Goldfein advocating FAA 1500 hour rule change???

[SocialD]

8 hours ago, drumkitwes said:

This has all been done before man. Google Comair academy. It simply hasn't happened at the majors because there isn't a need..... yet

It's being developed as we speak.

[drumkitwes]

5 hours ago, SocialD said:

It's being developed as we speak.

Are you referring to the JetBlue program? I'm not aware of the big three having an entry program... yet.

[SocialD]

19 hours ago, drumkitwes said:

Are you referring to the JetBlue program? I'm not aware of the big three having an entry program... yet.

Not JetBlue...emphasis on your "...yet."   

[BFM this]

Not JetBlue...emphasis on your "...yet."   

It will be interesting to see what their proposed solution will be. They could set up a robust 141/142 training program, and that could qualify their graduate to get an R-ATP at 750 hours. Graduating as a Comm/CFI would happen at ~250 hours, without applying Ponzi economics, the CFI puppy mill itself could get that graduate another 200 hours. Still 300 hours that need to be bridged somehow before that graduate can produce revenue in the right seat of an RJ.
Airline subsidy with a contract term?


Sent from my iPhone using Baseops Network Forums

[TnkrToad]

4 hours ago, BFM this said:

It will be interesting to see what their proposed solution will be. They could set up a robust 141/142 training program, and that could qualify their graduate to get an R-ATP at 750 hours. Graduating as a Comm/CFI would happen at ~250 hours, without applying Ponzi economics, the CFI puppy mill itself could get that graduate another 200 hours. Still 300 hours that need to be bridged somehow before that graduate can produce revenue in the right seat of an RJ.
Airline subsidy with a contract term?


Sent from my iPhone using Baseops Network Forums

It strikes me that the issue is timing: there is no time to unscrew this:

- Assumption (but backed by other posters on this forum): there are only about 3,000 civ pilots who are well-enough qual'd to be hired by the major airlines 

- Airlines are projected to hire 3,000+ pilots/yr for the foreseeable future (way conservative, but makes the math easier)

- Air Force & Navy are producing about 2,400 pilots/yr. Of those--due to illness/injury/death/disinterest in airline careers/promotion to Colonel/etc.--let's say maybe 1,500 of them (total from AF and Navy) will reach the ends of their mil careers and still be viable candidates for the airlines . . . and will actually want to fly for the airlines

- The commercial sector doesn't currently have a viable way to get folks to 1,500 hrs, to even start flying for Regionals, so the regionals will soon be going tits up: quality regional captains will be hired away by the majors, and there will be almost no way to get new blood into the ranks

- Based on the above assumptions, within 3 years, if not much sooner (my numbers are very optimistic), just about the only viable places US major airlines will be able to find qual'd pilots will be prior-mil folks and foreign pilots. Of course, the demand for pilots will be even greater overseas--particularly in Asia/Pacific--than there is in North America, so expats will be hard to come by

- If the 1,500 hr rule remains in place, the only viable way I can remotely imagine this won't be a major crisis--for both the airlines and the military--within the next few years is if the airlines start now (preferably last year or earlier, but oh well) to create a viable path to 1,500 hrs for airline pilot wannabes (a path that doesn't require any regional flying, which--again--will destroy the regionals and drive major airline hiring even higher). Even if they do create a viable path ASAP, I don't see how they're going to be able/willing to afford paying for the numbers of non-revenue generating hours they'll need to buy in order to get folks up to speed. Even if they can afford it, it takes quite a while to build 1,500 hrs--I would think more than 3 years

- We haven't even discussed the impact on business aviation, cargo airlines, civilian contractors that perform missions in lieu of military missions, etc.

But hey, it's outside of the CSAF's lane to think of such things. If he retires in the next 2-3 years, the crisis should happen on someone else's watch.

TT

 

[MD]

On February 10, 2017 at 8:16 PM, schokie said:

Well actually, the guy who infamously barrel rolled - technically aileron rolled- an MC-12 now flies for Fed-Ex.

