UPT Next

[SurelySerious]

5 hours ago, jazzdude said:

14 hours ago, SurelySerious said:

Right, but several incidents later, and the FAA upped the requirements...
 
Edit: I also think it’s difficult to look back on a phase of training and say when you learned X, Y, or Z skill that is now so fluid in your routine you don’t notice it. There are very few things where I look at a complex skill and go, that’s where the lightbulb was. So asking the experienced dudes which phase of training was important to their development may not be accurate. 

Yeah, but the AF never met that requirement. Even with UPT before syllabus cuts, guys were graduating with less than 200 hours, and going out to fly heavy transport category aircraft. Hell, there were many ACs (and IPs) that got certed before meeting ATP mins (other time excluded since the FAA doesn't count it).

Very true, the AF is self-certifying but part of that justification has been the quality of the training program. Also, remember UPT in FAA equivalency is only a commercial multi engine license. Lots of actual flying at that phase in a civilian pilot’s life, not sim-only. 
 

Edit: part of the disparity is the risk acceptance. The FAA is severely and understandably risk averse towards under-trained pilots flying passengers. The greater the number at risk, the greater the aversion to lack of flying experience. So the AF calculus is different. 

Edited August 26, 2020 by SurelySerious

[Johntsunami]

14 hours ago, Danger41 said:

How long are guys sitting casual before starting UPT now? I think we should start those casuals on ground school immediately and get them some basic instructions before they start UPT and give them access to the sim building. Give them basics to develop their hands and some instruction for primacy and that way, they can start the syllabus ahead of most guys and trim time off of how long UPT takes. If the goal is truly to produce talented aviators, let the motivated ones work on it instead of some bullshit casual job. Get rid of syllabus deviation and shit like that and allow students to take care of events themselves ahead of time. Just rewrite those events to make them hours requirements and assign some IP’s to ensure they’re not going full stupid with what they’re doing. Then give them something like a checkride prior to UPT start to ensure they’re at a standard and start them on the syllabus. I honestly think with some basic instruction with this type of training you could cut out large portions of contact and local instrument sorties. 

Vance is already doing this with their new 2.5 classes. Studs get early access to academics and knock out several tests before their class actually starts.

[jazzdude]

The thing that worries me is not the increase in sim time, but that were losing out experienced instructors out on the line. At least on the heavy side, you've got about 1.5-2 years to learn before you're up for AC. But if you don't have good instructors and ACs, knowledge and skills get lost, and we relearn those lessons the hard way

[SurelySerious]

There are at least two LTs at my base sitting around wasting COVID time with no foreseeable projection on when they PCS for UPT. What’s old is new again. 

[SurelySerious]

1 minute ago, jazzdude said:

The thing that worries me is not the increase in sim time, but that were losing out experienced instructors out on the line. At least on the heavy side, you've got about 1.5-2 years to learn before you're up for AC. But if you don't have good instructors and ACs, knowledge and skills get lost, and we relearn those lessons the hard way

I think this is one of the biggest symptoms of the 10 year ADSC. And the gravest. 

[viper154]

3 hours ago, Danger41 said:

This whole topic to me is odd because so many people are convinced we are going to produce terrible aviators that will kill themselves or not be able to accomplish the mission without doing UPT the same way we did in Vietnam. In my current community (U-28), I’d gladly take a smart kid that was T-6 only trained. Main reason for that is we put them in the copilot seat and most of their mission duties aren’t flying the airplane at all. The second reason for that is we have companion PC-12 trainers where you can go practically anywhere you want VFR or IFR and develop great air sense. That companion trainer is amazing to develop young aviators and I think that would help a lot. Admittedly, the PC-12 variants we fly have identical avionics and for all intents and purposes the performance is similar so that wouldn’t work in a lot of communities. Having some T-6 or T-7 (T-38 could work but I know they’re very in the tooth) sitting on the ramp for young bucks to cruise around in and build time would be great. I’m not personally a fan of the C-172 and similar as companion trainers because they’re just so different in performance than the assigned MWS. It’s better than nothing though.

I thought about this myself as a fellow U-28 guy. The PC-12 thing works great for IQT, but once the powers that be decided to convert more/all the fleet to mission birds it’s kinda gone down the drain. I’ve done 4 pilot pros the last couple weeks, all in the mission birds. It’s all about getting the most deployable tails we can.
 

