First AF Enlisted UAV Pilots

I wonder if they get military equivalency on FAA part 107 RPA certs?
 
Do they get flight pay ?
 
The Army learned long ago not to play those games with pilots.....enlisted guys been flying ARMY UAS for years....and millions of flight hours.
 
Last edited:
The whole officer vs enlisted and holding jobs back from enlisted seems kind of dumb. While there is a certain quality baseline you get for requiring officers for jobs theres a ton of qualified enlisted guys especially in the AF since they kind of pick who they want for enlisted anyways.

Requiring bars on your shoulder before you can Pilot, RPA, or CSO isnt right. Yes I get wanting to protect officer slots but whos more qualified? Me coming off the street with my BA in unrelated degree and 8 weeks of charm school at maxwell or the sensor operator whos been in for 4-6 years.
They should just take a page from the army and make WOs a thing. That way all these technical jobs and jobs with high levels of responsibility have fair pay and rank equal with what the job demands.If done right an added benefit the guy who actually likes doing ISR doesn't have to politic and check boxes as much just to stay in.
 
Lets go all old school European and get back Flight Sergeant Pilots and stuff for manned A/C. Keep the butter bars where they belong, runnning the mess and pushing papers. :D
 
The key question is what type of wings do they get? I see the Green Bags but hard to see the badge.

Cheers
 
Checkout_my_Six said:
what do you know? :eek:
Click to expand...
I know that there is no practical skills standards for certificating remote pilots under part 107. Military comp generally credits military pilots from having to demonstrate operational skill piloting an aircraft, but still requires the military pilot to take a knowledge test. Since there is only a knowledge test required to get a remote pilot certificate, what would a military pilot be credited for? Most of the material on the knowledge test is specific to part 107 and operating in the NAS. Most military UAS pilots without manned aircraft training receive little-to-no training in operating in domestic airspace.

If a military pilot holds a FAA certificate, he/she can bypass the knowledge test and take the online training course like many of us here.
 
There have been enlisted pilots in the US military in the past. There is a book on the subject titled "They Also Flew, The Enlisted Pilot Legacy".
 
I'm not sure why we are mixing a conversation about military drone (UAV) pilots with FAA Part 107 small UAS remote pilots. They have nothing in common with the exception the UAV is of course unmanned. With Part 107 you have to maintain visual contact with your UAV and there are tons of other restrictions. A military UAV pilot probably never sees his UAV as it could be flying halfway around the world from where he is at and the UAV flies at high altitudes and clearly presents a danger to those on the ground.

Now perhaps some day there will be additional ratings to add to a Remote Pilot certificate for other than the current Small UAS but for right now it is apples and oranges.
 
falconkidding said:
The whole officer vs enlisted and holding jobs back from enlisted seems kind of dumb. While there is a certain quality baseline you get for requiring officers for jobs theres a ton of qualified enlisted guys especially in the AF since they kind of pick who they want for enlisted anyways.

Requiring bars on your shoulder before you can Pilot, RPA, or CSO isnt right. Yes I get wanting to protect officer slots but whos more qualified? Me coming off the street with my BA in unrelated degree and 8 weeks of charm school at maxwell or the sensor operator whos been in for 4-6 years.
They should just take a page from the army and make WOs a thing. That way all these technical jobs and jobs with high levels of responsibility have fair pay and rank equal with what the job demands.If done right an added benefit the guy who actually likes doing ISR doesn't have to politic and check boxes as much just to stay in.
Click to expand...
I have to disagree in regards to pilot positions being open to enlisted. Being selected for a pilot slot requires working through a competitive process where the military is trying to find those who are most likely to be successful. The screening process eliminates those who are more likely to quit or lack the skills needed to be successful. Of course you can find talented people on the enlisted side who would be capable of performing a specialized task, but when that door is opened you are not necessarily just taking in the best. You have eliminated one of the criteria in the selection process, and are reducing the standards of competition. There is a definite distinction between the officer and enlisted ranks. In our age of assumed equality, we resent distinctions. The military is one place where they have been allowed to remain on a large scale. But in other professions the same standard exists. What about doctors? There are plenty of nurses that think they know more than the doctors, and in many cases it may be true. But the doctor is entrusted with the responsibility because he has proven himself to some degree by working through the process. Just as there is a difference that can be discerned between those who work to become doctors and those who choose to be nurses, there is a difference in those who work to become an officer and those who choose to be enlisted. There are always exceptions and there are definitely enlisted people capable of piloting an aircraft. But the level of responsibility in modern military aviation is high and retaining higher standards will aid in selecting from the best.
 