What's ironic is the CFACC at the time, now current CSAF, went on the warpath briefing all deployed units at the time bragging about how he was going to railroad that guy's career. Now 'that guy' is a retired O-5 flying the line at Fed-Ex, living the good life, and laughing all the way to the bank.

I think the AF is proper fucked. 

Goldfein indeed went after said MC-12 pilot in a stupidly produced video that was mandatory queep for crews to watch who were coming into the AOR. Goldfein basically ripped the guy apart in that video, before that guy had is 'day in court' and was essentially cleared with mitigating factors. That just showed that Goldfein was a standard flag-level politico, same as when he was the 49th CC.  He talks a good game of integrity, yet conveniently leaves out his brother's disgraceful involvement in the jumbotron contract scandal when he was the AWFC/CC at Nellis. He's as much a part of the problem as any other high ranking member of the AF corporation.

Ive never much cared for flag-level dynasties.

And yeah, said MC-12 pilot is doing just fine. 

[BFM this]

- The commercial sector doesn't currently have a viable way to get folks to 1,500 hrs, to even start flying for Regionals, so the regionals will soon be going tits up: quality regional captains will be hired away by the majors, and there will be almost no way to get new blood into the ranks

Agree with all, except the matinee ticket is 750 hours, not 1500. Still a substantially different problem to solve than the previous standard (or lack thereof), but credit where credit is due: the ERAUs and UNDs successfully lobbied themselves out of the hangmans noose.


Sent from my iPhone using Baseops Network Forums

[TnkrToad]

36 minutes ago, BFM this said:

 

 

Agree with all, except the matinee ticket is 750 hours, not 1500. Still a substantially different problem to solve than the previous standard (or lack thereof), but credit where credit is due: the ERAUs and UNDs successfully lobbied themselves out of the hangmans noose.


Sent from my iPhone using Baseops Network Forums

 

Copy all, but even with the R-ATP option, I still have difficulty seeing how ERAU/UND/Purdue/etc. can/will survive:

- ERAU: We'll help you become an airline pilot!

- Student: How's that going to work?

- ERAU: You'll plunk down $200k+ on a four-year education, along with flight instruction (by which time we'll get you to 250 hrs/commercial ticket! Woohoo!); then you'll get to starve as a CFI, building up to maybe 450 hrs total; then, well, we're not sure--maybe starve as the pilot for a dropzone, if you can find one of those jobs--to get to 750 hrs; then . . . you'll get to pay more for your R-ATP and starve as a regional airline pilot! (If said regional hasn't gone bankrupt, due to all the captains being hired away by the major airlines). If your regional airline does somehow survive, you'll eventually have a shot at getting hired by a major airline!

- Student: Hmm. Massive debt and no reasonable expectation of a living wage for at least 6.9 years after graduation? No thanks; I'll just become an electrical engineer and build a totally sweet flight sim for the days I get the flying itch.

Sure seems like we're 2-3 years (max) away from a crisis that'll take way more than 2-3 years to unscrew, even if the 1500 hr rule were eliminated today. Hard to see how anyone's even going to want to start into the ERAU/other pipeline, given the barriers to entry.

TT

[BFM this]

Copy all, but even with the R-ATP option, I still have difficulty seeing how ERAU/UND/Purdue/etc. can/will survive:

True, but if it had turned out to be a pure, no-exceptions 1500 hour rule, that would have been a clean kill.
Ironically, 1500hours probably would have worked in the AF's favor. Pilot careers would have been:
-OPS assignment with plenty of "broadening"...~600 hours
-RPA/ALO/365/etc
-Maybe, if you're lucky, another ops assignment...but probably not. If you're lucky, 1300 hours
-back to a desk/dumpster


Sent from my iPhone using Baseops Network Forums

[Guest]

