B-21 Raider

[Breckey]

 
My apologies, I meant to type active associate FTUs, to address the specific point about the B-21 FTU being pitched in SD. 
I wasn't aware there was an F-35 FTU active association, if true then I stand corrected. I'm of course keenly aware of legacy fleet FTU active associates (bit of a personal ancient history that's no longer here nor there), which is why I stipulated next-gen in my comments. BL, I don't see regAF ceding ground on new toy FTU PAAs. 

The MH-139 FTU is going to the 908th at Maxwell as an active associate. It's needed too because a legacy Herk unit has no idea what to do with a helicopter. It makes almost zero sense.

[pawnman]

2 hours ago, hindsight2020 said:

Fwiw, no active association (likely would have been the FTU, if the 307th/10th AF M.O. in KBAD was any indication) was ever pitched for the Bone side of the 307th. Which is to say that the active association angle is moot. 

What's your take/sense of the reasons for that unwillingness? 

Because they want to be "cool" and "tactical" and not have to teach the new kids how to fly the jet.  They're basically part of the 9th Bomb Squadron (the active combat unit at Dyess).  Share a building, fly rainbowed with the 9th, share tails, share maintenance.  The really ironic part is when it was pitched to us at Dyess, they were supposedly going to fly with the FTU.  They actually took billets from the FTU to create billets in the reserve unit, something the current FTU commander is looking to fix (either getting them to fly with the FTU, or taking the billets from the combat unit since that's who the reserves are augmenting).

 

[Sprkt69]

2 hours ago, Breckey said:

The MH-139 FTU is going to the 908th at Maxwell as an active associate. It's needed too because a legacy Herk unit has no idea what to do with a helicopter. It makes almost zero sense.

Word is lots of politics and the fact that Kirtland is not amazing.

[Disco_Nav963]

1 hour ago, pawnman said:

Because they want to be "cool" and "tactical" and not have to teach the new kids how to fly the jet.  They're basically part of the 9th Bomb Squadron (the active combat unit at Dyess).  Share a building, fly rainbowed with the 9th, share tails, share maintenance.  The really ironic part is when it was pitched to us at Dyess, they were supposedly going to fly with the FTU.  They actually took billets from the FTU to create billets in the reserve unit, something the current FTU commander is looking to fix (either getting them to fly with the FTU, or taking the billets from the combat unit since that's who the reserves are augmenting).

 

The original vision for the association was mixed support to FTU and ops, and we had half the squadron aligned with and actively flying the FTU mission. But RegAF asked us to support the combat squadron exclusively, and at that time most of our FTU augments pulled chocks because they weren't looking to deploy at that stage of their lives. The billets that came from the 9th/28th were vacant UMD billets that hadn't actually been filled by AFPC in some time. It cost the 28th zero actual personnel, the requirement for the 28th to maintain some people CMR to support 9th deployments went away, and seeing as the B-Course classes are 1/3rd smaller now and the FTU is out of the TX and FIC flying business, the demand signal on the FTU is demonstrably down.

When we were told to support the combat squadron we naturally adjusted our hiring strategy and brought in more off the street and crossflow guys, so naturally we need our instructors to instruct our non-instructors... Not to mention supporting MQT, upgrade, FIC etc. at the 9th [who we associate with, not are "part of"]. And we are required by our MAJCOM to fly our own Flying Hour Program, so while we did the rainbow crew thing as we were standing up [we're still "standing up," we've only gotten to 2/3rds of our planned footprint so far], now sometimes we just need our instructors butts in seats, flying the line, making RAP, and getting CT. Instructor CT is a good thing... Especially when we rainbow up in the deployed arena as we should.

