Is the T-1 totally retired from the UPT syllabus?

[Lord Ratner]

On 8/25/2024 at 3:35 PM, Clark Griswold said:

True but he was saying it was cheaper and still working at the time the Bobs fixed the glitch. I would add that the 38 fleet is old and not getting any younger, the T-1 came about to give breathing room to the the 38 program. Killing it was not going to make anything better.
Divesting the T-1 before the 38 was replaced or in the process of being replaced was utterly penny and pound foolish.
It amazes me how incompetent the AF has become of late, while it was not an insignificant cost but not an onerous one for sure, divesting the only multi-engine training aircraft you have was not going to make anywhere near enough money to fix other problems. Divesting it also was not going to radically increase production of students who met the time tested minimum requirements to then wing and send to FTUs.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I often marveled at the Air Force's remarkable ability to make incompetent decisions despite the fact that every general I met was, for the most part, a good dude and seemingly competent.

 

Then I saw who amongst my peer group was going to be the next generation of senior leaders. 

 

Turns out they were also, for the most part, good dudes. But when it's your peers it's easier to know *what* they were competent at, and it started to make sense. It's not the skill set you'd pick to lead a war fighting machine. 

 

[Clark Griswold]

2 hours ago, Lord Ratner said:

I often marveled at the Air Force's remarkable ability to make incompetent decisions despite the fact that every general I met was, for the most part, a good dude and seemingly competent.

Then I saw who amongst my peer group was going to be the next generation of senior leaders. 

Turns out they were also, for the most part, good dudes. But when it's your peers it's easier to know *what* they were competent at, and it started to make sense. It's not the skill set you'd pick to lead a war fighting machine. 

Concur, most GOs I met/worked for were ok it seemed and didn’t exhibit glaring intellectual flaws but I suspect the warping effect of CODELs and HHQ staff give us what we see now

Yeah, I’m not sure our current “system” of leadership observation then selection/grooming is working.  It starts winnowing way too soon and limits the pool before you really know what you have.

[contraildash]

Anyone else get the memo on how the T-1 sim only studs were doing at the MDS FTUs?

Struggle with multi-engine things and advanced FMSs.

This is my shocked face.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

[Lord Ratner]

On 8/27/2024 at 8:51 AM, Clark Griswold said:

Concur, most GOs I met/worked for were ok it seemed and didn’t exhibit glaring intellectual flaws but I suspect the warping effect of CODELs and HHQ staff give us what we see now

Yeah, I’m not sure our current “system” of leadership observation then selection/grooming is working.  It starts winnowing way too soon and limits the pool before you really know what you have.

The best explanation I heard was that the AF obsession with getting more Joint Staff General Officers meant two things:

1) You had to identify them very early because of all the different boxes you "needed" to check to qualify.

2) The boxes that needed checking were almost entirely administration and paperwork jobs, so once you were "selected for greatness" as a captain, you were basically done leading people in a real sense for the rest of your career. And as we know, pilots don't lead until much later in their career compared to the ground-pounders, so... Not a lot of experience or talented leaders at the top in the AF.

[08Dawg]

9 hours ago, Lord Ratner said:

The best explanation I heard was that the AF obsession with getting more Joint Staff General Officers meant two things:

1) You had to identify them very early because of all the different boxes you "needed" to check to qualify.

2) The boxes that needed checking were almost entirely administration and paperwork jobs, so once you were "selected for greatness" as a captain, you were basically done leading people in a real sense for the rest of your career. And as we know, pilots don't lead until much later in their career compared to the ground-pounders, so... Not a lot of experience or talented leaders at the top in the AF.

Which is the exact reason I heard we stopped the below the zone madness.  Too fast, too soon, not enough experience, and no on ramp later for late bloomers or way to replace misidentified early selectees. 

[Clark Griswold]

10 hours ago, Lord Ratner said:

The best explanation I heard was that the AF obsession with getting more Joint Staff General Officers meant two things:

1) You had to identify them very early because of all the different boxes you "needed" to check to qualify.

2) The boxes that needed checking were almost entirely administration and paperwork jobs, so once you were "selected for greatness" as a captain, you were basically done leading people in a real sense for the rest of your career. And as we know, pilots don't lead until much later in their career compared to the ground-pounders, so... Not a lot of experience or talented leaders at the top in the AF.

