Flight School backed up

[FlyNavy03]

While you and I might agree, I don't think PERS sees it that way outside of VTJ. 100% of my JO's from my DH tour that went production have all been told to only expect 24 months at their VT/HT/FRS and then off to a boat thereafter. Can't speak to the ones that went Wing Weapons School, but when I left, our newest Train-O had done exactly 24 months there, which is in line with the trend.

That's a topic worthy of its own thread.

I think it was 2021 when they cut the VT/HT orders to 30 months, including the FITU/HITU. There's a small, tin-foil-hat-wearing part of me that wonders if part of the reason they did that is to prevent too many people from getting to 2000 hours - the magic number for most decent civilian helo jobs - and thus reduce their incentive to get out of the military.

 

[Flash]

We brought a bunch of rotary wing guys, mostly USMC, into our T-2 squadron to instruct back in the day. Yes, they'd been through the T34, but long ago. They did alright.

I don't think it'd be that big of a deal.

Actually I think it would be a big deal, as COPT-R grads would have no fixed-wing military time (or possibly none at all).

Interesting question. I'll return one to you. How would 70 hours in a T-6 make someone a better helo pilot than 50 hours in a Bell 206?

I think an advantage the Navy has long had over Army pilots is that we make better aviators, not just helo pilots. If the Navy is willing to take the risk of the downstream effects of having folks trained solely as helo pilots, then so be it. But many of those effects likely won't be seen or felt by many who have conceived and implemented this scheme as they will take years to manifest.

 

[squorch2]

Maybe a bit of a challenge for their COs to rank them against peers who have an extra fitrep in rank

Timing trumps all, so they'll get boned compared to equivalent peers.

 

[jollygreen07]

Hi, current T-6 FITU IP here.

When we train new IPs coming from helo land we absolutely rely on their ~70 hours in T-6s as a foundation for teaching them how to safely operate, then safely instruct in these aircraft. After all, it was their primary trainer. They’ve already solo’d the damn thing a few times.

A helo-only pilot with good hands and a brain that can think faster than 120 KIAS will probably be ok without the fixed-wing time. But for those that lack one or both of those, the lack of the foundational fixed-wing experience may prove a challenge that resource and TTT-limited FITUs may not be able to overcome.

As some dirty hippie once said: “we shall see”

 

[Yardstick]

Hi, current T-6 FITU IP here.

When we train new IPs coming from helo land we absolutely rely on their ~70 hours in T-6s as a foundation for teaching them how to safely operate, then safely instruct in these aircraft. After all, it was their primary trainer. They’ve already solo’d the damn thing a few times.

A helo-only pilot with good hands and a brain that can think faster than 120 KIAS will probably be ok without the fixed-wing time. But for those that lack one or both of those, the lack of the foundational fixed-wing experience may prove a challenge that resource and TTT-limited FITUs may not be able to overcome.

As some dirty hippie once said: “we shall see”

Cook him, king

 

[FlyNavy03]

I think an advantage the Navy has long had over Army pilots is that we make better aviators, not just helo pilots...

I love the Navy, but I've flown with a lot of Army pilots in my day and I'm not sure I've seen any evidence that this is inherently true. What are you basing that on?

 

[FlyNavy03]

Hi, current T-6 FITU IP here...

You bring up a lot of good points. I'm not denying that COPT-R presents a lot of challenges, many of which we can't fully predict right now. Any new program always does.

The bottom line is that while it's not perfect, COPT-R is the only solution we have right now to take some of the load off the T-6. The problem's gotten big enough that ignoring it isn't an option anymore. Believe it or not, nothing is being said on here that wasn't said in the N7 office at CNATRA when we were discussing COPT-R. To paraphrase Winston Churchill, "[COPT-R] is the worst [solution] except for all those other [solutions]..."

Like I said before, if someone on here has a better solution I know for a fact that CNATRA and CNAF would really appreciate your input.

 

[FlyNavy03]

Really, though, I'm not here to start a salty-dog debate about the merits of COPT-R. I know it's new and scary but unless one of you is Vice Admiral Cheever in disguise, nothing that's said on here is going to effect the future of the program. It's here, and it's going to continue for at least the next 5 years.

The entire reason I came here was because I saw that there were questions being posted by SMAs about aspects of COPT-R that I actually can control, like what the day-to-day training looks like and other admin and logistical concerns. If someone has those questions I'd be happy to answer them.

