Air Force evaluating enlisted pilots.

I don't know why they just don't do a cadet program like the Navy / Marines used to have. Associate degree or 60 credit hrs, then you get 10 years from commission to get your bachelors. That way you're not dealing with problems that will surely arise with enlisted working in the same job title as officers.
 
Just make them warrant officers like the Army, which is mentioned in the article. Heck in WW2 they were "Flying Sergeants". USAF has enlisted flying RPAs now too.
 
Never did understand why you had to have a college degree to be a USAF Pilot. What, for example, a degree in literature, like Gen Bob Dixon, had to do with flying escapes me. A young lady who I flew as a Young Eagle is now a US Army WO entering Flight School for Apaches.

Cheers
 
I remember this commercial when I was a kid. "Not bad, for a rookie." :D

 
Political, but without naming names our educational system has gone to hell in a hand-basket so I can understand why the services require college.

That said, can a degreed guy fly a plane any better than some dude who never graduated high school? The military seeks the best but the pay is awful enough they have trouble retaining pilots and others with marketable skills. Why put yourself in a position to be downed by a bad guy's missile when you can work your way up to captain of a 74?
 
Velocity173 said:
I remember this commercial when I was a kid. "Not bad, for a rookie." :D

Click to expand...
Ah the good old days...I had quite a few High School Flight school guys in units early in my career...always seemed to work out well...many later interbranch transferred to Air force and Navy as their flight school commitment was finished prior to that magical number of 28 years old. I have a daughter who is doing an non-DOD Air force accession packet right now and frankly surprised at the recruiters response since she is well qualified and soon will be a newly minted PP.
 
Norman said:
Political, but without naming names our educational system has gone to hell in a hand-basket so I can understand why the services require college.

That said, can a degreed guy fly a plane any better than some dude who never graduated high school? The military seeks the best but the pay is awful enough they have trouble retaining pilots and others with marketable skills. Why put yourself in a position to be downed by a bad guy's missile when you can work your way up to captain of a 74?
Click to expand...

If they were lucky enough to attend a high school with a good math program, I doubt the enlisted members will have a problem. Unfortunately, as you alluded, high schools aren't what they used to be. I'm appalled at how many high school graduates can't even approximate sales tax in their heads. It's depressing.

Rich
 
All the High School to flight school types that I ran into would have made good candidates to any service academy...it was quite competitive at the time and still available today...but no idea if its numbers amount to much.
 
RJM62 said:
If they were lucky enough to attend a high school with a good math program, I doubt the enlisted members will have a problem. Unfortunately, as you alluded, high schools aren't what they used to be. I'm appalled at how many high school graduates can't even approximate sales tax in their heads. It's depressing.

Rich
Click to expand...

A degree doesn’t guarantee a better understanding of math. During my Navy career I was dealing with Surface Officers, not Aviators but I was really surprised at the number of officers that had a hard time understanding how to compute the speed needed to arrive on station at a given time.
 
This is a fix to a problem we don't have.

There are TONS of highly qualified candidates applying for UPT, many many get turned away every year. The USAF has a retention problem, not a recruiting one. If you read the test details, the officers that make it (O's and E's are starting in the same pipeline at the same time) they will go on to be pilots. The E's that make it go back to their original field (at least as it stands right now). It's just a test case. Either way whether O or E, this "solution" is to a problem we don't have (recruiting and initial pilot training). The holdup is in the RTU's.

Separate issue is whether you need a degree to be a pilot.

Does a degree in underwater basket weaving really help you be a better pilot? After 18 years (and counting) of flying in the USAF, I'd say unequivocally "it depends". The good is that you had to apply yourself to something and see it through. This degree program was gained after (all but a few) parents stopped exerting daily control over their life. Obviously that happens for some young people before college, and a few never get to that point, but most people finish college due to them seeing it through while also juggling freedom, access to alcohol (legally) and a lot of social expansion. If that major is something difficult, all the better because now you can see something through and you know how to study. Both of those things are absolutely critical to make it through UPT. I've been doing this my entire adult life and studying is still a regular part of my day because threats and tactics are constantly changing.

Is there any chance that a college graduate mailed it in and will do poorly at UPT? Yep, happens all the time. I can tell you that I was no where near ready for the studying, commitment or responsibility of flying jets when I was right out of high school. I don't know many people who are.