I don’t think we are really the best example for arguing a T-6 only track, although it probably would work for us. I’ve met a couple new guys we got from UPT next or whatever it’s called with only T-6 time. (One almost killed me in the pattern, but that’s another story) We are pretty much a heavier/slower T-6, and as you said, the young guys really need to focus more on mission work than flying across the world. I would think a lot of of the AMC bubbas have a different focus for the new guys. 
 

If we are going divest T-1s I would rather see IFS go away and the AF to invest in a fleet of 172s/182s or whatever. Academy and ROTC pilot selects get their PPLs prior to commissioning through a summer program that is semi similar to UPT, stand up, bold face, AF style flying etc. Then a rehack/pre UPT phase, get their hands warm, current on instrument flying, some out n backs/cross countries etc, maybe a month? And then start T-6s. 
 

Guys that go heavies at least get another 60-100 hours of real flying that is way cheaper than a high end sim or taking a 4 engine beast around the flag pole. Guys that go fighters have more basic flying back ground so hopefully phase 3 can focus more on those -4g dives with MIG-28s or whatever it is they do, and less time trying to figure how to get ATIS and fly a ILS. 

[MechGov]

I thought about this myself as a fellow U-28 guy. The PC-12 thing works great for IQT, but once the powers that be decided to convert more/all the fleet to mission birds it’s kinda gone down the drain. I’ve done 4 pilot pros the last couple weeks, all in the mission birds. It’s all about getting the most deployable tails we can.
 
I don’t think we are really the best example for arguing a T-6 only track, although it probably would work for us. I’ve met a couple new guys we got from UPT next or whatever it’s called with only T-6 time. (One almost killed me in the pattern, but that’s another story) We are pretty much a heavier/slower T-6, and as you said, the young guys really need to focus more on mission work than flying across the world. I would think a lot of of the AMC bubbas have a different focus for the new guys. 
 
If we are going divest T-1s I would rather see IFS go away and the AF to invest in a fleet of 172s/182s or whatever. Academy and ROTC pilot selects get their PPLs prior to commissioning through a summer program that is semi similar to UPT, stand up, bold face, AF style flying etc. Then a rehack/pre UPT phase, get their hands warm, current on instrument flying, some out n backs/cross countries etc, maybe a month? And then start T-6s. 
 
Guys that go heavies at least get another 60-100 hours of real flying that is way cheaper than a high end sim or taking a 4 engine beast around the flag pole. Guys that go fighters have more basic flying back ground so hopefully phase 3 can focus more on those -4g dives with MIG-28s or whatever it is they do, and less time trying to figure how to get ATIS and fly a ILS. 

I think you just described IFS, phase 3 and IFF

[SurelySerious]

47 minutes ago, MechGov said:

I think you just described IFS, phase 3 and IFF

He was on a roll!

 

How else could we reinvent the wheel?

[viper154]

15 hours ago, MechGov said:

I think you just described IFS, phase 3 and IFF

Ya pretty much. Innovation!!! <sarcasm> 

[norskman]

On 8/26/2020 at 9:11 AM, Danger41 said:

I’m not personally a fan of the C-172 and similar as companion trainers because they’re just so different in performance than the assigned MWS. It’s better than nothing though.

Dreaming here.... My vote for a companion trainer would be a tail dragger (ideally a Husky). Certified Day/night VFR/IFR. Airmanship-wise - anybody with any TW time on here can tell you the importance of using your feet for BAC! Still able to enter into your nearest Class B on IFR clearance and on VFR RTB hit a few grass strips to practice STOL. Again, dreaming here... 

[Prosuper]

19 minutes ago, norskman said:

Dreaming here.... My vote for a companion trainer would be a tail dragger (ideally a Husky). Certified Day/night VFR/IFR. Airmanship-wise - anybody with any TW time on here can tell you the importance of using your feet for BAC! Still able to enter into your nearest Class B on IFR clearance and on VFR RTB hit a few grass strips to practice STOL. Again, dreaming here... 

And a must for any Alaskan.

 

[Splash95]

A few weeks into 2.5 at KEND if anyone has questions, granted I'm a know-nothing student. Can confirm in generality that T-6 direct is/will soon be a thing.

[brabus]

One of our guys is about to start 2.5...the overall timeline is about one month shorter than traditional UPT. So it doesn’t save any appreciable time getting guys to the operational AF, which is the problem they’re trying to solve. So, if it doesn’t produce more and faster, what is the benefit?

[SurlySlipper]

Isn’t the benefit that it starts divesting from the t-1 and provides a stepping stone toward using the t-7?

