UAV's for UPT Grads

[BeeVee]

I have heard through the grapevine that the Chief of Staff of the Air Force will announce sometime next week the following:
Effective immediatley, there will be a new "track" for Air Force UPT graduates--the UAV track (Predator/Global Hawk).
This will be there career track/AFSC - they will never actually get into an aircraft.
Should do wonders for morale...
Anyone else heard this rumor?

 

[puck_11]

I've heard of guys getting UAVs for a short while now, thats the rumor on the Navy side at least. Bummer...

 

[McGillicutty]

Looks like that's the case, BeeVee. I heard it'll begin FY09 but who knows exactly when.

 

[millhouse21]

There are worse things... Speaking as an NFO who spent some time as a UAV det OIC, UAV's are the perfect platform for Navs / NFOs. How come nobody's thought of that?

 

[FlyingHigh262]

its bound to happen sooner or later...danger!

 

[Deuce130]

Suuuuuuuuuuucks..............seems there should be better ways to handle this problem.

 

[bssthound]

There are worse things... Speaking as an NFO who spent some time as a UAV det OIC, UAV's are the perfect platform for Navs / NFOs. How come nobody's thought of that?

The AF did quite awhile back. Several years ago Navs with Comm/Inst tickets were being recruited to operate UAVs. I'm not sure what the requirements are now but have no doubt someone on this board will be more up to date.

 

[CWGrizwald]

Warrant Officers

Suuuuuuuuuuucks..............seems there should be better ways to handle this problem.

Create a Warrant Officer program. Recruit from the ranks of motivated Airmen and NCOs and off the street. Train them to a FAA Instrument Rating. Provide an ACE style flying program with Cirrus's or something similar. By the definition, Warrant Officers are technitions, so they don't have to go off and career broaden, they become experts.
The Air Force advertises and recruits for pilots based on their dream, since childhood in most cases, of the romance and excitement of flying the most exciting aircraft and missions in the world. They even have a whole squadron of colorful F-16s to travel around and plant those seeds of the dream (They got me when I was nine, but they were F-4s back then). To ask for 10 years as payment to realize that dream and then turn you into a professional model railroader is a bunch of crap and these koolaid drinking morons who spew the "that's the needs of the AF" line are idiots. Glad I'm retired.

 

[bssthound]

Everyone's favorite food additive chemist said:

To ask for 10 years as payment to realize that dream and then turn you into a professional model railroader is a bunch of crap and these koolaid drinking morons who spew the "that's the needs of the AF" line are idiots.

Nothing more to add, just couldn't agree with you more.

 

[slacker]

And everyone feared Helos at UPT when I was there. Now, not sucking at UPT is more important than ever.

You can still take the UAV track as a Nav w/ you COM/INST ticket. I know someone who just did it.

 

[satpak77]

just a comment from a non mil guy, but I personally would have preferred C17, KC10, or KC135 airframes due to amount of flying and international travel.

Its not a F-16, I admit, but I dont see why more young guys dont see that the whole world does not revolve around flying a single seat fighter

 

[AvroGuy]

just a comment from a non mil guy, but I personally would have preferred C17, KC10, or KC135 airframes due to amount of flying and international travel.

Its not a F-16, I admit, but I dont see why more young guys dont see that the whole world does not revolve around flying a single seat fighter

That is because you are a civillian looking in...The fighter is where it is at for most. Now when you were a kid, you never dreamed of being a fighter pilot? Most kids have and still do. Once in the fighter track, you are tought/brainwashed that nothing else will due. When in reallity sometime heavies are better. You don't dropp bombs for the vast majority of heavies but you do go different places if you are in a C or K. If you are in an E, well you see a lot of the same place.

 

[tomgoodman]

Assignment follies

And everyone feared Helos at UPT when I was there.

A B-52 was the designated bogeyman used to scare students when I was in UPT. Eventually, SAC complained about getting all the low-ranking graduates, so MPC created a special "mini-drop" of assorted (non-fighter) assignments for the bottom 10%. That allegedly caused some guys to "shoot for the bottom" and maybe get, say, a C-141. Then MPC turned it all over to a computer, and who knows how they'll do it next?

 

[BeeVee]

Nice C-141 jab.....:laugh:
Looks like you ended up with an EC-135 out of UPT. (you really kicked a$$....)
I ended up with over 2000 hours in the "tube of pain"....enjoyed every minute of it. Airdrop, Air Refueling, Worldwide Airlift, Deep Freeze,...what an airframe!

 

[tankerswede]

Does anyone else think it is beyond a tremendous waste of money to send someone through the UPT program to develop skills that are largely unnecessary in the UAV world, then send them to UAV world?

I knew a few navs who went from tankers to UAVs back in the late 90's. I asked one if his civilian certificate (Comm/Inst) that he was required to have was also what would be subject to enforcement action if a violation occurred. Never did get a straight answer on that one...

 

[Tweetdrvr]

Suuuuuuuuuuucks..............seems there should be better ways to handle this problem.

