KC10 FATboy

I find it very sad in this country, that during harsh economic times, we can't find individuals willing to fly UAVs for 60-85K a year, best benefits, and a defined retirement. And to do so, we'll give them a bonus, flight pay, jackets, and whatever else to make them happy.

I say, let the enlisted do the damn job. I'd bet my life savings that they would be better at it than the Os.

navigatro

The Air Force has always had a hard time letting Enlisted swine be in control of a weapon system, especially one that is "high vis" and can blow stuff up and kill people.

HoursHore

Its not flight Pay. Its Aviation Career Incentive Pay. So I say give it to 'em.

hindsight2020

You're assuming they're opening the floodgates to the hungry. They're not. They're trying to tap into a market of labor where the median consider themselves good enough to pursue the prize; flying manned aircraft.

Money means nothing in the context of a fixed market (the military). I'd be a PA officer lickity split if I was hungry enough that I needed the money yesterday. But that's not the situation. I'm not starving, thence I can value my labor trade with enough flexibility that I can forego money for the pursuit of something I find more personally satisfying. This taken to the mathematical limit is where you get the airline industry, where people are effectively showing up to work for free.

If the Air Force would open the field to enlisted, poof there goes your hiring and retention problem, as you suggested. Heck, aggregate compensation for a UAV operator in the civilian realm could actually be higher than a commercial pilot and people would still line up to fly the manned aircraft. Just the way it is. Flying is neat-o and people will want to do it in spite of economic hardship. Now, to get the above-median [i.e. sharp and otherwise marketable outside of flying] performing dudes to do it at an economic hardship to themselves is a WHOLE different can of worms....Just like the pilot " shortage" . There's no pilot shortage, just shortage of good, current and qualified pilots willing to do it for food stamp wages.... The riff raff will always do it for free, may the souls of Colgan 3407 rest in peace as evidence of it....

CAFB 04-12

Whatever the finance book keepers call it, it's called FLY PAY on my LES and I get it because I fly airplanes.

Like I said, give 'em "RPA Career Incentive Pay" for all I care. Make it the same rate as FLY PAY. Let's just not confuse the two careers. They are not the same.

And God bless the pipeliners that keep me from driving one of these boxes.

KC10 FATboy

There is no reason why they should receive "Incentive Pay". We spend a million dollars or more training a pilot. So in order to get more bang for our buck, we offer an incentive to stay in -- EVEN when we're paying folks to leave.

What I don't understand is, if we aren't having a recruiting problem and a rentention problem hasn't developed, why are we paying these folks incentive pay?

Again, just another reason why the enlisted hate us.

webecheck

i know you all understand that, for the most part, flying anything from point a to point b is not the challenge. employing weapons in combat and taking enemy lives while preserving friendlies (sometimes in very close proximity) is the challenging part. who here has been forced to make a decision in combat which did the above? uav dudes are doing it all the time. if anything, the usaf should pay uav operators more since most are non vol'd, live in crappy places, work their asses off, and are the majority of the warfighters these days. dudes can debate all day long, but imo it doesnt matter where you pull the trigger from whether youre sitting in the cockpit at 20k ft or behind the control station of a uav(obviously it is different if the enemy has air defenses, but with respect to iraq/afghan[ie modern day operations] they dont). the trigger pullers have always been the big dogs and that is what this is all about. whatever tools big blue gives you to be that person is somewhat irrelevant. besides dont awacs/navs get the same flt pay? the dont fly, they are just passengers really. sure they perform a job, but they dont manipulate flight controls. so, the argument becomes whoever directly manipulates an aircraft from ground to airborne and back to ground again are the flyers. uav dudes do that. in the heavy world, should the autopilot receive 85% of the "flight pay"? in primary pilot tng you flew the entire sortie, what percent of it do you fly now? if managing/operating a weapon system is what you get your flight pay for, then how is the uav pilot any different.

i'm not even a uav guy believe it or not. i'm just rational enough to accept the future and have worked with them enough to know they deserve to be the future. would i rather fly, sure. is the uav guy any less important than a pilot a who gets air under his @ss, not imo. like i said before, we are here to project power, the ultimate method being pulling a trigger. whomever the dude is that bears that responsibility day in and day out should get the most rewards.

XHooker

You left the risk side out of the risk/reward incentive. How many UAV drivers died from ramp strikes, cold cat shots, midair collisions, CFIT, enemy fire, and sometimes, because ____ just happens? As long as they are pilots, give them flight pay, they earned it. Once it becomes a career playing a lethal video game, it's no longer deserving of pay that unofficially known to be hazardous duty pay. If they need incentives to attract people and keep them in the field, pay them, but make it a continuation bonus and don't call it flight pay.

webecheck

hooker, have you been to combat? i would argue the risk for any pilot in a cas scenario is not employing in a manner that saves the good guys while killing the bad guys. any cas pilot/alo/uav bubba cares less about themselves than they do their compatriots on the ground. the risk is killing friendlies or noncombatants. one doesnt understand the severity of that risk until they have had to operate with that responsibility.

any uav dudes on here to validate my argument?

the definition of flight pay i have to assume changed (dont know if there even was one before) when the chief of staff said uav pilots get flight pay. one must assume flight pay is now defined as an incentive to anybody who operates an aircraft or performs their mission from within an aircraft. surely there is some personnelist or finance airman on here who knows the exact description???? lol.

XHooker

Web, no combat time and CAS wasn't a primary mission area in anything I've flown. The little exposure I got to it made me think "how in the hell can anyone do this for real?" I understand your point about responsibility, but that's inherent in the mission of the military, ask the crew of the USS Vincennes. Although not technically hazardous duty pay, I think flight pay should involve people who actually have flown as part of their primary duties. The Tactical Action Officer (or whatever they call it) on a guided missile cruiser has the potential to inflict a lot of damage to enemies, friendlies and noncombatants while protecting the battle group, but they still don't give them flight pay, and he or she actually has some skin in the game. On the other hand, the helo crew doing medevac from that same DDG into a hot LZ isn't making life and death decisions about weapons employment, but they are risking their behinds and, IMO, that's a large part of what flight pay is about.