That checks with what I’ve thought, it’s a GO officers arms race 

[dream big]

3 hours ago, Clark Griswold said:

That checks with what I’ve thought, it’s a GO officers arms race 

And it’s stupid because we promote faster than every other service. Even without BPZ 0-5s and 0-6s are promoting 1-2 years ahead of other services. It does us a disservice in a joint environment because the Air Force officer is usually younger and less seasoned. Not to mention that is often their first time in a joint operational or  planning environment where their Army counterpart has lived in this environment since they were a 1lt. 

[Clark Griswold]

And it’s stupid because we promote faster than every other service. Even without BPZ 0-5s and 0-6s are promoting 1-2 years ahead of other services. It does us a disservice in a joint environment because the Air Force officer is usually younger and less seasoned. Not to mention that is often their first time in a joint operational or  planning environment where their Army counterpart has lived in this environment since they were a 1lt. 

Yeah I could see that particularly with our rated officers, I hate to say it but there is a competing tension between developing a high skill and knowledgeable aviator in whatever MDS/Mission and developing an (eventually) strategic leader
I’m not sure the AF culturally would accept open acknowledgment of this and allow during the foundation period of an officer’s career them to achieve a reasonable level of demonstrated competence (aircraft commander, 2 ship lead, etc…) and then focus on demonstrating their competence at leadership at the higher than tactical level (operational, theater then leading to strategic)


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Biff_T]

I'll buy a T1 from uncle Sam for $69.00.   Lol.   I'll finally get a chance to fly a heavy trainer.   Put all the students in a simulator.   That is going make the best pretend pilots the world has ever known.  Pretend because flying a sim is just pretending to fly.   T-6 straight into a C5 should work out just fine.  

Edited August 30 by Biff_T
I'm retarded

[Biff_T]

On 8/22/2024 at 7:11 AM, CaptainMorgan said:

I heard California DOC wanted to buy some for prisoner transport.

[WheelsOff]

On 8/23/2024 at 1:40 PM, cragspider said:

We have the great 19th CC for this entire debacle. Many said this wasn’t the way to go. I can speak for some mad units the products we are getting are putting more work on the ops units now. The ftu’s are passing on the buck. 

Ah, and this was precisely the same problem going on in 2018-19 at FTUs when Wills arrogantly pitched his UPT 2.5 plan that was designed (in part) to combat this issue going forward.
 

So what you’re telling us is it didn’t work out?!?!?!

[SurelySerious]

Ah, and this was precisely the same problem going on in 2018-19 at FTUs when Wills arrogantly pitched his UPT 2.5 plan that was designed (in part) to combat this issue going forward.
 
So what you’re telling us is it didn’t work out?!?!?!

No no no, it works in theory [marxism], you’re just not implementing it correctly.

[guineapigfury]

13 hours ago, SurelySerious said:

No no no, it works in theory [marxism], you’re just not implementing it correctly.

True UPT has never been tried.

[Maybe-tacos]

On 8/23/2024 at 6:59 AM, rb1391 said:

FWIW, I have T-1A pilot training dates at Columbus May 25 - Jan 26. I hope this program doesn’t get cut before then. 

Don’t get your hopes up too high! I only say this because Nov was suppose to be the last class at Columbus for XPW, but things keep changing everyday. 

[dusty69]

On 8/31/2024 at 8:53 PM, Maybe-tacos said:

Don’t get your hopes up too high! I only say this because Nov was suppose to be the last class at Columbus for XPW, but things keep changing everyday. 

Not sure about Vance or Columbus, but rumor is no more jets at DLF by November.. so ideally pcs'ing the IPs soon after if not going T-6s

[CaptainMorgan]

Not sure about Vance or Columbus, but rumor is no more jets at DLF by November.. so ideally pcs'ing the IPs soon after if not going T-6s

Don’t think anyone plans on going T-6s, and T-6 pit is backed up to the point that they were sending FAIPs TDY to teach qual phase. Also, they aren’t working assignments yet since the AMF-S end date hasn’t been officially announced.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[dusty69]

regardless of AMF-S date the assignments should be worked. without jets, no gate months. The MAJCOMS didnt send ppl to be full time sim instructors

[CaptainMorgan]

regardless of AMF-S date the assignments should be worked. without jets, no gate months. The MAJCOMS didnt send ppl to be full time sim instructors

Not nearly enough CSIs to keep the program going. Hence why the lack of an end date is an issue.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Biff_T]

The USAF's newest multi engine trainer!   All that sweet muti engine time to yourself.   

 

Edit: Imagine an elephant walk with this behemoth.   40 Colombian Cri Cris taxing out for the big one (sts).  

Edited September 4 by Biff_T
Afterthought