UPT Next

[CaptainMorgan]

Can UPT/UPT Next/People who identify as "in pilot training" get proficiency advanced? 

Is that a serious question? No, you can’t.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[nsplayr]

34 minutes ago, CaptainMorgan said:

Aren’t you a Nav? I’m sure your expertise qualifies you to concoct an 18X-11X syllabus.

Former CSO, current MQ-9 IP who has written a TX syllabus before so yea, I think I could take a hack at it!

A random major with irrational self-confidence, what problem can he *not* conquer! 😅

[CaptainMorgan]

Former CSO, current MQ-9 IP who has written a TX syllabus before so yea, I think I could take a hack at it!
A random major with irrational self-confidence, what problem can he *not* conquer! 

CSO and MQ-9. You’re clearly the SME on training pilots.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[JBueno]

37 minutes ago, CaptainMorgan said:

Is that a serious question? No, you can’t.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Serious question. And why not?

Is there a good reason not to, if a student is already meeting MIF? Sure, we all need air-under-our-ass time. Guard and Reserve slugs with a few thousand hours come to mind.

If bases are behind the timeline, and we’re hurting for pilots, why not? Seems like a poor use of everyone’s time. 

 

[SurelySerious]

Why? We just took civilians fresh off the street with zero flying hours, zero military experience and winged them as 11X pilots in ~6 months. Why would you hypothesize existing MQ-9 pilots would need more TX training than this?
https://www.aetc.af.mil/News/Article-Display/Article/3107596/upt-25-a-new-generation-begins/

It costs zero dollars and zero training days to send 18x to staff/aocs to free 11x for the cockpit.

[CaptainMorgan]

Serious question. And why not?

Is there a good reason not to, if a student is already meeting MIF? Sure, we all need air-under-our-ass time. Guard and Reserve slugs with a few thousand hours come to mind.
If bases are behind the timeline, and we’re hurting for pilots, why not? Seems like a poor use of everyone’s time. 

 

Simple answer: the syllabi don’t allow it.

Actual rationale: there’s no way to tell if somebody is that good, has temporary golden hands, or happened to get a streak of Santa Clauses that permitted a PA situation. What happens if you PA someone, but then they hook end-of-block and go to an 88 or 89, then a CR? I wouldn’t want to be the Sq/CC who authorized a PA in that situation.

Also, it would completely screw with the MASS. Is the guy who PA’d rides better than the guy who got all Es on their end-of-block rides?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[JBueno]

I guess that was a better question-why doesn’t the syllabus allow it?

You’re saying that subjective analysis will become objective if we just follows the syllabus. It makes sense within the Air Force’s self-imposed restrictions like MASS, etc. 

I’m saying they’d be PA’d if they’re meeting MIF early. You’re saying they may have had a Santa Claus or got lucky. But in your example of those end of block E’s, what if those came from Santas or they had temporary golden hands? How is that any different?

A Sq/CC facing a CR? Use common sense. You sent him ahead, it didn’t work out, give him a few more rides. 

We’re wasting millions of dollars and plenty of human capital letting training timelines get behind. Why not get ahead where we can? In the few cases it doesn’t work out, use common sense.

[jice]

26 minutes ago, CaptainMorgan said:

Simple answer: the syllabi don’t allow it.

Actual rationale: there’s no way to tell if somebody is that good, has temporary golden hands, or happened to get a streak of Santa Clauses that permitted a PA situation. What happens if you PA someone, but then they hook end-of-block and go to an 88 or 89, then a CR? I wouldn’t want to be the Sq/CC who authorized a PA in that situation.

Also, it would completely screw with the MASS. Is the guy who PA’d rides better than the guy who got all Es on their end-of-block rides?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Up front: I agree that we shouldn’t PA folks in UPT, but these aren’t good reasons for it. Instead of PAing them, offer additional challenges that the average student couldn’t hack. 
 

To answer your questions:

If they fail after PAing: The same thing happens as when somebody PAs in the FTU, MQ, IPUG, TX, or ICRS and then ends up washing out… except no FEB to worry about. If there’s doubt in writing the gradesheet, don’t PA them. Else it’s easy to stand by the decisions.

Not messing with a system that hasn’t ever been validated as a predictor of future performance is not a good reason to avoid adjusting syllabus flow to accommodate the student. Turns out the grades are subjective anyway; let’s just get comfortable with a subjective overall measure (as an option).

 

[CaptainMorgan]

I guess that was a better question-why doesn’t the syllabus allow it?
You’re saying that subjective analysis will become objective if we just follows the syllabus. It makes sense within the Air Force’s self-imposed restrictions like MASS, etc. 
I’m saying they’d be PA’d if they’re meeting MIF early. You’re saying they may have had a Santa Claus or got lucky. But in your example of those end of block E’s, what if those came from Santas or they had temporary golden hands? How is that any different?

