LivingInMEM

Last comment on the Army - just because they put high school grads (WO's) in the cockpit, does that mean the rest of the services should do that?

Here is the point...When does the dumbing down stop? We have UAV's providing CAS and ISR for the most important people in theater (the troops on the ground) and we are talking about putting non-experienced/non-rated/potentially UPT-washouts in there because we don't want to suck up that bad deal (sts)! Just because the AF is putting UPT grads in there does not mean it is right - it means it is expedient. The USAF has made a lot of decisions regarding aircraft acquisitions/manning/etc that I would have been opposed to. It would appear that very few USAF decisions are made in the context of increasing combat capability nowadays. Any current AD fighter guys want to talk about how the assignment process has kept up with (or not kept up with to be more accurate) the current level of flying in the CAF? How many first-assignment fighter dudes are getting 500hrs or making IP? Instead of MPC flexing with the real world and changing to maintain a certain level of actual experience level in a squadron (not that made up Exp qual that even applies to dudes returning to the cockpit after 2 non-flying tours), they keep doing the same thing they always have and squadron proficiency and experience suffers. Mention how combat capability should drive all of these decisions then look for the RCA dog stare.

We have actual aircraft (unmanned they may be) providing actual support, dropping actual weapons, in an actual war right now. We need to put our best people into those slots. What level of increased risk of mission non-accomplishment are you willing to accept in this situation? Before we put any rated officer in any staff job (or exec, or aide, or whatever), these positions need to be filled with the best candidates we have.

The troop on the ground is counting on 100% mission success from above and we need to step up to the plate. That's our obligation.

Sputnik

Roger, thanks for volunteering, your orders are in the mail. Clovis is lovely this time of year.

Sputnik

Thank you.


I do get tired of hearing "the Army uses enlisted, why don't we?" I understand it as a media soundbite but among aviators who ought to know better....

The vast majority of Army stuff is quite small, flown low to the ground, and doesn't expend ordinance. The larger stuff they have [huge caveat--that I've seen] was in fact flown by contractors. Experienced pilots.

Personally I think an enlisted guy is more than capable of flying a UAV. Never having flown one I don't really know, but I think it ought to be examined. I just have an issue with the argument that the Army does it, so should we.

Sputnik

You're not really saying WO's are dumb, are you?

The Army has WO's providing enormous amounts of CAS and ISR by warrant officers, and has for years. They call them helo pilots.

FlyFastLiveSlow

Are you serious? I know several Army WO's who would love to debate this with you in person. Just because the Army does it is not a reason in itself to make a change, but we should explore all options--maybe even contractors. That said, I'll share the skys with WO's anytime.

FDXLAG

Take it like you want especially if you feel you slighted by your educational background; but this is the way I take the comments by living in memphis:

No he did not say WO's are dumb. He did imply lowering the education requirements does tend to result in filling the positions with less educated people. I am sure he regrets the use of the word dumb, as he does live in Memphis. I am sure he knows that there are highly educated WOs.

bluto13

With modern UAV's, you really aren't even "flying" all that much. I know the ones in the pipeline for the future are more like FalconView controlled, just tell it where to go and where to land, etc.

LivingInMEM

FDXLAG - thanks for the intellectual honesty missing from the previous posts. Obviously, the "dumbing down" comment was referring to putting brand-new UPT grads or even UPT washouts in combat positions when previously the entry requirements were higher. I don't think it is uncommon in our society to use the phrase "dumbing down" to describe the process of lowering the entry requirements to a particular field. For the record, I have done quite a bit of work with Army WO's - that how I know about their existence.

Bluto, my references to UAV's are more to the MQ-9 than the Global Hawk. The MQ-9 pilot is very much in the loop when he employs the weapons and when he decides where the aircraft needs to be to provide the most appropriate coverage of the objective.

USMCFLYR

Mod note

Either keep the personal insults off the thread or risk it being closed.
Most of the people on this forum I'm assuming are military officers.
Act like it.

USMCFLYR

LivingInMEM

Sputnik and FlyFast - did I say they were dumb? I said that is what they do; therefore, should we do that, also - because that is exactly what the earlier post inferred, do what the Army does. If we are going to use "the Army does it that way" excuse for this, than are we going to quit requiring a college degree for our pilots, or we going to have the majority of our pilots be WO's, are we going to make our dudes eat MRE's and sleep in tents, where do you want to stop with this "they do it that way" trash. If the Army standard is what you want to use, let's use it - or was that a selective thing?

Spaceman - I am not a commander and I have yet to wear my blues on Monday (as a matter of fact, I don't own a serviceable pair), but I am tired of the USAF having every priority except the correct priority. Here is the deal - the USAF is trying to solve a manpower issue with a manpower fix, simple as that - they are not concerned with how it affects the mission, they are concerned with how to make the numbers work the easiest. Let me offend everyone else by saying the FAIP concept was the same - there should be no FAIP. I don't need to hear about how good of an IP some FAIP was, if he was that good right out of UPT - he'd be even better after a tour in the real world. The FAIP program is "we can accept a certain decrease in instructor capability because the upside is we save PCS/re-training costs." What about the tanker debacle - have you heard "let's give half the contract to each and then everyone will be happy" - because, after all, that would be the easiest solution. It's about doing the right thing, not the easy thing.

Is the USAF a social welfare program to get you to your airline career, or is its purpose to provide for the common defense of the nation? I figured out long ago when I was a UPT IP that a lot of USAF pilots (and apparantly a lot of the ones who reply to this thread) think the taxpayers are paying to build their resume rather than defend the nation. The majority of taxpayers could care less if you fly your aircraft or MQ-1, as long as the war gets won. Are the anti-pilot sentiments on this board related to capabilities, or are they related to some pilots whining about having to go where the technology is going? It is when you can't give a valid reason for your belief that you are forced into "are you calling WO's stupid?" or "you must be a commander" statements.

You want to dumb down the USAF, quit sending UPT grads to the right seat of the C-5 or C-17 - put anyone with a commercial rating there instead. It can be done, can't it - or would you care to explain why not? Just because it can be done doesn't mean it should, and our USAF "officers" need to understand that somewhere in the paperwork they signed was the concept that "needs of the service come first" - you knew it when you signed it.

You can tell me all you want about how much you contributed to the war effort when you brought in those supplies or whatever you did - the fact is any contract carrier could have done that. You will have every reason in the world why that should have been you instead of some less qualified person, but UAV's are different. Unfortunately, the aircraft that are currently in combat the most are the UAV's. Too bad, it wasn't my idea, suck it up. But, since that is who is doing the fighting right now, and since fighting is what our number one priority should be right now, the decisions need to revolve around "which solution increases our combat capability the most?" Not, which solution is the easiest or which solution makes everyone happy.