Delayed B Course Date

[Clark Griswold]

4 hours ago, hindsight2020 said:

Thing is, the inflection point is training completion. If the member wants out of the AF ASAP, it'd be more advantageous for him/her to start the ADSC clock by finishing UPT than it would be to get banked like in the 90s, awaiting initial training while in some other AFSC. Frankly, I'm surprised big blue hasn't in fact considered 90s styled banking in lieu of starting these people's ADSC clock.

Retention at this point is stipulated as a non-concern for big blue. It's not a business accountable to anyone but congressional pork, as such senior management can afford to be perfectly price-inelastic when it comes to the question of retention.

 

Gotcha but I thought the OP was saying 38 grads are getting delayed B course dates after SUPT graduation so my comment was advocating letting these newly minted graduates continue flying on their own dime if they want while waiting 

Banking could happen also, banking was over when I was commissioned then winged but if it came back then being the broken record I am, the AF should pay for at least 30 hours a year in GA aircraft while slaving away in a cube farm at some base

It’s been a minute but didn’t our SUPT ADSC start the day we were winged?

[Boomer6]

53 minutes ago, Clark Griswold said:

It’s been a minute but didn’t our SUPT ADSC start the day we were winged?

Yes. Although now they get wings post T-6's...

[HuggyU2]

There sure are a lot of replies to a rumor started by a 2Lt casual student. 
 

Of note, the nephew of a guy I know just showed up to his Navy/Marine F-35 RAG... 5.5 years after starting on active duty.  We aren't the only ones  

 

Accountability:  I've always been impressed that the commander and executive director of AFPC weren't both fired by the CSAF for their inability to manage the rated force.  

 

For you airline guys, I heard some really crazy shit recently about another merger. I heard it on the crew bus from a flight attendant and...

Edited August 28 by HuggyU2

[Boomer6]

Unfortunately, this is the kind of rumor you get when the bobs start, what some would call, bold facing lying to students. 

They're being told they'll do one assignment and then go to fighters. At one base they're also being told they may get sent to IFF before their heavy B-Course.

Idk if the bobs are afraid they're going to have a revolt when this next -38 drop happens, or if they actually believe the BS they're telling studs. Flt/CCs gave their studs the drop sheet for the one this week (all 3 regular upt bases) and let them decide amongst themselves who was going where. The good news is there are no UAVs in the drop.

 

[Inertia17]

5 hours ago, HuggyU2 said:

There sure are a lot of replies to a rumor started by a 2Lt casual student.

Not a rumor, memo from HAF/A3T to the UPT Wg/CCs. Mayorofrollcall (not me) on IG if you want to read it.

[SurelySerious]

Mayorofrollcall (not me) on IG

Exactly what Mayorofrollcall would say.

[Ant-man]

[contraildash]

Has it ever not been the FTUs?

I feel like we are on a 15 year cycle with this subject. For the youngins here, back in 2009 they reduced T-38 students to two per class…..and they ended up with a massive shortage in the 2007/2008 year groups in CAF.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

[Beaker16]

I got to Vance Aug of 2016 and there were a max of 10 students per class T-38s between AD assignables, Guard and international. Luck and timing if you had a lot of the latter two, I saw one class with 3 AD students. If you tracked -38s you had a high likelihood of going 11F, to the extent you needed to be non-recommended. Towards the end of the year was heavily bias towards AD and almost everyone got an 11F, to the point it was a running joke if you tracked T-38s and completed your consolation prize was a Viper.
 

FY17 to FY18 was max AB to reverse with drops. The first 3 classes had 3 11Fs between the JSUPT bases. It eased up and my Vance class (18-05) had 4 11Fs and 3 heavies. 

As others have stated, APFC ed over the FTUs and OPS units, guys and gals sat waiting for following courses for a year plus. There is a recent RAND study on pilot absorption at the ops units, creating a CMR pilot. It takes a lot of investment to create an E coded IP in a lot of MDSs. I became one 4 years from getting to my OPS unit and deployed 3 times in the process. It’s a difficult problem with a lot of teams but at this point I don’t even know the problem. Is it retention, is it a pilot shortage, is it a training efficiency issue, tasking issue even (air shows at JSUPT bases)? Mind boggling the shortsightedness on repeat. 

