Guard or Reserve

[Scrapdog]

Maybe it was just you...I had about 200 hours of general aviation time (multi instrument), and found the T-37 portion to go relatively smooth. One thing that I do agree with about having some civilian time was your instrument skills - that did help excel in the instrument phase of the Tweet. However T-38's were the great equalizer...and most folks were pretty even when we started flying them. T-38's were a blast, but certainly wasn't "easy." And I guess I did OK as I happened to get my first choice - which was the F-15C.

Most of the folks had little to no prior time (maybe 30 hours or so in a 172). All of them turned out to do great and I think every one of them got their first choice of fighter. Our top grad had absolutely no time whatsoever starting UPT.

Of the 2 guys that washed out - one was a comm officer who couldn't stop puking and the other dude was an RJ pilot that had about 2000 hours of civilian jet time but couldn't fly a mil jet to save his life.

 

[RedDogC130]

I guess there is no proof one way or another. If you give it your all you should suceed.

 

[McGillicutty]

I find those who had little to no time prior to UPT tend to be the ones saying that it does not matter.

Absolutely. Just like size, prior time matters; but then again so does attitude. All that talk about bad habits is crap provided the high timer has a willingness to change/learn. Coming out of Corpus, the top 5 NSS's (Navy Standard Score) in the squadron, for the year, went to prior flight timers.

 

[RedDogC130]

I was one of them last year.

 

[BengalsFan]

2 Points

1. To the dude who started this post... check out baseops.net for units who are hiring... most of the advertisements also state whether or not they are looking to send people to UPT, or if they are only seeking current and qualified applicants. Also, most units prefer someone who either currently lives in, or grew up in/has ties to the state in which that unit is in.

2. As a former UPT instructor, I'd say that more students without prior time don't make it, compared to those with prior time... but I was very suprised with how much prior experience pilots struggled, especially with basic instrument flying.... and I'd also say that the guys with lots of prior experience never, ever were even close to the best in the class when all was said and done.

 

[hindsight2020]

2 Points

2. As a former UPT instructor, I'd say that more students without prior time don't make it, compared to those with prior time... but I was very suprised with how much prior experience pilots struggled, especially with basic instrument flying.... and I'd also say that the guys with lots of prior experience never, ever were even close to the best in the class when all was said and done.

Ok......That's a crass generalization. If they really know their stuff, and have cared enough to remain current in their civi flying (I know plenty of dudes at UPT who got up until their commercial but haven't been on a plane in 2-3 years and can't remember what FAR/AIM stands for), there is no reason a prior civi should have problems flying IFR during UPT. As a matter of fact, it is hard to even bring up the point, when said prior guy has more IMC real time than the IP in front..particularly single pilot IMC.. This was usually the case flying against FAIPs. Forget the students, the instrument instruction was lacking in my opinion, they should call it undergraduate pilot testing for all I've seen so far.

By the end of Phase II, everybody pretty much caught up with the canned routine of UPT. The real SA-builder for the non-prior time folks comes on x-countries and off-station flying, where, you guessed it, the civies feel at home. Again, it is important to recognize that for the sake of the argument, UPT is AETC, which is not operational military flying. Anybody can excel at turning rejoins independent of prior time (particularly since very few civies come to UPT with formation time) but the addtional SA built over years of flying in the NAS makes a significant difference in whether somebody gets to work a little less or a little more in keeping up with the 'firehose'...particularly during Phase II where it really counts.

In my short tenure in AETC, most folks with prior time have pretty much coasted through the program, most of those also happen to be Guard/Reserve (no surprise there). The problem arises when somebody's attitude does not allow them to flex around the massive qweepload that the UPT environment creates. To suggest civilian pilots as a whole have problems adjusting to the environment is another crass generalization.

The thing is that people miss the point of prior experience and the difference of what said time means for an active duty stud vs. a Guard/Reservist. We have already established that lack of flight time is NOT an impediment at all for anybody to excel at UPT and get his first choice and be número 1. What needs to be established is that the prior-time guy has for the most part the discretion to COAST through the program. Combine that with already knowing what you're going to fly and there's your answer.

