Track Selects and Assignment Nights

[YoungnDumb]

Back to our regularly scheduled broadcast of Assignments-

END

T-38

-3x F-16 split between Holloman and Tucson

-1x F-15E

-1x T-38 FAIP

T-1

-MC-130J

-E-3

-Toner FAIP

Honestly don't remember much.

[Dudemanbro]

CBM 16-15

38s:

F15C

F15E

F16

T38 FAIP

 

T1s (what I remember at least):

CV22

E3

Several C17s and 135s

130J 

MC130

 

[carminsandiego]

with the 11B shortage, how have they been managing to drop only fighters?  Are we expecting to see a shit ton of bomber drops out of 38s or are they going to be dropping them out of T1s very soon? 

[pawnman]

11 hours ago, carminsandiego said:

with the 11B shortage, how have they been managing to drop only fighters?  Are we expecting to see a shit ton of bomber drops out of 38s or are they going to be dropping them out of T1s very soon? 

Apparently the fighter shortage is worse than the bomber shortage.  Our FTU is about 50% manned right now, so even if they gave us more students I'm not sure we really have the capacity to put them through in a timely manner.

[Ulysses]

Apparently the fighter shortage is worse than the bomber shortage.  Our FTU is about 50% manned right now, so even if they gave us more students I'm not sure we really have the capacity to put them through in a timely manner.

Just out of curiosity, which FTU?

[pawnman]

1 minute ago, Ulysses said:

 

Just out of curiosity, which FTU?

 

B-1, but the slides from the AFPC webinar implied that the BUFFs and B-2s have similar struggles.

Edited September 22, 2016 by pawnman

[WheelsOff]

9 hours ago, pawnman said:

 B-2s have similar struggles.

Then they should have let me apply last fall instead of letting AFPC take over their assignment system!!

[Inertia17]

There have been some rumors floating around about bombers starting to drop from the T-1 side.

[Dudemanbro]

48 minutes ago, Inertia17 said:

There have been some rumors floating around about bombers starting to drop from the T-1 side.

The latest T-1 FAIP drop sheet here at Columbus included a B1 and a B52

[hispeed7721]

There have been some rumors floating around about bombers starting to drop from the T-1 side.

The latest word I heard from UPT bases involved track select becoming 3 fold instead of just T1/T38. It would consist of: heavy (T1 only), fighter (T38 only) and bomber (T38 to start then transition to T1 at some point)

I don't think it's the most insane idea I've ever heard, but no clue as to it's validity


Sent from my iPhone using Baseops Network Forums

[magnetfreezer]

2 hours ago, Ulysses said:

Being even newer than a new guy, I can't help but wonder: why is it that this never really happened before? Are Tones not really suitable for 11B training? I talked to this old colonel once who said that in his day, TAC and SAC had completely different mentalities in how they approached air. Was this true, and is it true today for ACC and GSC?

 

SAC tactics didn't perform well in a real war: https://www.historynet.com/the-11-day-war.htm. All platforms (especially bombers) need the aggressiveness and skilled pushing up to the limits taught in tactical aviation. Even if your airplane only pulls 2 G, fly every threat reaction to 2.0 G. 1.7 isn't conservative, it's a debrief point. 

Finally, ACC uses failure to improve yourself and others in the debrief. AMC and AFGSC use it to generate Q-3s and FEBs. 

Edited September 23, 2016 by magnetfreezer

[SurelySerious]

Finally, ACC uses failure to improve yourself and others in the debrief. AMC and AFGSC use it to generate Q-3s and FEBs. 

Forget the Millennium math problems, There ought to be a million dollar prize to stop that shit.

[YoungnDumb]

15 hours ago, Rooster said:

The latest T-1 FAIP drop sheet here at Columbus included a B1 and a B52

Affirm, all my bubbas at END had to redo their dreamsheets to include bombers, some went for it, some didn't.  It'll be interesting to see what AFPC does with this.

[Hacker]

15 hours ago, Ulysses said:

why is it that this never really happened before? Are Tones not really suitable for 11B training?

For a time in the early '00s, bombers did come from the T-1 track.  There even used to be a short T-38 postgraduate top-off program called "Introduction to Bomber Fundamentals".