[brabus]

Sure more hours would be nice, but that doesn’t fix the pilot bail rate. It’s not lack of flying hours that’s pushing guys out the door. 

[Inertia17]

6 hours ago, TheLaughingCow said:

The Air Force does not have a pilot shortage

Fix the flying hour shortage and the pilot shortage will be fixed in 3 years or less.

Are you in senior leadership? Sounds like the "we don't have a retention problem" line they are spouting right now.

Counter point, IPs at Laughlin fly a crap load...but no one wants to go there (unless they married a local), and all the FAIPs who leave that assignment with 1000+ hours will all bail first opportunity.

[Duck]

Wow. Everything old is new again. “Universally assignable” or whatever they were calling it 15 years ago is back again!


Sent from my iPhone using Baseops Network mobile app

[Blue]

12 hours ago, TheLaughingCow said:

The Air Force does not have a pilot shortage

The Air Force has a flying hour shortage

Fix the flying hour shortage and the pilot shortage will be fixed in 3 years or less.

Flying hour shortage?  Or more accurate to say a shortage of aircraft to fly those hours?

If someone could wave the proverbial magic wand and put a fleet of T-7s at every UPT base, and plus-up the FTUs with as many aircraft as they wanted, that seems like it would go a long way towards helping the issue.

[Clark Griswold]

If this training backlog from UPT to FTU is forecast to last for years (3 or more) then why not use their time wisely, develop the skills of your pilots and seed a large pool of your rated officers with exposure and training in missions they may not get a chance to later when they eventually go to their MWS FTU?
There is money, it can be reprogrammed and we have resources for a Graduate Pilot Training program to absorb UPT graduates to develop the Line of the Air Force.  Just as LFEs are not to train any one person, they’re there to train the overall force, this program would be basically the same thing.
Build it to handle 300 to 350 students a year, list it as an assignment for the students to rank with their choices and let this program be the accumulator to help the training pipeline. Course length about 1 year.  
4 different aircraft in the program based at 2 different bases, geographically separated, east coast and west cost.
Train, support ops and participate in exercises to support the Joint Force.  Some of this would take the place of what contractors do now, not much but some.
West Coast Base X gets AT-6Bs and Cessna SkyCouriers.  Light Attack, ISR, Light Air Mobility with ACE training and experience. 
East Coast Base Y gets Scorpions and T-1s.  Aggressor, target simulation and light fighter training, Light Air Mobility support for passenger, cargo and courier services.  
This would not be cheap but not unaffordable 

[Day Man]

bro why do you do this to yourself? big blue isn't doing anything like this

[hindsight2020]

It also attempts to address a non-problem, that of idle bodies with a long ADSC balance. The DOD doesn't care. Retention  of their experienced chattel is an actual material concern for the DOD, and they still don't care enough about it to give up an inch on the 'control' line item of the ledger. And that's fighting separation-eligible bodies they have actually sank millions of dollars in recurrent training in. 

Good bad or indifferent, BITers simply are in the weakest negotiating position of their entire careers. Their only reprieve is that their clock is running post winging. Now, the AF goes and changes the contract to functional AFSC complete before clock starts (aka core ID other than 92T), and all bets are off. That would def sour the entire batch writ large, and cause all sorts of second tier morale effects all the way up the training pipeline to the op units. In fairness to the borg, there's no indication they've gotten that greedy.

[dream big]

On 8/28/2024 at 5:56 PM, Ant-man said:

Not seeing the problem here? Every MDS needs pilots in the mean time. Going through 38s doesn’t entitle you to a fighter. When I went through 38s you maybe had 1 fighter in a class of six, maybe two. 

[brabus]

12 hours ago, TheLaughingCow said:

There is a retention problem but it would be a non-issue if we were getting the same flying hours as we did 15 years ago.

No. Sounds like we’re from different corners of the AF; once every 2 weeks flying sounds terrible, I’ll l give you that. But that is not what’s killing the AF. It’s all the other bullshit in conjunction with dickless leadership who doesn’t give a fuck about winning. Enough of that horseshit makes a guy move on. Period.

