Timeframe for T-1 retirement

[BrightNeptune]

There is a huge difference between training people in a modern level D sim vs the trash that is the current T-1 flight training device. There is no T-1 simulator per the FAA definition of a simulator.

UPT is simply going to graduate a different product for those that go non-fighter/bomber. FTUs will have to pick up the slack.

[SurelySerious]

There is a huge difference between training people in a modern level D sim vs the trash that is the current T-1 flight training device. There is no T-1 simulator per the FAA definition of a simulator.
UPT is simply going to graduate a different product for those that go non-fighter/bomber. FTUs will have to pick up the slack.

It still stands that no one tries training anyone in a level D until they have hundreds of actual flight hours. Airlines aren’t taking Joe schmo off the street and making him an A320 FO in a year of sims only.

[BrightNeptune]

1 hour ago, SurelySerious said:

It still stands that no one tries training anyone in a level D until they have hundreds of actual flight hours. Airlines aren’t taking Joe schmo off the street and making him an A320 FO in a year of sims only.

I understand that. Airlines also don't let 24-year-olds with <150 flight hours act as second in command with hundreds of people in the back. The Air Force will.

The statement I made was aimed at those that think the current T-1 flight training device can replace all of the training that is currently being done in the T-1 airplane. 

Edited May 22, 2022 by BrightNeptune

[Swizzle]

8 hours ago, HuggyU2 said:

//

...But each iteration should distill into a better process.

//

At 74 years old, Mother Blue should be a damn fine distiller! 

Meanwhile the bureaucracy tries its best...caveat emptor

The real challenge is negotiating the mandatory US govt acquisition bureaucracy with less rated and experienced staff guiding and smoothing the way; capital outlays/expenses infighting; and adaptation to current and future manning/equipping/training dilemmas, like generational changes and massive technical leaps coming or already here. It's a massive shift in culture ultimately which needs to be ushered in adeptly and quickly, and financially sound to keep it feasible. The idea that THE and OUR security imperative is enough justification to fund ever changing military exploits fast enough is silly. When conflict hits-the-fan the best system will win, and our leaders know it. 

Which slogans are they: accelerate change? Adapt or die?

 

[Lord Ratner]

On 5/22/2022 at 1:44 PM, HuggyU2 said:

But I find it hard to believe that a sim syllabus... combined with other methodologies that will likely include time in the actual aircraft... can't be successful in creating a qualified and skilled aviator. 

Of course it can. It has been for decades.

 

But the Air Force isn't suddenly interested in reevaluating that mix to see if there's a better distribution of sim and aircraft hours that will result in an acceptable product.

 

They fucked up, they're out of specific resources, and they are going to mold the solution to fit the shortage, not the training/proficiency requirements.

 

We all know the score. How many of these new methodologies include more time in aircraft? When all of your testing scenarios support a predefined conclusion, in this case, more same time will allow for less aircraft time, the result is predetermined.

 

I wasn't around. Did we buy the T-1 because we determined that business jet-trained students do better in the MAF than pilots who successfully completed the T38 syllabus? I doubt it...

[LiquidSky]

1 hour ago, Lord Ratner said:

I wasn't around. Did we buy the T-1 because we determined that business jet-trained students do better in the MAF than pilots who successfully completed the T38 syllabus? I doubt it...

Cheaper per flt hour and probably decreases washout rate significantly for those pilots that will never need fighter style form or bfm. Also have heard reasons such as simulates the feel of a heavy (no ailerons, just spoilerons), turbine training, and crm training.

I think it worked well but the parts supply chain isn't there to support and the jet chosen was never designed to be a trainer. So it took quite the beating and wore out quick. Add in the fuel tank issues, the Laughlin hail storm, etc. End of life for the platform was cursed.

Edited May 23, 2022 by LiquidSky

[LookieRookie]

3 hours ago, Lord Ratner said:

 

 

I wasn't around. Did we buy the T-1 because we determined that business jet-trained students do better in the MAF than pilots who successfully completed the T38 syllabus? I doubt it...

It was chosen to extend the life of the T-38. It was nothing about CRM or mobility flying.

[Clark Griswold]

4 hours ago, Lord Ratner said:

Of course it can. It has been for decades.

But the Air Force isn't suddenly interested in reevaluating that mix to see if there's a better distribution of sim and aircraft hours that will result in an acceptable product.

They fucked up, they're out of specific resources, and they are going to mold the solution to fit the shortage, not the training/proficiency requirements.

We all know the score. How many of these new methodologies include more time in aircraft? When all of your testing scenarios support a predefined conclusion, in this case, more same time will allow for less aircraft time, the result is predetermined.

I wasn't around. Did we buy the T-1 because we determined that business jet-trained students do better in the MAF than pilots who successfully completed the T38 syllabus? I doubt it...

This.

@congressman - this needs to be one of your last missions before your district disappears.  Take the AF to the woodshed publicly and shame them.  I know Schlitz is tight right now but this is another shit hole short sighted idea that needs to be quashed.  Heavy / crew aviators should have a Phase 3 training program that is challenging and teaches them the all fundamentals and intangibles of being an aviator on crewed, multi engine, complex aircraft executing a range of missions.  Flying heavies executing the set of Air Mobility missions is not the same as 121 or 135 flying, not saying that that flying is not challenging or requires talented trained aviators, but Air Mobility is a challenging set that requires its own special training for its new cadre.

