Information on PIT (Pilot Instructor Training)

[C-21.Pilot]

The irony.

Exactly.

[BADFNZ]

Uh, I'm a current PIT IP and haven't even heard a whisper on this? If this is the case -- BONUS! Teaching folks who already have a clue -- awesome.

Wouldn't this take about 25ish% of your sorties out of the syllabus?

[C-21.Pilot]

I called a few guys (because I'm currently deployed) and they didn't say that this was a solid deal. It was discussed and is a plan in motion. I don't know specific details but it looks as if the main factor is saving PCS vs. TDY money.

Things I was was told that are being looked at:

1. It will reduce the manning at Randolph, plus save on BAH money.

2. Will increase sorties at the UPT bases while reducing the reducing sorties at RND.

3. Will be given a Form 8 check at your UPT base, come to RND for a sortie checkout and complete the instruction portion.

[Muscle2002]

8-10 sorties you'll take a front seat checkride.

What is there to learn that requires 8-10 sorties?

[AwShoot1209]

Dude, TP stalls are intense.

[Nasty2004]

What is there to learn that requires 8-10 sorties?

[Muscle2002]

Not trying to be a bad ass; seriously, what requires 8-10 sorties? I can think of at least four MDS whose TX-type courses are not that long.

Edited December 15, 2013 by Muscle2002

[xaarman]

Are they 1.2s?

[Cap-10]

I saw the e-mail traffic that said P Qual is on for the 38's as well starting summer of 2014.

Academics, Sims, 6-9 rides in the front seat, IQ Check, then a handful of RCP fam landing sorties prior to going to PIT.

Syllabus at home stations is 35 training days.....at PIT, 45 training days.

If that's the case, I say do away with PIT all together and let the squadrons do all the Instructor upgrades in house, like every CAF squadron already does.

Cap-10

[stract]

If that's the case, I say do away with PIT all together and let the squadrons do all the Instructor upgrades in house, like every CAF squadron already does.

Cap-10

Wrong. Both the HH-60 and HC-130 Instructor Upgrades (for every crew position) are done at Kirtland (FTU schoolhouse). To do them in house requires an SMT waiver, and ACC hasn't been handing those out a lot recently. Nor do the squadrons really have the flights to dedicate to that effort. Hell, a 3 ride flight lead upgrade syllabus can take several months to complete, and it's not for lack of trying.

[Cap-10]

By CAF I was referring to Fighter squadrons (staying in my wheel house), where only initial qual and TX courses are accomplished....Instructor, FLUG, MC is all done in house.

If they do away with PIT, (or Kirtland in your case), then I assume the metal and bodies would be spread out amongst the line units, thus allowing plus up of daily line flying.

(Note: yes, I know that just because the metal and bodies are there, doesn't mean MX, range, airspace, etc can handle the increased daily flying)

Cap-10

[hindsight2020]

I think we all agree that from a qualitative point of view, PIT adds nothing. I'm sure people currently loving the hell out of a San Antonio duty station would scream bloody murder and fight that notion, but if you ask the rank and file at UPT, nobody has anything positive to say about the place. That's not a dig against the dudes, but let's face it. The program is pretty mickey mouse.

[Tunes3]

Isn't this kind of like all of the UPT bases having their own IFF? Then they changed their minds and centralized it again.

I don't see how this is feasible, there are barely enough resources for current studs here. LSI and MX can't give us more and the current evaluators are pretty busy w regular IP checks and 89 rides. This should be a fun exercise in futility until they change their minds in 6-9 months.

[Lord Ratner]

I think we all agree that from a qualitative point of view, PIT adds nothing. I'm sure people currently loving the hell out of a San Antonio duty station would scream bloody murder and fight that notion, but if you ask the rank and file at UPT, nobody has anything positive to say about the place. That's not a dig against the dudes, but let's face it. The program is pretty mickey mouse.

I disagree. It was probably a bit much for a FAIP, only because we had just finished flying the plane, but the MWS guys in my class for the most part wanted more, not fewer rides. The FAIPS who did T-38s seemed to need even fewer rides than the FAIPs like myself who had done T-1s.

My fear, as someone who worked on the line and in check flight (where we do a good percentage of the TI/Fam/MQT/whatever-they're-called-now rides) is that moving it to UPT will sideline the instructor candidates. At PIT you are the only priority, and at least in my class you got all the instruction you needed/wanted. It was a lot harder to dedicate that much time to the TI guys when you had student rides, snapshots, additional duties, and all the other BS everyone in the AF has to deal with when they aren't TDY. I'm not saying it's impossible, I just think it will be very easy to put the new guys on the back burner.