[Clark Griswold]

11 hours ago, Day Man said:

bro why do you do this to yourself? big blue isn't doing anything like this

Yeah but light a candle vs curse the f’ing darkness.  It’s a long shot but maybe a staffer, CODEL, SES, O6, GO, etc… lurks on these forums and maybe you’ll cause one shoeclerk to pause and think, you gotta try…

9 hours ago, hindsight2020 said:

It also attempts to address a non-problem, that of idle bodies with a long ADSC balance. The DOD doesn't care. Retention  of their experienced chattel is an actual material concern for the DOD, and they still don't care enough about it to give up an inch on the 'control' line item of the ledger. And that's fighting separation-eligible bodies they have actually sank millions of dollars in recurrent training in. 

Good bad or indifferent, BITers simply are in the weakest negotiating position of their entire careers. Their only reprieve is that their clock is running post winging. Now, the AF goes and changes the contract to functional AFSC complete before clock starts (aka core ID other than 92T), and all bets are off. That would def sour the entire batch writ large, and cause all sorts of second tier morale effects all the way up the training pipeline to the op units. In fairness to the borg, there's no indication they've gotten that greedy.

Yeah I see your point, non problem in the short term sense to shoe clerks but leaders have to be strategic thinkers, 3 moves ahead and multiple permutations, if they allow this BIT issue to go unaddressed vs using it as a chance to build a cohort of inspired and trained Os for the AF then we will have missed yet another chance to better and break the trend of an inevitably less and less varied flying training.

If we are serious about getting out the stagnate paradigm that 20+ of GWOT has left in the mindset of the AF then this program could be one part of it.   

They have to see it’s not about bodies but the quality of the bodies, in mind, body and martial spirit.  These people want to be military pilots and leaders, keep them going in that direction not sitting on their hands starting in their careers building up resentment.

Edited August 31 by Clark Griswold

[tac airlifter]

On 8/30/2024 at 5:15 PM, Clark Griswold said:

If this training backlog from UPT to FTU is forecast to last for years (3 or more) then why not use their time wisely, develop the skills of your pilots and seed a large pool of your rated officers with exposure and training in missions they may not get a chance to later when they eventually go to their MWS FTU?
There is money, it can be reprogrammed and we have resources for a Graduate Pilot Training program to absorb UPT graduates to develop the Line of the Air Force.  Just as LFEs are not to train any one person, they’re there to train the overall force, this program would be basically the same thing.
Build it to handle 300 to 350 students a year, list it as an assignment for the students to rank with their choices and let this program be the accumulator to help the training pipeline. Course length about 1 year.  
4 different aircraft in the program based at 2 different bases, geographically separated, east coast and west cost.
Train, support ops and participate in exercises to support the Joint Force.  Some of this would take the place of what contractors do now, not much but some.
West Coast Base X gets AT-6Bs and Cessna SkyCouriers.  Light Attack, ISR, Light Air Mobility with ACE training and experience. 
East Coast Base Y gets Scorpions and T-1s.  Aggressor, target simulation and light fighter training, Light Air Mobility support for passenger, cargo and courier services.  
This would not be cheap but not unaffordable 

This is a terrible idea.  If MC12 taught us anything, temporary MDS is a recipe for disaster unless overwhelming GO support exists to chaperone the program through all the gatekeepers and roadblocks from established corners of the bureaucracy.  For so many reasons this would not work: no one cares about it (senior leadership sponsorship is critical), the only people gameplanned to lead are folks who wouldn’t have gotten a chance in closely scrutinized communities (not intending to disparage here, but it’s true), everyone else is competing for scarce dollars for programs already proven, the line flyers are focused on their next assignment… bro, it briefs well but in practice would be a horror show.

Not to mention we have actual MDS that could gainfully employ these pilots for 3-5 years.  Or forever.  If a random staffer is lurking on here for ideas (doubtful) please don’t pick this one.

[LookieRookie]

20 hours ago, hindsight2020 said:

It also attempts to address a non-problem, that of idle bodies with a long ADSC balance. The DOD doesn't care. Retention  of their experienced chattel is an actual material concern for the DOD, and they still don't care enough about it to give up an inch on the 'control' line item of the ledger. And that's fighting separation-eligible bodies they have actually sank millions of dollars in recurrent training in. 

