Drone Pilots: We Don’t Get No Respect

[Chaff]

If you don't know the numbers look them up. ...50+ percent crash rate.

I would be interested to know where you looked that up

[dvlax40]

I would be interested to know where you looked that up

50 + the rate of manned. I guess I was wrong. Currently they crash at a rate of 300%+ the rate of manned crashes.

I believe it's about 9 per 100000 hours to 3

Don't need to cite the sources. They are it there and readily google able

[HU&W]

50 + the rate of manned. I guess I was wrong. Currently they crash at a rate of 300%+ the rate of manned crashes.

I believe it's about 9 per 100000 hours to 3

Don't need to cite the sources. They are it there and readily google able

Here's the 2013 open source list (https://usaf.aib.law.af.mil/indexFY13.htm). The math doesn't jive either way you look at it. Are you including Army? My googlefu must be weak.

Edit: I did find this June 2014 article that references the following mishap rates:

MQ1/9/RQ4 combined - 3.23:100k

MQ9 - 1.95:100k

F16 - 3.63:100k

F15 - 1.26:100k

U2 - 0:100k

General Aviation - 12:100k

Edited June 2, 2015 by HU&W

[FUEL]

Logistics debateAble? Ok I'm not one to throw stones but ###### that shit dude. If you don't know the numbers look them up. bandwidth, maint, 50+ percent crash rate. The cadre of dudes task with control and retrieval.

If manned assets fell out of the sky and required so much shit and were so vulnerable and only were slightly better in very certain situations the Air Force would be part of the army again so fast your head would spin

My argument (which could be wrong, I am assuming), is not the total logistics tail is smaller; we know, DCGS, LRE/MCE, Comm, MX, etc takes more than manned. Rather, where the logistics footprint is itself. In some cases I believe manned would require too large of a footprint too close to the area of interest to pull the same on station hours than our national security policy/strategy allows or is advantageous to our goals.

[dvlax40]

https://www.businessinsider.com/bloomberg-study-shows-drones-most-accident-prone-in-air-force-2012-6

This was compiled information and lumps the drones together vs manned aircraft.

[KState_Poke22]

My argument (which could be wrong, I am assuming), is not the total logistics tail is smaller; we know, DCGS, LRE/MCE, Comm, MX, etc takes more than manned. Rather, where the logistics footprint is itself. In some cases I believe manned would require too large of a footprint too close to the area of interest to pull the same on station hours than our national security policy/strategy allows or is advantageous to our goals.

That's not necessarily true for some platforms, they can have a pretty damn small footprint compared to unmanned.

[zrooster99]

Logistics debateAble? Ok I'm not one to throw stones but fuck that shit dude. If you don't know the numbers look them up. bandwidth, maint, 50+ percent crash rate. The cadre of dudes task with control and retrieval.

If manned assets fell out of the sky and required so much shit and were so vulnerable and only were slightly better in very certain situations the Air Force would be part of the army again so fast your head would spin

Yeah, I just deployed with a manned ISR asset a shit load of times over the last 5 years of my career and have a strong background in aircraft MX and support...what do I know. I'm pro manned ISR, but you could make the argument either way. Some manned assets use a lot of bandwidth too...

That's not necessarily true for some platforms, they can have a pretty damn small footprint compared to unmanned.

Depends on how many orbits you need and how close to the objective you are and what kind of legs your manned asset has. If you're going to provide the "unblinking eye" it takes some extra crews to fly the schedule and possibly an additional tail to cover down in case of MX issues.

BL, it depends...

[dvlax40]

Yeah, I just deployed with a manned ISR asset a shit load of times over the last 5 years of my career and have a strong background in aircraft MX and support...what do I know. I'm pro manned ISR, but you could make the argument either way. Some manned assets use a lot of bandwidth too...

.

BL, it depends...

Not saying you don't know anything just felt like saying logistics aren't a huge issue was glossing over a potential snake pit.

