Pilot Shortage Deepens, USAF is SCREWED.

[Hacker]

59 minutes ago, sqwatch said:

There was no such program in 2004. AF used to pay for 40 hours of flight time if you didn’t have your PPL. That program went away when IFT/S was implemented

His point was, with the exception of a couple of years here and there, there has historically generally been some sort of pre-UPT screening program.

Nice white paper on the history of USAF screening programs here:

https://www.aetc.af.mil/Portals/88/Documents/history/AFD-061109-020.pdf

[matmacwc]

7 hours ago, Seriously said:

Flight screening has been around for a long time. Before DOSS IFS, it was IFT (probably what you did). Before that it was T-3s at Hondo. Before that it was T-41s (Big Spring, TX?). Hondo was happening in the mid-90s. The T-41 goes back to the 60s. Not sure if there was anything else between those two or if everyone had to attend that training.

 

https://www.af.mil/News/Article-Display/Article/129834/officials-announce-t-3a-firefly-final-disposition/

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cessna_T-41_Mescalero

You are correct sir!  I got my full private pilots license (I think they only did this 1 or 2 years, it was great) at the Travis AFB aeroclub while on casual status, easiest thing I've ever done in the AF, and in a T-41!.  My actually point was that the youngin' who brought it up commented on the attrition rate from decades he wasn't alive and his parents were probably to young to produce, stay out of waters you know nothing about.

Edited February 23, 2018 by matmacwc

[TnkrToad]

On ‎2‎/‎15‎/‎2018 at 10:11 AM, Crosswind said:

Can any Mobility guys fill in/answer this question...

Why aren’t more Mobility pilots leaving?

Annual days gone is 200+ (anecdotal)
High probability of being a UPT IP
Do a staff job there’s no fighter guy to fill in for
Already “airline ready” knowing how to use FMS, fly international, crew concept

What’s keeping them in?

Had a bit closer look at the stats, and if I'm reading them right, the AF has given up on trying to retain 11Ms. Running the numbers paints a pretty dismal picture:

- Per CH's posted slide deck, the AF projects losing 933 11Ms from their inventory over the next 5 years (from substantial surplus to substantial deficit)--an average loss of 187/yr

- IAW the 1400/yr plan, apparently 640 UPT grads/yr will go to mobility cockpits

- If we produce 640/yr, but the inventory drops 187/yr, that means 827/yr (11Ms alone) will separate, retire, get promoted to O-6, or be grounded/die/etc.

-- From FYs 15-17, the 11M community only lost about 440/yr to seps/retirements/O-6 promotion/grounding/etc (with just 215 of those being folks who separated)

- Problem is, there ain't that many 11Ms approaching retirement/their O-6 boards (force shaping & a-word hiring took care of that), and it's unlikely there'll be a huge spike in folks getting grounded/dying off (one hopes)

- The upshot is  this: the Air Force seems to be planning on three times more 11Ms separating (not staying to retirement/not competing for O-6) than in the prior three years. This is going to decimate a mobility pilot community that's already on the ropes.

I'd say 11Ms are very aware of their marketability. The weird thing is, the Air Force is tacitly acknowledging this, yet is doing nothing to stop the hemorrhaging. Crappy quality of life, plus AF leadership that doesn't seem to care about their plight--seems like a winning combination.

TT

[Seriously]

3 hours ago, matmacwc said:

You are correct sir!  I got my full private pilots license (I think they only did this 1 or 2 years, it was great) at the Travis AFB aeroclub while on casual status, easiest thing I've ever done in the AF, and in a T-41!.  My actually point was that the youngin' who brought it up commented on the attrition rate from decades he wasn't alive and his parents were probably to young to produce, stay out of waters you know nothing about.

The Air Force had to kill IFT because it was too great of a deal.

[Seriously]

4 hours ago, sqwatch said:

There was no such program in 2004. AF used to pay for 40 hours of flight time if you didn’t have your PPL. That program went away when IFT/S was implemented

I thought that program was called IFT (Initial flight training). When DOSS took over, it went back to being called IFS (initial flight screening).

[mb1685]

To make things even more confusing, the Doss program is now called IFT (not IFS anymore).