Good bad or indifferent, BITers simply are in the weakest negotiating position of their entire careers. Their only reprieve is that their clock is running post winging. Now, the AF goes and changes the contract to functional AFSC complete before clock starts (aka core ID other than 92T), and all bets are off. That would def sour the entire batch writ large, and cause all sorts of second tier morale effects all the way up the training pipeline to the op units. In fairness to the borg, there's no indication they've gotten that greedy.

Post T-6, UPTs are recored to 11T1x with the x being t-1, t-7, t-38, th-1

[LookieRookie]

Clark, I’ve always wondered, what is your background and were you a pilot?

[Clark Griswold]

2 hours ago, tac airlifter said:

This is a terrible idea.  If MC12 taught us anything, temporary MDS is a recipe for disaster unless overwhelming GO support exists to chaperone the program through all the gatekeepers and roadblocks from established corners of the bureaucracy.  For so many reasons this would not work: no one cares about it (senior leadership sponsorship is critical), the only people gameplanned to lead are folks who wouldn’t have gotten a chance in closely scrutinized communities (not intending to disparage here, but it’s true), everyone else is competing for scarce dollars for programs already proven, the line flyers are focused on their next assignment… bro, it briefs well but in practice would be a horror show.

Not to mention we have actual MDS that could gainfully employ these pilots for 3-5 years.  Or forever.  If a random staffer is lurking on here for ideas (doubtful) please don’t pick this one.

No doubt this would require more than one GO who had strong buy in and believed there was a deficit in aviator and officer development willing to either make the case for supplemental funds or slay someone's sacred cows to get what would be needed, I don't know of any who has made any statements to that effect, but I post what I think so maybe it will change a mind(s).

As to execution and it getting FUBAR, quite possibly as it probably would not be in the ideal career development plan for a lot people on the path to power but the ARC could possibly be a good manpower source for cadre, if the program could be located near or at airline domiciles or other strategic / desirable locations.  

The admin and cadre are ARC, the customers are the AD.  Owners are the GOs and investors are the CODELs who want the program in their districts.  Keeps the streams from crossing and roles clear.

I'll agree it has risk but we have to get out of the mindset of well it's out of the norm so screw it, the USAF is getting sclerotic and needs a good ol' splash of cold water in the face, instead of the change being less real flying, less challenging and varied opportunities, try to offer more.

1 hour ago, LookieRookie said:

Clark, I’ve always wondered, what is your background and were you a pilot?

Pilot, 20+ years, AD and ANG, flying for a major right now.  Heavy guy, lucky and blessed bastard who got to fly several types/missions.

Edited September 1 by Clark Griswold

[tac airlifter]

11 hours ago, Clark Griswold said:

The admin and cadre are ARC, the customers are the AD.  Owners are the GOs and investors are the CODELs who want the program in their districts.  Keeps the streams from crossing and roles clear.

 the USAF is getting sclerotic and needs a good ol' splash of cold water in the face...

Splash of cold water?  The USAF needs a sledge hammer to wreck bureaucracy, a firing squad (figuratively) for many layers of cultivated pussy officers, and a promotion system directly linked to proven combat success (versus current "future potential" BS).  But it won't get either because there's no accountability in government and therefore no incentive to change.

I like where your hearts at but you misunderstand the organization if you think another multi-million dollar program with numerous stakeholders and fuzzy immeasurable outcomes versus a single commander with clear objectives is the right path.  But respect for your consistency & desire to keep the force flying.

[Clark Griswold]

10 hours ago, tac airlifter said:

Splash of cold water?  The USAF needs a sledge hammer to wreck bureaucracy, a firing squad (figuratively) for many layers of cultivated pussy officers, and a promotion system directly linked to proven combat success (versus current "future potential" BS).  But it won't get either because there's no accountability in government and therefore no incentive to change.

I like where your hearts at but you misunderstand the organization if you think another multi-million dollar program with numerous stakeholders and fuzzy immeasurable outcomes versus a single commander with clear objectives is the right path.  But respect for your consistency & desire to keep the force flying.

Fair enough, I think you argue in good faith.  No doubt about the problem with accountability.

I think it you could keep it under control and actually measurably accountable but I’m an optimist.

I’ve made my point as have you so good enough for BO.