How long is T-38 PIT? Are there any pipeline delays to be expected?

Turbo prop pilot, hasn't flown in 3 years, or the T-38 in 10 years. Is this cause for concern? Asking for a friend.

I'm in T-38 PIT right now. At a "normal" pace it'll be about 4 months. But throw in ROM before PIT, any time you interact with someone with COVID-like symptoms, and any flying deficiencies, you're looking at a longer timeline. 

As far as your friend's concern goes, it'll probably be pretty rough, especially through the formation phase, but the squadron is used to instructing non-fighter guys/gals. For reference, I graduated UPT in 2012 and got most of my flight time in twin turboprop aircraft. T-38 formation flying is slowly coming back to me, but there's definitely a steep learning curve.

Thanks for the info.

Anyone know the latest updates on the T-1 retirement timeline at Randolph? On the upcoming winter VML and trying to see if T-1 IP would keep me in the cockpit through retirement in 2025. TIA

19 hours ago, Bingo said:

Anyone know the latest updates on the T-1 retirement timeline at Randolph? On the upcoming winter VML and trying to see if T-1 IP would keep me in the cockpit through retirement in 2025. TIA

If you want to stay in a T-1 cockpit till 2025 your best bet is Vance. 

13 hours ago, Homestar said:

If you want to stay in a T-1 cockpit till 2025 your best bet is Vance. 

Pensacola is a better bet. Will continue to be around as the Navigator Express. 

I think there is a massive 3 green suit wearing T-1 drivers at Pcola, so probability is not good.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

2 minutes ago, Bode said:

I think there is a massive 3 green suit wearing T-1 drivers at Pcola, so probability is not good.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Of all of the T-1 bases, which will be last to divest the platform? I can guarantee it won’t be Vance.

14 minutes ago, Standby said:

Of all of the T-1 bases, which will be last to divest the platform? I can guarantee it won’t be Vance.

Vance just refreshed with a Proline 21 cockpit. I doubt that Vance goes before anyone else. But I’ve seen the Af do stupider stuff. 

6 minutes ago, Homestar said:

Vance just refreshed with a Proline 21 cockpit. I doubt that Vance goes before anyone else. But I’ve seen the Af do stupider stuff. 

That doesn’t prevent iron from moving to a new location. 

Of all of the T-1 bases, which will be last to divest the platform? I can guarantee it won’t be Vance.

I fly the toner currently and just last week the 19af/cc talked about potentially a partial divestiture with the toner only at CBM and END


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I fly the toner currently and just last week the 19af/cc talked about potentially a partial divestiture with the toner only at CBM and END


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Yeah they can’t afford to let the Del Río tone pilots keep “accidentally” flying into Mexico...


Sent from my iPhone using Baseops Network mobile app

1 hour ago, Standby said:

That doesn’t prevent iron from moving to a new location. 

Gen Wills? Is that you?

10 hours ago, Homestar said:

Gen Wills? Is that you?

Ouch...what did I do to deserve that?

11 hours ago, the g-man said:

I fly the toner currently and just last week the 19af/cc talked about potentially a partial divestiture with the toner only at CBM and END

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

This is such an easy fix for the AF...

https://beechcraft.txtav.com/en/king-air-c90gtx

1 hour ago, Standby said:

Ouch...what did I do to deserve that?

1) you just seem to know a lot about how the Af plans to divest the T-1

2) it wasn’t meant as an insult. 

1 hour ago, Clark Griswold said:

This is such an easy fix for the AF...

https://beechcraft.txtav.com/en/king-air-c90gtx

Procuring a new UPT trainer is easy?

49 minutes ago, Homestar said:

Procuring a new UPT trainer is easy?

No but it should be 69% easier than it is now. 

Look at civilian multi-engine training, I don't see them flailing about because the existing aircraft that are typically used right now are somehow rapidly falling behind an ever increasing set of training tasks that their training aircraft can't meet.

Our mulit-engine requirements are not that different and what mil unique training items we have in our heavy track we already simulate.  If the Toners are wearing out then replacing them should be straight forward.

Edited February 7, 20214 yr by Clark Griswold
adjectives added

No but it should be 69% easier than it is now. 
Look at civilian multi-engine training, I don't see them flailing about because the existing aircraft that are typically used right now are somehow rapidly falling behind an ever increasing set of training tasks that their training aircraft can't meet.
Our mulit-engine requirements are not that different and what training items we have in our heavy track we already simulate.  If the Toners are wearing out then replacing them should be straight forward.

It totally should be. They should be able to buy any light twin corporate jet slap a UHF radio in it and call it good.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

3 hours ago, Clark Griswold said:

This is such an easy fix for the AF...

https://beechcraft.txtav.com/en/king-air-c90gtx

You're missing the point.

 

Airline training baby. Turns out .mil flying is so simple you can just tabletop it. What's a 'little' handflying atrophy here and there. And yeah some folks may die, but well within Big Blue's ALR on this one. Innovation! *wet fart*

/s

Oh, we're still not hitting the production targets, 4 years since they began this pseudo-intellectual word salad affair. At the rate we're going, they're just gonna contract out undergraduate training to part 141 and the unvetted cholate mess  they get out of that one can go direct to FTU MAF cockpits (aka CPW reductio ad absurdum). 

 

Edited February 7, 20214 yr by hindsight2020
grammarz

You're missing the point.

 
Airline training baby. Turns out .mil flying is so simple you can just tabletop it. What's a 'little' handflying atrophy here and there. And yeah some folks may die, but well within Big Blue's ALR on this one. Innovation! *wet fart*
/s
Oh, we're still not hitting the production targets, 4 years since they began this pseudo-intellectual word salad affair. At the rate we're going, they're just gonna contract out undergraduate training to part 141 and the unvetted cholate mess  they get out of that one can go direct to FTU MAF cockpits (aka CPW reductio ad absurdum). 
 

Yeah, I know I’m just venting on BO as the decline of the AF continues

I’m just amazed how submissive/apathetic the heavy rated GO community is and not pushing back on this effort(s) to short change training / vetting for the heavy communities


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

16 hours ago, MyCS said:

That looks S-E-X-Y to a prop guy.

Listed at 3.8 million so the AF price would probably be 5.8 million a tail but even at that cost replacing the 178 Jayhawks in service today would come to 1.03 billion, spread that over 5 FYs.

Fight like hell heavy aviators to keep a decent advanced trainer for heavy / crew tracked students or the Bobs are going to take your red stapler and put you in the basement with a can of roach spray. 

If by some miracle a follow on to the T-1 comes about, call it the Swingline and paint it red

Edited February 8, 20214 yr by Clark Griswold

Going to be over $7M after the AF pays to redesign the PT-6A to remove beta/reverse.

That sounds about how the T-6 GPS acquisition process is going to work....now that we can’t fly GPS approaches expect a ridiculous contract for an inferior product, all in the name of mission essential.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Any tips for family/pet friendly PIT pads?