Degradation of SUPT

[Hawg15]

10 hours ago, TreeA10 said:

Claimed an Art 15 kill on a Captain class SRO for cheating on one of my tests

If you ain’t cheating you ain’t trying

[TreeA10]

11 hours ago, Hawg15 said:

If you ain’t cheating you ain’t trying

So true. However, if you are going to break the rules, the execution needs to be flawless.

In this case, it was just a weekly quiz and our hero was a failure away from highlighting himself for further evaluation. To avoid this, he changed an answer AFTER I graded his test, returned it to me, and accused  me of making an error. Unfortunately for him, I kept records of what questions were missed to find weak areas and he was the only one who missed that question. Oops. 

[JimNtexas]

Question from the peanut gallery:   UPT Next:  Threat or menace?

https://www.aetc.af.mil/News/Article/1946135/pilot-training-next-graduates-14-in-learning-experiments-second-iteration/

 

[Bender]

Question from the peanut gallery:   UPT Next:  Threat or menace?

https://www.aetc.af.mil/News/Article/1946135/pilot-training-next-graduates-14-in-learning-experiments-second-iteration/

 

 

You a fan of loaded questions? Why not provide your own intelligent perspective on PTN rather than offer it up like meat to lions? PTN can do whatever PTN does and it makes no difference to any UPT line IP’s life for the next 2+ years.

 

This whole thread is a sport bitch exercise...

 

PTN is literally the only counter weight to this thread’s topic, outside of UPT innovation flights...which wouldn’t exist if it wasn’t for PTN in the first place.

 

Captains and Lieutenants are actively trying to unf*ck what Lt Cols, Cols, and GOs have done over the last decades and even the last couple years...so focus your fire precisely and be constructive in your criticisms.

 

This coming from a guy that climbed up hill both ways in the snow...way too old to not be able to empathize with the perpetrators...but smart enough to see both the heroes and the victims.

 

Waiting for this thread to even find a glimpse of usefulness,

~Bendy

[pawnman]

9 hours ago, JimNtexas said:

Question from the peanut gallery:   UPT Next:  Threat or menace?

https://www.aetc.af.mil/News/Article/1946135/pilot-training-next-graduates-14-in-learning-experiments-second-iteration/

 

Take a breather there, J. Jonah Jameson.
 

 

Edited August 31, 2019 by pawnman

[dream big]

16 hours ago, JimNtexas said:

Question from the peanut gallery:   UPT Next:  Threat or menace?

https://www.aetc.af.mil/News/Article/1946135/pilot-training-next-graduates-14-in-learning-experiments-second-iteration/

 

I’ll hold my breath until I see graduates of PTN roll through our ops squadrons and perform.

Generally speaking, I’ve seen a decline in the airmanship of new LTs the last couple years.  Good dudes and all, just seem to lack some of the basics that should be taught in UPT. 

[Bigred]

11 hours ago, dream big said:

just seem to lack some of the basics that should be taught in UPT. 

For curiosity's sake, what are some of the basics you have seen that are missing?

[brabus]

- Unsafe decisions/actions (the type that come from a lack of airmanship that should be overcome somewhere around the first 1/3 of phase 3 UPT). Things I expect a 69 hr PPL to make/do, not a winged military pilot.

- Can’t multitask, which contributes to the above.

- Basic aviation GK that applies to all airplanes lacking (doesn’t understand portions of instrument flying, let alone basic aerodynamics...when you have to discuss why an action leads to a stall in the operational AF, enough said there).

- Physical flying ability immature...this I attribute simply to low flight time in the training pipeline. Not something that won’t come over time, but now the AF expects kids to get these crucial, early career hours in operational assignments instead of T-X in a benign AETC environment. The risk of death, injury, breaking jets, and mission failure is far higher.