SkyDog58 said:
I'm not sure why we are mixing a conversation about military drone (UAV) pilots with FAA Part 107 small UAS remote pilots. They have nothing in common with the exception the UAV is of course unmanned. With Part 107 you have to maintain visual contact with your UAV and there are tons of other restrictions. A military UAV pilot probably never sees his UAV as it could be flying halfway around the world from where he is at and the UAV flies at high altitudes and clearly presents a danger to those on the ground.

Now perhaps some day there will be additional ratings to add to a Remote Pilot certificate for other than the current Small UAS but for right now it is apples and oranges.
Click to expand...
did I miss the thread title....or something? :D
 
Cooter said:
I have to disagree in regards to pilot positions being open to enlisted. Being selected for a pilot slot requires working through a competitive process where the military is trying to find those who are most likely to be successful. The screening process eliminates those who are more likely to quit or lack the skills needed to be successful. Of course you can find talented people on the enlisted side who would be capable of performing a specialized task, but when that door is opened you are not necessarily just taking in the best. You have eliminated one of the criteria in the selection process, and are reducing the standards of competition. There is a definite distinction between the officer and enlisted ranks. In our age of assumed equality, we resent distinctions. The military is one place where they have been allowed to remain on a large scale. But in other professions the same standard exists. What about doctors? There are plenty of nurses that think they know more than the doctors, and in many cases it may be true. But the doctor is entrusted with the responsibility because he has proven himself to some degree by working through the process. Just as there is a difference that can be discerned between those who work to become doctors and those who choose to be nurses, there is a difference in those who work to become an officer and those who choose to be enlisted. There are always exceptions and there are definitely enlisted people capable of piloting an aircraft. But the level of responsibility in modern military aviation is high and retaining higher standards will aid in selecting from the best.
Click to expand...


But But... I'm a special little snowflake.. My mommy said so..:rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes:
 
Cooter said:
I have to disagree in regards to pilot positions being open to enlisted. Being selected for a pilot slot requires working through a competitive process where the military is trying to find those who are most likely to be successful. The screening process eliminates those who are more likely to quit or lack the skills needed to be successful. Of course you can find talented people on the enlisted side who would be capable of performing a specialized task, but when that door is opened you are not necessarily just taking in the best. You have eliminated one of the criteria in the selection process, and are reducing the standards of competition. There is a definite distinction between the officer and enlisted ranks. In our age of assumed equality, we resent distinctions. The military is one place where they have been allowed to remain on a large scale. But in other professions the same standard exists. What about doctors? There are plenty of nurses that think they know more than the doctors, and in many cases it may be true. But the doctor is entrusted with the responsibility because he has proven himself to some degree by working through the process. Just as there is a difference that can be discerned between those who work to become doctors and those who choose to be nurses, there is a difference in those who work to become an officer and those who choose to be enlisted. There are always exceptions and there are definitely enlisted people capable of piloting an aircraft. But the level of responsibility in modern military aviation is high and retaining higher standards will aid in selecting from the best.
Click to expand...

I agree but it's getting to the point with the AF fighter pilot shortage that they need to find other avenues to fill those slots. I see this enlisted UAV thing as a way of freeing up pilots to get back into the cockpit.

Now, enlisted manned pilot? I don't see the demand right now but if this shortage keeps up, they might have to. 250K bonuses only help so much. Like the Navy NAVCAD program, flying petty officer program, or the Marine MCP. When times are tough, they look to other ways to fill the void. Heck, in the Army, they'd never be able to meet their pilot quota just through the commisioned rank applicants. Plus, they save a fortune with warrants because they're cheap labor. :D
 
Velocity173 said:
I agree but it's getting to the point with the AF fighter pilot shortage that they need to find other avenues to fill those slots. I see this enlisted UAV thing as a way of freeing up pilots to get back into the cockpit.

Now, enlisted manned pilot? I don't see the demand right now but if this shortage keeps up, they might have to. 250K bonuses only help so much. Like the Navy NAVCAD program, flying petty officer program, or the Marine MCP. When times are tough, they look to other ways to fill the void. Heck, in the Army, they'd never be able to meet their pilot quota just through the commisioned rank applicants. Plus, they save a fortune with warrants because they're cheap labor. :D
Click to expand...
I think there are better options available for the pilot shortage. The problem is that the leadership is always in reaction mode and has the attitude of doing the minimum necessary to keep the required number of pilots. They wait until the problem has fully developed then think that begrudgingly raising a bonus tied to an onerous commitment will solve the problem. The problem is too large for a simple signing bonus to solve but the military is unwilling to address it accordingly. The market for pilots on the civilian side is providing an attractive alternative and until the military addresses the whole issue and can match what is offered on the outside, pilots will continue to leave.