When we've gotten a specific request from the FTU that we could actually support (i.e. not three months ago, when we were deployed) we've sent people... Case in point, two of our IWSOs flew with them this month. And two of our new hires (1x IP/1x IWSO) are going to live/work primarily in the FTU (with the caveat that they have to stay CMR and will have to deploy). But our force structure can't change on a dime just because one year RegAF wants us all-in on ops and two years later new local leadership wants us back in the schoolhouse in a big way... Especially because while RegAF's near rock may be FTU production, AFRC's long game is B-21 involvement and at Dyess that means Ops/Test/WIC, not FTU. There are two parties to this association, and AFRC is not going to let the other party unilaterally dictate our priorities. RegAF needs our Ops/Mx manpower and we need RegAF's iron, so we each hold some of the cards, and we (ARC) know we aren't going to get everything we want, but when y'all don't get everything you want it isn't because we have bad attitudes. It's because we're pursuing our organizational interests (from Sq to NAF to MAJCOM) like any rational group of people.

[Breckey]

9 hours ago, Sprkt69 said:

Word is lots of politics and the fact that Kirtland is not amazing.

1. Yes a lot of politics

2. Kirtland is far better. There really aren’t any training areas or ranges near Maxwell that will further reduce the training quality. The only thing that Maxwell has is a little used runway.

This further reduces the number of good assignments for the “Huey” as Yokota is most likely going away as well.

[hindsight2020]

11 hours ago, Disco_Nav963 said:

AFRC's long game is B-21 involvement and at Dyess that means Ops/Test/WIC, not FTU. 

And that's the signature marker that tells me RCA TFI is a pipedream, and not at all the direction of interest by the 10th/307th critters on the AFRC side. They're not going to dismantle the entire TFI footprint in order to make a move towards the B-21 FTU (assuming it ends up in SD in the first place) in a duty station that'd make the DYS operation look like UNICEF charity work on the the commuting/travelpay front. 😄 

 

 

[pawnman]

On 12/31/2020 at 2:31 AM, Disco_Nav963 said:

The original vision for the association was mixed support to FTU and ops, and we had half the squadron aligned with and actively flying the FTU mission. But RegAF asked us to support the combat squadron exclusively, and at that time most of our FTU augments pulled chocks because they weren't looking to deploy at that stage of their lives. The billets that came from the 9th/28th were vacant UMD billets that hadn't actually been filled by AFPC in some time. It cost the 28th zero actual personnel, the requirement for the 28th to maintain some people CMR to support 9th deployments went away, and seeing as the B-Course classes are 1/3rd smaller now and the FTU is out of the TX and FIC flying business, the demand signal on the FTU is demonstrably down.

When we were told to support the combat squadron we naturally adjusted our hiring strategy and brought in more off the street and crossflow guys, so naturally we need our instructors to instruct our non-instructors... Not to mention supporting MQT, upgrade, FIC etc. at the 9th [who we associate with, not are "part of"]. And we are required by our MAJCOM to fly our own Flying Hour Program, so while we did the rainbow crew thing as we were standing up [we're still "standing up," we've only gotten to 2/3rds of our planned footprint so far], now sometimes we just need our instructors butts in seats, flying the line, making RAP, and getting CT. Instructor CT is a good thing... Especially when we rainbow up in the deployed arena as we should.

When we've gotten a specific request from the FTU that we could actually support (i.e. not three months ago, when we were deployed) we've sent people... Case in point, two of our IWSOs flew with them this month. And two of our new hires (1x IP/1x IWSO) are going to live/work primarily in the FTU (with the caveat that they have to stay CMR and will have to deploy). But our force structure can't change on a dime just because one year RegAF wants us all-in on ops and two years later new local leadership wants us back in the schoolhouse in a big way... Especially because while RegAF's near rock may be FTU production, AFRC's long game is B-21 involvement and at Dyess that means Ops/Test/WIC, not FTU. There are two parties to this association, and AFRC is not going to let the other party unilaterally dictate our priorities. RegAF needs our Ops/Mx manpower and we need RegAF's iron, so we each hold some of the cards, and we (ARC) know we aren't going to get everything we want, but when y'all don't get everything you want it isn't because we have bad attitudes. It's because we're pursuing our organizational interests (from Sq to NAF to MAJCOM) like any rational group of people.