Those are the big picture ones. The list could continue with more specific items. The common contributing factor is much lower amounts of flight time and skipped/rushed training events due to sliced syllabi. It’s not that young guys are less capable/smart than their predecessors, it’s that they’re getting very shorted on training opportunities combined with a far lower standard in AETC (so guys who should never have had wings have them, and guys in X jet should never have been within 6.9 nm of said jet).

[Gazmo]

Anyone who can answer some questions about being a reservist at a UPT base (T-6's at Columbus specifically), could you hit me up offline? Thanks in advance!

[Duck]

We should have listened to those 90 year old sim instructors who said this was going to happen when we got rid of the “fix to fix”


Sent from my iPhone using Baseops Network mobile app

[BashiChuni]

Hahaha duck!!!

[Merle Dixon]

On 8/30/2019 at 11:02 PM, Bender said:

 

You a fan of loaded questions? Why not provide your own intelligent perspective on PTN rather than offer it up like meat to lions? PTN can do whatever PTN does and it makes no difference to any UPT line IP’s life for the next 2+ years.

 

This whole thread is a sport bitch exercise...

 

PTN is literally the only counter weight to this thread’s topic, outside of UPT innovation flights...which wouldn’t exist if it wasn’t for PTN in the first place.

 

Captains and Lieutenants are actively trying to unf*ck what Lt Cols, Cols, and GOs have done over the last decades and even the last couple years...so focus your fire precisely and be constructive in your criticisms.

 

This coming from a guy that climbed up hill both ways in the snow...way too old to not be able to empathize with the perpetrators...but smart enough to see both the heroes and the victims.

 

Waiting for this thread to even find a glimpse of usefulness,

~Bendy

Ha! Every thread on here turns into sport bitching. My intent in starting the thread was to see if these things are happening at every SUPT base:

1) Degradation of student phase 3 performance.

2) No more daily morning briefs and or standup.

3) Low IP manning.

4) Lack of civilian sim IPs.

Edited September 1, 2019 by Merle Dixon

[zachbar]

On 8/30/2019 at 11:02 PM, Bender said:

 

You a fan of loaded questions? Why not provide your own intelligent perspective on PTN rather than offer it up like meat to lions? PTN can do whatever PTN does and it makes no difference to any UPT line IP’s life for the next 2+ years.

 

This whole thread is a sport bitch exercise...

 

PTN is literally the only counter weight to this thread’s topic, outside of UPT innovation flights...which wouldn’t exist if it wasn’t for PTN in the first place.

 

Captains and Lieutenants are actively trying to unf*ck what Lt Cols, Cols, and GOs have done over the last decades and even the last couple years...so focus your fire precisely and be constructive in your criticisms.

 

This coming from a guy that climbed up hill both ways in the snow...way too old to not be able to empathize with the perpetrators...but smart enough to see both the heroes and the victims.

 

Waiting for this thread to even find a glimpse of usefulness,

~Bendy

But PTN does have a daily effect on us daily line IPs. You said it yourself: innovation flight. Even those of us not in innovation flight are picking up the students that would otherwise be flying with the “innovation IPs.” 

Off the topic of PTN, Merle already hit on I think the biggest problem, the IP to student ratio. It’s taking away from IP proficiency, ruining the flight dynamic because the flying day was stretched beyond 12 hours, causing split shows. No more USEM events as a flight, only one or two IPs at formal brief in the mornings. The biggest thing though is most IPs don’t have time anymore to sit and hangar fly with the students. They fly, fly again, then go do their desk work before they have to leave 12 hours prior to the next day’s show. 

Fortunately a a lot of this has been noticed by 19AF, and if they put their money where their mouth is the student load will hopefully get cut. 

[Bender]

But PTN does have a daily effect on us daily line IPs. You said it yourself: innovation flight. Even those of us not in innovation flight are picking up the students that would otherwise be flying with the “innovation IPs.”

 

While innovation flights wouldn’t exist if it weren’t for PTN, there is no further connection there.