Edited February 23, 2018 by mb1685

[YoungnDumb]

It's a Training program vs a Screening program now (hence IFT vs IFS).  From what I understand there is about 0% chance of someone washing out, vs when I went thru (circa 2012) we lost 6 out of a 24 person flight.  We've definitely seen the difference on the UPT side as well, much lower caliber of the general student population.

[DirtyFlightSuit]

From what I understood IFS was changed back to an IFT program since even with the higher rate of washout in IFS we didn't see lower rates at UPT.  Though I can't remember the source so probably just more of my B.S

 

[Danger41]

This thread is really funny to me for the simple fact that you know new guys sucking isn’t a new phenomenon, right? When we were going through, I’m sure the IP’s were saying how terrible we were compared to them and how easy we had it.

[DirtyFlightSuit]

Up hill BOTH WAYS!

[HossHarris]

1 hour ago, Danger41 said:

This thread is really funny to me for the simple fact that you know new guys sucking isn’t a new phenomenon, right? When we were going through, I’m sure the IP’s were saying how terrible we were compared to them and how easy we had it.

Students have always been terrible. The difference is whether or not you can wash them out. That pendulum swings. And the quality of the end product swings with it 

[VMFA187]

On 2/23/2018 at 4:10 AM, gimmeaplane said:

It doesn’t help that they cranked up the DQ rate with the computer eye test in that exact same timeframe.  Tighten the crank too far on one thing and something that matters has to give...that something is aptitude.  Sister services aren’t exactly crashing a/c left and right with old school tests.  Bros on waivers wouldn’t have made it through the front door today.

EDIT:  I notice you have a VMFA tag, so not sure what the USN/USMC issue would be unless they did something similar.  Point remains for the AF pipeline.

I think it has something to do with general work ethic. We have had the same lady work at the front of the simulator building for probably 20 years and she generally has a pretty decent read on all the students. She was talking to a few IPs and mentioned how she's noticed a significant decrease in practice time that studs are putting in when they're not hard scheduled when compared with just five and ten years ago.

That being said, I do think the students have more to learn than I did only seven years ago. Most of my A/A syllabus was notch-to-defend with a brief into into drag. For PGMs I had one flight devoted to GBU-12s and 38s. They're introduced to significantly more than I was at the same point in my career. 

[dream big]

On 2/19/2018 at 12:12 AM, LiquidSky said:

By burying their heads in the sand and pretending there isn't a problem? Don't have to fix what you don't admit is broken. You already have some LTs from rotc waiting for nearly a year to enter active duty or spending a ridiculous amount of time on casual status. We have some of the highest paid gate guards, bus drivers, marshalers that can't marshal,  etc. as a result of casual.

 I'm a little more concerned that the average pcsm of a pilot select Cadet is down 14 points, GPA down 0.13, Pfa by 1.5. CSOs are down by similar numbers as well. Do y'all think that there will be a noticeable difference in quality of the average stud? Or a higher washout rate as a result? Obviously these #s aren't the best metric in the world to predict flying ability but I would expect to see some future correlation.

Hahah! They won’t wash many out, can’t make the failed “production” initiatives ruin a perfectly good OPR bullet for some O-7s.  They will just ram them through barely meeting MIF.  God I feel so sorry for anyone getting a UPT Inst assignment right now. 

[dream big]

On 2/22/2018 at 2:22 AM, Motofalcon said:

Aviation Leadership Program; we take the best and brightest from up and coming countries (former eastern bloc, South America, Africa, etc) and put them through a 10-month T-6 only syllabus (basically T-6s twice) and then give them USAF wings and send them back home. It's a mil-pol program, because we take the young lts who show promise to become higher ranking/chiefs of staff/etc later on, so if we need to conduct ops in/need support from their country in the future (when these ALP'sters are in charge), we can hopefully cash in on the good experience/training/memories they have of the US/USAF. 

Most of them are already pilots in their home country; some of it can be pretty easy (I taught a Colombian Tucano pilot - flying with him was like flying CT, and he had gnarly stories about going after drug runners) but some can be ridiculously difficult due to language/cultural barriers or the fact that the kid may have never seen an airplane until he flew to America, so the whole concept of aviation is foreign (no pun intended).