You're never going to convince me that unmanned ISR is anything more then the governments wet dream of being able to kill/spy without officially sending in American personnel. Which I don't have a problem with. But call a spade a spade. The saves money argument is garbage

[MooseAg03]

I didn't want to derail the Track Selects thread any more than it already has been. How many of you out there received the Career Decisions survey? I completed it last night and was surprised at how detailed the questions were about future plans regarding obtaining my ATP, etc. I thought their idea of a 15 year total commitment for UPT (8 active/7 reserve) was ridiculous.

[HossHarris]

Yup.

That's who you want flying your planes. Indentured servants.

What could possibly go wrong.

[Magellan]

I thought their idea of a 15 year total commitment for UPT (8 active/7 reserve) was ridiculous.

Considering for a second how many people go to the Academy just so they could get a pilot shot. How crazy is it that you can get 18 year old kids to sign up for just about anything? And it isn't very likely after 4 years of indoctrination they will know any better at age 22 that a commitment locking them in until age 37 is a bad idea.

Unless of course they do some research and stumble upon forums like these.

I think this is funny when other gigs like the 18A job only have a 6 year ADSC. Especially when you consider the only thing keeping the wheels on the RPA wagon is utilizing UPT grads that were non-vol'd or wanted to get the hell out of their old community. But don't worry we have General Chang at A1 to make it all go smoothly!

[MooseAg03]

Nothing concrete so far, but I've heard from several sources that a large portion of UPT students these days are Capts, has the average UPT student class actually changed that much? When I went through we only had 1LT and no Capts. Maybe that shows less willingness for young people to sign away 10 years with the good chance at least half of that will be spent in a GCS.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Majestik Møøse]

How many of you out there received the Career Decisions survey? I completed it last night and was surprised at how detailed the questions were about future plans regarding obtaining my ATP, etc. I thought their idea of a 15 year total commitment for UPT (8 active/7 reserve) was ridiculous.

Dudes need to respond to this survey with nothing held back. Especially the high quality guys that are deciding to leave. Also, there's a question in there asking if a $35k bonus would help, so I expect that to be the AF's next move.

[Tulsa]

I gave my $.02 worth on said survey above. Their 15 year TFI commitment is absurd no matter how much money is offered. The USAF needs to readjust their reality of what type of force they want to retain. If outside agencies are hiring no one will sign up for a 15 year TFI commitment, regardless of how much cash is thrown down. So, let's accept the reality and realize we're going to be a younger, more inexperienced force. I suggested 6 year commitments to allow for initial training and follow on flow to the ARC without the lifelock commitment. Much better recruitment and retention net, vice treating the symptoms and not the disease.

[dvlax40]

I gave my $.02 worth on said survey above. Their 15 year TFI commitment is absurd no matter how much money is offered. The USAF needs to readjust their reality of what type of force they want to retain. If outside agencies are hiring no one will sign up for a 15 year TFI commitment, regardless of how much cash is thrown down. So, let's accept the reality and realize we're going to be a younger, more inexperienced force. I suggested 6 year commitments to allow for initial training and follow on flow to the ARC without the lifelock commitment. Much better recruitment and retention net, vice treating the symptoms and not the disease.

shack

[Karl Hungus]

Dudes need to respond to this survey with nothing held back. Especially the high quality guys that are deciding to leave. Also, there's a question in there asking if a $35k bonus would help, so I expect that to be the AF's next move.

I'd hope people realize that a potential $35k bonus simply corrects the current $25k bonus for 15+ years of inflation. I doubt it would meaningfully change the dynamic- those who take the bonus now or at $35k are still those who were going to stay anyway. Based on what folks talk about in my community, I'd say the bonus would have to be approaching $50k to get people who were headed out the door to change their minds.

As for the 8 years AD/7 years ARC UPT ADSC... would be interesting to see how that would work. Is AD going to force ARC units to hire people? Does the ARC get a say? What if the ARC doesn't operate whatever you flew on AD, or if you want to change an airframe... who pays for the new qual? Sounds like the brainchild of some AD staffer that doesn't understand how the ARC works, which isn't surprising.