Fair enough.  I wasn't aware it was a request direct from RegAF.  Sitting down in the FTU, we were told that we were losing those UMD slots but that the reserves would help with the FTU burden.  For like the first six months, there were three guys that would fly with us about once a month.  Then it stopped.  To the point where one newly-hired reservist asked the reserve leadership about flying with the FTU and was told "we don't do that.  Ever.  Don't ask again".

As for those manning slots being unfilled...you may have a point.  But it also makes the numbers look better so they're less likely to get help.  If I have 8 of 32 manning slots filled, I'm at 25% manning.  If I have 8 of 16 slots filled, I'm suddenly at 50% manning - twice as good.  With the same number of people in the squadron.

Anyway, it's not my problem anymore for a few years.  And with the B-21 starting up and all the restrictions they've put on the B-1, I wouldn't be surprised to see the FTU shut down in a couple years anyway.  What's the point in training a dude to fly a plane that's getting retired before he even upgrades to mission lead or aircraft commander?

[Sua Sponte]

I saw a dude go from legacy Herk initial qual to then immediately go through KC-135 initial qual because RegAF upgraded to C-130Js. Don’t hold your breath.

[Scooter14]

...
What's the point in training a dude to fly a plane that's getting retired before he even upgrades to mission lead or aircraft commander?

You’re not trying to use common sense here are you?

[pawnman]

5 hours ago, Scooter14 said:

 

You’re not trying to use common sense here are you?

 

You're right.  The Texas delegation would pitch a fit if we said we were closing a squadron at Dyess for any reason.

[08Dawg]

17 hours ago, pawnman said:

You're right.  The Texas delegation would pitch a fit if we said we were closing a squadron at Dyess for any reason.

Because Texas is so lacking for other Air Force bases...

[Sprkt69]

On 12/31/2020 at 8:38 AM, Breckey said:

1. Yes a lot of politics

2. Kirtland is far better. There really aren’t any training areas or ranges near Maxwell that will further reduce the training quality. The only thing that Maxwell has is a little used runway.

This further reduces the number of good assignments for the “Huey” as Yokota is most likely going away as well.

Ft Ruck is pretty close. Maybe Elgin too?

if you take one of the mouths to feed from Kirtland, doesn’t that mean more range time for the 60/22/130 crews? Maybe get them back toward timeline?

[Breckey]

Range time isn't the reason they're behind the timeline. I think the plan is to use the Rucker LZs as of now but now you have zero high DA training.

There is no way that the Eglin ranges could support another customer and it's 100+ miles each way.

[08Dawg]

On 1/3/2021 at 3:06 PM, Breckey said:

Range time isn't the reason they're behind the timeline. I think the plan is to use the Rucker LZs as of now but now you have zero high DA training.

There is no way that the Eglin ranges could support another customer and it's 100+ miles each way.

Given where these things will be based (AFGSC missile bases), do you necessarily need high DA training?  Asking out of ignorance. 

[Breckey]

FE Warren and Malmstrom are regularly above 5K DA. The KPP point for performance was FEW in the summertime (6K MSL, 35C).

[SPAWNmaster]

The boys and gals at Fairchild also do plenty of mountain flying as well. 

[504PIR]

The purpose is to establish an Air Force Reserve Command Formal Training Unit (FTU) at Maxwell AFB for Boeing MH-139A Grey Wolf medium-lift helicopters to provide modern capability gaps training in the areas of speed, range, endurance, payload, and survivability in support of the Air Force Global Strike Command’s intercontinental ballistic missile missions.

The first aircraft would arrive in the fourth quarter of fiscal year 2023 (July, August, September), with the remainder to be delivered during FY 2024. A total of 10 MH-139 helicopter aircraft at Maxwell AFB; 8 aircraft would serve as the primary aircraft inventory and 2 as backup. The MH-139 mission is slated to replace the mission of the Air Force’s aging C-130H Hercules aircraft of the 908th Airlift Wing (908 AW) currently at Maxwell AFB. The divestiture of the C-130H aircraft is anticipated to occur during FY 2022.