[billy pilgrim]

On 9/22/2016 at 2:05 AM, Rooster said:

CBM 16-15

38s:

F15C

F15E

F16

T38 FAIP

 

[matmacwc]

2001 and 2007 all over again

[pawnman]

21 hours ago, Inertia17 said:

There have been some rumors floating around about bombers starting to drop from the T-1 side.

We tried that before.  Results were mixed at best.

Edited to add: still doesn't solve the throughput problem when your FTU is only 50% manned and you don't have enough jets for the FTU lines.

Edited September 23, 2016 by pawnman

[Razor666]

22 hours ago, Ulysses said:

 

Being even newer than a new guy, I can't help but wonder: why is it that this never really happened before? Are Tones not really suitable for 11B training? I talked to this old colonel once who said that in his day, TAC and SAC had completely different mentalities in how they approached air. Was this true, and is it true today for ACC and GSC?

 

So correct me if I am completely throwing out chaff and flares here as I only went to UPT at a place with 38s only but from what I have been told and discussed in the squadron is that studs that fly T-1s (nowadays at least) usually pick their top choices based off location and lifestyle. That being said, all bomber locations are pretty heinous (Minot, Dyess, Shreveport, Whiteman, etc). While the missions are cool as in you wipe bad guys off the face of the map, you never even land in or see the world really (C17 bros snapchat me drinking wine in Italy on a TDY while I'm sitting in the Deid). Therefore, your top T1 dudes put heavy platforms that are in sweet locations and land at even sweeter locations. Now if this is true and that you give your top studs what they want, then you give the bottom part of T1 guys the bombers (this is what they are doing with UAVs to T1 studs). As Pawnman mentioned before, the results are mixed. Can these bottom graduation dudes in T1 somehow learn to have great hands in these jets and push it up? Possibly. Or is it more likely that they get stuck in a jet they don't want, in a place they don't want, in a mission they don't want and all of this for a guaranteed commitment of ten years. You make pretty bitter people doing that which is dangerous in its own way. You cannot have the latter flying these planes because you need to have an aggressive 38 like attitude to fly through a SAM MEZ knowing that you will get shot at and you will most likely get hit (no one is out maneuvering a SAM at 2.0 G), but need to drop bombs on target on time.  

 

This was the problem currently going in my community until recently. We had older pilots that flew the T1 that showed a lackluster performance in these jets. The thinking then was we need to get dudes that we not the bottom of the barrel to revitalize the squadrons especially since we are seeing combat. Hence now why the last 2 years we have been getting T38 studs in the FTU that got bombers as a must assign who were very capable of going to something with a pointy nose. 

[Jaded]

 

3 hours ago, Razor666 said:

Lots of text

So, bomber dudes need to have "an aggressive T-38 attitude," the T-38 guys who go to bombers are "not the bottom of the barrel," bomber guys need to "learn to have great hands in these jets," and that T-1 guys will get "stuck in a jet they don't want" while T-38 guys are putting bombers at the top of their dream sheets?

[Seriously]

On 9/23/2016 at 10:05 AM, Ulysses said:

Being even newer than a new guy, I can't help but wonder: why is it that this never really happened before? Are Tones not really suitable for 11B training? I talked to this old colonel once who said that in his day, TAC and SAC had completely different mentalities in how they approached air. Was this true, and is it true today for ACC and GSC?

 

This has happened before... multiple times. It's cyclical like all of the UPT drops and all of the conversations in this thread. These exact same conversations were happening when this forum first opened up. 

[pawnman]

On 9/23/2016 at 6:49 PM, Razor666 said:

So correct me if I am completely throwing out chaff and flares here as I only went to UPT at a place with 38s only but from what I have been told and discussed in the squadron is that studs that fly T-1s (nowadays at least) usually pick their top choices based off location and lifestyle. That being said, all bomber locations are pretty heinous (Minot, Dyess, Shreveport, Whiteman, etc). While the missions are cool as in you wipe bad guys off the face of the map, you never even land in or see the world really (C17 bros snapchat me drinking wine in Italy on a TDY while I'm sitting in the Deid). Therefore, your top T1 dudes put heavy platforms that are in sweet locations and land at even sweeter locations. Now if this is true and that you give your top studs what they want, then you give the bottom part of T1 guys the bombers (this is what they are doing with UAVs to T1 studs). As Pawnman mentioned before, the results are mixed. Can these bottom graduation dudes in T1 somehow learn to have great hands in these jets and push it up? Possibly. Or is it more likely that they get stuck in a jet they don't want, in a place they don't want, in a mission they don't want and all of this for a guaranteed commitment of ten years. You make pretty bitter people doing that which is dangerous in its own way. You cannot have the latter flying these planes because you need to have an aggressive 38 like attitude to fly through a SAM MEZ knowing that you will get shot at and you will most likely get hit (no one is out maneuvering a SAM at 2.0 G), but need to drop bombs on target on time.  

