Pilot Shortage Deepens, USAF is SCREWED.

[DuckHunter]

37 minutes ago, flyusaf83 said:

Is it just me, or is there no plan in those slides to improve retention?  Seems like they have given up.

Nope, as far as I'm concerned I'm now training 1400 pilots to get out of the AF instead of just 1000.   If we don't address retention, do we just expect the 1400 new pilots to just forget about all these issues?  I feel like I'm taking crazy pills sometimes.

[gearhog]

According to the .doc posted above, 100% of the focus is pilot production. It looks as though they intend to surge (unsustainably) until the dozens of separate complex COAs and programs can be implemented. They don't seem to consider this is going to burn out the current IPs and exacerbate the problem.

A pre-planned transition to the airlines?

 

Sim training:

 

Contract IPs: I'd like to see that contract.

Put all the T-1s at a single base. Great idea.

Break Glass? Translation: screw the current workforce to build the new workforce.

[RTB]

The Problem Statement on Slide 1, which supposedly drives the entire discussion, is fundamentally flawed.  They're not even addressing the right problems.  To say that the "aircrew ecosystem" has been damaged by unstable funding and will be improved by "stable and predictable funding" and "advanced technologies" shows a complete lack of acknowledgment of the real problem.

[Snooter]

19 hours ago, 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?

Well I can tell you that everyone has their eyes on the door.  Part of the issue is I 7-day opted an assignment and it took three months before I got the separation date approved email.  It’s still not in the virtual so I can’t begin further out processing and I’ve tried palace chasing.  Anecdotally similar individuals to my qualifications have asked for six months off their adsc only to be countered with one month off.  They are doing everything in their power short of stop loss to plug the holes...

[flyusaf83]

2 hours ago, RTB said:

The Problem Statement on Slide 1, which supposedly drives the entire discussion, is fundamentally flawed.  They're not even addressing the right problems.  To say that the "aircrew ecosystem" has been damaged by unstable funding and will be improved by "stable and predictable funding" and "advanced technologies" shows a complete lack of acknowledgment of the real problem.

Nah, it’s totally Congress’ fault that I spend 40 hours a week on OPRs, awards, decs, making trackers, making trackers to track the trackers, making slides, staff meetings, responding to every single made-up tasker invented by some level of leadership, CBTs, SAPR training, commanders calls, FOD walks to make Mx troops feel validated, planning parties, attending parties, planning retirement and promotion ceremonies, forced attendance at awards ceremonies, mandatory PT sessions, forced mentorship sessions all tailored at building the next Chief of Staff which nobody wants to be, getting non-vol’d to watch other dudes dicks as they piss into cups, sitting Sup, sitting SOF, and any other 60-90 completely valid tasks.

Oh , plus the 15 hours a week that I actually devote to flying related stuff.  It’s kind of like a hobby of mine.  But this is all due to Congress and funding.  Nobody would think that any of this crap is self-induced.  

I trust my overlords to fix the problem they created, and cannot identify.

Edited February 16, 2018 by flyusaf83

[gearhog]

6 minutes ago, flyusaf83 said:

Nah, it’s totally Congress’ fault that I spend 40 hours a week on OPRs, awards, decs, making trackers, making trackers to track the trackers, making slides, staff meetings, responding to every single made-up tasker invented by some level of leadership, CBTs, SAPR training, commanders calls, FOD walks to make Mx troops feel validated, planning parties, attending parties, planning retirement and promotion ceremonies, forced attendance at awards ceremonies, mandatory PT sessions, forced mentorship sessions all tailored at building the next Chief of Staff which nobody wants to be, getting non-vol’d to watch other dudes dicks as they piss into cups, sitting Sup, sitting SOF, and any other 60-90 completely valid tasks.

Oh , plus the 15 hours a week that I actually devote to flying related stuff.  It’s kind of like a hobby of mine.  But this is all due to Congress and funding.  Nobody would think that any of this crap is self-induced.  

I trust my overlords to fix the problem they created, and cannot identify.

“Hello, AETC? Can we get a new pilot over here? This one seems broken. No idea why.”

[ClearedHot]

10 hours ago, Breckey said:

@ClearedHot do you have anything on the contract UHT plan? Last COA I heard was to dissolve Ft Rucker and everything go to a contract including aircraft selection. The AETC CUPT plan uses AETC aircraft, hopefully the CUHT plan will do the same.

ETA: Looks like the AETC CONOPS has the RW guys not seeing a military instructor until the FTU. What could possibly go wrong?

