Leaderboard

I agree. While it might be a distinction without a difference, I'm trying to separate the tactical question of whether a new civilian cadre can teach T-6s and the strategic question of why do we need to create a new civilian cadre to teach T-6s. I think the first answer is yes. I think the answer to the second question is this, this, and this.

Howdy y'all, Long time stalker, first time poster. Wanted to contribute to this thread as this was integral to my success in securing a fighter slot this past spring. Almost everything that was asked had some roots in what has already been said here. The one thing that I'd never heard before was something along the lines of: "You're going to get back from the B-Course and be qualified to fly one of the most advanced weapon systems in the world, and I'm going to make you make coffee and popcorn. How do you feel about this? Do you know why we do this?" In addition, I was asked very tailored questions as I had been rushing and interviewing with the squadron for the previous 2.5 years. This, being my third round with the unit, was the most relaxed interview I had ever been in. General gouge for the readers: if you are anything like me, you have been viewing this pursuit in the form of checking off boxes. In my humble opinion, that is the wrong way to think of it at the interview stage of the game. The reason why I got the slot this year was that I truly got to know myself outside of my desire for this career. This gave me a deeper understanding of my motives and inner character, which allowed me to communicate effectively and confidently in the interview. Number one piece of advice for the applicant who gets their first interview: think introspectively and truly get to know yourself before going in. Best of luck to everyone!

This should just become the entire hypocrisy thread... My favorite hypocrisy of the day from yesterday is the DUI arrest of Nancy Pelosi's husband. Despite lawyers and multiple freedom of information requests good ole California is refusing to release his booking photo, the bodycam video from the officers involved and any records whatsoever related to the arrest. If it was a member of the GOP it would have been pushed out to every network as breaking news.

Can't speak to the guard slot, but if you wanna fly, and this is a chance, take the opportunity! F*ck what people think of contractors flying and take advantage of the opportunity.

You should worry because it represents the continuation of the AF's failure to handle retention. It's great if you're an aspiring CAIP, and I agree, they'll be fully capable of teaching the syllabus. But if you're in the uniform, you should be quite convinced at this point that it will only get worse from here, because no one in charge is seemingly capable of wrapping their head around retention. Making your life better will *always* be the last, and least acceptable option.

Get trained by DAF as a T-6 CAIP (civilian augmentee instructor pilot - you can steal that one), teach for a while, earn some cred, get hired by the Guard, drop mil leave on DAF, profit.

My opinion is that until DC fast charging infrastructure is more plentiful (in progress), it makes a lot of sense for the average two-car family to have 1x EV for whoever has the longest commute + normal in-town family driving, and 1x ICE vehicle for road trips if that's something you do regularly. That'll probably be the case for the next 6-9 years if I had to guess. My family does not do a lot of road tripping, but we make an annual ~750 mile one-way trek to the beach and yea, that will be challenging if we decide to take the EV on that trip because it's already a long haul. Probably will opt to take my ICE truck for the duration/ease of fueling + larger cargo capacity, even though 14 mpg and $5 gas will be very painful. The EV vs ICE fueling numbers are still overwhelmingly favorable for 99% of our driving though, but as always (and literally in this case), YMMV. If/when we get some combination of swappable batteries, 500+ mile range, and > 800v charging, at that point even road tripping across our impressively big country will work great in EVs. The Porsche Taycan that you can buy today already has an 800v charger on board, which is awesome.

New thread to show how it's all about as I say not as I do... Luxury and corporate jets to receive special exemptions from European Union aviation fuel tax - TheBlaze

As a former non-rated officer that jumped into aviation and is actually currently teaching mil students in one of the IFS programs, this sounded like an awesome opportunity. Way better than slinging gear at the regionals, even with the GS-09 starting pay. But I reached out to AFPC and the program is strictly limited to aviation major students who got their degree and flight training at the same time, and you have to have graduated in the last two years. Bummer. It will be interesting to see how this program does. Having spent some decent time in the civilian aviation world now, I'm not sure this program will get all that many takers in the end. Most civ students want the airlines and nothing else, and those with mil flying interest will probably want to be actual military aviators and not T-6 only instructors. It's a pretty niche group of people that would actually look to do this job. Selfishly speaking here of course, but it seems a bit of a missed opportunity to not find a way to include folks like myself that have military experience and at least understand some of the demands the students have beyond just flying. I've found that to be super helpful in my current role. Let's be honest, this is a definitely just a grasp to try and fill IP manning with bodies that cost pennies on the dollar to even a FAIP.

GS-9s? Good luck. Sent from my iPhone using Baseops Network mobile app

To answer at least part of your question, the current plan is to use the EX as a C model replacement. That means a lot of different things depending on who you ask. Some people think that all guard units want is something to go fly CT BFM on weekends, some say they need it for homeland defense, some want it to pick up all or some of a multi role mission. To answer the other part of your question, Strike Eagles aren't going anywhere, anytime soon. Meaning that you would still be able to fly them for the better part of your flying career, if not the whole career. My long term hunch is that it will look something similar to a Super Hornet fleet, with different squadrons picking up different missions depending on pilot only, pilot/WSO, E or EX. That's what I would do if I were king, but I clearly have my biases.