[Homestar]

I literally LOLed when I read the question about 15 year total force commitment. Dumb dumb. Money doesn't solve all problems, but it solves a lot. At the 10 year point a pilot with an ATP could make more money on the outside and not have to deploy. Until the AF corrects this it will not solve anything.

[di1630]

No matter how long the commitment, the USAF will never have a problem getting people to sign up....however once the novelty has worn off and dudes realize they are indentured servants to a complete clusterfooook of an organization where the leadership, err, managers either are morons or liars, possibly both, they will have the lowest morale issue ever seen.

Jesus, I just am in awe of how the USAF can make the worlds greatest job undesirable.

[Sim]

https://www.jqpublicblog.com/rpa-manning-in-shambles-air-force-enacting-desperate-fixes/

RPA Manning in Shambles, Air Force Enacting Desperate Fixes

[Disregard]

Have to appreciate the ad on JQP.

[Slander]

Anyone else think the underlying issue is that no one will stem the insatiable appetite for RPAs? We're almost unable to sustain the number of CAPs we have now, but do we actually need all of the CAPs we have or are told we need? Are the COCOMs demanding something unnecessarily?

[Jaded]

I think that the brass will do nothing to fix the underlying issues and will continue to put band-aids on the situation to the detriment of the long term viability of the airframes and career field.

[sqwatch]

Anyone else think the underlying issue is that no one will stem the insatiable appetite for RPAs? We're almost unable to sustain the number of CAPs we have now, but do we actually need all of the CAPs we have or are told we need? Are the COCOMs demanding something unnecessarily?

nope, they are amazing for the fight we put ourselves in.

speaking from the perspective of a guy who spent 3 years in the uav community and has gone back to the manned world and been fortunate enough to fly combat sorties post uav life, they bring so much to the AO. But I would not go back to uav land even knowing the positive affect they have on the fight because the quality of life for my family was poor and i love flying like William loves interns. The UAV mission undoubtedly helps the fights we choose to involve ourselves in, I just don't want to be the guy doing it.

[Clark Griswold]

nope, they are amazing for the fight we put ourselves in.

speaking from the perspective of a guy who spent 3 years in the uav community and has gone back to the manned world and been fortunate enough to fly combat sorties post uav life, they bring so much to the AO. But I would not go back to uav land even knowing the positive affect they have on the fight because the quality of life for my family was poor and i love flying like William loves interns. The UAV mission undoubtedly helps the fights we choose to involve ourselves in, I just don't want to be the guy doing it.

2

I did a UAV assignment then got back to the manned world and would not go back, it's important but not why I joined, I have no doubt that if they attached a golden apple to it like an ACE program and an emphasis on QOL to keep dudes from getting burned out and pissed off (non-vol centric perspective) they would take the RPA job with more enthusiasm

Expanding on the idea they are good for the fight we are currently in, the anti-UAV systems are starting to come online too, move counter-move.

https://www.flightglobal.com/news/articles/british-smes-develop-system-to-counter-uavs-412481/

https://www.uasvision.com/2015/06/10/thales-developing-counter-uav-technology/

https://www.militaryaerospace.com/articles/2014/03/army-focusing-on-counter-uav-weapons.html

https://www.popsci.com/south-korea-gets-ready-drone-drone-warfare

Minor edit.

Edited June 14, 2015 by Clark Griswold

[guineapigfury]

Anyone else think the underlying issue is that no one will stem the insatiable appetite for RPAs? We're almost unable to sustain the number of CAPs we have now, but do we actually need all of the CAPs we have or are told we need? Are the COCOMs demanding something unnecessarily?

We're not "almost unable to sustain the number of CAPs we have now", we are unable. We're cutting from 65 to 60 CAPs and that won't even begin to fix the problem. The number of pilots talented enough to do job well and willing to do the job long term on Active Duty might properly man 15 CAPs IMHO. The Air Force erred grievously in letting this niche capability expand to it's current level.