Does the Navy have a shiny pilot training program like USAF's UPT 2.5?

[Python]

Okay. You win. I don’t share an office with the guy(s) in charge of Corsair. Nor do I get CC’ed on emails about it. I’m sure you’re much more in the loop on it than I am.

You’re right. MIF and CTS aren’t hard. But I’m sure your year and a half in Meridian has made you super knowledgeable about it. Especially since you have another system with which to compare it.

I think MIF/CTS is orders of magnitude better than above/below it replaced. Now some of the MPTS rules about progression and unsats are another story, but as far as just grading students on the gradesheet…IMO no contest. From being a stud under both systems, and an IP under the “new” system.

 

[SlickAg]

I think MIF/CTS is orders of magnitude better than above/below it replaced. Now some of the MPTS rules about progression and unsats are another story, but as far as just grading students on the gradesheet…IMO no contest. From being a stud under both systems, and an IP under the “new” system.

The problem with this is that as soon as you meet MIF in all of the critical areas, you can prof advance to the next stage. Did a decent job on your second form flight? Bypass the following four flights, move on to the solo, and then directly into cruise form. Do okay on the second cruise form flight? Skip the next two and on to the solo, and then on to div form. Carry this forward, and you’re going to wind up with someone with substantially less time in the seat than someone who “struggled”.

The goal for primary is to identify the studs who will go helo and maritime sooner and get them out of the T-6 ASAP and into the T-44 and TH-57. Is there some merit there? Sure. But I’d be afraid to discount the flying experience that the additional time in the T-6 gives those students.

The VR goggles also have merit, but currently they’re not proctored or monitored with CSIs or IPs. So if two studs want to go “practice” something with the VR sims, it’s not graded syllabus events, it’s two dudes (potentially) learning bad habits from each other. The T-45 syllabus has changed before based on input from the FRSes and fleet. The current trend is shortening the syllabus and waiving as much as possible to get studs out the door and into the FRS ASAP. Brilliance at the basics has always been the goal of the VTJs. We can certainly get the FRS people sooner, and shorten the time to train, but that comes at a cost.

My litmus test has always been to ask NFOs this question: do you want someone up front with more or less time flying around in Navy jets? Same thing with FRS and fleet guys: do you want your -2, -3, and -4 to have more or less time flying in close proximity and operating with other jets? The recent trend in mishaps would seem to indicate that more flight time and experience is a good thing.

The Navy and Marine Corps don’t have an accession problem. It has a retention problem. We’re making pretty big changes in order to fix a relatively short-term issue caused by issues with the training platform and having improperly manned VTJ squadrons due to poor planning.

This pendulum has swung back and forth several times over the years- several years ago students who selected T-45s out of primary got some “top off” flights in the T-6 and had instrument flights cut out of the T-45 syllabus to save money since the T-6 was so similar to the T-45 in an IFR environment. What was the end result? Those students generally didn’t do as well as their peers and ended up needing extra T-45 flights to get up to snuff, negating the cost savings. That program didn’t last very long.

 

[HuggyU2]

Keep in mind the Air Force is rolling out these slick new ads ...
Don't let the Air Force's slick ad campaign lead you to believe their program is something that it's not.
... the Air Force puts a lot more money into shiny and slick ads, and feel good social media posts.

So you watched that video and this is your analysis. Well... OK, then.

What I saw was the 19th AF commander... a two star... speak to the AF pilot cadre to inform them on what is happening in the Training Command. Within the USAF pilot community, there's a lot of talk, concern, and questions about what UPT 2.5 is all about and how it is being implemented. Was it aimed at 20 year olds to get the into USAF pilot training? Maybe so. Who cares? I thought it was a good look at what the AF is doing. And if I was 20 years old, I'd appreciate seeing a pretty candid discussion on what to expect. Has the Dept of the Navy done something like that recently? If not, don't hate on the AF because your marketing sucks. Making a "slick video" to educate your "troops" ain't that tough.

Much of what I've heard over my 3+ decades in military flying squadrons was that senior leadership didn't communicate what they were doing. But here we have Maj Gen Wills (who I don't know from Adam) speaking about where this program came from... where it is going... why they are doing it... and addressing some of the questions about it. You know... information flow from a General officer. Honestly, flgator92, you have an issue with that? If so, I can't really help you.