Initial ME training with a contractor, 50-75 hours in a King Air 260 or Cessna M2, then Tac Training in a backcountry STOL capable aircraft, 20ish hours.  #brokenrecord I know but if the PPT rangers get this thru it will be almost unrecoverable

[dream big]

3 hours ago, Clark Griswold said:

This.

@congressman - this needs to be one of your last missions before your district disappears.  Take the AF to the woodshed publicly and shame them.  I know Schlitz is tight right now but this is another shit hole short sighted idea that needs to be quashed.  Heavy / crew aviators should have a Phase 3 training program that is challenging and teaches them the all fundamentals and intangibles of being an aviator on crewed, multi engine, complex aircraft executing a range of missions.  Flying heavies executing the set of Air Mobility missions is not the same as 121 or 135 flying, not saying that that flying is not challenging or requires talented trained aviators, but Air Mobility is a challenging set that requires its own special training for its new cadre.

Initial ME training with a contractor, 50-75 hours in a King Air 260 or Cessna M2, then Tac Training in a backcountry STOL capable aircraft, 20ish hours.  #brokenrecord I know but if the PPT rangers get this thru it will be almost unrecoverable

Not a huge fan but the one thing I respected about John McCain is that he would publicly roast the Air Force for their incompetence.  The famous video of McCain giving it to Welsh over the A-10 retirement debacle is priceless; as a result we still have the A-10. 
 

Kinzinger, take notes, find your sack and hold people accountable. 

Edited May 24, 2022 by dream big

[Lord Ratner]

6 hours ago, LookieRookie said:

It was chosen to extend the life of the T-38. It was nothing about CRM or mobility flying.

Exactly.

[Internationalmesa]

With the T-1 sim only program becoming a test class, will the instructors still be faips? If so, what happens when the last one leaves?

[Arkbird]

I'd imagine they'll stop FAIPing T-1 guys and slowly replace them with civilian sim instructors.

[edf8fde]

At Columbus currently and FAIPing T-1s is nonexistent anymore. 

 

[Swizzle]

3 hours ago, Internationalmesa said:

With the T-1 sim only program becoming a test class, will the instructors still be faips? If so, what happens when the last one leaves?

Sshhhh, that’s for the next generation to figure out (also, going rate in generational politics…and taxes)

[Homestar]

4 hours ago, Internationalmesa said:

With the T-1 sim only program becoming a test class, will the instructors still be faips? If so, what happens when the last one leaves?

No more new FAIPs at END. Nobody knows what will happen to T-1 IPs when AMF-S is the main program. XPW will remain. Everyone is getting certified to instruct XPW in the meantime. Some may be required to instruct sims (MSI) as they do now. Some may be redbird instructors. Some may be rerouted to T-6s. If these decisions have been made they haven't been communicated to the squadron level.

T-1 PIT is shutting down by this summer.

[hindsight2020]

32 minutes ago, Homestar said:

 

T-1 PIT is shutting down by this summer.

Was that before or after the T-1 divestment got frozen by congresscritter X at the 11th hour?

If the quoted is true, it sure doesn't look like it has been communicated to AFRC. We got a pretty big footprint on that enterprise; I'd think we would have been sending folks shopping for new units due to divestment already (T-38 ADAIR for example, and those guys had a lot more lead time).

That's gonna be interesting for our group. We'll probably capture a few to T-6 re-cat, but there's a lot of folks who'll probably try to retire or go desk/IMA/cat-E, especially over going back to a grey heavy with the usual TDY impositions. Interesting times indeed.

 

[Homestar]

13 hours ago, hindsight2020 said:

Was that before or after the T-1 divestment got frozen by congresscritter X at the 11th hour?

If the quoted is true, it sure doesn't look like it has been communicated to AFRC. We got a pretty big footprint on that enterprise; I'd think we would have been sending folks shopping for new units due to divestment already (T-38 ADAIR for example, and those guys had a lot more lead time).

That's gonna be interesting for our group. We'll probably capture a few to T-6 re-cat, but there's a lot of folks who'll probably try to retire or go desk/IMA/cat-E, especially over going back to a grey heavy with the usual TDY impositions. Interesting times indeed.

 

Like I said, nobody knows anything.  19th AF's truth will change tomorrow probably.

But if I were a T-1 reservist at Any Base, U.S.A., and not retiring in the next 12-24 months I'd be looking for a new job personally.

[WheelsOff]

A gal in my indoc class who retired out of the 99th at RND said they are slowly attriting…no more inbounds for T-1 PIT IPs. 

[nunya]

On 11/30/2022 at 10:45 AM, Homestar said:

But if I were a T-1 reservist at Any Base, U.S.A., and not retiring in the next 12-24 months I'd be looking for a new job personally.

If you’re a T-1 Reservist living near CBM looking for a PIRR gig and you want to stay near CBM, DM me. 

Edited December 2, 2022 by nunya