Jump to content

Changing/Switching airframes


Guest whairdhugo?

Recommended Posts

36 minutes ago, BrightNeptune said:

AFSOC doesn't even let dudes fly the PC-12, which is a single pilot plane, with only one pilot. Zero chance this happens. 

Nor the few C-12s (Beech 200/350s) that are scattered around various commands. 

Are B-2s single pilot rated? I wasn't aware of them having a jump seat but they've also clearly done a fam flight. Must be one or the other.

Edited by LiquidSky
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, LiquidSky said:

Nor the few C-12s (Beech 200/350s) that are scattered around various commands. 

Are B-2s single pilot rated? I wasn't aware of them having a jump seat but they've also clearly done a fam flight. Must be one or the other.

The H-60 isn’t single pilot rated but we took guys up on fam flights all the time. The how, we had to get approval from the CC and it had to be an EP as the AC.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The fact that single pilot KC-46 pilot operations was even suggested and staffed up to Mini demonstrates just how broken the USAF is.  There are only two possible reasons to allow this moronic idea to see the light of day. 

The first option is they know the big-wing tankers are gonna get whacked in a fight with China, so lets keep the body count low.  After showing a ray of hope with the KC-Y discussion, they quickly defaulted to dogma and signaled intent to buy more of the same...Fing brilliant...not.

The second option is they know the pilot shortage is worse (and accelerating), than they are saying in public.  Sadly, this option is a solvable problem.  If they want to try out of the box solutions then give up one freaking KC-46 and dump that $170M into pilot retention.  Figure out what the actual number is to get a pilot to stay until 20 and PAY them.  Seriously, we spend a $1M to put an ejection seat in a jets to save pilots, why not spend a million dollars to keep them on active duty.  I know not everyone wants to stay for 20 years and the nonsensical queep of the past 15 years has made it even less desirable but money speaks and so does messaging.  Congress gave authority to pay more bonus but the shoes chase the curve rather than lead turn it with a long-term view.   If USAF never uses the full allocation, what message does that send to the force.  COVID saved this clown show...but that little respite is over and it is time to get serious.

I am using old numbers but as I recall USAF makes approximately 1000 pilot a year and needs an approximate retention rate of 60% at end of initial commitment to break even.  In recent years that number has fallen to the around 37-39%.  I wonder how the calculus would change if they swallowed their pride and put real money on the table.  Realistically they need 200-250 pilots to stay each year...offer each one $1M and see if your retention rate changes.  Pay it lump sum, pay a portion each year, pay it however the pilots want to receive it and you will see a difference.  $250M is decimal dust to the Air Force and if it solved one of the toughest problems it would be money well spent. 

  • Like 1
  • Upvote 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Being a A&P and taxing multiple airframes all Boeings how you can safely taxi with one guy in the cockpit, I was asking the guy next to me are we clear always. Most damage done on airliners is done at the gate or the pushback or taxi away from the terminal. It's great it gives a bunch of us mechanics a bunch of OT but it also means some guy's career just destroyed.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 7/19/2022 at 4:42 PM, ThreeHoler said:

CH, the NDAA forces the Services to make a “business case” for each bonus segment. They can’t just offer the max to everyone because Congress has limited it when they tried that. Or so we have been told.


Sent from my iPhone using Baseops Network mobile app

Dogmatic thinking...It takes leadership.  If USAF senior leaders can go to the mat for new programs and weapons, do the same for your Fing people.  Having worked on the hill I know what you are saying and trust me I understand the NDAA, go FIGHT for your people.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 7/19/2022 at 2:52 PM, ClearedHot said:

offer each one $1M and see if your retention rate changes.

That’s pretty close to the cumulative airline v O5 pay difference over 10-15 years.  $150k in the AF, $200-250k in the airlines.  

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 7/19/2022 at 5:34 PM, Prosuper said:

Being a A&P and taxing multiple airframes all Boeings how you can safely taxi with one guy in the cockpit, I was asking the guy next to me are we clear always. Most damage done on airliners is done at the gate or the pushback or taxi away from the terminal. It's great it gives a bunch of us mechanics a bunch of OT but it also means some guy's career just destroyed.

 

No reflection on you but when I've relinquish ownership and sat in the back while mechanics do engine runs or taxied a plane you would think they were teenagers that had just gotten their license.  We had one guy drive a A320 into the gate and terminal at LGA and almost took out the 757 sitting at the next gate.  The 320 was out of commission at least 6 mths if it was ever repaired.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, ClearedHot said:

I wonder who they will black ball if this comes to fruition - USAF Autonomous Cargo Operations

The C-130J has a 1980s com/nav suite, datalink (Block 6) that’s utter thrash and TOLD that’s not even accurate…but sure let’s jump straight to single pilot operations. Me thinks the speed of staff / acquisitions makes this a long ways off regardless of whether or not the technology is there.  The C-130 doesn’t just fly straight and level at FL390, low levels, formation, assault, NVG ops, a lot going on to simply automate. 