It's not your ability to go insane trying to go out with gusto, it's being able to cruise the course that is a more palpable gage of the impact previous flight time has on success in the program. And in my experience that has been the unavoidable truth. If active dudes frown on that attitude, then go sail a boat, but that's the real impact of previous flight time. Why do you think they don't want pre-UPT AF dudes sandbagging rides, and getting stick time prior to the course? The leadership itself admits a monkey can be taught to fly given enough repetition! So come on....

 

[BengalsFan]

Nope I agree 100%... most dudes with prior time do try to coast... find out its not the same, then have to work their butts off to catch up... and this has nothing to do with active duty or guard/reserve...
And you are right, the prior experience guys... especially the regional guys who came through were great getting vectors to final for an ILS, but ask them to go direct to a radial/DME fix, then shoot the VOR full procedure with a circle, and they just look at you like your crazy, and tell you that they normally let their FMS find the point.
I'm not saying that this is all the prior experienced studs... I'm just saying that this is the fact of what happend with the ones I flew with.

 

[frog_flyer]

Ok......That's a crass generalization. If they really know their stuff, and have cared enough to remain current in their civi flying (I know plenty of dudes at UPT who got up until their commercial but haven't been on a plane in 2-3 years and can't remember what FAR/AIM stands for), there is no reason a prior civi should have problems flying IFR during UPT. As a matter of fact, it is hard to even bring up the point, when said prior guy has more IMC real time than the IP in front..particularly single pilot IMC.. This was usually the case flying against FAIPs. Forget the students, the instrument instruction was lacking in my opinion, they should call it undergraduate pilot testing for all I've seen so far.

By the end of Phase II, everybody pretty much caught up with the canned routine of UPT. The real SA-builder for the non-prior time folks comes on x-countries and off-station flying, where, you guessed it, the civies feel at home. Again, it is important to recognize that for the sake of the argument, UPT is AETC, which is not operational military flying. Anybody can excel at turning rejoins independent of prior time (particularly since very few civies come to UPT with formation time) but the addtional SA built over years of flying in the NAS makes a significant difference in whether somebody gets to work a little less or a little more in keeping up with the 'firehose'...particularly during Phase II where it really counts.

In my short tenure in AETC, most folks with prior time have pretty much coasted through the program, most of those also happen to be Guard/Reserve (no surprise there). The problem arises when somebody's attitude does not allow them to flex around the massive qweepload that the UPT environment creates. To suggest civilian pilots as a whole have problems adjusting to the environment is another crass generalization.

The thing is that people miss the point of prior experience and the difference of what said time means for an active duty stud vs. a Guard/Reservist. We have already established that lack of flight time is NOT an impediment at all for anybody to excel at UPT and get his first choice and be número 1. What needs to be established is that the prior-time guy has for the most part the discretion to COAST through the program. Combine that with already knowing what you're going to fly and there's your answer.

It's not your ability to go insane trying to go out with gusto, it's being able to cruise the course that is a more palpable gage of the impact previous flight time has on success in the program. And in my experience that has been the unavoidable truth. If active dudes frown on that attitude, then go sail a boat, but that's the real impact of previous flight time. Why do you think they don't want pre-UPT AF dudes sandbagging rides, and getting stick time prior to the course? The leadership itself admits a monkey can be taught to fly given enough repetition! So come on....

Damn you put some effort in typing these posts! Good on ya

 

[Tweetdrvr]

Hindsight, Well said!! One of the best written replies to a thread in a long while.

My .02 as a watcher of several clans of chimpanzees going through the Jane Goodall UPT flight room for several years, I can make the following broad generalizations.

It is all attitude, I have seen lazy pilots with civilian bad habits who thought they knew it all struggle. I have seen good pilots who knew their instrument procedures, airspace, and FAR/AIM cold who could concentrate on the main differences and new military procedures (mostly RSU pattern ops and formation) really excell at UPT. I have also seen military pilots come back from one operational tour who for various reasons (lack of self discipline, or the struggle to balance family with ops tempo and PME/Masters degree requirements against staying in the books) who have turned into SCNS/FMS/INS babies who could barely do the basics let alone explain them to students and could not make it through PIT.

A good pilot is a good pilot whether they were trained civilian or military. I learned that at my regional job where I flew with a lot of great captains who in my opinion had a great deal of SA beyond just getting vectors to final and asking ATL approach everybody's favorite call when it got busy--"How long is the final?" What matters is someone who is willing to learn and always wants to improve themselves and their flying ability.