The MH-139 program would capitalize on the Fort Rucker airspace operations areas (on the north side side of the Fort Rucker complex and south of Maxwell AFB out to the 30-minute ring of distance) for unprepared landing areas. Additionally, the MH-139 program is proposing to utilize both the Gunnery ranges at Fort Benning (owned by the US Army and located approximately 90 nm east of Maxwell) and Camp Shelby (owned by the Mississippi National Guard F-16 unit approximately 165 nm west-southwest of Maxwell AFB). Fort Benning would be designated as the primary range, with Camp Shelby as the secondary range. Fort Benning usage would be 3 sorties per week (day and/or night), 2 hours per sortie approximately. 

The FTU would require 3,722 flight hours annually for training. A total of 1,760 sorties would be required, with 683 going to the municipal airports and 1,091 going to Fort Rucker heliports. The 683 sorties to the municipal airports would be distributed equally on an annual basis to all of the airports listed above. A total of 3,560 closed patterns (an additional 7,120 operations) would be performed annually.

In order to support the MH-139 aircraft, Maxwell AFB would require up to 489 personnel, a partial replacement from the current staffing. Associated personnel would consist of active duty, reserve full-time, reserve part-time, contractors, and civilians. The current staffing level of the C-130 personnel (532 personnel) would be reduced with the replacement of the MH-139 FTU.

[B52gator]

She’s airborne

https://x.com/d_great_white/status/1723001325351305510?s=20

https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/b-21-raider-has-flown-for-the-first-time

[jonlbs]

12 minutes ago, b52gator said:

https://x.com/d_great_white/status/1723001325351305510?s=20

 

B-21 first flight, Full big dick, America, F*** terrorists

Brian's Stepdad November 2023

 

Such potent and poetic words.

Edited November 10, 2023 by jonlbs

[Biff_T]

3 hours ago, b52gator said:

She’s airborne

https://x.com/d_great_white/status/1723001325351305510?s=20


 

Somebody let that crew know there's a Viper on it's six. 

[HuggyU2]

3 hours ago, b52gator said:

She’s airborne


 

Radar contact...

 

[Biff_T]

On 1/5/2021 at 7:20 PM, Breckey said:

FE Warren and Malmstrom are regularly above 5K DA. The KPP point for performance was FEW in the summertime (6K MSL, 35C).

Old quote.

Yeah.  FE, Malmstrom and Fairchild are mountainous.   The others not so much.  

Its a different animal flying helicopters at high DA in the mountains.  Way different than sea level.  

I imagine, they'll have to go through a mountainous flying mission upgrade when they arrive to the unit.  

There have been a several instances of students torching engines at KIKR during EP sorties.  Due to high DA and lack of experience flying in it.  Going from a 30 percent power margine to less than 10 or even sometimes zero is quite a change for a student.  In my opinion, they should have kept the training at KIKR.  I guess it will be easier to teach students to fly a new aircraft at sea level but the high-da, mountainous flying ops will be the responsibility of the gaining unit.  In the end, its not about making the best pilots.  It's about keeping polictians happy.  

Edited November 10, 2023 by Biff_T

[Sim]

On 11/10/2023 at 8:53 AM, b52gator said:

She’s airborne

https://x.com/d_great_white/status/1723001325351305510?s=20

https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/b-21-raider-has-flown-for-the-first-time

 

What is a point of making a "first" DT flight - a public event? 

 

 

[RegularJoe]

22 minutes ago, Sim said:

What is a point of making a "first" DT flight - a public event? 

 

 

"No bucks, no Buck Roger's"

[HuggyU2]

Newly released view of the inside of the cockpit of the advanced companion trainer for the B-21.