Sorry brother, nothing so far.

 

[nsplayr]

Thank God they're not considering Contractor Undergraduate Navigator Training...I did a double-take the first time I saw the CUHT acronym for the helo dudes.

Overall it seems like Big Blue has gone full-auto, spray-and-pray at the wrong target, so I've got my popcorn ready for the next 5-10 years of this mess!  ANG is much better, although I am currently mired in a multi-year UFT production bottleneck...

Edited February 16, 2018 by nsplayr

[war007afa]

4 hours ago, torqued said:

According to the .doc posted above, 100% of the focus is pilot production. It looks as though they intend to surge (unsustainably) until the dozens of separate complex COAs and programs can be implemented. They don't seem to consider this is going to burn out the current IPs and exacerbate the problem.

A pre-planned transition to the airlines?

 

Sim training:

 

Contract IPs: I'd like to see that contract.

Put all the T-1s at a single base. Great idea.

Break Glass? Translation: screw the current workforce to build the new workforce.

Please tell me the airlines don’t actually believe the Air Force will give them their people back at the end of the contract timeline. The most untrustworthy institution will definitely find an excuse to prevent the transition, or tie on some ARC requirement which still bones the airline. 

[Hacker]

4 hours ago, RTB said:

a complete lack of acknowledgment of the real problem.

SHACK.

Leadership is simply unable to acknowledge the real cultural and leadership issues that are driving pilots to the door.

It isn't a big mystery -- pilots are quite clear and vociferous about their reasons for leaving.  Thus, there can only be a couple of reasons why leadership is failing to understand, internalize, and act on these reasons.

My favorite theory is still the self-indoctrination, self-delusionary, fart-smelling, alternate reality theory that says leadership is so in denial that they are a key part of the cause (and a key part of the solution) that their worldview simply ignores these clear reasons and invents other alternate reasons out of thin air so it "logically" makes sense to them.

Leadership can change their philosophy of leading and commanding.

Leadership can change who they groom for promotion, who they promote, and for what reasons they promote.

Leadership can re-institute a mission focus and shut down the death-by-papercuts side interests that dominate AF life.

Leadership can stop the pandering and social experimentation to non-mission essential people, tasks, and ideas.

We know there is a war on.  We know you don't control what the National Command Authority tasks the USAF to do. We know there is suck and sacrifice in doing our duty.  None of those things are why we have left or are intending to leave.

[Hacker]

1 hour ago, nsplayr said:

Thank God they're not considering Contractor Undergraduate Navigator Training...

I never understood why they didn't use the term "Combined", which IIRC is the term when actions are multi-national (the analog of "Joint" for multi-service actions).

Since international students are trained there (and there are sometimes international instructors), it should have been "Combined Undergraduate Navigator Training" this whole time.

[nunya]

7 minutes ago, Hacker said:

Since international students are trained there (and there are sometimes international instructors), it should have been "Combined Undergraduate Navigator Training" this whole time.

Little Rock has some International Instructors in their LM school, right?  Combined Loadmaster Initial Training?

[Gazmo]

What I find disturbing is that the ANG is at 84% manning. The worst of them all. Definitely not the ANG of the early 2000's.

[AZwildcat]

Very basic math shows that if the AF was to pay every single active duty, guard and reserve pilot an extra $100K/year that would cost somewhere in the neighborhood of $2.1B / year.  The FY 19 AF budget is $156 B.  So for a roughly 1.3% reallocation of funds the AF could be competitive with airline pay.  Obviously that's very simplistic, but you get the point.

Don't piss on my leg and tell me it's raining AF...if you value your people you need to start paying them like it.  The AF just spent over $1B on NG to tell us that a square peg sensor doesn't fit on a round hole Global Hawk.  GMAFB.  We have the money.

People say it isn't about the money...they're lying.  QoL is a big factor, but there's a lot more you're willing to put up with to keep flying cool jets at the right price.

[Prozac]

52 minutes ago, war007afa said:

Please tell me the airlines don’t actually believe the Air Force will give them their people back at the end of the contract timeline. The most untrustworthy institution will definitely find an excuse to prevent the transition, or tie on some ARC requirement which still bones the airline. 