This UPT 2.5 program will have many failures. I see that as part of the process when you are being innovative. Oh... I seem to recall many times over my career a complaint that there were leaders that wouldn't let us "think outside the box" for the sake of innovation, because "failure" would make them look bad. Maybe the UPT 2.5 folks are willing to accept that they won't get it right 100% of the time... but that the elements of success will be identified and integrated into USAF UPT. If your focus is that their use of in-cockpit camera footage while Maj Gen Wills was talking is just "shiny and slick" marketing, then once again, I can't help you.

In 2016, on my first flight in the 737, it was full of pax... I landed at night... via a circling/visual approach... to Kona... after 20 days of training. The technology to get me there was pretty good. It wasn't me with a plunger stuck to my floor, chair flying the event like I did in 1985-1986 in UPT. Can the AF maybe... just maybe?... find a way to do UPT training better than it was for me 35 years ago? I certainly hope so.

The AF is willing to spend a bunch on new training technologies. And you should be glad. Because since the AF will focus so heavily on that, the Dept of the Navy will hopefully be able to let the AF fund mucyh of it, and then roll in in 5 years and pick the successful items to integrate, having not spent a lot of their budget on the entire process. After all, Dept of the Navy has ships, Marines, SEAL's and a bunch of other stuff competing for their money.

The Navy stopped doing carrier quals for their student pilots in the T-28 in 1983. The T-45 was introduced 8 years later. T-28 to T-45 in 8 years??? Was the Navy "late to innovate"? Did someone just suddenly wake up and realize the T-28 needed to go? You can scoff at what the the AF is doing with UPT 2.5, but if you want to keep doing your Navy flight business the same way you've been doing it after 40 years, then you shouldn't become an entrepreneur in the civil sector. There's a lot that the Navy would probably like to change about their pilot training during a modernization enterprise. Navy Flag officers aren't stupid, nor are they beholden to things we did that are now outdated. They want the Navy to be efficient and better... and there is no doubt in my mind that this sort of thing is coming your way.

I'm guessing a lot of your comments are born of the Navy's culture of viewing the AF with derision. And that culture is fine... until it blinds you from things that can potentially help you become better. Hate the AF all you want... but don't hate the data they obtain by serious effort and funding... especially when it can help your and your Navy/Marine aviation cohorts.


BTW, a good friend of mine did an interservice transfer to the Dept of the Navy. I recall him telling me after a bunch of AF bashing in his ready room, he was asked "So what does the AF think of us?"

His reply: "We don't".

 

[insanebikerboy]

I haven’t gone through AF UPT but having been around a whole helluva lot of 1LTs over the past two years, the thing I take away from them is the AF and Gen Wills are more than willing to try and find ways to make the process faster and better. There will be learning curves but that’s always the case with anything new.

My personal opinion is that more actual flight hours is always better, regardless of how experienced or inexperience the pilot may be. Unfortunately flying is expensive and I think all branches will have to find ways to use more sim or VR functions and there are phases of flight that can easily be transitioned.

 

[RoarkJr.]

sounds like we all need to lay off the vr porn...

 

[wlawr005]

Okay. You win. I don’t share an office with the guy(s) in charge of Corsair. Nor do I get CC’ed on emails about it. I’m sure you’re much more in the loop on it than I am.

You’re right. MIF and CTS aren’t hard. But I’m sure your year and a half in Meridian has made you super knowledgeable about it. Especially since you have another system with which to compare it.

You sound about as knowledgeable about this as you did COVID. Can't wait for the fucking charts and graphs to start ?

If you're as smart about everything as you think you why aren't you in charge? For fucks sake dude, what aren't you an expert at?

 

[wlawr005]

If there are still inquiring minds out there, Corsair (and also Hellcat and Avenger) is a multi-faceted approach to leverage many things in an attempt to modernize flight training. There hasn't been a significant technological improvement to Navy flight training in over 30 years and for the most part we are still training flight students in much the same way we did in Vietnam. Rather than arbitrarily cutting flight hours to replace them with video games, these programs are looking at ways to improve infrastructure, manning, aircraft availability, student throughput, and advantages to be gained from leveraging new technologies in formal ground training.

For example, our students all have iPads and wifi is coming to every hangar. We are revamping our hangar spaces to bring in the best computer and internet services the Navy is able to negotiate with the morons at NMCI. Our stan officers are reviewing and cutting thousands of slides of outdated or incorrect Computer Aided Instruction slides, local SOPS, FTIs, and Stan notes. We have representatives meeting with people from the FRS and TOPGUN to make sure that the flight hours we are allocating are being used to teach students things that are preparing them to step directly into high end technology fighters. We are looking at several options for a new syllabus and a new syllabus flow, down to how we load the student classes in order to be the most efficient based on jet and instructor availability. There are numerous other projects too small to mention, and of course all of this in being done with the replacement for the T-45 in mind.