 

This was the problem currently going in my community until recently. We had older pilots that flew the T1 that showed a lackluster performance in these jets. The thinking then was we need to get dudes that we not the bottom of the barrel to revitalize the squadrons especially since we are seeing combat. Hence now why the last 2 years we have been getting T38 studs in the FTU that got bombers as a must assign who were very capable of going to something with a pointy nose. 

On the plus side, you get to spend time at home.  Your C-17 bros may indeed be having fun in Italy, Germany, Spain, wherever...but they're also on the road 200+ days a year.  If you think six month deployments are rough on the family, try being gone more often than you are home.  

Abilene, Rapid City, and Shreveport are not as bad as you make them out to be.  There's also the Guam trips with stops in S. Korea, Japan, and Australia now that B-1s are part of Global Strike.  

[carminsandiego]

28 minutes ago, Ulysses said:

 

Well damn, and here I was a few months ago, scared shitless because I thought they'd only drop one or two 38s per class. I'm feeling pretty good about myself now.

 

Wouldn't get too comfortable- it's only a matter of time before the pendulum shifts the other way again (and yes, it can happen that quickly- AF knee jerk reaction)

[Danger41]

7 hours ago, Ulysses said:

 

Well damn, and here I was a few months ago, scared shitless because I thought they'd only drop one or two 38s per class. I'm feeling pretty good about myself now.

 

Keep up the min run attitude and see how well that works in your flying career.

[Danger41]

So my initial response was to type, "eat shit, cadet", but since I was given a direct order to "expound", I will do that.

When you say something along the lines of "I was worried there was only 1 T-38 but now there's probably 6, I don't have to worry!" it indicates a couple of things. That you are already planning the path of least resistance and you haven't even commissioned yet. Secondly, you think highly enough of yourself that you're going to be able to coast into a T-38 and then go off to slip the surly bonds in whatever you put at the top of your dream sheet.

Point #1 - Things change, and by the time you go through UPT they may be in a mobility pilot shortage and now you're destined for AMC.  Not likely, but who knows. The only thing you can control is how hard you study, prepare, learn, and help your bros. There are other variables that are totally out of your control that will have a large effect on your assignment. But if you're already looking forward to taking the easy route, you'll find yourself left out of the party.

Point #2 - How many people in your ROTC det got UPT slots?  I guarantee it wasn't 100%.  It's the same for all sources.  There were plenty of people that wanted slots who didn't get them. People that get to UPT are not the type of people that fall ass backwards into it. They're usually types that have been good at everything they've ever done and are used to success.  The rub of it is that most of those people are not naturally gifted towards aviation, but they have developed a work ethic that will get them to be good aviators. Good luck earning a higher desired assignment than those people.

Please rebut my points and anything else I've written because it's been awhile since a Cadet came here and went full retard. 

[Clark Griswold]

On September 23, 2016 at 7:49 PM, Razor666 said:

So correct me if I am completely throwing out chaff and flares here as I only went to UPT at a place with 38s only but from what I have been told and discussed in the squadron is that studs that fly T-1s (nowadays at least) usually pick their top choices based off location and lifestyle. That being said, all bomber locations are pretty heinous (Minot, Dyess, Shreveport, Whiteman, etc). While the missions are cool as in you wipe bad guys off the face of the map, you never even land in or see the world really (C17 bros snapchat me drinking wine in Italy on a TDY while I'm sitting in the Deid). Therefore, your top T1 dudes put heavy platforms that are in sweet locations and land at even sweeter locations. Now if this is true and that you give your top studs what they want, then you give the bottom part of T1 guys the bombers (this is what they are doing with UAVs to T1 studs). As Pawnman mentioned before, the results are mixed. Can these bottom graduation dudes in T1 somehow learn to have great hands in these jets and push it up? Possibly. Or is it more likely that they get stuck in a jet they don't want, in a place they don't want, in a mission they don't want and all of this for a guaranteed commitment of ten years. You make pretty bitter people doing that which is dangerous in its own way. You cannot have the latter flying these planes because you need to have an aggressive 38 like attitude to fly through a SAM MEZ knowing that you will get shot at and you will most likely get hit (no one is out maneuvering a SAM at 2.0 G), but need to drop bombs on target on time.  