I have had many discussions with ANG/Reserve CFI/II/MEIs at UPT and they all talked about how much they learned about teaching and looking outside from the way most of us do intial manuever demos and the value of hard core chairflying. Most said they would now teach some of that stuff to their civilian students, especially UPT candidates, if they ended up teaching again when they got finished with training and were back at their units flying.

There is a new paradigm at UPT. For those of you who did T-37s/T-38s or T-37s/T-1s, JSUPT has changed greatly since the advent of the T-6. T-6 academics are mostly done on CBTs, not the intense classroom hands on instruction that was given mostly by IPs or contract instructors in the old days. I will let the current UPT students on here say what they think about the quality of their academics.

Also we are teaching way more in the same 90 training days that Phase II allows than was taught in T-37s. Due to the single engine and possibility of engine failure necessitating an off station landing, today's student is learning SFO/ELP patterns (which are vastly different than a single engine overhead in a T-37) to uncontrolled airports and how to make CTAF calls on VHF while managing SOF/RAPCON on UHF. We are now doing some approaches at uncontrolled fields to alleviate pattern congestion at the home field, so they have to learn radio management to deal again with approach/center and make the switch off to CTAF and make a good advisory call. We are doing GPS approaches and using the GPS for area orientation backup and they need to know all the RNAV RNP constraints as well as setting up the machine so that it doesn't yield the classic garbage in/garbage out SA sucking situation.

The T-6 syllabus has more hand tying constraints regarding when events need to be accomplished. The T-6 syllabus also has 20 more simulator events than did the T-37 syllabus. When you take into account the 45 minute contracted prebrief, the 1.3 simulator session time, and the 45 minute contracted debrief time, we have just piled an additional 55 hours or work onto their plate that takes away from study time. If you assume each student spends an hour to get ready for each of those sims, we just added another 20 hours of prep time. All totaling up to 75 hours more time spent that was not spent before, almost two weeks of work on a standard 40 hour work week.

Gone are the days from just a few years ago when someone could come to UPT having never flown an airplane (it happened in the post T-3/pre IFT standup time in 98), and get through T-37s. A friend of mine was in that situation, not only got through Tweets, but got 38s, got a fighter follow on when they still gave follow on assigments to FAIPs, and is now flying F-15s. He was good and had a lot of natural talent, but I don't know that he would have done as well in T-6s as he did in Tweets due to the aforementioned differences in the program and the 1100hp of torque, spiraling slipstream and p-factor, and tandem seating that comes with the T-6.

Taking all that into consideration, I believe someone with prior time and a good attitude/open mind and a desire to be a better pilot has a greater chance of success at UPT than someone with just 25 hours of IFT under their belt. The active duty people who get the UH-1 given to them instead of choosing it by virtue of the MASS ranking are usually the ones with limited to no prior flying experience or had some time and thought they knew it all and got behind from being lazy early on in Phase II and just got so far behind that they struggled just to stay above water the whole way through. (By that I meant no slam on the rotor community, just that some people want fixed wing and don't want to go to Ft Rucker find themselves in an unwanted Phase III assignment.) Once you leave the RSU pattern and until you get to formation, flying to and from the MOA, shooting approaches, and what you do in the enroute structure on cross country is flying in the NAS and should be 95% the same whether you are in a flight suit or wearing a tie and collar. Someone with prior time and a ANG/Reserve assigment can coast a little bit and get through Phase II, those going to fighter units who try this usually struggle a bit in 38s, because it is the great equalizer. I have seen several prior time people over the years work really hard and take the trophy at graduation and make their guard/reserve sponsor unit look really good, and I have seen some guys work harder at helping their classmates without being know it alls end up number 4 or 5 in the MASS ranking at the end of Phase II because they devoted more time to their classmates than they did to themselves.

 

[McGillicutty]

Taking all that into consideration, I believe someone with prior time and a good attitude/open mind and a desire to be a better pilot has a greater chance of success at UPT than someone with just 25 hours of IFT under their belt.

Exactly. As Reddog mentioned, all of the nay-saying about dudes with eleventy-billion hours washing out typically comes from the 25hour IFTers who don't have the prior time to back it up.