Guest Safe&Clear Posted October 23, 2007 Posted October 23, 2007 You would think the Navy would have asked this question a long, long time ago.... but, I just had a "Pipeline Production Consultant" (well-paid civilian) ask me why, in my opinion, the AF primary syllabus (T-6/T-37) could be completed in 10-ish weeks less time than the Navy's??? I've done a brief search, but haven't been able to find a copy of the T-6 syllabus. I'd like to peruse it and see what, if any, additional instruction/ flights Navy T-34 guys get that AF guys don't. Anybody able to get me one of these? We're also wondering why it takes at least 15 weeks longer to qual a Navy F-18 driver than it does an AF F-15E pilot. Of course Carrier Qual takes some time, but what else do they do that takes significantly longer than the T-38/ IFS/ FTU pipeline for the Strike Eagle? Your opinions and responses are welcome.
POKESC17 Posted October 23, 2007 Posted October 23, 2007 If I recall the number of hours were not that much different at whiting than at AF UPT bases. It took me a little over 11 months to finish phase I and II and by the time I track selected and was ready to PCS it was over a year. Keep in mind, I did three hurrivacs, had one freak hail storm that downed over three quarters of the fleet, endured a fuel shortage after katrina and just had general bad weather all the way around. It also took me over a month just to complete the aerobatics phase becuase weather would never get above solo mins. If I remember correctly each stud does something like four or five aerobatics solo's and if they don't get up in five days they require a warm up ride before they are allowed to solo. The five day rule also goes across the board for all syllabus flights and the IP's took advantage of the giving studs 86 rides. I think it has a lot more to do with it being a more self paced program to. If you weren't ready, you didn't fly. The sim phase is also seperate from the flying phase. I never flew and had sims at the same time. When you started sims, you did nothing but sims until you were completed with that block of training, then you would go back to the flightline. There might have been some more navigation sorties since the formation portion was so short but nothing major. Looking back over my log book I had some months were I flew only twice in a month but the average seems to be around six. The most I had in a month was 13. You can also add another three to six weeks of time into the mix becuase after you finish the six weeks of phase 1, you will sit at whiting for one to three weeks (actually knew a few that sat longer than that) waiting to class up then you will under go another three or four weeks of T-34 specific academics and then start EP sims after that. Thats not really the syllabus for T-6's you asked for but you can start to see why it takes longer with the Navy.
HerkDerka Posted October 23, 2007 Posted October 23, 2007 (edited) but, I just had a "Pipeline Production Consultant" (well-paid civilian) ask me why, in my opinion, the AF primary syllabus (T-6/T-37) could be completed in 10-ish weeks less time than the Navy's??? Ugh. A contractor who is trying to save money and thinks it's a syllabus issue. The AF and the Navy have two different attitudes/approaches when it comes to pilot training. That's why it takes longer on the Navy side. If he wants to shorten the Navy's training time, it isn't something that can be completely changed by a new syllbus. It's a culture change. -It took me a little over 11 months to finish phase I and II -by the time I track selected and was ready to PCS it was over a year -each stud does something like four or five aerobatics solo's and if they don't get up in five days they require a warm up ride before they are allowed to solo. -If you weren't ready, you didn't fly. -When you started sims, you did nothing but sims until you were completed with that block of training -I had some months were I flew only twice in a month but the average seems to be around six. The most I had in a month was 13. Case in point. Big Blue is focused on maxing training and meeting deadlines. The Navy not so much. HD Edited October 23, 2007 by HerkDerka
Guest thefranchise Posted October 24, 2007 Posted October 24, 2007 Ugh. A contractor who is trying to save money and thinks it's a syllabus issue. The AF and the Navy have two different attitudes/approaches when it comes to pilot training. That's why it takes longer on the Navy side. If he wants to shorten the Navy's training time, it isn't something that can be completely changed by a new syllbus. It's a culture change. Case in point. Big Blue is focused on maxing training and meeting deadlines. The Navy not so much. HD focused so much that the end product is worse overall due to big blue trying to check boxes and push weak studs through a program just to meet a deadline and keep pipepline #s high.
HerkDerka Posted October 24, 2007 Posted October 24, 2007 focused so much that the end product is worse overall due to big blue trying to check boxes and push weak studs through a program just to meet a deadline and keep pipepline #s high. I wouldn't necessarily say that. Running a set training timeline forces the student to adapt and learn or wash out. Arguements can be made either way, I'm not getting into that. I'm just saying it will take more than a syllabus change to reduce training time for the Navy. HD
Guest thefranchise Posted October 24, 2007 Posted October 24, 2007 I wouldn't necessarily say that. Running a set training timeline forces the student to adapt and learn or wash out. Arguements can be made either way, I'm not getting into that. I'm just saying it will take more than a syllabus change to reduce training time for the Navy. HD i agree with you totally but what ends up happening on AF side is nobody washes out when the timeline get crunched from delays; no one wants to hook people and suffer sorties that were non-timeline productive. i've seen BLATENT unsat rides written off as good just to get studs done on time and out the door. disgusting IMO.
Toro Posted October 24, 2007 Posted October 24, 2007 Dickhead switch on. Search for "Syllabus" reveals this five page thread with the last post about a month ago. Navy vs. AF training - In there Corpus and Whiting issues - In there Pushing weak studs through the AF program - In there Good discussion, but unless you've got a T-6 syllabus for S&C, take it over there. Dickhead switch off.
HerkDerka Posted October 24, 2007 Posted October 24, 2007 Here you go S&C, courtesy of www.t6driver.com AETC/CNATRA JPPT Syllabus HD
Guest Bender Posted October 24, 2007 Posted October 24, 2007 Dickhead switch, nice... I wonder if I have one of those? Would be nice to know. BENDY
HercDude Posted October 25, 2007 Posted October 25, 2007 Dickhead switch, nice... I wonder if I have one of those? Would be nice to know. BENDY Wait, you can turn those off?
pawnman Posted October 25, 2007 Posted October 25, 2007 Wait, you can turn those off? Some of us can. There are those who have trouble reaching the switch by themselves.
Guest Safe&Clear Posted October 25, 2007 Posted October 25, 2007 Here you go S&C, courtesy of www.t6driver.com AETC/CNATRA JPPT Syllabus HD Thanks a million, HerkaDerka. Not sure if it'll enlighten me or anybody else but thanks for posting it. I'm at home on the sofa, however, and ain't about to open it now cause I really don't care THAT much! Moderators, please leave this up until I can download it at the office. Thanks!
Recommended Posts
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 accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now