Air Force is hiring for civilian T-6 IPs

[HuggyU2]

Well, I stand corrected.
I had comms with AFPC and there is a meeting with OPM next month to discuss the program.

More to follow. 

[Biff_T]

22 hours ago, HuggyU2 said:

Well, I stand corrected.
I had comms with AFPC and there is a meeting with OPM next month to discuss the program.

More to follow. 

UPT locations are a hard thing to sugar coat.    

[SocialD]

21 hours ago, Biff_T said:

UPT locations are a hard thing to sugar coat.    

 

Given that we're a "total force" now, I've always said they should move AETC to the ARC.  While some wouldn't care to teach UPT/FTU, many would.  It's a ANG dream, no deployments, no chem gear, much easier job to maintain as a part timer...it's a no brainer from that perspective.  You'd have no problem filling squadrons and keeping great experience around to teach the young studs.  Free up all those AD IP's to fill the spots in AD squadrons.  Rotate a small number of AD pilots through to keep a fresh look/perspective, but that will naturally happen as we hire AD pilots anyway.  If we had something like that, I'd probably still be in.  

[Clark Griswold]

 
Given that we're a "total force" now, I've always said they should move AETC to the ARC.  While some wouldn't care to teach UPT/FTU, many would.  It's a ANG dream, no deployments, no chem gear, much easier job to maintain as a part timer...it's a no brainer from that perspective.  You'd have no problem filling squadrons and keeping great experience around to teach the young studs.  Free up all those AD IP's to fill the spots in AD squadrons.  Rotate a small number of AD pilots through to keep a fresh look/perspective, but that will naturally happen as we hire AD pilots anyway.  If we had something like that, I'd probably still be in.  

Damn genius Gump
If you could move or remission the existing Wings to easy driving distance to major domiciles, CLT-ATL-MIA-DFW-DEN-PHX, boom manning problems solved
Like Bluto’s grade point average, about the same chance as happening
Split the work, basic skills in one or two bases, studs get PPL INSTM and ME done there, move on two two or more bases to do the MIL flying (one training aircraft my suggestion is to move to a PC-21) and get winged. IFF for some, pre AMC, AFSOC, AFGSC, Heavy ACC for everyone else, Rotary to Mother Rucker


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[DirkDiggler]

2 hours ago, SocialD said:

 

Given that we're a "total force" now, I've always said they should move AETC to the ARC.  While some wouldn't care to teach UPT/FTU, many would.  It's a ANG dream, no deployments, no chem gear, much easier job to maintain as a part timer...it's a no brainer from that perspective.  You'd have no problem filling squadrons and keeping great experience around to teach the young studs.  Free up all those AD IP's to fill the spots in AD squadrons.  Rotate a small number of AD pilots through to keep a fresh look/perspective, but that will naturally happen as we hire AD pilots anyway.  If we had something like that, I'd probably still be in.  

HC-130J FTU is following this model at Kirtland now.

[Biff_T]

2 hours ago, Clark Griswold said:

Damn genius Gump
If you could move or remission the existing Wings to easy driving distance to major domiciles, CLT-ATL-MIA-DFW-DEN-PHX, boom manning problems solved
Like Bluto’s grade point average, about the same chance as happening
Split the work, basic skills in one or two bases, studs get PPL INSTM and ME done there, move on two two or more bases to do the MIL flying (one training aircraft my suggestion is to move to a PC-21) and get winged. IFF for some, pre AMC, AFSOC, AFGSC, Heavy ACC for everyone else, Rotary to Mother Rucker


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

45 minutes ago, DirkDiggler said:

HC-130J FTU is following this model at Kirtland now.

The MH-139 dudes at Maxwell are doing something similar.   

https://www.af.mil/News/Article-Display/Article/3918915/mh-139a-grey-wolf-participates-in-first-training-event/

Edited Wednesday at 06:19 PM by Biff_T
Article

[HuggyU2]

2 hours ago, DirkDiggler said:

HC-130J FTU is following this model at Kirtland now.