So no, no one is strapping a set of VR goggles on a kid and saying it's just as good as flying an airplane. Not even close. But I don't sit next to the Corsair guy in Kingsville so take this all for what it's worth.

 

[SlickAg]

You sound about as knowledgeable about this as you did COVID. Can't wait for the fucking charts and graphs to start ?

If you're as smart about everything as you think you why aren't you in charge? For fucks sake dude, what aren't you an expert at?

So, correct me if I’m wrong here, but you’re upset that someone would back up their argument using actual charts and data?

You don’t have to get upset that I called you out when you said no one is trying to cut flight hours. That is literally what they are trying to do, especially in the T-6.

I also forgot how much of an expert you were about CNATRA CQ. Sounds like you ARE in charge of everything in Meridian given your vast experience. Or about to be anyway. Send me an invite to your CoC. I’ll definitely make it.

 

[croakerfish]

So you watched that video and this is your analysis. Well... OK, then.

What I saw was the 19th AF commander... a two star... speak to the AF pilot cadre to inform them on what is happening in the Training Command. Within the USAF pilot community, there's a lot of talk, concern, and questions about what UPT 2.5 is all about and how it is being implemented. Was it aimed at 20 year olds to get the into USAF pilot training? Maybe so. Who cares? I thought it was a good look at what the AF is doing. And if I was 20 years old, I'd appreciate seeing a pretty candid discussion on what to expect. Has the Dept of the Navy done something like that recently? If not, don't hate on the AF because your marketing sucks. Making a "slick video" to educate your "troops" ain't that tough.

Much of what I've heard over my 3+ decades in military flying squadrons was that senior leadership didn't communicate what they were doing. But here we have Maj Gen Wills (who I don't know from Adam) speaking about where this program came from... where it is going... why they are doing it... and addressing some of the questions about it. You know... information flow from a General officer. Honestly, flgator92, you have an issue with that? If so, I can't really help you.

This UPT 2.5 program will have many failures. I see that as part of the process when you are being innovative. Oh... I seem to recall many times over my career a complaint that there were leaders that wouldn't let us "think outside the box" for the sake of innovation, because "failure" would make them look bad. Maybe the UPT 2.5 folks are willing to accept that they won't get it right 100% of the time... but that the elements of success will be identified and integrated into USAF UPT. If your focus is that their use of in-cockpit camera footage while Maj Gen Wills was talking is just "shiny and slick" marketing, then once again, I can't help you.

In 2016, on my first flight in the 737, it was full of pax... I landed at night... via a circling/visual approach... to Kona... after 20 days of training. The technology to get me there was pretty good. It wasn't me with a plunger stuck to my floor, chair flying the event like I did in 1985-1986 in UPT. Can the AF maybe... just maybe?... find a way to do UPT training better than it was for me 35 years ago? I certainly hope so.

The AF is willing to spend a bunch on new training technologies. And you should be glad. Because since the AF will focus so heavily on that, the Dept of the Navy will hopefully be able to let the AF fund mucyh of it, and then roll in in 5 years and pick the successful items to integrate, having not spent a lot of their budget on the entire process. After all, Dept of the Navy has ships, Marines, SEAL's and a bunch of other stuff competing for their money.

The Navy stopped doing carrier quals for their student pilots in the T-28 in 1983. The T-45 was introduced 8 years later. T-28 to T-45 in 8 years??? Was the Navy "late to innovate"? Did someone just suddenly wake up and realize the T-28 needed to go? You can scoff at what the the AF is doing with UPT 2.5, but if you want to keep doing your Navy flight business the same way you've been doing it after 40 years, then you shouldn't become an entrepreneur in the civil sector. There's a lot that the Navy would probably like to change about their pilot training during a modernization enterprise. Navy Flag officers aren't stupid, nor are they beholden to things we did that are now outdated. They want the Navy to be efficient and better... and there is no doubt in my mind that this sort of thing is coming your way.