[Majestik Møøse]

2 hours ago, brabus said:

One of our guys is about to start 2.5...the overall timeline is about one month shorter than traditional UPT. So it doesn’t save any appreciable time getting guys to the operational AF, which is the problem they’re trying to solve. So, if it doesn’t produce more and faster, what is the benefit?

Hypothesis: it cooked the books enough to increase the production numbers for one particular leader’s tenure.

[dream big]

2 hours ago, brabus said:

One of our guys is about to start 2.5...the overall timeline is about one month shorter than traditional UPT. So it doesn’t save any appreciable time getting guys to the operational AF, which is the problem they’re trying to solve. So, if it doesn’t produce more and faster, what is the benefit?

$$$$$

[Clark Griswold]

Isn’t the benefit that it starts divesting from the t-1 and provides a stepping stone toward using the t-7?

That assumes they will put everyone thru a classic UPT program vice what I think is their intention to put some thru a true advanced trainer phase 3 program and others thru a weak / nothing advanced trainer program

There are about 500 T-38s in the inventory now including companion trainers but they ordered only 351 T-7s but with options for more.

If they said divest the 170ish T-1 to buy more T-7s to return to UPT then sure but as we see the AF doesn’t believe if your going to a heavy you need robust military mission specific and multi engine training.
They wanna phone it in and create a second tier of pilots, and the heavy aircraft GOs are just rolling over and taking it...

But I’m not cynical not one bit and yes you do need an advanced training program if you are going to heavies


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Homestar]

Maybe everyone could just watch Gen Wills' A/TA seminar:

 

https://airlift-tanker-association.s3.amazonaws.com/Virtual+Seminar+Series/Seminar6-14Aug2020.mp4

[Majestik Møøse]

31 minutes ago, Homestar said:

Maybe everyone could just watch Gen Wills' A/TA seminar:

TL;DR? Or at least a time stamp

[SurlySlipper]

6 hours ago, Clark Griswold said:

That assumes they will put everyone thru a classic UPT program vice what I think is their intention to put some thru a true advanced trainer phase 3 program and others thru a weak / nothing advanced trainer program

There are about 500 T-38s in the inventory now including companion trainers but they ordered only 351 T-7s but with options for more.

If they said divest the 170ish T-1 to buy more T-7s to return to UPT then sure but as we see the AF doesn’t believe if your going to a heavy you need robust military mission specific and multi engine training.
They wanna phone it in and create a second tier of pilots, and the heavy aircraft GOs are just rolling over and taking it...

But I’m not cynical not one bit and yes you do need an advanced training program if you are going to heavies


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I assumed the t-7 was just going to replace the 38’s in UPT, how many of those 500 38’s are a-model companions or ADAIR? 

I’m not quibbling, just genuinely curious at why there’s such a big gap in the T-7 buy...

[Clark Griswold]

1 hour ago, SurlySlipper said:

I assumed the t-7 was just going to replace the 38’s in UPT, how many of those 500 38’s are a-model companions or ADAIR? 
I’m not quibbling, just genuinely curious at why there’s such a big gap in the T-7 buy...

Not sure, just a WAG but I think probably 75-85 would be ADAIR, Companion Trainers, Test / Chase Birds, etc...

Just my cynical suspicion on the delta between what is now and what is planned for the future is less or no flight hours for students bound for heavies / most crew aircraft in the future.  Strongly disagree with that idea but it seems the Bobs are looking at that.

Ranting into the ether but if the Borg Cube of HAF is listening (not holding breath for that) consider that if you min run Phase 3 for crew / heavy tracked students with little or no flight time in SUPT you will create yet another chasm in the culture of the rated force.  They will never be considered even close to their peers who tracked 38 or 7 and had a more robust, challenging and respected training phase to successfully complete. 

This will just make things worse in the rated communities I think in immediate terms of the product supplied to the MDS communities by having a less rigorous training program to build experience, knowledge and judgement while also being a less effective filter to appropriately winnow the field who of who should not be pilots.  I hate that aspect of training but their must be a filter aspect to it otherwise the herd will not be as strong as it should be.  I also doubt that the T-1 sim even if improved would be the right training environment for that. 

In the long term, it makes the heavy / crew pilot and officer less in the eyes of peers and other branches and this is not a small or unimportant detail.  If these rated officers do not have the full respect of their peers as aviators and likely as officers, a large and sizeable mission set of the Air Force looses ground in the never ending competition for leadership and resources.  Seems like overeaction I realize but would you really respect someone who didn't go thru a program at least similar to yours to earn the same operational badge? 