As far as a solution, the Air Force and Navy need to be willing to separate non-flying duties and leave much of the administration to those who wish to climb through the ranks to senior officer positions. There needs to be separate career tracks. Warrant Officer seems to be one solution to this, but personally I just see this as difficult culturally in the Navy and AF. A flying career that allows pilots to specialize and remain in flying billets without the pressure of padding their performance reports with other duties would be one step towards removing some of the burdensome tasks that discourage pilots. A flying track that caps at O-4 without a negative stigma would be an attractive alternative to what is currently offered. Of course commensurate pay and reasonable deployment schedules will also have to be addressed as well. I'll leave the social engineering and progressive indoctrination out of the conversation, but that too is an issue that the military has let run unrestrained until it has reached absolute absurdity.
 

Attachments

  • HegFcXi.jpg
    HegFcXi.jpg
    17.4 KB · Views: 27
Lol! That chart cracks me up. "Where the fire extinguishers are." One of my first additional duties was fire marshal for the hangar. A 70 yr old former German hangar that used to house FW 190s in WWII. The entire thing was a fire hazard! I was also the public works officer for the hangar, which was even worse than fire marshal.

Plenty of other nonsense could be added to that pie chart, such as "proper PT belt wear" and "sensitivity towards gays / transgenders."
 
Yup. Check this out:
1) Stop making my primary duty a tertiary duty,
2) leave me and my family the f#$% alone when in garrison/not deployed,
3) deploy me as needed in my agreed upon AFSC, otherwise see #2

Done. Did I ever mentioned money? Nope, sure didn't.

Survey says......NONE of these conditionals are being met currently.

That's why people are scoffing at flying assignments in the military. Senior leadership flat out refuses to even entertain the legitimacy of what I've just expressed in those bullet points. Everybody instead insists on going around in circles about money, when most of us would agree to a O-4 promotion cap for the sake of getting the conditions listed above. There is just no getting it through senior leadership's thick skull though. They just think the whole premise it's too Burger King to even consider, so it gets scolded down as a non-starter.

So Eff it, the airlines are hiring. Let the market make them eat cake. It's been 15 years of a seller's market due to 9/11, '08 crash and age 65, aka the Lost Decade. But now the conveyor belt is finally cracking a movement and it's all of a sudden blasphemy for pilots to exercise options? Yeah, spare me the feigned indignation and the Core Values speech.

As to the fighter pilot shortage. Good God for the umpteenth time, it's an 11F-coded staff billet body shortage, not a shortage of cockpit meat. There's no shortage of 11Fs to fly anything with afterburners in the AF. If anything, 11Fs barely have the budget to fly these days compared to heavy drivers. We got Viper dudes sitting in attached billets in BMR status barely cracking 100 hours a year, with the rest of the roster playing "RAP lottery" every quarter and rotating in and out CMR status. Fighter pilot shortage my ass. But it's a great bait and switch so giddy up.
 
Velocity173 said:
Lol! That chart cracks me up. "Where the fire extinguishers are." One of my first additional duties was fire marshal for the hangar. A 70 yr old former German hangar that used to house FW 190s in WWII. The entire thing was a fire hazard! I was also the public works officer for the hangar, which was even worse than fire marshal.

Plenty of other nonsense could be added to that pie chart, such as "proper PT belt wear" and "sensitivity towards gays / transgenders."
Click to expand...
Yeah, diversity training definitely needs to be represented but it is surprisingly accurate otherwise.
 