True, but if it had turned out to be a pure, no-exceptions 1500 hour rule, that would have been a clean kill.
Ironically, 1500hours probably would have worked in the AF's favor. Pilot careers would have been:
-OPS assignment with plenty of "broadening"...~600 hours
-RPA/ALO/365/etc
-Maybe, if you're lucky, another ops assignment...but probably not. If you're lucky, 1300 hours
-back to a desk/dumpster


Sent from my iPhone using Baseops Network Forums

I just met the 1500 hrs (counting only primary and secondary time) between UPT and my first ops assignment in the -17.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Buddy Spike]

On 2/12/2017 at 11:00 AM, drumkitwes said:

Are you referring to the JetBlue program? I'm not aware of the big three having an entry program... yet.

https://www.psaairlines.com/careers/cadet-program/

 

I saw a few of them (couple hot chicks too) at the Museum interviewing in November.  It's a real program.  

[Jaded]

1 hour ago, gearpig said:

There's only one logical explanation that merits this type of "solution" from someone like him: The CSAF believes changing conditions outside the Air Force is more feasible than changing conditions inside the Air Force. He's essentially admitting, "I can't pay you more, I can't reduce your time away from home, I can't reduce your additional duty commitments and queep, I can't increase support. The AF is a giant runaway bureaucracy and there's not much I can do (aside from letting you push up your flight suit sleeves.)"

Wow, really good point.

[TnkrToad]

1 hour ago, gearpig said:

As to the first point, does anyone have real (public record) numbers regarding AF pilot production vs. pilot retirements/separation eligibility broken down by year? Someone has apparently done the math and I'm sure there's a sweet .ppt out there. Not only does it not look good, it's bad enough to drive these acts of seeming desperation. I'd be curious to know what the numbers are that would drive Goldfein to take these actions.

You can check out the annual FY Rated Retention Reports at https://access.afpc.af.mil/vbinDMZ/broker.exe?_program=DEMOGPUB.static_reports.sas&_service=pZ1pub1&_debug=0. The FY16 report still has yet to be published, but here were the losses (to separations, retirements, promotion to Colonel, grounded or "other') over the last few FYs:

- FY12: 1420 (590 were separations)

- FY13: 1104 (432 were separations)

- FY14: 1735 (832 were separations)

- FY15: 1139 (579 were separations)

If, prior to FY16, we were (1) averaging over 1k/yr losses, (2) only producing a little over 1k pilots/yr, and (3) airline hiring is still just getting warmed up, I'd say the AF is in a tight spot.

59 minutes ago, ihtfp06 said:

I just met the 1500 hrs (counting only primary and secondary time) between UPT and my first ops assignment in the -17.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Especially for heavies, the 1500 hr rule is nothing close to a discriminator. Much like ihtfp06, I had over 1,500 hrs by the end of my first flying assignment. By 10 yrs after SUPT, I was around 3,500. That total was limited by the fact that one of the later flying assignments was at an overseas tanker base, where crews weren't even deploying downrange when I got there.

TT  

[Gazmo]

The market is already flooded with RJ pilots from the regionals with thousands of hours of 121 jet time and military guys are still getting hired up like they're going out of style. The majors have their demographics they follow. White, black, yellow, male, female, civilian/Part 121, military, etc. Historically military hiring will stay around 30-35% of overall hiring at most of the companies. Flooding the market with RJ pilots will basically make it harder to for RJ pilots to get jobs with the majors.

Sent from my SM-G935V using Tapatalk

[ViperMan]

What about upping the retirement age to 85?

[fire4effect]

"Wilson reports that the Air Force and Navy train a combined 2,000 new pilots per year at an ultimate cost of $10 million for a seasoned fighter pilot." Gen. Steven Wilson, Vice Chief of Staff of the Air Force testifying before the House and Senate Armed Services committees last week.