Save money by changing Phase 3 for heavy tracked dudes?  Sure but they still need FLIGHT training.

Edited August 30, 2020 by Clark Griswold

[Bender]

Maybe everyone could just watch Gen Wills' A/TA seminar:
 
https://airlift-tanker-association.s3.amazonaws.com/Virtual+Seminar+Series/Seminar6-14Aug2020.mp4

Vance AFB is conducting UPT 2.5 because “they were just so far ahead of the other bases”...LOL.

Anyone can sign up for stupid anytime they want, doesn’t make one “farther ahead”...I would NOT want to be dealing with this thing in mass as END right now. This thing is hard enough with a single flight SGTO.

Grade A way to become so overwhelmed you learn nothing (just wait until we sprinkle on a little timeline pressure), but that’s just one man’s opinion.

That whole syllabus is going to require a MASSIVE overhaul...not a bad try for writing it in a couple months when no one had any idea what they were doing.

Good luck to Vance & Randolph,
Not to mention Columbus & Laughlin,
~Bendy


Sent from my iPad using Baseops Network mobile app

[LookieRookie]

6 minutes ago, Bender said:

 

Vance AFB is conducting UPT 2.5 because “they were just so far ahead of the other bases”...LOL.

Anyone can sign up for stupid anytime they want, doesn’t make one “farther ahead”...I would NOT want to be dealing with this thing in mass as END right now. This thing is hard enough with a single flight SGTO.

Grade A way to become so overwhelmed you learn nothing (just wait until we sprinkle on a little timeline pressure), but that’s just one man’s opinion.

That whole syllabus is going to require a MASSIVE overhaul...not a bad try for writing it in a couple month when no one had any idea what they were doing.

Good luck to Vance & Randolph,
Not to mention Columbus & Laughlin,
~Bendy


Sent from my iPad using Baseops Network mobile app

 

Are you at Vance?

 

UPT 2.5 is at Vance because it was developed from Banzai

[Bender]

Are you at Vance?
 
UPT 2.5 is at Vance because it was developed from Banzai

I am not at Vance. UPT 2.5 is at Vance because Vance leadership asked it to be, AGAINST the advice of people close to its development.

Banzai is not a Vance term; it’s a PTN term, adopted by every base.

I’m not rooting against you, I just think the acceleration over the last 5-6 months is irresponsible. That isn’t on you or any other IP...

If you think that syllabus, or this effort, is Vance’s, you should go find someone that knows what they’re talking about.

Although, at this point, sometimes I wish it was...

The next 6 months are very important here...we might just scrap this whole F’ing thing.

Again,
Good Luck,
~Bendy

[Clark Griswold]

11 hours ago, Homestar said:

Maybe everyone could just watch Gen Wills' A/TA seminar:

https://airlift-tanker-association.s3.amazonaws.com/Virtual+Seminar+Series/Seminar6-14Aug2020.mp4

Watched / listened to his presentation, had valid points on updating the methods of pilot training but I'm just crusty, bitter and clinging to my 3-3 and whiz wheel.

Still advocating for a new and challenging phase 3 for heavy tracked studs

Split the program into a military taught and civilian instructed program with multiple aircraft.  I'm ok with T-6 program increased in length and additional training accomplished there to have Phase 3 focused on different concepts / skills.

- Multi-engine Fundamentals.  30 hours in a Beech Baron G58 for basic twin experience and extensive cross country missions. 

- Tactical Air Mobility Fundamentals.  Low levels, NVG takeoff / landings, short field and grass strips.  Would use a simple, tough aircraft like the aforementioned Husky and probably around 20-30 hours.  

- Strategic Air Mobility Fundamentals.  This could be all sim and I think that could work.  At least a Cat C sim with the student training not to emphasize learning this aircraft backwards and forwards but introduction to managing a sophisticated, fast jet with integrated FMS/AP/AT/CPLDC/etc.. and military specific avionics to manage and execute Air Refuelling, Air Delivery, Air Land.

That's likely 6+ months but just my two cents looking back and what I think would have trained me for what I needed to be able to do when I was first in the right seat of a USAF heavy jet.  Gets the fundamentals done in a cheaper system(s) before the FTU, likely costing more time in SUPT but saving time in the FTU and likely money.