoD employment. Not really, you’re either Civil Service/NAF or you’re a contractor. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WheelsOff Posted May 8, 2021 Share Posted May 8, 2021 7 minutes ago, Sua Sponte said: Not really, you’re either Civil Service/NAF or you’re a contractor. Checks…I meant I used the term loosely. Clearly they’re different. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LookieRookie Posted May 11, 2021 Share Posted May 11, 2021 On 5/8/2021 at 8:21 AM, HuggyU2 said: I may be incorrect but I believe these pilots are Civil Service employees, not contractors. How it works is a squadron converts a military IP slot to civilian. It is advertised on USAjobs, interview, and selection. They are GS-2181-13s, so civil service yea. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LiquidSky Posted July 21, 2021 Share Posted July 21, 2021 What's the deal with winging before phase 3? This isn't even upt next. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brabus Posted July 21, 2021 Share Posted July 21, 2021 Smoke and mirrors. They are essentially just executing phase 3, but with wings. I don’t understand how this changes anything, except maybe gets them a form 8 earlier so the MAF bound guys can be softened up to Q3s and re-quals earlier in their career. 8 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BashiChuni Posted July 21, 2021 Share Posted July 21, 2021 I cannot wait for all the “#InsertBasePROUD” or “InsertBaseSTRONG” goes away. So cliche. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SurelySerious Posted July 21, 2021 Share Posted July 21, 2021 What's the deal with winging before phase 3? This isn't even upt next.UPT 2.5 is after UPT Next in the iteration of bad ideas from AETC timeline, I think. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MCO Posted July 21, 2021 Share Posted July 21, 2021 2 hours ago, BashiChuni said: I cannot wait for all the “#InsertBasePROUD” or “InsertBaseSTRONG” goes away. So cliche. I’m a big fan of everyone using #insertbaseReadyAF Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Swizzle Posted July 21, 2021 Share Posted July 21, 2021 3 hours ago, brabus said: Smoke and mirrors. They are essentially just executing phase 3, but with wings. I don’t understand how this changes anything, except maybe gets them a form 8 earlier so the MAF bound guys can be softened up to Q3s and re-quals earlier in their career. They're looking at "seasoning" options to "produce" more after wings too. Totally just fluffing the heck out of everything - aka smoke amd mirrors, but you can see we're running out of options Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
di1630 Posted July 21, 2021 Share Posted July 21, 2021 I saw the data and UPT 2.5 looks fine. Winging after the T-6…whatever. “But that’s not how I did it!!”I was a UPT IP when fix to fixes went away…the uproar…but we survived.And for data, I have 2x relatives who got wings after original 169kt T-6’s and went on to fly 10,000k hours in everything from prop and jet bombers to Mach 2 fighters. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scooter14 Posted July 22, 2021 Share Posted July 22, 2021 And for data, I have 2x relatives who got wings after original 169kt T-6’s and went on to fly 10,000k hours in everything from prop and jet bombers to Mach 2 fighters. How many aircraft did we lose back then? What were the accident rates?I’ll wait... 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jice Posted July 22, 2021 Share Posted July 22, 2021 Anybody in the know: What’s the stated purpose of winging after phase II if they’re just going to complete phase III? The optimist in me thinks there must be a reason… right? Right? Does the training commitment still start post-winging? If so we’re buying 4-6 fewer useful months of indentured servitude. If not, this is (on its face at least) a long-term stupid-button solution for boosting 11X numbers on paper. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
di1630 Posted July 22, 2021 Share Posted July 22, 2021 How many aircraft did we lose back then? What were the accident rates?I’ll wait...Plenty, because planes were less safe and tougher to fly. What point are you trying to get at? I’ve flown with kids whose 1st solo in a jet is in the b course. Time to advance the way we train. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pawnman Posted July 22, 2021 Share Posted July 22, 2021 10 hours ago, jice said: Anybody in the know: What’s the stated purpose of winging after phase II if they’re just going to complete phase III? The optimist in me thinks there must be a reason… right? Right? Does the training commitment still start post-winging? If so we’re buying 4-6 fewer useful months of indentured servitude. If not, this is (on its face at least) a long-term stupid-button solution for boosting 11X numbers on paper. Makes it a lot harder to fail them out of Phase III. Turns It from a commander's decision and a handshake into an FEB. 