I'm guessing a lot of your comments are born of the Navy's culture of viewing the AF with derision. And that culture is fine... until it blinds you from things that can potentially help you become better. Hate the AF all you want... but don't hate the data they obtain by serious effort and funding... especially when it can help your and your Navy/Marine aviation cohorts.


BTW, a good friend of mine did an interservice transfer to the Dept of the Navy. I recall him telling me after a bunch of AF bashing in his ready room, he was asked "So what does the AF think of us?"

His reply: "We don't".

 

[CommodoreMid]

The problem with this is that as soon as you meet MIF in all of the critical areas, you can prof advance to the next stage. Did a decent job on your second form flight? Bypass the following four flights, move on to the solo, and then directly into cruise form. Do okay on the second cruise form flight? Skip the next two and on to the solo, and then on to div form. Carry this forward, and you’re going to wind up with someone with substantially less time in the seat than someone who “struggled”.

The goal for primary is to identify the studs who will go helo and maritime sooner and get them out of the T-6 ASAP and into the T-44 and TH-57. Is there some merit there? Sure. But I’d be afraid to discount the flying experience that the additional time in the T-6 gives those students.

The VR goggles also have merit, but currently they’re not proctored or monitored with CSIs or IPs. So if two studs want to go “practice” something with the VR sims, it’s not graded syllabus events, it’s two dudes (potentially) learning bad habits from each other. The T-45 syllabus has changed before based on input from the FRSes and fleet. The current trend is shortening the syllabus and waiving as much as possible to get studs out the door and into the FRS ASAP. Brilliance at the basics has always been the goal of the VTJs. We can certainly get the FRS people sooner, and shorten the time to train, but that comes at a cost.

My litmus test has always been to ask NFOs this question: do you want someone up front with more or less time flying around in Navy jets? Same thing with FRS and fleet guys: do you want your -2, -3, and -4 to have more or less time flying in close proximity and operating with other jets? The recent trend in mishaps would seem to indicate that more flight time and experience is a good thing.

The Navy and Marine Corps don’t have an accession problem. It has a retention problem. We’re making pretty big changes in order to fix a relatively short-term issue caused by issues with the training platform and having improperly manned VTJ squadrons due to poor planning.

This pendulum has swung back and forth several times over the years- several years ago students who selected T-45s out of primary got some “top off” flights in the T-6 and had instrument flights cut out of the T-45 syllabus to save money since the T-6 was so similar to the T-45 in an IFR environment. What was the end result? Those students generally didn’t do as well as their peers and ended up needing extra T-45 flights to get up to snuff, negating the cost savings. That program didn’t last very long.

Ok so we’re then passing the buck to the fleet squadrons to get pilots the min required time to make aircraft commander then. Even with the new rules that just popped in P-8 we’re struggling to get pilots the hours needed for PPC.

 

[scoolbubba]

This adds to the the snowball effect of 700-800 hour total time pilots showing up as instructors.

Hint: from someone who trained them at the ITU, they suck. It's not their personal failing, they just have 1/2 the experience of the peeps who came before them. The low total time IPs, on average, lack airmanship and SA and then we put them in a high performance orange and white with an SA vortex in the front seat. I have watched some very questionable almost-calls from the new active component IPs that took some chats from the silverbacks to talk them out of. The common theme was all were sub 1000 hour pilots at the training command.

They're fine after a year or so of instructing, but that puts them where they ought to be, hours and experience-wise, when they're checking in. The detailers playing fucky games with their shore tour length isn't doing any favors to the average experience base at the training command, either.

 

[Gatordev]

This adds to the the snowball effect of 700-800 hour total time pilots showing up as instructors.

Hint: from someone who trained them at the ITU, they suck. It's not their personal failing, they just have 1/2 the experience of the peeps who came before them.

I'd argue 1/2 the experience is an exaggeration. More like 2/3, as ~1200TT seemed to be the norm before VP red stripe and helo T&R cuts in the early to mid 2000's. But then, if everyone is showing up with the same (low) time, there isn't a problem, right? Everyone is equal!

Seriously though, I agree with your overall thesis.

 

[scoolbubba]

I'd argue 1/2 the experience is an exaggeration. More like 2/3, as ~1200TT seemed to be the norm before VP red stripe and helo T&R cuts in the early to mid 2000's. But then, if everyone is showing up with the same (low) time, there isn't a problem, right? Everyone is equal!

Seriously though, I agree with your overall thesis.

yea, you're probably closer. I had just shy of 1400 when I showed up to the tracom, but I was probably on the high side of the average.