This info is CAO 2010 from Columbus (which I think was the only base doing ALP back then), others may have more current info...

And with the exception of the Italians most of them (Saudis, Nigerians) are god awful and don’t deserve to be near an airplane let alone pilot it.  

[matmacwc]

39 minutes ago, dream big said:

And with the exception of the Italians most of them (Saudis, Nigerians) are god awful and don’t deserve to be near an airplane let alone pilot it.  

Dunno if I'd go that far with the Italians, the EPAF countries are generally (sometimes better, hurts to say) as good as US students.  A lot of the countries with cultural hangups have issues, I think a lot of them are fighting through this while they learn or don't pay attention, usually to the female instructors.  Take it for what its worth, 10 years of teaching foreign studs to fly T-38's and F-16's.  

[HeloDude]

50 minutes ago, dream big said:

They will just ram them through barely meeting MIF. 

Passing students who meet standards?  That's horrible!  Or did you mean to write something different?

[dream big]

5 hours ago, HeloDude said:

Passing students who meet standards?  That's horrible!  Or did you mean to write something different?

You got me, I meant to say passing students who shouldn’t meet MIF but are just passed through anyways to meet timeline.  

[matmacwc]

51 minutes ago, dream big said:

You got me, I meant to say passing students who shouldn’t meet MIF but are just passed through anyways to meet timeline.  

Meh, washing them out is a big improvement to the timeline.  I successfully invited a few people to try a new line of work at the SUPT and RTU level, the paperwork sucks, but its do-able.

[17D_guy]

https://warontherocks.com/2018/02/air-force-crisis-part-pilot-retention-matters-right-now/

[Bode]

It's a Training program vs a Screening program now (hence IFT vs IFS).  From what I understand there is about 0% chance of someone washing out, vs when I went thru (circa 2012) we lost 6 out of a 24 person flight.  We've definitely seen the difference on the UPT side as well, much lower caliber of the general student population.

I can second this. A close friend worked for Doss during the transition. When they made it Doss followed the first 10 students they identified as “would have washed out of a screening program”. 8/10 washed out of UPT.

[Sprkt69]

https://www.airforcetimes.com/news/your-air-force/2018/03/01/secaf-air-force-pilots-are-flying-17-hours-per-month-but-its-still-not-enough/

 

True, or fake news?

[ThreeHoler]

Probably true since all of us staff pukes fly rarely or not at all...and skew the numbers. Same for the penguins on bases like execs and whatnot.

[Dogs-N-Guns]

I believe it, but there is a lot to unpack.

First I would assume 17 hours/month doesn't include msn planning. My info is 5 yrs old now, but in the C-17 world we would msn plan a training local the day prior. A random route low level through through Alaska, with a tanker rendezvous, plus assault landing and pattern work could easily take 5+ hours to plan and brief for a 5 hour sortie. Airdrop and formation even more time. No experience with fighters, but I would guess they take just as long to plan for sortie that is less than 2 hours. Back of the napkin math would mean that heavies are working 35-40 hours per month on flying stuff and fighters up 80 hours. In the dream world of a 40 hour work week (160 hours/month) that mean heavies spend 75% of their time doing non-pilot stuff, fighters are 50/50.

Next problem. I hate averages, primarily because Wing Kings have used it to beat the sqdns claiming we were are not over worked. Problem is there are too many pilot the schedulers can't touch. Rotating exec desk at the sq/gp/wg takes up 2-4 pilots, Wg FSO, ADOs, schedulers, just off the top of my head. When some logs ZERO hours than brings down the average fast. Give me the entire stats, Mean, Median, and Standard Deviation. I would bet it shows a small group of pilots are carrying a disproportionate load of the flying hours.

Take everything with a grain of salt. I've been flying a desk for almost 5 years.

[RASH]

It wasn't that long ago (ok, 25 years) we were logging 10-15 hours a week...

[Jaded]

7 hours ago, Sprkt69 said:

https://www.airforcetimes.com/news/your-air-force/2018/03/01/secaf-air-force-pilots-are-flying-17-hours-per-month-but-its-still-not-enough/

 

True, or fake news?

True, but includes both downrange sorties and RPA flying. Not joking.