Air Force is hiring for civilian T-6 IPs

[Lockjaw]

On 6/9/2022 at 6:24 PM, MFE said:

Recommend taking a look at the FAA's Aviation Instructor's Handbook; covers learning theory, teaching adults, and more. Free for download here: 

https://www.faa.gov/regulations_policies/handbooks_manuals/aviation/aviation_instructors_handbook

FYI, this is the material CFI candidates study leading up to the Fundamentals of Instruction FAA knowledge test.

--MFE

Yup, we used that document quite a bit when building the courseware. Thanks!

[LookieRookie]

20 hours ago, WheelsOff said:

 

That said, I agree with your point of them staying within the lanes of what they know—which frankly is probably only instrument flying and maybe some basic contact, as others have stated.

This is the same gate keeping that says only 11Fs can teach T-6/T-38 line abreast formation (read tactical).

 

Granted a lot of non-11Fs (and even some 11Fs) suck at it initially, but it’s a skill that be gained/instructed.

Edited June 11, 2022 by LookieRookie

[WheelsOff]

54 minutes ago, LookieRookie said:

This is the same gate keeping that says only 11Fs can teach T-6/T-38 line abreast formation (read tactical).

 

Granted a lot of non-11Fs (and even some 11Fs) suck at it initially, but it’s a skill that be gained/instructed.

Agreed, very valid point. Didn’t mean for that previous comment to sound elitist. I just find it insulting that leadership would resort to an idea like this when we all know this is just a big middle finger to the rest of us. 
 

I guess the crux of my original comment was rooted in the fact that a 23-24 year old CFI who’s given 50 hrs instruction in a -172 ain’t gonna know anything but instruments/basic contact skills. But as the old saying goes, “give me enough time and I can teach a monkey to fly this thing”. I’m just honestly surprised they set the bar for entry so low in terms of quals. The learning curve at PIT will be quite dramatic for the less-experienced hires.

Edited June 11, 2022 by WheelsOff

[Bode]

Maybe we staff the good locations with GS pilots then send all those captains and majors to Del Rio and Columbus.

Anyone in on the loop of this yet? Would love to pick up a Pcola spot, as I just retired from that unit.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[JimNtexas]

I wonder if these  CFIs will teach formation flying.

[HeloDude]

3 hours ago, JimNtexas said:

I wonder if these  CFIs will teach formation flying.

The ad says all phases of T-6 raining.

[HuggyU2]

Why not simply offer to put young, experienced CFI's through OTS and commission them... put them through UPT...guarantee them a FAIP assignment... and only give them a ~4 year commitment (post UPT)?

Then... offer them the option to remain on active duty and go to a new assignment if they so desire.  
 

Edited June 12, 2022 by HuggyU2

[nunya]

7 hours ago, HuggyU2 said:

Why not simply offer to put young, experienced CFI's through OTS and commission them

End strength.

[Swizzle]

21 hours ago, Bode said:

Maybe we staff the good locations with GS pilots then send all those captains and majors to Del Rio and Columbus.

Anyone in on the loop of this yet? Would love to pick up a Pcola spot, as I just retired from that unit.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

That AF program offers double base pay for assignments to hard to fill locations.

We'll see if the money-talks enough to Del Rio por el Mar (Del Rio by the Sea). And how that plays out is anyone's guess...anyone have any metrics of quantity eligible in the first place? Or is this even feasible to fill the gap? 

[FDNYOldGuy]

7 hours ago, HuggyU2 said:

Why not simply offer to put young, experienced CFI's through OTS and commission them... put them through UPT...guarantee them a FAIP assignment... and only give them a ~4 year commitment (post UPT)?

Then... offer them the option to remain on active duty and go to a new assignment if they so desire.  
 

My guess is it might be from the other aspect: the Bobs think they won’t attract the talent with that level of commitment. OTS-UPT-PIT is a little shy of 2 years and then another 4 years on that. Sure, that’s not epic, but for CFIs looking to bang out hours and head to the airlines yesterday, maybe they think a short commitment will allow folks to take the job knowing it’s perhaps better than building hours at the regionals or as a CFI in a 172? 

Not that the GS commitment they’re asking for is much different, but less of a “we own you” in a world where airlines are hiring folks with a pulse at mins. And the hiring boom seems to be greatest before the end of the decade and with seniority being huge, airline-bound folks are probably very averse to getting to the party too late, leading them to be set on max hours/min time.

I’d guess it plays better on a resume, too, having “instructed AF Pilots.”

The AF gets “cheap” single-digit GS help that fills a need and will likely bounce before they get too close to/spend too long in the higher GS levels. Lather. Rinse. Repeat; choosing a conveyor belt of cheap, newly-minted CFIs as opposed to (potentially bitter) FAIPs that are not headed to filled needed MWS seats. 

Note: I did not stay at a Holiday Inn Express last night.

[HuggyU2]

Well it won't matter. 
The economy is tanking, and it won't be long before the airlines start to furlough. 

Then the AF will have "solved" their pilot retention program for a couple of years. 
 

No need for civilian IPs at that point. 

[ItnStln]

On 6/7/2022 at 10:03 AM, brabus said:

Are they going to send these guys through full UPT, followed by full PIT? If so, they’re no different than FAIPs, so maybe this is OK. But my cynicism says the AF won’t do that and they’ll get some corner-cutting training and be a “half-FAIP,” making this one of the dumbest ideas I’ve seen. 

If they go through full UPT will they qualify for the 750 hour RATP?

[DirkDiggler]

Just saw an advertisement for this on Facebook, the comments underneath were amusing to say the least.