Well said. You would think all the old guys would line up to fight the fight via data link from Creech and not deploy. Let the young guys still full of pi$$ and vinegar fly airplanes from the first person and get the SA to later do it via data link, run 4 radios and answer the honey do phone calls from the spouse on what to pick up at the BX on the way home.

But then again, we are the service who just paid pilots to get out while we tried to sell people for F-22s.

 

[satpak77]

again, a civilian guy looking in, why not contract out UAV flying to Lockheed, etc etc et al ? It's not like the contractors are "taking pilot jobs" or anything like that.

 

[CWGrizwald]

Contractors

Can't work a contractor like a military person. Contractors have contracts that say how much they will work for, how many hours a day they will work so on and so forth. But more importantly, UAVs now drop and shoot things that kill people which would then make a contractor a mercenary whereas a military person is covered by and has to abide by the USMJ and laws of armed conflict. At least that's why I think you can't contract out all of the UAV flying. That being said, there are many contractors in the UAV world as instructors, mechanics and other assorted jobs.

 

[puck_11]

I didn't even think of the commitment factor, is it 10 from wings for the AF? That would suck, they should ammend their flight contracts to four years max if thats what they select. Maybe they should take the guys that attrite out of flight school due to airsickness and let them be UAV guys. I know the Navy has their fair share.

 

[viper548]

Give the UAV's to the enlisted guys

 

[BigPappa]

That would sooooo s#ck to finish UPT only to get an UAV. Wow, I don't know what to say other than F... that! That would be worth crashing one of those on your first SOLO flight.

 

[satpak77]

what could happen if you crash one? they "ground you?" (actually, a serious question)

 

[millhouse21]

I asked my boss that very question before I went off to Iraq. "What happens if (when) I crash one? Do I write an email asking you to send me another or do I convene a Mishap Investigation Board?" The answer was that it depends. When I did lose one it was pretty obvious what happened and the thing was about to be replaced so it fell into the email category. A friend of mine lost one and the Mishap Board was suggested. That fell through when somebody pointed out that although the mishap involved loss of the aircraft, there was no Naval Aircraft involved since the thing had no actual existence to the Navy.

P.S. I'm sure that the USAF has somewhat more structured procedures for the loss of a UAV.

 

[gcsass]

Any Guard units flying these things yet? I would love to sit home and drink beer while logging a double and let my kid play with daddy's new "Nintendo" system....

 

[SIG600]

just a comment from a non mil guy, but I personally would have preferred C17, KC10, or KC135 airframes due to amount of flying and international travel.

Its not a F-16, I admit, but I dont see why more young guys dont see that the whole world does not revolve around flying a single seat fighter

There are two types of aircraft in the world. Fighters and targets. Get it?

I visited 13 countries last year, flying a single seat fighter... so your point is, well, wrong.

This UAV out of UPT is a complete waste of money and human resources. Frankly I'm appalled at this program.

 

[satpak77]

There are two types of aircraft in the world. Fighters and targets. Get it?

I visited 13 countries last year, flying a single seat fighter... so your point is, well, wrong.

This UAV out of UPT is a complete waste of money and human resources. Frankly I'm appalled at this program.

Yeah clearly you can do that. Heck, I have visited 8 countries and I fly a King Air.

I guess my overall point was that of the types, I was under the impression that in civilian and wartime, the transport/tanker guy will fly more hours and see more places. But I don't know.

I agree with your UAV comments.

 

[michael707767]

Any Guard units flying these things yet? I would love to sit home and drink beer while logging a double and let my kid play with daddy's new "Nintendo" system....

actually, there is the answer. Give it to the Guard and Reserves. Would be a great way for an airline pilot who wants to finish out his time in the reserves. And since they are flying for an airline, they wouldn't care about the lack of flying job in the military.

 

[BeeVee]

satpack,

You are 100% correct.
I have been flying for the Air Force for almost 20 years now. On the one side, no one can deny that flying a fighter would be sweet - all my fighter bro's love "strapping it on" and kicking a$$. On the other side, as you mentioned, flying "heavies" has many opportunities of its own. We see the world. I have now been to over 70 countries and to every continent on this planet (yes, even Antarctica). If a person wants to travel and experience different cultures, flying heavies is where it's at. Also, heavy guys rack up a helluva lot more flying time than fighter guys. Classmates of mine from the Zoo that went straight to fighters all have in the neighborhood of 2000-3000 hours. You can see, I have double that.
It really just depends on your personality and what/how you want to contribute to our Mission.

 

[SIG600]

Yeah clearly you can do that. Heck, I have visited 8 countries and I fly a King Air.

I guess my overall point was that of the types, I was under the impression that in civilian and wartime, the transport/tanker guy will fly more hours and see more places. But I don't know.

I agree with your UAV comments.

KC-10 bud of mine doesn't see a lot of countries, just the same ones over and over. Nothing like hitting the UAE a dozen times. uke:

 

[Cobra17]

There are two types of aircraft in the world. Fighters and targets. Get it?

Soon there will be also be two types of aircraft in the world. Fighters (unmanned) and targets (manned). Everyone has their preference. The top guys in my class all took heavies, fighters went to the bottom.