This was the problem currently going in my community until recently. We had older pilots that flew the T1 that showed a lackluster performance in these jets. The thinking then was we need to get dudes that we not the bottom of the barrel to revitalize the squadrons especially since we are seeing combat. Hence now why the last 2 years we have been getting T38 studs in the FTU that got bombers as a must assign who were very capable of going to something with a pointy nose. 

So I read I read your post and (and a few others) that seem to throw heavy guys who tracked T-1 maybe not under the bus but definitely into oncoming traffic, at first I was pissed (not that it matters) but after gonking a bit I realized it is just a reiteration of a theme I have heard before in muted tones, that we are basically inferior as pilots and I will assume that attitude carries over to us as officers as by your anecdotes we're lazy barely trainable retards.  I wish to dispel you of that idea.

I'm not going to get into a dick measuring contest with you on quals, instructor/evaluator time, chief of shop(s), FTU cadre, air medals (single events or cumulative), times shot at, times actually in danger or all the other shit that goes into a military flying career over multiple operations, AORs and other missions but sufficient to say when I look back at mine and other "fatty" pilots (actually I like that) the idea that we are stupid, lazy ignoramuses is complete bullshit that needs to stop.  

I realize that the power of that intellectual statement is overwhelming so I will expound...

1- We tracked T-1 because that is how the order of merit at Track Select placed us and some deliberately chose T-1s.  Not me, I wanted to 38s but I didn't place high enough so I gratefully took my T-1, worked hard, enjoyed it and look back with pride on what I accomplished.  

Sometimes when you have a group of really strong, fast runners the difference between first and last is actually not that much, it is just that in that competitive a race, the 0.1 seconds make the difference, it is not that number 3 or 4 are slow or weak it is just that the race was that competitive.

2 - We worked hard in T-1s and accomplished a difficult syllabus that was not spoon fed to us and we were expected to perform, held to high standards and had the motivation to perform well as we all wanted as you said "pick their top choices based off location and lifestyle".  If by our T-1 order of merit we were higher ranking, then we got to pick a better assignment, I can only speak for my class and the others I had friends in but no one slowed down because no one wanted to get stuck somewhere they didn't want to be doing something they didn't want to do.  That was going to happen to somebody as there are a finite number of the "dream jobs" but everyone I knew worked hard to have the most control over there own fate, we would have greatly have appreciated having a lazy turd in our class to be a target for a less than desirable assignment but alas we all worked hard and hence kept all of our class working hard.

They were not allowing T-1s to track bombers when I was going thru (2000 timeframe) but had they been allowing it, I would have worked my ass off for it.  I worked hard, didn't get my first choice but not my last either.  I look back and realize my job was not glamorous but important to do well, didn't expect a backslapping recognition for doing it as best I could and moved on.  

If your community (I assume B-1s) didn't get product they were completely happy with don't stereotype us all.  It could have been supplied thru a poor selection process, thru a selection process deliberately fed misfit toys to get rid of them or just not taken seriously by the releasing command(s).

3 - We fly aircraft that take airmanship, intelligence and a strong work ethic to learn to operate, manage the missions, lead the crew, support the team and roll with the punches when things go south.  

This is recognized and why several friends of mine (all T-1 tracked, heavy drivers) have gone on to fly U-2s, attend TPS, flown for the 89th, exchange tours and the like.    

Yours truly is a mediocre officer and I rate myself average yoke operator but I was cut from the same training cloth as those other heavy guys who have done more than me, the example of what they have done should give people pause before they have someone all figured out.

Edited September 26, 2016 by Clark Griswold
minor