[pcola]

It seems to me like the ATP requirement should actually work in the Air Force's favor.  As many have pointed out, the new rules pose a prohibitively high cost of entry into the professional flying community.  In theory, this should help the AF's recruitment effort.  Judging by this assessment: 

8 hours ago, TnkrToad said:

Copy all, but even with the R-ATP option, I still have difficulty seeing how ERAU/UND/Purdue/etc. can/will survive:

- ERAU: We'll help you become an airline pilot!

- Student: How's that going to work?

- ERAU: You'll plunk down $200k+ on a four-year education, along with flight instruction (by which time we'll get you to 250 hrs/commercial ticket! Woohoo!); then you'll get to starve as a CFI, building up to maybe 450 hrs total; then, well, we're not sure--maybe starve as the pilot for a dropzone, if you can find one of those jobs--to get to 750 hrs; then . . . you'll get to pay more for your R-ATP and starve as a regional airline pilot! (If said regional hasn't gone bankrupt, due to all the captains being hired away by the major airlines). If your regional airline does somehow survive, you'll eventually have a shot at getting hired by a major airline!

- Student: Hmm. Massive debt and no reasonable expectation of a living wage for at least 6.9 years after graduation? No thanks; I'll just become an electrical engineer and build a totally sweet flight sim for the days I get the flying itch.

 

it would seem that the best path for anybody seriously considering a professional pilot career is through the military.  

Also, it seems that an experienced (10-year) military pilot is always going to be highly competitive for the major airline jobs.  This would indicate that even if the ATP rules were relaxed, allowing the market to become flooded with a legit civilian pilot pipeline, the experienced mil guys/gals transitioning from AD would still remain highly qualified even in a competitive job market.  

Ultimately, the only solution to the AF problem is internal (or at least resides within the USG.)  Relaxing the ATP requirement only serves to reduce the pool of qualified applicants seeking AD military flying jobs, but does little-to-nothing to keep experienced pilots in service on the back end.

At the risk of opening a can of worms here, if you ask me, it all boils down to this un-winnable war on VEOs.  Allow me to pontificate a bit... Opstempo, morale, toxic leadership, money problems, polarized government and populace - all of these tensions draw (at least in part) from the incredible drain caused by the last 15 years at war.  Furthermore, anybody that thinks that these VEOs can be decisively defeated is either disillusioned, ignorant, or just plain stupid.  I realize that most will see this sidebar as only being tangentially related at best, but I believe its actually fundamental.  The AF is not sinking because of any civilian pilot production capacity issue.  The AF is sinking because of a virus which has taken root and festered inside of the conditions created by this un-winnable war.  The financial strains drive the requirement for efficiency, yet the security requirements undermine that efficiency.  Further, the opstempo drives increased workload for all.  This means that we literally have to "do more with less."  The toxic leadership results from a culture of refusing to say "no" or "can't" to our civilian political masters.  The end result is a force that is stretched thin, past the breaking point, meeting at a juncture with a rebounding economy providing much more tantalizing opportunities for the service's best and brightest.  The result is inevitable, a hollow force.  If the DOD wants to get serious about remaining ready for the future threats posed by the "4+1" it needs to seriously reconsider its objectives as related to dealing with VEOs.  

OK, rant off.  BL, I agree with the majority that the CSAF is barking up the wrong tree here, and that gearpig is probably closer to the truth than most would like to believe.

[Fuzz]

Sure the higher ATP minimums should help the AF but I don't think we are suffering from qualified applicants either nor are we short of new copilots. We are short in the 12 year majors that should be our senior instructors who are now all flying for the majors. Doesn't matter how many guys are beating down the AF's door, they will be leaving at 11 years TIS which is still a problem for the AF.

[di1630]

They are going to up the UPT commitment. 16 yrs is my guess. This will push some people away, but there will be no shortage of people signing up not knowing what they are getting into. Quality may go down, lowered standards in ROTC/academy for a pilot slot but I think it's coming.