They told me to get lost as well since I didn't graduate 141 program. I respectfully made it clear how foolish that was. I guess 3 engineering degrees with 7 years work experience, no busted rides and training coast guard cadets on the weekends just doesn't compare to that fresh 141 CFI. Whatever man. If that isn't already a redflag indicator that you'll likely be treated as a fourth rate citizen I don't know what is.

I will add, from my corner of the IFS world, IPs with military experience still tend to do better with instructing and relating to the students than straight civilian experience instructors. The absolute best (besides previous mil pilots) are the former CSOs, WSOs, NFOs, etc... that understand the nuances of briefing and debriefing appropriately, but even the former mil non-rated instructors understand better how formal training works in a military environment. That's not to say the civilians don't do well, but you can see students respond differently when they are dealing with a former mil IP vs civilian only. My one question is why has the Air Force not just made GS-12 or 13 T-6 IP positions that's open to hire anyone? Yeah that's not amazing pay and it would be hard to compete with the airlines, but certainly there are some guys who don't want to do the airlines that would be interested in being a T-6 IP after their time on active duty? Heck, I'm 400 hours short of heading to the regionals right now and I would gladly jump into a GS position T-6 job over going to the regionals. Haven't there been a couple of RFIs put out for contractor T-6's as well? What happened with those?

I don't think a civilian instructor would be better than a FAIP, but I do think they could be just as good. The challenge for the AF is what washout rate they are willing to accept for CFIs going through their version of PIT. Generally, studs with prior flight time tend to do well in UPT, so hiring CFIs out of a part 141 school (more rigid environment than part 61) should increase the odds of them getting through training. Plus, there's already a significant amount of civilian instructors teaching in UPT today: something like half the syllabus is sim training. Though I will concede that most of those instructors are former mil of some sort. But they manage their work schedules fine. On the flight line as a T-6 IP I think my typical day was around 10ish hours, so that'd make for a 4 day work week. I will say it's curious they are targeting to hire young CFIs, but it's probably because they are willing to work for cheaper. Sounds like this job is hiring at GS9, while I think the sim IPs are GS12s. I wouldn't see the civilian IPs touching any of the officer development portions of UPT, just the flying skills training. I'd expect leadership in the flights to still be military, and to enforce the military unique aspects of the UPT environment. It's similar to commissioning from ROTC: civilian education with some extra mil training/guidance/mentorship layered on top. The C-17 schoolhouse is heavy on contractor led instruction. PIQ students do all their training with a contractor until their first checkride. The sim instructors also teach the first half of both the copilot and AC airdrop courses.

I wouldn’t call close formation and ET3 “fundamental flying skills”…and I’m pretty sure they don’t teach this in IFT. A civilian IP can definitely learn/be able to teach it, but it will take much more training since they’ve never seen it in UPT. Oh, and here’s a data point: Some T-1 trained FAIPs have gone through CRs at T-6 PIT (and some have even washed out) for lack of formation flying abilities due to the cuts in UPT. As far as being a military officer, UPT is centered around flight instruction based on the foundation of military bearing, integrity, etc. If this wasn’t necessary, then mil cap wouldn’t be a thing. It’s not to say that 23 year old civilian pilots can’t also have these qualities, but there’s no training program to weed those people out who aren’t a good fit. Just think about people you’ve met who said they’ve wanted to be a military pilot but just didn’t have the qualities we seek in a military officer…there’s a reason why we’re different. Also, unless they rewrite the rules, you can’t work a civilian more than 40 hours a week without permission, compensation, etc. This changes the ball game quite a bit. Rucker, Kirtland, and other programs have had civilian/contractor flight instructors, but I’m pretty sure the vast majority have been very experienced military pilots in the past, and their instruction has been more/less limited to contact/instrument flying…they leave the formation and other stuff to the mil IPs. That all being said, my biggest concern is with the comments on this page who think this will make a better IP than those graduating from PIT…and across the board, I just don’t see it. Do you agree with Jice that these young civilian CFIs with 50 hours of C172 IP time will be better than a UPT graduate going to PIT to be a FAIP?

So a 23 year old, 50 hour CFI, who has never gone through any military training (flight or otherwise) will be better than a 25 year old officer who has gone through a commissioning source, graduated UPT (they still wash people out btw), and has successfully gone through the current PIT syllabus (which also still washed people out)?

I might be misunderstanding you…but are you suggesting that this program will make instruction at UPT better by making white jets more selective for AD pilots due to sending less qualified low time CFI’s through some sort of PIT (I’d be willing to bet their syllabus will not be the same as it is right now)?