Edited by dream big
  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, dream big said:

The C-130J has a 1980s com/nav suite, datalink (Block 6) that’s utter thrash and TOLD that’s not even accurate…but sure let’s jump straight to single pilot operations. Me thinks the speed of staff / acquisitions makes this a long ways off regardless of whether or not the technology is there.  The C-130 doesn’t just fly straight and level at FL390, low levels, formation, assault, NVG ops, a lot going on to simply automate. 

You know the “Strat Airlift Mafia” of AMC leadership never gave a shit about the Herk. Maybe it’ll be different under Mini sue to his Herk background, but then again probably not. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Springer said:

No reflection on you but when I've relinquish ownership and sat in the back while mechanics do engine runs or taxied a plane you would think they were teenagers that had just gotten their license.  We had one guy drive a A320 into the gate and terminal at LGA and almost took out the 757 sitting at the next gate.  The 320 was out of commission at least 6 mths if it was ever repaired.

When I first got qualified to taxi was in the late 80's when stationed at Andrews in the 89th, C-137's, we all had to get signed off by an IP. Due to the fact that the only high powered runup areas was on the hammer head. The old JT3D's took a lot of mx and always had writeups. Plus, it was part of our preflight checklist to taxi them to the VIP spot at the terminal. All our flight engineers were taxi qualified too, after I left in 91 Gen McPeak hated seeing enlisted taxi jets and ordered it stopped.  

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 hours ago, Chida said:

This Mini worship is reminiscent of Welsh worship. Not directed at anyone in particular. 

Valid...I am biased.  Know them both and I know how hard Welsh tried and what he was up against.  I think I've posted the story before but I recall a conversation with Boomer about an ongoing ugly AF issue, he took a sip of his drink and replied "you would be surprised how little power the CSAF actually has."  As per the design of our Constitution civilians get the final say and those "appointed" to be service secretaries often have other political agendas.

I've known Mini for 28 years but have not spoken with him in a few years.   As a captain/IP he was a great pilot and a solid bro who took care of folks, I never saw a single act of careerism.  When he was the Wing/CC at Andrews I reached out for helping hiring one of my former Flight Engineers and Mini went to great lengths to help the guy who was eventually hired.  Others may have other data points but my observation so far is he is trying to break some of the dogmatic thinking. 

Also, interesting Welsh and Minihan were at Moody at the same time (Welsh was the OG, Mini was an IP).

We shall see...at least it's not CZ or Rat.

  • Like 1
  • Upvote 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, ClearedHot said:

Valid...I am biased.  Know them both and I know how hard Welsh tried and what he was up against.  I think I've posted the story before but I recall a conversation with Boomer about an ongoing ugly AF issue, he took a sip of his drink and replied "you would be surprised how little power the CSAF actually has."  As per the design of our Constitution civilians get the final say and those "appointed" to be service secretaries often have other political agendas.

I've known Mini for 28 years but have not spoken with him in a few years.   As a captain/IP he was a great pilot and a solid bro who took care of folks, I never saw a single act of careerism.  When he was the Wing/CC at Andrews I reached out for helping hiring one of my former Flight Engineers and Mini went to great lengths to help the guy who was eventually hired.  Others may have other data points but my observation so far is he is trying to break some of the dogmatic thinking. 

Also, interesting Welsh and Minihan were at Moody at the same time (Welsh was the OG, Mini was an IP).

We shall see...at least it's not CZ or Rat.

My guess is some Capt WO had this as an idea for a deployment situation and wanted to try it now instead of when shit kicks off. Instead of just killing it, Mini said well let’s try this out of the box thinking and see if it’s feasible. I also assume they went into it knowing the answer may end up being no. However instead of just killing the idea he empowered the people to try it in a controlled environment, the stuff most of us want. But the memo leaked and we lost our minds because we all made assumptions about why the memo was created, the long term intent, and the classic “that’s not how we’ve always done it”. People read way too much into this. Maybe I’m just looking at this with my glass half full.

  • Upvote 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

58 minutes ago, MCO said:

My guess is some Capt WO had this as an idea for a deployment situation and wanted to try it now instead of when shit kicks off. Instead of just killing it, Mini said well let’s try this out of the box thinking and see if it’s feasible. I also assume they went into it knowing the answer may end up being no. However instead of just killing the idea he empowered the people to try it in a controlled environment, the stuff most of us want. But the memo leaked and we lost our minds because we all made assumptions about why the memo was created, the long term intent, and the classic “that’s not how we’ve always done it”. People read way too much into this. Maybe I’m just looking at this with my glass half full.

But but but but but…the airlines don’t do it this way, the FAA says we can’t, and I need someone to tell me how to properly report lasing accidents while I fly around lights on in Meg!

  • Haha 1
  • Upvote 1
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...