 

What do you mean by “picking up the students that would otherwise be flying with “innovation IPs.”? Those “flights” took on an entire class (against their will) with similar manpower. I’m not tracking on your statement...

 

Perhaps your base’s flight isn’t handling all of class 20-15? I was under the impression all of UPT’s 20-15 was inside of innovation flights (outside of kids washed back into that class...outside flights would still be “picking them up”.)

 

 

Trying to understand your “impact”,

~Bendy

[zachbar]

2 minutes ago, Bender said:

 

While innovation flights wouldn’t exist if it weren’t for PTN, there is no further connection there.

 

What do you mean by “picking up the students that would otherwise be flying with “innovation IPs.”? Those “flights” took on an entire class (against their will) with similar manpower. I’m not tracking on your statement...

 

Perhaps your base’s flight isn’t handling all of class 20-15? I was under the impression all of UPT’s 20-15 was inside of innovation flights (outside of kids washed back into that class...outside flights would still be “picking them up”.)

 

 

Trying to understand your “impact”,

~Bendy

I can’t remember the class number off the top of my head, but before they finally tracked, the innovation sister flight had over 20 students as a result. They were supposed to get a class off to fly with the innovation students, but they just received a new class again for some reason. Still trying to figure out why... Are you at DLF? We may just see things differently if you are, or if we are separate bases our ops groups might be doing things differently.

Bottom line in my mind is that anything that splits the squadron’s attention into two mindsets with different ways of thinking is going to create inefficiencies. It breaks up the unity of effort. I realize we’re in a garbage situation, but I wish PTN could create whole and established concepts to give to the UPT squadrons instead of throwing out the syllabus and just telling us to innovate.

[Bender]

I can’t remember the class number off the top of my head, but before they finally tracked, the innovation sister flight had over 20 students as a result.

 

None of the innovation flight students in the initial 19AF sanctioned 20-15 effort are close to track select. Sounds like you’re at Vance, where this shenanigans has been on going for longer than the other bases. I can’t speak intelligently on the details of what Vance is doing outside of 20-15 (and honestly, it’s often difficult even when it comes to 20-15). How one flights student loading is impacted by another is the work of your Squadron Commanders as much as it is any particular flight (to include innovation). A number of moving pieces going on in that opening...

 

 

They were supposed to get a class off to fly with the innovation students, but they just received a new class again for some reason. Still trying to figure out why... Are you at DLF? We may just see things differently if you are, or if we are separate bases our ops groups might be doing things differently.

 

Get a class off to fly with innovation students? Again, seems like a weird concept on face value. Sounds like the start of 20-15 May have also had an impact on previously laid plans when Vance got forced to take on a specific innovation load at a specific time...

 

 

Bottom line in my mind is that anything that splits the squadron’s attention into two mindsets with different ways of thinking is going to create inefficiencies. It breaks up the unity of effort. I realize we’re in a garbage situation, but I wish PTN could create whole and established concepts to give to the UPT squadrons instead of throwing out the syllabus and just telling us to innovate.

 

Sounds like another statement that can only come from Vance, where there were intentional activities (mostly driven by CSI manning) that we’re interrupted when the 19AF decided now would be a good time to release a brown cluster bomb.

 

I realize we’re in a garbage situation, but I wish PTN could create whole and established concepts to give to the UPT squadrons instead of throwing out the syllabus and just telling us to innovate.

 

PTN feels exactly the same way, so whatever solace you can find in that fact.

 

 

 

So...tell me if I’m right....Vance?

 

Vance IPs have been impacted by this innovation stuff more than the rest of us (so far)...

~Bendy

[zachbar]

26 minutes ago, Bender said:

 

None of the innovation flight students in the initial 19AF sanctioned 20-15 effort are close to track select. Sounds like you’re at Vance, where this shenanigans has been on going for longer than the other bases. I can’t speak intelligently on the details of what Vance is doing outside of 20-15 (and honestly, it’s often difficult even when it comes to 20-15). How one flights student loading is impacted by another is the work of your Squadron Commanders as much as it is any particular flight (to include innovation). A number of moving pieces going on in that opening...