But I suppose money is the only consideration these days, and probably should be for the next few years.

Edit to add: PIT in no way prepared me for the types of crazy mistakes students would make. Most (not all) of the IPs there were too afraid of something happening, some carryover from tweets, some who didn't even think we should do low levels because of the single engine. So in that aspect, I thought PIT failed. But the many rides repeating the maneuvers over and over while being forced to verbally instruct were highly valuable. Since they're keeping that at PIT, maybe it'll work out just fine.

Edited December 15, 2013 by Lord Ratner

[Toro]

What is there to learn that requires 8-10 sorties?

You know there are people out there who have never flown a T-6, right?

[Muscle2002]

You know there are people out there who have never flown a T-6, right?

Yes; although, you know as well as I do that the E-model B-course only requires six rides to get the initial INSTM/QUAL (no previous experience in the jet required). The track 4 at Klamath only required five-to-six and the equivalent at Luke is four rides, and can be proficiency advanced down to three (neither of these syllabi require previous MDS experience for course entry).

I don't offer those examples to stir up a pissing contest, but as a point of reference. Even if the T-6 were more complicated to fly than the those other aircraft, 8-10 rides seems high.

Edited for spelling.

Edited December 15, 2013 by Muscle2002

[Toro]

Yes; although, you know as well as I do that the E-model B-course only requires six rides to get the initial INSTM/QUAL (no previous experience in the jet required). The track 4 at Klamath only required five-to-six and the equivalent at Luke is four rides, and can be proficiency advanced down to three (neither of these syllabi require previous MDS experience for course entry).

I don't offer those examples to stir up a pissing contest, but as a point of reference. Even if the T-6 were more complicated to fly than the those other aircraft, 8-10 rides seems high.

Edited for spelling.

Valid

[Lord Ratner]

I don't offer those examples to stir up a pissing contest, but as a point of reference. Even if the T-6 were more complicated to fly than the those other aircraft, 8-10 rides seems high.

I am also not trying to start a pissing contest, and I will caveat this by saying I am a heavy pilot now, but the people who needed 8-10 rides before the IQ check in a T-6 were not the guys/gals coming from fighters. It was the people who had spent the last 3-10 years in planes that don't require trimming, or making radio calls while flying, or spinning your own bugs, or keeping your hands on the controls for the entire flight.

I racked up 600ish hours in one year in the T-6, but after a year off for the MC-12 gig, It took me a couple rides to get my hands back. I imagine a break of 6+ years without 600 hours of previous experience to fall back on would have required more than a couple rides.

I fully intend to go back to the T-6 one day, and I suspect by the time I do, I will have a new appreciation for the heavy pilots who spent all of PIT on CAP. Especially if they upgrade the tanker to a modern autopilot while I'm in it.

[Muscle2002]

I am also not trying to start a pissing contest, and I will caveat this by saying I am a heavy pilot now, but the people who needed 8-10 rides before the IQ check in a T-6 were not the guys/gals coming from fighters. It was the people who had spent the last 3-10 years in planes that don't require trimming, or making radio calls while flying, or spinning your own bugs, or keeping your hands on the controls for the entire flight.

I racked up 600ish hours in one year in the T-6, but after a year off for the MC-12 gig, It took me a couple rides to get my hands back. I imagine a break of 6+ years without 600 hours of previous experience to fall back on would have required more than a couple rides.

I fully intend to go back to the T-6 one day, and I suspect by the time I do, I will have a new appreciation for the heavy pilots who spent all of PIT on CAP. Especially if they upgrade the tanker to a modern autopilot while I'm in it.

That makes sense...so it sounds like there is flexibility in the syllabus with regards to number of rides.

[C-21.Pilot]

Yes; although, you know as well as I do that the E-model B-course only requires six rides to get the initial INSTM/QUAL (no previous experience in the jet required). The track 4 at Klamath only required five-to-six and the equivalent at Luke is four rides, and can be proficiency advanced down to three (neither of these syllabi require previous MDS experience for course entry).

I don't offer those examples to stir up a pissing contest, but as a point of reference. Even if the T-6 were more complicated to fly than the those other aircraft, 8-10 rides seems high.

Edited for spelling.

Very valid points. No argument.