And they were taking ~11 months to get a new co-pilot through the syllabus.  
Unsat. 

[DirkDiggler]

15 minutes ago, HuggyU2 said:

And they were taking ~11 months to get a new co-pilot through the syllabus.  
Unsat. 

The syllabus was expanded at KABQ for MC/HC-J training, especially on the sim side, compared to what it looked like in the legacy.  Main reason being students in the legacy airframe used to go to KLRF for Phase 1&2 training (which typically took about 5-6 months) before they came through Kirtland, which then generally took another 5-6 months.  For the J model students now come straight to Albuquerque from UPT/UCT/Tech school.  So overall the FTU pipeline estimated duration has stayed about the same.

  Kirtland on the flightline has almost always trended behind in the 21 years I’ve been involved with the program, as both a student, FTU IP, and now sim CI.  The reasons vary, but weather during the winter is a factor, manning on the AD has been a challenge lately (see the new airline thread) and since it’s AETC Kirtland is the last priority for parts.  MX usually has manning issues, and the personnel here tend to be on the younger side.  There’s also a lot of tactical incompletes given on sorties nowadays due to the decreased training guys/gals are getting in UPT (more on that below); this gives guys/gals additional rides to make up for the lack of initial training they’re not getting in UPT.  Add in unforeseen events like 100% of your contractor workforce getting laid off for a month this year and you can see how they’re constantly digging themselves out of a hole.

  AFSOC (really just old Tony B) in its infinite wisdom decided the fix for all this is to just cut the syllabus by 47% and push a large number of tactical events down to be taught by the line units.  The product we’re getting from UPT is much less polished (students coming through the pipeline now are T-1 sim only; the last time they flew an airplane was T-6s).  The line units aren’t manned appropriately to pickup the slack and the IPs in the line units are getting younger/more inexperienced because we’re upgrading them quicker out of necessity.  It’s a real problem that hopefully won’t manifest in a series of Class As.

  So far ACC hasn’t cut their FTU syllabus, which in my opinion is a good thing.

[brabus]

9 hours ago, Clark Griswold said:

CLT-ATL-MIA-DFW-DEN-PHX,

The FAA reps at the initial pitch meeting:

[Clark Griswold]

44 minutes ago, brabus said:

The FAA reps at the initial pitch meeting:

I get it (DFW based) but reasonable driving distance is probably outside the Bravo or under it’s outer and tallest shelf.  Most in base dudes I fly with seem to live around 30+ miles from the AA mothership, I’m guessing the other airline crew dawgs are similarly around their airline base.

Besides you’ve got a lot of other choices besides the big bases I rattled off there, major cities that are smaller domiciles for some carriers (BNA, BAL, MSP, MCO, etc…) or cities which used to be domiciles (STL, MCI for instance) that are easy commutes and would likely support a viable training location

Edited yesterday at 02:15 AM by Clark Griswold

[brabus]

Unless there’s a large enough existing MOA with capacity, it’s a non-starter. The FAA is horrendous to work with - it’s their kingdom and they don’t give a fuck about training, readiness, national defense, etc. To top it off the AF majorly bent the knee to them a few years ago and slammed some huge nails into its own coffin on the airspace front. 
 

Edit: I love the hypothetical idea, just am too jaded by the reality of bureaucracy that would immediately crush a good solution to a problem. Now if Elon gets involved, maybe we’re on to something!

Edited yesterday at 03:36 AM by brabus

[Clark Griswold]

38 minutes ago, brabus said:

Unless there’s a large enough existing MOA with capacity, it’s a non-starter. The FAA is horrendous to work with - it’s their kingdom and they don’t give a fuck about training, readiness, national defense, etc. To top it off the AF majorly bent the knee to them a few years ago and slammed some huge nails into its own coffin on the airspace front. 
 

Edit: I love the hypothetical idea, just am too jaded by the reality of bureaucracy that would immediately crush a good solution to a problem. Now if Elon gets involved, maybe we’re on to something!