Sent from my iPhone using Baseops Network Forums

[tac airlifter]

5 hours ago, pcola said:

At the risk of opening a can of worms here, if you ask me, it all boils down to this un-winnable war on VEOs......  Furthermore, anybody that thinks that these VEOs can be decisively defeated is either disillusioned, ignorant, or just plain stupid.

 If the DOD wants to get serious about remaining ready for the future threats posed by the "4+1" it needs to seriously reconsider its objectives as related to dealing with VEOs.  

Can of worms challenge accepted.  For your first paragraph, i think you're wrong.  Everyone can be defeated and history is full of examples.  We haven't been trying to win, despite the best efforts and sacrifices of those who are forward, and that unfortunate fact drives all the toxicity and festering discontent you correctly identify within our organization.

for your second point, I don't understand you at all: the "plus one" is the threat you earlier say we can't defeat.  So are you saying that if DOD wants to remain ready for future threats by VEOs it needs to reconsider its objectives and admit it cannot defeat VEOs?  

I agree with your overall sentiment that the military has been losing for 15 years and is on a path to continue losing.  That drives bizarre internal dynamics that make people hate life and want to leave.  We disagree in that my prescription is a return to the ruthless pursuit of victory and nothing else.

[guineapigfury]

Could someone define "VEO" for me?

[Herk Driver]

Could someone define "VEO" for me?

Violent extremist organization


Sent from my iPhone using Baseops Network Forums

[WTFAF]

We disagree in that my prescription is a return to the ruthless pursuit of victory and nothing else.

So what does your ruthless pursuit of victory look like, and what is the end state or definition of victory?

Excerpt from a great essay written in 2007 regarding Al Qaeda [insert VEO]:

"The point of imagining the end of the war on terror is not to suggest that it is imminent but to keep the right goals in mind -- so that leaders can adopt the policies most likely to achieve those goals. If they fall prey to the illusion that this is World War III -- and that it can be won like a traditional war -- they risk perpetuating the conflict. Even if Americans were somehow prepared, as in World War II, to mobilize 16 million troops, reinstate the draft, spend 40 percent of GDP on defense, and invade and occupy several major countries, such an effort would likely end up creating more terrorists and fueling the hatred that sustains them. It would unify the United States' enemies, squander its resources, and undermine the values that are a central tool in the struggle. Certainly, the U.S. experience in Iraq suggests the perils of trying to win the war on terror through the application of brute military force."

https://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/2007-11-01/can-war-terror-be-won

[tac airlifter]

1 hour ago, WTFAF said:

So what does your ruthless pursuit of victory look like, and what is the end state or definition of victory?

https://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/2007-11-01/can-war-terror-be-won

PM me if you care for my opinion so I don't derail this anymore.   Copy your article link, there's a wealth of differing opinions out there which I've spent the past 18 months digging into for various schools.  Short version: all the folks saying we can't kill our way to victory haven't actually tried.  History says kinetic works if we define victory as preventing their power projection ability to threaten us instead of using COIN to change their religious opinions, which is a fruitless waste.

Edited February 14, 2017 by tac airlifter

[TnkrToad]

12 hours ago, fire4effect said:

"Wilson reports that the Air Force and Navy train a combined 2,000 new pilots per year at an ultimate cost of $10 million for a seasoned fighter pilot." Gen. Steven Wilson, Vice Chief of Staff of the Air Force testifying before the House and Senate Armed Services committees last week.

. . . Which helps prove my point. I went with optimistically high mil pilot production, optimistically low annual airline hiring, and an optimistically high number of pilots the AF/Navy can afford to lose to the airlines. FWIW, I've found quotes of up to 1200 each from AF and Navy, hence the 2,400. Using even my most sanguine assumptions, we're still just a few years away from major issues in both the Air Force and the airlines. Feel free to adjust my assumptions to whatever you think closer matches reality, and see where that puts the Air Force and the broader aerospace industry in a few years.