A Sq/CC facing a CR? Use common sense. You sent him ahead, it didn’t work out, give him a few more rides. 
We’re wasting millions of dollars and plenty of human capital letting training timelines get behind. Why not get ahead where we can? In the few cases it doesn’t work out, use common sense.

If you were to PA someone in UPT, it screws the MASS. You would have to assign fake grades to the stud who PA’d, or disregard those rides for everyone else.


PA doesn’t matter in later courses, because there is no merit-based competition that affects assignments.

As for the Sq/CC, you showed bad judgement sending him ahead. You would look like a f*cking idiot if you PA someone and they falter afterwards.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[LookieRookie]

2 hours ago, JBueno said:

Can UPT/UPT Next/People who identify as "in pilot training" get proficiency advanced? 

Yes they can.

The sorties can then be reallocated to other blocks.

[LookieRookie]

6 minutes ago, CaptainMorgan said:

If you were to PA someone in UPT, it screws the MASS. You would have to assign fake grades to the stud who PA’d, or disregard those rides for everyone else.


PA doesn’t matter in later courses, because there is no merit-based competition that affects assignments.

As for the Sq/CC, you showed bad judgement sending him ahead. You would look like a f*cking idiot if you PA someone and they falter afterwards.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

PA is explicitly allowed. The MASS algorithm accounts for it.

 

Edit:

5. Proficiency Advancement The Wg/CC, delegated no lower than the Sq/CC, is the approval authority for Proficiency Advancement (PA). As a minimum, PA may be utilized in cases where overall student performance meets minimum course training standards and Special Syllabus requirements (SSR) prior to completion of a unit/block of training, while demonstrating consistent performance.

Edited October 21, 2022 by LookieRookie

[1:1:1]

I'm sure Proficiency Advancing a few high-performing students through their last instrument ride will solve the training pipeline 🙄  Let them get the experience. How many UPT DGs have morted themselves in the traffic pattern or on ILS?

[ConfidentlyIncorrect]

My understanding is that end of the block flights for Trans and Nav are definitely possible (and relatively common) to PA as long as everything has been at/above MIF for a consistent trend, but studs that do PA end up using the 'extra' rides in their mission blocks for extra training

[ConfidentlyIncorrect]

25 minutes ago, 1:1:1 said:

I'm sure Proficiency Advancing a few high-performing students through their last instrument ride will solve the training pipeline 🙄  Let them get the experience. How many UPT DGs have morted themselves in the traffic pattern or on ILS?

To be fair, I'd rather transfer that potential experience over to a mission ride where I can get aero, form, low level, instruments, etc. all in one 'free' sortie in the mission phase rather than slog through a final nav sortie where all I can do is approaches. 

Edited October 21, 2022 by stickshakergoaround

[Bender]

PA is explicitly allowed. The MASS algorithm accounts for it.
 
Edit:
5. Proficiency Advancement The Wg/CC, delegated no lower than the Sq/CC, is the approval authority for Proficiency Advancement (PA). As a minimum, PA may be utilized in cases where overall student performance meets minimum course training standards and Special Syllabus requirements (SSR) prior to completion of a unit/block of training, while demonstrating consistent performance.

Not only is it a thing, it’s nothing new (PA has been in the syllabus at least for 2 decades). The primary “oddities” of the 2.5 syllabus are actually designed to promote PA/PR, so that they are used in the most advanced “phase” of training possible, or at least where the student needs it the most.

I don’t believe the MASS does account for PA at this point. A PA event is just absent, so it won’t/can’t hurt, but it won’t/can’t help either. Shouldn’t be a big deal, as the reason the PA occurs is the student is doing well already.

They like the MASS details to be a black box (beyond what’s in the AFI), but it was opened up during the generation of the 2.5 syllabus…some things have been tweaked, like difficulty grading, but that and other things like the maneuver weightings are not accessible knowledge to the average IP.

~Bendy


Sent from my iPad using Baseops Network mobile app

[1:1:1]

59 minutes ago, stickshakergoaround said:

To be fair, I'd rather transfer that potential experience over to a mission ride where I can get aero, form, low level, instruments, etc. all in one 'free' sortie in the mission phase rather than slog through a final nav sortie where all I can do is approaches. 

If students are actually flying additional flights to work on other weak areas that's great. From what I remember of pilot training if you PAed through a ride you just flew one less flight than everyone else.

As far as I'm concerned, a dozen instrument flights is such little training already that even if you have a hot streak or just feel like you're nailing it, it's still worth it to see it one more time to solidify effective habit patterns and to potentially expose you to a situation you haven't seen yet.