Fair enough and understood all too well about the Borg Cube that is any part of the federal government pre DOGE, post DOGE might be different…

Imagining it and trying to be semi realistic, I see this as a Reserve idea and probably not involving the Guard.  Not that the Guard could not do it but if the AF wanted to really push this, it would be simpler legally and maybe a bit politically 

[raimius]

7 hours ago, DirkDiggler said:

The product we’re getting from UPT is much less polished (students coming through the pipeline now are T-1 sim only; the last time they flew an airplane was T-6s).

Don't worry.  The T-1 sim is going away.  They'll go straight to the FTUs from T-6s.

...leave it to the AF to "save money" by getting rid of the T-1, so people can do their training in the (oh, so much cheaper) C-17, KC-135, etc...

I knew the AF had problems, then I got assigned to AETC...

[SurelySerious]

Don't worry.  The T-1 sim is going away.  They'll go straight to the FTUs from T-6s.
...leave it to the AF to "save money" by getting rid of the T-1, so people can do their training in the (oh, so much cheaper) C-17, KC-135, etc...
I knew the AF had problems, then I got assigned to AETC...

What’s $69k/flight hour amongst friends?

[LiquidSky]

15 minutes ago, SurelySerious said:

What’s $69k/flight hour amongst friends?

Nothing compared to that $75M hard landing.

[SocialD]

10 hours ago, brabus said:

Unless there’s a large enough existing MOA with capacity, it’s a non-starter. The FAA is horrendous to work with - it’s their kingdom and they don’t give a fuck about training, readiness, national defense, etc. To top it off the AF majorly bent the knee to them a few years ago and slammed some huge nails into its own coffin on the airspace front. 
 

Edit: I love the hypothetical idea, just am too jaded by the reality of bureaucracy that would immediately crush a good solution to a problem. Now if Elon gets involved, maybe we’re on to something!

 

 

I'm in agreement that this will likely never happen and there are lots of issues with it.  But on your point, we did successfully created a temp MOA about 25 miles from base.  It's turning into a published MOA in the near future, so it can happen...after a monumental effort lol.

[busdriver]

53 minutes ago, SocialD said:

I'm in agreement that this will likely never happen and there are lots of issues with it.  But on your point, we did successfully created a temp MOA about 25 miles from base.  It's turning into a published MOA in the near future, so it can happen...after a monumental effort lol.

Temp MOAs annoy the FAA for some reason.  They'd prefer permanent.  But those are harder to establish due to NEPA.  And the hippies will always complain.

So the trick is to make a temp MOA, use it alot until the FAA gets pissy and offers to make it permanent.  Profit.

[brabus]

2 minutes ago, busdriver said:

Temp MOAs annoy the FAA for some reason.  They'd prefer permanent.  But those are harder to establish due to NEPA.  And the hippies will always complain.

So the trick is to make a temp MOA, use it alot until the FAA gets pissy and offers to make it permanent.  Profit.

It used to be easier, but now even an ATCAA (way less environmental impact vs. a MOA, temp or perm) will take 2-5 years to create under the new, draconian process. MOAs are advertised as a 10 year process (with a massive asterisk that says “never going to happen”). It’s a very anti-mil process and the FAA loves every bit of it. 

[busdriver]

1 hour ago, brabus said:

It used to be easier, but now even an ATCAA (way less environmental impact vs. a MOA, temp or perm) will take 2-5 years to create under the new, draconian process. MOAs are advertised as a 10 year process (with a massive asterisk that says “never going to happen”). It’s a very anti-mil process and the FAA loves every bit of it. 

I guess what I mean is going through the temp MOA seems to remove the asterick.  It's still beyond slow.

NEPA for a new activity in an existing MOA is 2-3 years or so.  In that process (exercise EA) we got a temp turned permanent.

DM has been working an expansion of a MOA since 2018 or so.  I haven't heard anything about it in a long time, so may well be DOA.