It wouldn't be all bad if you found that <.000001% of high school graduates that showed the maturity, academic aptitude, social skills, work ethic and desire to tackle a huge undertaking of UPT/follow on pipeline training. That young person would bounce back quickly, perform at high levels, learn faster than older folks and could get to the pinnacle of his/her flying field at an earlier age which would lend itself to staying relevant longer. (honestly I don't see the "staying relevant" argument as much of a factor but I'm trying to be a glass-half-full-guy.

Anyway, two separate issues. Shortening pilot training to push more people through isn't the problem we need to fix - we have no absorption capability. Fix that first and there'd be a lot less push back from current USAF pilots on a test case like this.
 
Soooo...they train the enlisted to fly and the airlines snatch them up as well. What difference is this gonna make? I'm all for letting enlisted fly, why not, many enlisted have degrees and just don't feel like going through the crap to go from enlisted to officer. But there reasoning is not justification to change because those enlisted pilots will be gone just as fast as the officer when there time is up.

I always thought you had to be an officer to have command authority to fire from an aircraft, hence enlisted flying unarmed drones. Just what I always thought...

I see officers everyday not perform well here at UPT and I talk to those prior enlisted who excel, so to me if they have the aptitude regardless of rank, let them fly.
 
simtech said:
Soooo...they train the enlisted to fly and the airlines snatch them up as well. What difference is this gonna make? I'm all for letting enlisted fly, why not, many enlisted have degrees and just don't feel like going through the crap to go from enlisted to officer. But there reasoning is not justification to change because those enlisted pilots will be gone just as fast as the officer when there time is up.

I always thought you had to be an officer to have command authority to fire from an aircraft, hence enlisted flying unarmed drones. Just what I always thought...

I see officers everyday not perform well here at UPT and I talk to those prior enlisted who excel, so to me if they have the aptitude regardless of rank, let them fly.
Click to expand...

Plenty of enlisted door gunners. Of course back in the day they had enlisted pilots like Yeager and Hoover also. Just over time, the services went with the officer requirement.
 
flhrci said:
Very misleading! So I went into the Navy instead. :)

Click to expand...

Yeah, I went to the Army recruiter and he literally laughed at me. "We're not gonna let a kid fly a multimillion dollar aircraft right out of high school." High school to flight school used to be pretty common but it's rare these days.
 
simtech said:
Soooo...they train the enlisted to fly and the airlines snatch them up as well. What difference is this gonna make? I'm all for letting enlisted fly, why not, many enlisted have degrees and just don't feel like going through the crap to go from enlisted to officer. But there reasoning is not justification to change because those enlisted pilots will be gone just as fast as the officer when there time is up.
Click to expand...

Agree they would leave asap when they are able - the money would be an even bigger draw (even though most people leaving say it's not because of the money).

I'd argue that if it's not worth it to "go through the crap to go from enlisted to officer" that they don't want it bad enough. There's a reason silver wings don't come in a CrackerJack box; you gotta want'em and earn'em. I don't want that to change. Again, we're not hurting for qualified applicants.
 
When I was flight instructing, I could tell a big difference between college graduates and high school graduates. The college kids were usually more prepared for each lesson.
 
mscard88 said:
Just make them warrant officers like the Army, which is mentioned in the article. Heck in WW2 they were "Flying Sergeants". USAF has enlisted flying RPAs now too.
Click to expand...
Or make 'em Corporal-Captains:

49b96e6696148723f5d0994a6fa37ba6--gary-burghoff-mash-tv.jpg
 
A slaked corporal-captain at that.
 
Maybe they figure retention will be better since the airlines all require college degrees, the enlisted pilots won't be eligible...
 
Dana said:
Maybe they figure retention will be better since the airlines all require college degrees, the enlisted pilots won't be eligible...
Click to expand...

But with credit for service training, CLEP tests, tuition assistance, and GI Bill, an enlisted pilot could very easily have their degree completed by the time their contract is up.
 
simtech said:
Soooo...they train the enlisted to fly and the airlines snatch them up as well. What difference is this gonna make?
Click to expand...

I wonder if the difference is the Enlistment have...enlistments. They sign up for a fixed period, four years. Officers do not have a fixed service requirement, except as needed to "pay back" training (like flight school). After that time, they're free to stay or go just about any time (at least when I was in...).

If nothing else, it would let the Air Force plan things better if there was a known window when an enlisted pilot's term was up.