When you're RTB low on gas, at night and in the weather from an LFE sortie that utterly blew your mind, you'll be glad you have good habit patterns to fall back on.

[nsplayr]

@CaptainMorgan sure looks like you ain't much of an expert on the syllabus when it comes to if is PA allowed huh? 😅

Maybe a former nav & current RPA guy could in fact know a little something about how to write a syllabus, and even remember what it says! Just spitballin' here.

I keed mostly...let's write that 18X -> 11X syllabus together. Save the AF some manpower it will otherwise inevitably lose, fly fight win, accelerate change or lose, ::insert buzzword of the day:: I'm on swings shift right now so I've got the time.

[BashiChuni]

6 minutes ago, nsplayr said:

@CaptainMorgan sure looks like you ain't much of an expert on the syllabus when it comes to if is PA allowed huh? 😅

Maybe a former nav & current RPA guy could in fact know a little something about how to write a syllabus, and even remember what it says! Just spitballin' here.

I keed mostly...let's write that 18X -> 11X syllabus together. Save the AF some manpower it will otherwise inevitably lose, fly fight win, accelerate change or lose, ::insert buzzword of the day:: I'm on swings shift right now so I've got the time.

please stop.

 

i've seen 2-3 students over 5 years who could PA. it's very rare IMO.

each UPT student needs to use the maximum number of allotted syllabus flights. we've already watered down the standards enough.

and yes....we have lowered the standards.

Edited October 21, 2022 by BashiChuni

[CaptainMorgan]

[mention=80946]CaptainMorgan[/mention] sure looks like you ain't much of an expert on the syllabus when it comes to if is PA allowed huh? 
Maybe a former nav & current RPA guy could in fact know a little something about how to write a syllabus, and even remember what it says! Just spitballin' here.
I keed mostly...let's write that 18X -> 11X syllabus together. Save the AF some manpower it will otherwise inevitably lose, fly fight win, accelerate change or lose, ::insert buzzword of the day:: I'm on swings shift right now so I've got the time.

No thanks. I’d rather a clean slate than an 18X (I am a pilot!) any day.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Homestar]

14 hours ago, CaptainMorgan said:

Seeing as Vance is done flying the Legacy jets, and they’re done AMPing them, I doubt you’ll see that happen.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

You don't say....

[Pooter]

16 hours ago, Homestar said:

I don't remember this. Been at Vance since 2018. Musta been a T-6 thing.

I think Laughlin still needs to give us our T-1s back that we lent them after the hail damage.... 😄

Yeah it was t-6's and lol I don't think you're ever getting those back

[Pooter]

10 hours ago, nsplayr said:

@CaptainMorgan sure looks like you ain't much of an expert on the syllabus when it comes to if is PA allowed huh? 😅

Maybe a former nav & current RPA guy could in fact know a little something about how to write a syllabus, and even remember what it says! Just spitballin' here.

I keed mostly...let's write that 18X -> 11X syllabus together. Save the AF some manpower it will otherwise inevitably lose, fly fight win, accelerate change or lose, ::insert buzzword of the day:: I'm on swings shift right now so I've got the time.

Global strike actually had an initiative going to develop a syllabus for 12B to 11X since the WSO/Nav positions are going away. Similar to an 18x you have a lot of experience there to leverage and anecdotally CSOs excel in legacy pilot training. 
 

But from what I understand Gen Willis in his infinite wisdom took personal issue with the proposed syllabus not having originated from AETC, so it didn't go anywhere. 

[WheelsOff]

10 hours ago, Pooter said:

But from what I understand Gen Willis in his infinite wisdom took personal issue with the proposed syllabus not having originated from AETC, so it didn't go anywhere. 

The “Doc Foglesong” of this modern era…glad this lunatic has finally left. 

[ThreeHoler]

Pay up


Sent from my iPhone using Baseops Network mobile app

[Pooter]

On 10/20/2022 at 10:39 PM, BashiChuni said:

each UPT student needs to use the maximum number of allotted syllabus flights. we've already watered down the standards enough.

Heartily disagree. Course training standards exist for each block, and if a student can consistently meet or exceed CTS they should PA to the end of that block. I've seen tons of gradesheets for above average students where it's firewall MIF or better for the 3-4 straight rides approaching the end of block or a checkride. 
 

Do those 3-4 Firewall mif rides provide more experience which will yield a slightly better product at the end of UPT? Of course.  More time under your ass will always be a good thing.  But this idea that there's a certain number of sorties written in stone that it takes to make a pilot is just not true. Some people are going to need more, some people are going to need less, and some people will never get it no matter how many rides you give them.  But if you force everyone to do the same number of sorties regardless of ability, you're literally doing no child left behind but with airplanes.