[Danger41]

Can you share? Don’t have FB anymore but I’m guessing it’s a bunch of nay sayer/back in my day cold warrior types?

[HuggyU2]

24 minutes ago, Danger41 said:

... guessing it’s a bunch of nay sayer/back in my day cold warrior types?

You say that like it's a bad thing.  

[DirkDiggler]

25 minutes ago, Danger41 said:

Can you share? Don’t have FB anymore but I’m guessing it’s a bunch of nay sayer/back in my day cold warrior types?

Actually most of it centered on how much the requirements are severely limiting the pool of potential applicants (several people/retired guys said they’d happily move to XL if this was a GS-13 gig).  And also how much the pay would suck.  And they standard wheels coming off/dumpster fire/this will work as well as the dryers downrange type stuff.

[Stoker]

2 hours ago, ItnStln said:

If they go through full UPT will they qualify for the 750 hour RATP?

I wouldn't think so. The law says you have to provide proof of honorable discharge or proof that you're currently serving in the armed forces, and have been rated a military pilot. It's not UPT graduation that lets you have an R-ATP, it's being a military pilot (not a civilian pilot who flies for the military). Presumably if we sent a new pilot to a foreign program as an exchange rather than UPT, they'd still qualify for the R-ATP if we rated them.

[JimNtexas]

On 6/11/2022 at 11:16 PM, HuggyU2 said:

Why not simply offer to put young, experienced CFI's through OTS and commission them... put them through UPT...guarantee them a FAIP assignment... and only give them a ~4 year commitment (post UPT)?

Then... offer them the option to remain on active duty and go to a new assignment if they so desire.  
 

A lot of the young CFIs might say 'and give up 10  years of seniority, with the risk of washing out of UPT.  No thanks'? 

[Clark Griswold]

On 6/11/2022 at 11:16 PM, HuggyU2 said:

Why not simply offer to put young, experienced CFI's through OTS and commission them... put them through UPT...guarantee them a FAIP assignment... and only give them a ~4 year commitment (post UPT)?

Then... offer them the option to remain on active duty and go to a new assignment if they so desire.  
 

Another COA similar to that would be to poach Army pilot WOs separating from Big Green and offer an AF WO program for fixed wing qual but only as UPT IPs in the T-6

Warrant commissions are meant to be for specific duties / roles, this would fit that bill and offer a path to a regular commission for those interested in continuation 

As they would not be in command of operational aircraft / missions but formal training aircraft / missions, this should ease the heartburn some have with anything other than RLOs in charge of AF flying platforms 

[dream big]

8 hours ago, Danger41 said:

Can you share? Don’t have FB anymore but I’m guessing it’s a bunch of nay sayer/back in my day cold warrior types?

No it’s actually dudes like you and me on the pilot network, many with valid concerns on how poorly the Air Force is managing pilot retention. 

[ItnStln]

16 hours ago, Stoker said:

I wouldn't think so. The law says you have to provide proof of honorable discharge or proof that you're currently serving in the armed forces, and have been rated a military pilot. It's not UPT graduation that lets you have an R-ATP, it's being a military pilot (not a civilian pilot who flies for the military). Presumably if we sent a new pilot to a foreign program as an exchange rather than UPT, they'd still qualify for the R-ATP if we rated them.

I thought it had to do with the training as I've heard about foreign pilots getting their FAA CPL for going through UPT. I did look it up and it looks like both are true:

(h) Documents for qualifying for a pilot certificate and rating. The following documents are required for a person to apply for a pilot certificate and rating:

(1) An official U.S. Armed Forces record that shows the person is or was a military pilot.

(2) An official U.S. Armed Forces record that shows the person graduated from a U.S. Armed Forces undergraduate pilot training school and received a rating qualification as a military pilot.

(3) An official U.S. Armed Forces record that shows the pilot passed a pilot proficiency check and instrument proficiency check in an aircraft as a military pilot.

(4) If a person is a military pilot in the Armed Forces from a foreign contracting State to the Convention on International Civil Aviation and is applying for a pilot certificate and rating, that person must present the following:

[VMFA187]

On 6/6/2022 at 9:36 PM, Magnum said:

Why stop there. Why not just contract Embry Riddle to instruct all UPT?  Or Draken and Top Aces to man our Fighter Squadrons. This has to be a joke, right?

DRG is currently trying to work a contract where they have civilians instructing in the F/A-18A-D at Miramar for FY23. Pay is suppose to be around $300k/yr. Similar to what they do with the F-15SA  and QA, only you get to stay in the states but also lose out on the $450k/yr those dudes in the Middle East make. 

[Negatory]

Why the f would anyone stay active duty

[jice]

4 minutes ago, Negatory said:

Why the f would anyone stay active duty

Yeah…

Congress and the services: “Unique jobs, camaraderie, quality of service… intangibles… the retirement”

The free market: “I see your claims and raise you… the exact same job, same people, different intangibles (like a family), same quality of service, at 3x the pay. Retirement? Yeah, I’ve got one too; where do you dock yours in the winter?”

I’m not saying staying active duty is dumb… but the market is drawing the line from A to B pretty clearly WRT compensation. 

[HeloDude]

21 minutes ago, Negatory said:

Why the f would anyone stay active duty

Just curious, if you think it’s silly for someone to stay on AD, why do you believe so?  Reason I ask you specifically is that on other threads you’re very pro-big government and seem to trust the feds wrt environmental, health, economic policies, and in general being pro-regulation vs not. .  So why not extend that same faith/enthusiasm to serving in the active duty military?