 

[klamsy]

You bring up a lot of good points. I'm not denying that COPT-R presents a lot of challenges, many of which we can't fully predict right now. Any new program always does.

The bottom line is that while it's not perfect, COPT-R is the only solution we have right now to take some of the load off the T-6. The problem's gotten big enough that ignoring it isn't an option anymore. Believe it or not, nothing is being said on here that wasn't said in the N7 office at CNATRA when we were discussing COPT-R. To paraphrase Winston Churchill, "[COPT-R] is the worst [solution] except for all those other [solutions]..."

Like I said before, if someone on here has a better solution I know for a fact that CNATRA and CNAF would really appreciate your input.

I think the frustration, as someone on the other end of the training continuum, is the vibe (whether its accurate or not) that CNATRA is cranking out winged aviators and kicking the can down to the fleet to fix inexperienced or subpar pilots. If this program sucks, the consequences won't be felt by CNATRA directly and won't truly pop up for a couple years. I would argue the tell is not an advanced NSS or getting to wings, but farther success in the form of advanced qualifications and time to train in the fleet. For me, someone being a good helicopter pilot is the bare minimum for entry because I need them to do that while also being a FAC(A) or AMC.

As someone who now is only required to have a 120 knot mind, I think there was tremendous value in my fixed wing time. I went into primary wanting RW and selected RW, but if I were a 2ndLt today I would NOT do COPT-R and I would not advise an SNA to pursue it.
20 hours for someone who graduates flight training with ~200-ish hours I would argue is also significant. That's 10-15 (whatever, I can't remember how long a T-6 sortie was) reps of going through all of the communications and mechanics of getting out to the training area and doing the thing for someone who has almost no flight hours. It's not nothing. 20 hours in a fleet aircraft is also significantly more expensive in an environment with different resource constraints than flight school....it's not as simple as saying "that's a month!"

Like, I get it, I am the product of a syllabus that was designed to generate a minimum viable product of competence to progress through the FRS and the fleet (as we all are!). If we had all the time and money in the world, it'd be great for RW SNAs to get like 300 hours before wings, but that is just not realistic. Call me an old lady yelling at clouds if you want because I don't have a good solution either beyond waving a magic wand to fix T-6 production issues, I just am skeptical.

 

[DanMa1156]

That's a topic worthy of its own thread.

I think it was 2021 when they cut the VT/HT orders to 30 months, including the FITU/HITU. There's a small, tin-foil-hat-wearing part of me that wonders if part of the reason they did that is to prevent too many people from getting to 2000 hours - the magic number for most decent civilian helo jobs - and thus reduce their incentive to get out of the military.

I think even earlier than that. Mine were 30 including the HITU and that would have been ~2016. One of my peers had 27 month orders to make disassociated! The Skipper straight up told him on check in that there was no viable way for him to compete because functionally his peers were already 3 to 6 months ahead of him in terms of producing students.

 

[FlyNavy03]

I think the frustration, as someone on the other end of the training continuum...

Again, you make very good points. In fact, your post reads almost verbatim like some of the emails between the Deputy Commandant for Aviation's office and CNATRA when they were getting the Marines to participate in COPT-R.

Like I said, though, as imperfect as it it, COPT-R is still the best - and honestly only viable - solution to our current training woes that we have. I agree that there will be unintended consequences down the road, but in the end we'll do what we always do. Adapt and overcome. Semper Gumby.

 

[MGoBrew11]

Eh...more like Bush 43.

ENS winger from the Obama years here.

 

[hscs]

I love the Navy, but I've flown with a lot of Army pilots in my day and I'm not sure I've seen any evidence that this is inherently true. What are you basing that on?

I’ve seen it but more in the IFR ability and ability to be flexible. They also lack some of the authority that we do in 3710.

 

[FlyNavy03]

I’ve seen it but more in the IFR ability and ability to be flexible. They also lack some of the authority that we do in 3710.

You're right that Army pilots tend to lag behind us when it comes to IFR, but I would argue that has more to do with us spending most of our time over featureless terrain, like water, than it does with how we train. I'm just saying that some of the best pilots I've ever flown with are former Army, as are some of the worst. The same could be said for every branch of the military, including foreign pilots and even straight-stick civilians.

 

[FlyNavy03]

ENS winger from the Obama years here.

What did you have to give the Devil to make that happen?