Trust me, during the T-6 IQ session - EVERYONE needs all the rides they can get. I've given plenty of check rides (over 200) and to date, I have only seen 2-3 folks who made my eyes water (both were FAIPs) -- most folks are average at best. By the end of the program, we are definitely fast forwarding those folks who have shown the progression and that is typically folks with an 11F background and are off to DO/CC jobs.

Also, remember its an instrument/qual Form 8. The 11F instrument pilots I have flown with here all have a typical vector to final background and that's simply due to the environment. It normally takes 2 rides for those folks to get used to flying GPS, pure holding, full procedure, blah blah….it's just a refresher which you quickly pick up, but you still need rides outside of simulation to feel comfortable. Again, not cosmic.

Heavy guys usually take a bit longer to discover the landing picture due to the sitting height (7 feet vs. 30 feet) and are typically average at best in formation, but they generally are well versed in all instrument procedures.

Sure it's an easy airplane inside and out (probably the easiest in the AF), but that's not what's driving the equation. It's a different flying mentality for most: single engine concepts, no automation, gyroscopic effects, landing pictures, etc which require a few extra rides to be safe. Nobody here at PIT is "hooking" for power on stalls, spins, etc. Most folks do those fine with a couple of folks losing SA and busting a MOA every now and then, or simply forgetting a particular step in the procedure….it's not cosmic, it's just a lot to drive home in a few days. Plus, new airspace, new pattern, new airfields, etc.

Me personally, I would prefer the IQ not go to a UPT base. Here, your only focus is flying, and we have the resources available to give more 1 v 1 time if warranted. We have all the SME's, all the experience. Most of us have well over 1500 sorties in the plane (1802 for me) and have recent UPT experience to boot. We definitely have the best T-6 pilots and we do the IQ program better hands down. I've had experiences at both.

[ARAMP1]

Well, the AF could go to the Navy model and have a Fixed-wing Instructor Training Unit at every base. At NAS Whiting, there's 10 of us in the wing that are dedicated to instructing the replacement pilots from the fleet. Eight rides and then an equivalent to a form 8 check. Then, there's the contact, instrument, and navigation flights and working on being an instructor. It's a pretty small operation and fairly efficient (for the Navy).

Positives to this model are

1) the FITU instructors can sub in at the squadrons for help as needed and they don't get rusty flying with actual students.

2) squadron instructors can augment the FITU as need be and can easily cycle through like a PCA.

3) flexibility...not sure how AF pilot training works now days, but there's only 8 or 9 rides, a check then a form solo in the Navy student syllabus. The pig in the snake, if you will, will always be early contact flights, so the squadrons have the option to pull the instructor prior to getting form qualed to start instructing where he/she is needed and send them back to the FITU at a later date for forms.

4) Also, the instructor is already very familiar with the local area too. Not just getting out to gunshy/dogface and the nuances of flying in the local area , but his/her family is already in place and house is settled, etc. Plus, it saves time for TDY, check-in/check-out, etc.

Negatives to this model are

1) it's not in San Antonio

Edited December 15, 2013 by ARAMP1

[hindsight2020]

Negatives to this model are

1) it's not in San Antonio

Yep, jest aside, you just called the emperor naked.

[C-21.Pilot]

Well, the AF could go to the Navy model and have a Fixed-wing Instructor Training Unit at every base. At NAS Whiting, there's 10 of us in the wing that are dedicated to instructing the replacement pilots from the fleet. Eight rides and then an equivalent to a form 8 check. Then, there's the contact, instrument, and navigation flights and working on being an instructor. It's a pretty small operation and fairly efficient (for the Navy).

Positives to this model are

1) the FITU instructors can sub in at the squadrons for help as needed and they don't get rusty flying with actual students.

2) squadron instructors can augment the FITU as need be and can easily cycle through like a PCA.

3) flexibility...not sure how AF pilot training works now days, but there's only 8 or 9 rides, a check then a form solo in the Navy student syllabus. The pig in the snake, if you will, will always be early contact flights, so the squadrons have the option to pull the instructor prior to getting form qualed to start instructing where he/she is needed and send them back to the FITU at a later date for forms.

4) Also, the instructor is already very familiar with the local area too. Not just getting out to gunshy/dogface and the nuances of flying in the local area , but his/her family is already in place and house is settled, etc. Plus, it saves time for TDY, check-in/check-out, etc.

Negatives to this model are

1) it's not in San Antonio

Then you would have no operation at RND -- which NOBODY would vote for. Think of all the flying staff we have here….

[xaarman]

It would also leave RND with no flying mission

[BADFNZ]

Plus it would kill one of the best flying gigs in the AF, being a T-6 PIT IP.