 

 

 

 

Get a class off to fly with innovation students? Again, seems like a weird concept on face value. Sounds like the start of 20-15 May have also had an impact on previously laid plans when Vance got forced to take on a specific innovation load at a specific time...

 

 

 

 

Sounds like another statement that can only come from Vance, where there were intentional activities (mostly driven by CSI manning) that we’re interrupted when the 19AF decided now would be a good time to release a brown cluster bomb.

 

 

 

PTN feels exactly the same way, so whatever solace you can find in that fact.

 

 

 

So...tell me if I’m right....Vance?

 

Vance IPs have been impacted by this innovation stuff more than the rest of us (so far)...

~Bendy

Laughlin, but from talking to PIT buddies at Vance we’re in similar situations. 

[Bender]

Laughlin, but from talking to PIT buddies at Vance we’re in similar situations. 

LOL...WTF. Okay...I’m out then, had no idea there was that level of shenanigans going on there.

~Bendy

[MechGov]

2) No more daily morning briefs and or standup.

Wait, what?

[Bender]

Wait, what?

 All traditional production flights at CBM still do both morning briefs and standup. When our schedule cluster bomb causes the flight to have to show up in multiple groups to make the 60 yard goal posts work out, there is difficulty in getting mass events accomplished without unduly increasing workload on scheduler and USEMs.

 

That said, the innovation flight at Columbus does a morning brief, but it has nothing to do with weather. The students are expected to plan for themselves rather than spend time reviewing it together for a toastmaster session. The intent and result of such a move can be debated, but it’s probably too early to tell...probably here nor there anyway.

 

The innovation flight likely does more EP training than a standard production flight. In addition to the tabletops associated with the daily flight, they rotate between traditional standup and using a VR EP training program in front of other students...anything that can’t/isn’t accomplished in the VR is followed up in a traditional fashion.

 

Break, break...

 

I find it to be a hard stretch to think that someone that “chooses” to make a low SA move in the Viper wouldn’t have been capable of it just because the did the May ‘18 Ch 1 or Feb ‘19 syllabus rather than the preceding version of airplane flying and simulating. The differences just aren’t that vast.

 

Reducing hours is a part of the equation, but in reality the hours aren’t being reduced...they’re being flown, which is in reality the failure of the new syllabus revisions.

 

Me thinks you were always going to get that guy/gal, and they were always going to do that. Maybe if they had done that in the 6 or 38, they would have actually washed out...luck and timing, and apparently that cat has both.

 

~Bendy

 

 

[jazzdude]

Just curious, any whiting mafia guys online? No stand up when I went through as a stud at VT-3, but definitely a table top pretty much every sortie and a simulated EP to a HAPL/LAPL/PEL in the jet. That mentality seems to also build solid aviators. Any one have a different experience with navy trained pilots?

I think the problem might be just pencil whipping or rushing EP training. Seems like when I was a T-6 IP a lot of instructors would rush through table top discussions, signing off exposure to EPs 6-9 at a time in about 10-15 min. Sure, it keeps the schedule moving, but does a disservice to the stud. But the pressure is there with increased student loads.

[T6CBM]

9 hours ago, Gazmo said:

Anyone who can answer some questions about being a reservist at a UPT base (T-6's at Columbus specifically), could you hit me up offline? Thanks in advance!

I have no clue how to PM since I don’t have a account, but I’m a T-6 CBM guy and if you can respond to this offline I’ll help you with any ?’s you got

[BashiChuni]

More with less is not a thing when it comes to training aviators. 

VR does not replace ass in the seat. 

[Bender]

More with less is not a thing when it comes to training aviators. 
VR does not replace ass in the seat. 

Who is telling you that is the intention? A General?

~Bendy

[BashiChuni]

Actions speak louder than words