Ron Wanttaja
 
I wonder if it is a recruitment tool for enlisted ranks? As EvilEagle pointed out, there are plenty of pilot applicants, but maybe it would help enlisted recruiting if you can tell the high school kid he might get to be a pilot of he enlists in the Air Force (even if it is a remote chance)
 
ColoPilot said:
I wonder if it is a recruitment tool for enlisted ranks? As EvilEagle pointed out, there are plenty of pilot applicants, but maybe it would help enlisted recruiting if you can tell the high school kid he might get to be a pilot of he enlists in the Air Force (even if it is a remote chance)
Click to expand...

Doubt it. It says it's test program, and I'd guess that's as far as it'll get IMO.
 
Yeah I don't think it'll go past a testing phase. Even if they go with enlisted pilots, it'll probably only apply to those who are already enlisted and are stand outs in their current MOS.
 
Velocity173 said:
Yeah I don't think it'll go past a testing phase. Even if they go with enlisted pilots, it'll probably only apply to those who are already enlisted and are stand outs in their current MOS.
Click to expand...

Damn, I coulda been a Thud or Phantom driver!
 
mscard88 said:
Damn, I coulda been a Thud or Phantom driver!
Click to expand...

No no. You didn't read what I said. Gotta be a STAND OUT in your MOS. Washing out of ATC school in the AF doesn't fulfill that requirement.:D:D:D
 
Velocity173 said:
No no. You didn't read what I said. Gotta be a STAND OUT in your MOS. Washing out of ATC school in the AF doesn't fulfill that requirement.:D:D:D
Click to expand...

But but I didn't wash out! So do I get a Thud now?
 
mscard88 said:
But but I didn't wash out! So do I get a Thud now?
Click to expand...

Speaking of fighters, did you get a fam ride when you did ATC? My brother drew the short straw and got a T-37. Some of his friends went up in F-16s though.
 
Velocity173 said:
Speaking of fighters, did you get a fam ride when you did ATC? My brother drew the short straw and got a T-37. Some of his friends went up in F-16s though.
Click to expand...

Supposed to have gotten an F4, did all the egress training and didn't get it. Then won something of the quarter award and was supposed to go up in an F15, had me a couple pilots picked out, who I knew from them working in the tower as SOFs. Never got that one either. Flew on an HH43 though once, and a bunch of T38 sim time. :(
 
Part of the logic is an officer has a broader mandate - yeah, you're a pilot, but you theoretically are prepared, by formal education and military training, to assume other management duties, outside of flying.

Theory, anyway. It's been attacked a bunch of ways over the decades- Yeager was a Sgt pilot; USAF had aviation cadets (not commissioned immediatley, back in the day). The Navy had Limited Duty Officers (LDO); I shared a hop with a LDO COD pilot long ago. And Army Warrant Officers, of course.

USCG enlistees routinely have significant college credits; they average about 21 years old, and score high, so I could see those kids going to flight school, flying as enlisted. . .roughly speaking, an AA degree is about the equivalent of a HS diploma from the early-mid 1960s, IMHO.
 
So much BS.. the military wants people who has committed to the long term learning experience, and have a 4 year degree.
are are willing to do the full comment of a commission.
I have worked for and flown with several non-com pilots, most were simply azzholes who were on their last tours, and only wanted to get as many years in as possible to get the max retirement.
 
Today advancement trail starts with being a O-1 if you are not going to give that to a pilot, why make them a pilot.
 
Tom-D said:
So much BS.. the military wants people who has committed to the long term learning experience, and have a 4 year degree.
are are willing to do the full comment of a commission.
I have worked for and flown with several non-com pilots, most were simply azzholes who were on their last tours, and only wanted to get as many years in as possible to get the max retirement.
Click to expand...
Several huh? And never met an officer pilot azzhole just stacking it up for retirement?

The military wants to recriut and retain the people they need to achieve readiness; culture has changed, and they're looking around at what they can do to adapt. It may be an undergrad degree is a good predictor of success, and they'll stick with it. More likely some mix of preparation and platforms will be the way to go - like Army with WO and commisioned pilots, or USAF with enlisted flying unmanned vehicles.
 
Sundancer said:
Several huh? And never met an officer pilot azzhole just stacking it up for retirement?
Click to expand...
Back when I was a 2nd Looie, there was a sergeant in our squadron with Command Pilot wings. Was told the Air Force was going to RIF him when he was a Major, at about his 16-year point. They allowed him to stay in to get his last four years for retirement, but he had to do it as the E- equivalent of his grade.

Ron Wanttaja
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top