I agree with Cooter. No issue with the idea of Enlisted folks flying planes, unmanned or otherwise. But I have also seen how their evals (the only thing that can be used to rack and stack a group of applicants) and career milestones go. Not their fault in any way, but it is a complete joke. Things like "well this guy/gal has been here for a year, it is probably time for a NAM" have been uttered in Enlisted ranking and awards boards I have been part of. If you can fog a mirror, and most importantly, have participated in a bunch of "extracurricular" activities at the detriment of your actual job, you will likely make CPO. Those who don't have the time to do such activities because they are in a mission critical job such as maintenance are not competitive. If I had a dollar for every time a fantastic maintenance shop Sailor of mine was overlooked in favor of some YN/IT/IS assclown who can't be bothered to even shave or adhere to military customs and courtesies, much less actually do their job, I'd have a mansion in Tahoe. Across the board, Enlisted or Officer alike, this system rewards a bunch of no talent assclowns who want to be called "warfighter", yet do nothing of the sort, and are too lazy to actually support those who do. That is why we are all leaving. That and the E9's who enable this to continue. All the bonus money in the world wouldn't convince me to stay. If we started literally keel hauling ****ty leadership, O and E alike, I'd consider it. Instead, we have a small group of people who would have no other option outside the military, who get promoted because they are the only ones left. There are good ones left, don't get me wrong, but they are evenly mixed with the worst. My old man retired as a post squadron command O-5, my grandpa as a post wing command O-6. G-pa is long dead, but my dad completely "gets it" when he hears the kind of BS that is going on these days. And I am not talking the commonly reported cries of "political correctness", or "social agendas"……those things are minor annoyances. The real issue is when you realize how horribly we are managing personnel, and how out of touch the O-6+ crowd generally is. Quite literally, it is more worth it to me to inconvenience the bureau of personnel, than it is to collect the ~$2 million (bonuses and tax-free money included) that I would make over the course of the next 10 years before full retirement, let alone the post active-duty retirement pay I'd collect for the rest of my life. I can make many more times that in another job, where I don't have to deal with such a reactive group of leaders, nor do I have to placate no-load subordinates for the sake of not hurting feelings and building "retention".
 
Last edited:
Cooter said:
As far as a solution, the Air Force and Navy need to be willing to separate non-flying duties and leave much of the administration to those who wish to climb through the ranks to senior officer positions.
Click to expand...

Worst idea ever. Do you really want career administrators in senior positions?
 
Back in the day when I wrote OER's, the primary thing was how well the person was doing their primary job. All the other HS was added when I ran out of white space (which was seldom). In that ancient time, my people got the promotions they deserved. Glad I'm not stuck with have to give superlatives for Snacko duties.

Cheers
 
Clark1961 said:
Worst idea ever. Do you really want career administrators in senior positions?
Click to expand...
They already are, but if you were reasonably informed on the issue you would have known that. Do you have anything of value to offer? I assume not since you joined the discussion as a insecure adolescent bully would have.
 
Cooter said:
They already are, but if you were reasonably informed on the issue you would have known that. Do you have anything of value to offer? I assume not since you joined the discussion as a insecure adolescent bully would have.
Click to expand...
Wow, playing the bully card for a simple disagreement. Good luck with that.
 
Clark1961 said:
Wow, playing the bully card for a simple disagreement. Good luck with that.
Click to expand...

It isn't for simple disagreement, it is for the ignorance, arrogance and rudeness. The bully part was incidental, it was the insecure adolescent part you should pay attention to. BTW, you didn't actually voice a valid disagreement.
 
Clark1961 said:
Worst idea ever. Do you really want career administrators in senior positions?
Click to expand...

If you're labeling career administrators as those who don't have the warfighter needs as number one priority, then yeah, that's not a good idea. What I think Cooter was getting at, is allowing those who want to climb the ranks in a cubicle in Pentagon, have at it. Believe it or not, there are those who have grown tired of the tactical side and now seek positions to affect change. I knew many fine aviators in the Army who would rather lead, than stay in the cockpit for 20 years. Those who were former disgruntled junior officers because of poor leadership and policy decisions. These "reformers" are what you want going into senior non operational positions.

What we don't need are the ones who put making rank ahead of needs of the service. The "Pentagon Wars" effect if you will. Unfortunately, that type will always exist in the service to some extent.
 
Last edited:
hindsight2020 said:
As to the fighter pilot shortage. Good God for the umpteenth time, it's an 11F-coded staff billet body shortage, not a shortage of cockpit meat. There's no shortage of 11Fs to fly anything with afterburners in the AF. If anything, 11Fs barely have the budget to fly these days compared to heavy drivers. We got Viper dudes sitting in attached billets in BMR status barely cracking 100 hours a year, with the rest of the roster playing "RAP lottery" every quarter and rotating in and out CMR status. Fighter pilot shortage my ass. But it's a great bait and switch so giddy up.
Click to expand...

I am sure there is some great information there, but as a civie, I have no idea what you are talking about.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top