Right, I didn't mean "Contact only" by stalls and falls. I just mean it's all very basic stuff, especially after the CAIP goes through a multi-year training pipeline. If a tanker bubba can teach low level nav and a C-5 bubba can teach form (one of my best form instructors was a C-5 guy. Super chill), there's no reason to write these CFIs off. They're not teaching 4 ship tactics against SA-69s. If we're ok with FAIPs, I don't see any reason to worry about CAIPs.

Let’s not forget all the Dems pushing for additional gun control laws while failing to enforce those already on the books.

If this was an option when I was a punk ass 22 year old CFI building hours, I would’ve jumped at this. I know tons of my peers that would have too. A bunch of them flew puddle jumpers from Huron, SD to other upper Midwest garden spots trying to build hours and they were all miserable. This is a fantastic option for young CFI’s. Acceptance amongst the IP cadre will be interesting. I’ll bet most of the cool IP’s who also are good pilots will be great to work with. I’ll bet a lot of the guys who suck at flying and are burdens to every organization they’re a part of (yet convinced they’re God’s gift to mil aviation) will be a pain.

First off, you won't be a civilian contractor. You'll be a civilian employee to the government. Big difference in that you won't be beholden to contact renegotiations and other instability. Govt civilian has it's pluses and minuses. It will be interesting to see how they manage these people as the civilian structure is much different from the military structure to include performance, feedback and removal from positions. Will you be shit on as a civilian? This is a complicated question. Will you get work the mil guys don't want to do? Depends on how they write the position. Will you be respected by students and other IPs? You'll definitely have an uphill battle to earn respect as an IP. You'll be missing the "been there done that" of the military in general. I would imagine students will avoid going to these guys for mentoring and insight as they will not be relevant for military flying outside the few T-6 hours gained at PIT. That said, if you can be humble and do the job for what it is, you'll probably have a great time doing something your peers won't be able to do. No reason to pass on it if your motivation is purely for the flying experience. As for bailing for the guard, I haven't seen a civilian position come with a commitment and I don't know if that's even legal. If you don't have a contract, you can pack your bags at any point.

https://www.wsj.com/articles/i-rented-an-electric-car-for-a-four-day-road-trip-i-spent-more-time-charging-it-than-i-did-sleeping-11654268401

Promise you that the AETCI about Instructor-Student no-frat. will still apply...AETC wouldn't condone that in a thousand years.

What did you expect from the same leadership caste that ran the service for the past 20 years? They were never good at leading or managing, they just relied on the patriotism of youth and the comfort-seeking of age (amplified by an uncertain economic environment) to solve their manning issues. Now the patriotism is diminishing in the next generation and the older pilots have realized that making 2-3x the pay for 16 days of easy work a month is worth the fear of change... So they are scrambling. Add on the insult that the O6-O10s had to eat a million shit sandwiches, leave their families behind, and repeatedly fight force reductions over their careers, but now they have to convince/beg/bribe a bunch of Millennials and Gen-Z to stay. Good luck.

Ha, I don't even meet the minimum qualifications...I guess I should have spent more time working at that GPA.

From what I understand the F-15 EX Eagle II is replacing, in part, the single-seat F-15 C/D models, not the F-15E Strike Eagle, i.e. the one with the WSOs onboard. Boeing apparently offered that as a possibility back in 2020, but I haven't seen any movement on that actually happening; perhaps someone in the Strike Eagle community can speak to that more intelligently. It should not make a big difference one way or the other. Either the Strike Eagle will continue on unchanged, get replaced with a two-seat EX, or by the single-seat F-35, meaning slightly less CSO seats in the Air Force, or who knows. It doesn't really impact you as a individual unless you're actively a WSO in that community already. And most importantly, don't put the cart before the horse...there are plenty of platforms with CSOs/WSOs/etc. and if you're trying to board for CSO, I would get excited about the possibilities of any/all of them. I might recommend shooting for the U-28 or the AC-130J just based on my experience but YMMV 🇺🇸 Good luck!

No one is trying to change your mind. Just an good video that discussed a lot of points found in this chat group. Regress to sarcasm achieved nsplayr Accidental double post deleted. But did you watch both? Does 2 year old logic make it wrong?

If you completed pilot training, you’re rated. It will be easier to get hired at a unit with a similar aircraft to what you’re flying in the Navy/USMC (e.g. fighter to fighter). But, it is completely possible to do a course or two to switch from heavy to fighter or helo to fixed wing (fighter or heavy). That said, your chances of getting hired are significantly reduced, but certainly not impossible. It’s unit dependent (what are their current needs) and if AETC has slots for your specific training requirement on the timeline you want/unit wants.

A 2 year old, 34 minute long Ben Shapiro video, posted twice. Well hot damn consider my mind changed! 😆

No, I’m saying that with fewer green bags walking around we need to send other than bottom of the barrel guys to make sure the pipeline produces something we want. I’m not concerned about the quality of instruction from the GS hires just because they’re GS hires. As long as they’re provided with valid training, they’re likely to be better than a FAIP or bottom third aviator from any other community because they’ll be able to focus on their j.o.b.