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HeloDude Posted July 22, 2021 Share Posted July 22, 2021 (edited) UPT 2.5 grads at RND are not going to a full phase 3. The “T-1/heavy tracked” students get 6 weeks of T-1 sims/VR and off to the FTUs they go. I think Vance 2.5 grads are actually flying the T-1, but I forget how much time they get. Edited July 22, 2021 by HeloDude Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shakermaker Posted July 22, 2021 Share Posted July 22, 2021 11 hours ago, jice said: Anybody in the know: What’s the stated purpose of winging after phase II if they’re just going to complete phase III? The optimist in me thinks there must be a reason… right? Right? Does the training commitment still start post-winging? If so we’re buying 4-6 fewer useful months of indentured servitude. If not, this is (on its face at least) a long-term stupid-button solution for boosting 11X numbers on paper. Simple, one high ranking bob gets to tell another high ranking bob that we are making pilots 4 months faster! Problem solved. And we all know the staff doesn't think about problems 10 years from now, let alone next week. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shakermaker Posted July 22, 2021 Share Posted July 22, 2021 3 minutes ago, HeloDude said: UPT 2.5 grads at RND is not going to a full phase 3. The “T-1/heavy tracked” students get 6 weeks of T-1 sims/VR and off to the FTUs they go. I think Vance 2.5 grads are actually flying the T-1, but I forget how much time they get. Most recent iteration of the syllabus has 42.8 hrs programmed in the jet. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dream big Posted July 22, 2021 Share Posted July 22, 2021 15 hours ago, di1630 said: I saw the data and UPT 2.5 looks fine. Winging after the T-6…whatever. “But that’s not how I did it!!” I was a UPT IP when fix to fixes went away…the uproar…but we survived. And for data, I have 2x relatives who got wings after original 169kt T-6’s and went on to fly 10,000k hours in everything from prop and jet bombers to Mach 2 fighters. Just out of curiosity, are you currently in an ops squadron directly seeing the current UPT product ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scooter14 Posted July 22, 2021 Share Posted July 22, 2021 Plenty, because planes were less safe and tougher to fly. What point are you trying to get at? I’ve flown with kids whose 1st solo in a jet is in the b course. Time to advance the way we train. Were they tougher to fly or did we not train the crews well enough? Some of the same KC-135s I flew were probably flown by friends of your ancestors.My point or my rebuttal to your post is that, just because Grandpa flew the original T-6 and was just fine, there were probably a lot of others that weren’t and we lost a lot of aircraft back then. Were they less safe? Maybe. Were we pumping out pilots at a breakneck pace to keep up with a Cold War threat? Yes. Was the training adequate? Maybe. Were the planes “harder to fly” back then or are they easier to fly now? I don’t know. I flew with a crew in a C-130H1 last month. So that level of technology still exists in 2021. Evolution of training...I’m all for it. I’m glad we don’t do fix to fixes anymore. But, we can’t get ahead of ourselves and I think we are still in the data collection phase. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
di1630 Posted July 22, 2021 Share Posted July 22, 2021 Just out of curiosity, are you currently in an ops squadron directly seeing the current UPT product ? FTU so yes I’m seeing the direct result of training. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
di1630 Posted July 22, 2021 Share Posted July 22, 2021 Were they tougher to fly or did we not train the crews well enough? Some of the same KC-135s I flew were probably flown by friends of your ancestors.My point or my rebuttal to your post is that, just because Grandpa flew the original T-6 and was just fine, there were probably a lot of others that weren’t and we lost a lot of aircraft back then. Were they less safe? Maybe. Were we pumping out pilots at a breakneck pace to keep up with a Cold War threat? Yes. Was the training adequate? Maybe. Were the planes “harder to fly” back then or are they easier to fly now? I don’t know. I flew with a crew in a C-130H1 last month. So that level of technology still exists in 2021. Evolution of training...I’m all for it. I’m glad we don’t do fix to fixes anymore. But, we can’t get ahead of ourselves and I think we are still in the data collection phase. Go look at safety archives and check out the engine failures historically vs now. As for tech, I started out in T-37s, and I’ve stepped thru a lot of cockpit tech iterations. We’ve come a long way. I admit I’m just one data point. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LookieRookie Posted July 23, 2021 Share Posted July 23, 2021 13 hours ago, Shakermaker said: Most recent iteration of the syllabus has 42.8 hrs programmed in the jet. Vance or Randolph syllabus? Randolph from what I know is AMF aka ITD/sim only. It is the step towards having no T-1s. Fighter/bomber bound will still get T-38 eventually T-7 time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sprkt69 Posted July 23, 2021 Share Posted July 23, 2021 10 hours ago, di1630 said: FTU so yes I’m seeing the direct result of training. And not the slightly above well below average UPT graduates. Don’t kid yourself Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now