Jump to content

Changing/Switching airframes


Guest whairdhugo?

Recommended Posts

16 hours ago, LawnDart said:

Anyone have any insight on the opportunities to crossflow over to the 46 these days? Curious if a large amount of former KC-10 bros are taking all the open slots as they slowly try to sunset the Gucci life, or if the community is still so undermanned that it's not making a difference.

If you are a KC-10 dude or dudette I'd say apply to the 89th, but I believe I overheard our recruiter saying their functional wasn't releasing anyone since they are undermanned.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest PeggyDriver46
2 hours ago, StoleIt said:

If you are a KC-10 dude or dudette I'd say apply to the 89th, but I believe I overheard our recruiter saying their functional wasn't releasing anyone since they are undermanned.

This is true for the 46 as well. If you come to the 46, your heart better be completely in it because you are here for life. One guy threatened to drop paperwork if they didn't release him. 

I'm fairly sure he's at airline training now, so I guess technically he did get out of the 46. 

Edited by LoveDumpster
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, StoleIt said:

If you are a KC-10 dude or dudette I'd say apply to the 89th, but I believe I overheard our recruiter saying their functional wasn't releasing anyone since they are undermanned.

Not KC-10s, currently in the 17.  Interesting to hear that the 10s are "undermanned" despite being shut down? Or are they starting to walk that back I wonder.

6 hours ago, LoveDumpster said:

This is true for the 46 as well. If you come to the 46, your heart better be completely in it because you are here for life. One guy threatened to drop paperwork if they didn't release him. 

I'm fairly sure he's at airline training now, so I guess technically he did get out of the 46. 

Wow that's impressive, I guess. Did he have some sort of gripe with the 46 or was he just looking to do something different?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 hours ago, LawnDart said:

Not KC-10s, currently in the 17.  Interesting to hear that the 10s are "undermanned" despite being shut down? Or are they starting to walk that back I wonder.

Oh, the retirement is still moving forward - but also here's a bunch of last minute taskings we have absolutely no one else to do. What do you mean you don't have a crew?

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest PeggyDriver46
17 hours ago, Scooter14 said:

 


Haven’t you heard?

It’s cool to hate the -46. All the cool kids are doing it.

 

The 46 has had some teething issues but overall I love the aircraft. It's a joy to fly, and landing it is a breeze. The 767 time is a blessing if I ever get tired of the Air Force's shit and decide to punch.

That guy had his own personal aspirations. I think he wanted to do FAO or something like that. The big gripe is with the community. We have a, IMO, well earned reputation of being the MAF fastburner type. When the 46 brought people in, they took the shiny pennies from every community, and now all the shiny pennies are fighting to be the shiniest penny of them all. The younger generation is trying to change that, but it'll take time. It's gotten a lot better in the last few years as some of the more toxic leaders have moved up or out. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 6/29/2022 at 3:43 PM, Stoker said:

Oh, the retirement is still moving forward - but also here's a bunch of last minute taskings we have absolutely no one else to do. What do you mean you don't have a crew?

The USAF is getting a free lesson right now on why the artificial tanker gap caused by early KC-10 retirement is at best a criminally negligent act and at worse a root cause for a loss in a shooting war. Even against a second-rate opponent. The real question is whether they’ll admit mistakes or implement a solution.

  • Like 1
  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

We have a, IMO, well earned reputation of being the MAF fastburner type.

Lolz… Reminds me of the time I went to Carswell looking for a job and some random Maj who “interviewed” me said, “We’re a pretty elite unit.”
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest PeggyDriver46
40 minutes ago, Chida said:


Lolz… Reminds me of the time I went to Carswell looking for a job and some random Maj who “interviewed” me said, “We’re a pretty elite unit.”

The "MAF fastburner type" was not a complement.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...
2 hours ago, Sua Sponte said:

McConnell allegedly submitted a waiver to AMC today to fly the -46 with one pilot and one boom. This is due to them freaking out about pilot retention. This is also against the flight manual.

No way it gets approved.  This ain’t Nam

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Having never flown the KC-46, is it really a bridge too far to fly it single pilot? Beyond what the flight manual says, is it essential to have 2 pilots?

You carry one of these in your flight bag?

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-4514916/Footage-shows-Darpa-s-robot-pilot-flying-737-sim.html

Just on a regulatory basis, it’s certificated for two pilots, and the FAA isn’t very quick these days.
  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

43 minutes ago, Danger41 said:

Having never flown the KC-46, is it really a bridge too far to fly it single pilot? Beyond what the flight manual says, is it essential to have 2 pilots?

I think in normal normal ops, no it would not be crazy to fly with a single pilot. Lots of automation and low task loads when things are going completely standard.  I would guess this holds for most crewed aircraft in benign situations. The issue is when the situation becomes not benign. When nonstandard things / EPs / mission changes start happening now you have a single brain having to manage a very large very complex aircraft and deal with those externalities as well.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I’ve nearly had to fly solo while refueling -16s in Afghanistan during the other guy’s code brown situation. At this point, soloing on most sorties wouldn’t be a huge deal for me in the KC-135, on a normal, good day. Shoot, you’re basically soloing with a new MCT copilot.

The problem is when things are not normal, you’re flying back-half of the clock, and your circadian rhythm is completely effed. Sure, KC-46 is much more ergonomic and has better automation. Doesn’t change the complexity that can occur.

Wouldn’t surprise me if this waiver leads to a crew ratio change and then squadrons are even more hard up to man office jobs in the squadron.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, StrikeOut312 said:

..

Wouldn’t surprise me if this waiver leads to a crew ratio change and then squadrons are even more hard up to man office jobs in the squadron.

This, and yup...future dumpster fire brewing, smoldering

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, SurelySerious said:


You carry one of these in your flight bag?

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-4514916/Footage-shows-Darpa-s-robot-pilot-flying-737-sim.html

Just on a regulatory basis, it’s certificated for two pilots, and the FAA isn’t very quick these days.

Related....

https://www.popsci.com/technology/merlin-labs-air-force-cargo-planes/

 

C-130J...go figure, wonder how well Merlin can fly a Day Vis LL? Or Max Effort LDG? Now with a UPT2.5 graduate upgraded AC in min time who is also a fast burning, minimum flying WG/CCE??

 

robot-fail.gif

Edited by Swizzle
Robotics have actually greatly increased, but for flying we should be skeptical a bit more...
  • Like 2
  • Haha 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Swizzle said:

 Now with a UPT2.5 graduate upgraded AC in min time who is also a fast burning, minimum flying WG/CCE??

 

 

Exactly what I’m thinking. Some kid will upgrade, have no depth of experience to fallback on, and be sent to the wolves. GMAFB.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, SurelySerious said:


You carry one of these in your flight bag?

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-4514916/Footage-shows-Darpa-s-robot-pilot-flying-737-sim.html

Just on a regulatory basis, it’s certificated for two pilots, and the FAA isn’t very quick these days.

This seems like an insane solution lol. With coupled autopilot + autothrottles, all you need is software, you don't need some weird robot arm that's just a likely to turn into Skynet and impale me before taking over and crashing the jet into the White House or something out of a Michael Bay movie.

That being said...I'm fully on board with fully RPA big jets doing cargo and etc. both over the oceans and CONUS, as well as remote-pilot augmentation for a manned crew.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

They need the weird robotic arm so that it is a drop-in pilot replacement for airplanes that exist now. Then in however many years the 2nd pilot robot can be designed into the aircraft and you won’t have the weird robotic arm anymore. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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 account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...