I really don’t understand this concept in the first place. Let’s see if I have this straight.....The USAF is going to send a guy to the airline side to get training on an airframe they both operate. Presumably this will be on the 767 unless they are planning on sending new Lts straight into C-40s and C-32s, or unless United has some super secret F-16s on order. Once the guy has his type, he heads over to the AF side to complete his 10 year commitment. Now the airline gets him back with 10 years of seniority and likely has to re-train him in new equipment because they no longer operate the type he was on, or his seniority allows him to hold something else. What’s the upside for the airline?  Think the union might want a say in this?  This whole concept seems like a pipe dream dreamt up by some shoe clerk who literally has no fucking clue how airlines work. I imagine airline management laughed in the CSAF’s face when this was brought up in their little meeting a while back. 

[nunya]

17 minutes ago, Prozac said:

I imagine airline management laughed in the CSAF’s face when this was brought up in their little meeting a while back. 

You mean the intern they sent because it wasn't worth C-Suite time?

[Termy]

I’m still curious what the “flight training center” is of those slides. 

And still laughing at the slide that blames congress for this mess. 

[ColoradoAviator]

What I find disturbing is that the ANG is at 84% manning. The worst of them all. Definitely not the ANG of the early 2000's.

Where are these undermanned AFRC & ANG units and what do they fly?

From my experience all the units I’ve talked to have the drawn-out, picky, secret-decoder-ring hiring process. Must live local and have three first cousins in the unit to be considered.

[TnkrToad]

Just how bad is it?

 




 

So, if I’m reading the slides right, the AF has a (fictional) surplus of 437 11Ms currently. By 2023, we’re slated to have a shortfall of 496 11Ms. That’s a pretty impressive drop in inventory.

This is despite the grand ideas to have regional pilots go through short courses to become heavy drivers, contract UPT instructors, etc.

Sure seems to me like there’s an 11M manning crisis. Heavy drivers are getting crushed right now; can’t wait to see what life is like when the community is down another 840 bodies.

TT

[Hermey]

41 minutes ago, TnkrToad said:

Sure seems to me like there’s an 11M manning crisis. Heavy drivers are getting crushed right now; can’t wait to see what life is like when the community is down another 840 bodies.
 

They’ll just lower the crew to tail ratio to 2.0. Spreadsheet green again and problem “fixed”. (Lowering from 3.0 to 2.5 around 2015 is why the AD MAF is so “healthy” with a “surplus” right now).

[TnkrToad]

On 2/15/2018 at 11:43 AM, pilotguy said:

Mobility guys are leaving in droves. That positive delta can’t be correct.

Look at the steady decline in the take rates. It will be mid 30s in FY18

Quoted for truth. The positive delta can only be due to creative accounting.

Scary part is the AF’ plan is to let the 11M inventory drop by about 840 over the next 5 years, IOT get the other communities healthy. That kind of rapid inventory drop can only happen with really poor retention.

Only thing I can figure is that AF planners are hoping they’ll be able to contract out ever-greater portions of the mobility mission—civilian contract air refueling, even more contract airlift, etc. Of course, that would drive up demand for prior-mil folks even more.

11Ms are well aware of their marketability on the outside, and abysmal retention rates are reflecting this reality.

TT

[Prozac]

10 minutes ago, TnkrToad said:

Only thing I can figure is that AF planners are hoping they’ll be able to contract out ever-greater portions of the mobility mission—civilian contract air refueling, even more contract airlift, etc. 

Good luck with that. Evergreen and North American are gone. Atlas and everyone else are busy with Amazon and their own stuff. Not exactly a lot of excess lift out there right now. 

[TnkrToad]

They’ll just lower the crew to tail ratio to 2.0. Spreadsheet green again and problem “fixed”. (Lowering from 3.0 to 2.5 around 2015 is why the AD MAF is so “healthy” with a “surplus” right now).

Changing crew ratios sure is an easy way to “fix the glitch.”

Even better, when the AF bought the C-17, they originally planned on a 5.0 crew ratio (AD + ARC). I heard this straight from Gen Handy when he was TRANSCOM/CC. Air Force mag quoted this same ratio much more recently.

https://www.airforcemag.com/MagazineArchive/Documents/2011/February%202011/0211arsenal.pdf

AMC will be an awesome place for single dudes who want to rack up ridiculous amounts of flying hours. Not so much for those who like their families...

[BashiChuni]

Bottom line the Air Force is hanging their hat on the economy turning sour and airines slowing hiring. 

 

Theyre using stop gaps to hopefully get us to the next recession

[Termy]

1 hour ago, BashiChuni said:

Bottom line the Air Force is hanging their hat on the economy turning sour and airines slowing hiring. 

 

Theyre using stop gaps to hopefully get us to the next recession

The age 65 change arguably had an equal or greater effect than the economy.  We could have another recession and it barely affect airline hiring.