Pilot shortage?

[Python]

and yet they reject very highly qualified applicants.....just sayin' ....

^ what he said.
There is zero problem of accession. It is only retention.

 

[johnboyA6E]

There is zero problem of accession. It is only retention.

I don't doubt that, but wondering what is the rationale behind lowering the ASTB standards?

USNA mids are told the min score went from 5/6/6 to 4/5/5

 

[insanebikerboy]

USNA mids are told the min score went from 5/6/6 to 4/5/5

I’m hoping someone checks my memory but I want to say those (4/5/5) were the requirements for pilot when I was at USNA. This was circa 2004.

 

[Triumph_MAC]

I’m hoping someone checks my memory but I want to say those (4/5/5) were the requirements for pilot when I was at USNA. This was circa 2004.

I’m merely an OCS aviation candidate hopeful so I can’t personally speak on what the USNA requirements are or were, but the program authorization for SNA and SNFO dated October 2019 shows 5/6/6.

 

[Swanee]

I don't doubt that, but wondering what is the rationale behind lowering the ASTB standards?

USNA mids are told the min score went from 5/6/6 to 4/5/5

I suppose for some reason the powers that be want more USNA grads to be eligible to go to flight school.

Or they want to marry up with the lower scores needed for USMC?

 

[johnboyA6E]

this change was just announced in the past month

the standard is the same across the board for OCS, NROTC and USNA as i understand it

haven't been able to find an official source for it though

 

[SynixMan]

this change was just announced in the past month

the standard is the same across the board for OCS, NROTC and USNA as i understand it

haven't been able to find an official source for it though

Regardless, I don't expect the quality of people winging to go down. The standard doesn't change, but maybe attrition will tick up.

 

[zippy]

I don't doubt that, but wondering what is the rationale behind lowering the ASTB standards?

USNA mids are told the min score went from 5/6/6 to 4/5/5

Probably to make a wider pool of applicants.

 

[HAL Pilot]

Probably to make a wider pool of applicants.

I.e. diversity.

 

[robav8r]

I.e. diversity.

I wonder how “equity” will fit in to the training command . . .

 

[Tycho_Brohe]

DanMa1156 PERS got caught with their hand in the cookie jar violating the DoDI. I remember one of the PERS-43 briefs at Hook or NHA where they said something along the lines of “yeah so turns out we can’t shorten people’s shore tours to make them retainable, so we ‘fixed that glitch’”. That was the 18/19 timeframe, and I believe folks showing now are all getting what they should.

Someone at my command just got told, after previously being told that they'd be approved to extend shore tour to their MSR, that they are instead detaching two months early to obligate a sea tour. They put a clause in shore tour orders:

"SHORE DUTY ORDERS WRITTEN FOR 36 MONTHS TO COMPLY WITH DODI 1315.18. PERS-43 HAS THE AUTHORITY TO DETACH AN OFFICER BETWEEN 24-36 MONTHS FOR CAREER MILESTONES AND PRIORITY SEA DUTY REQUIREMENTS."

I looked through DODI 1315.18, DODI 1315.7, and several MPM references, and nothing I've found so far gives PERS the authority to detach someone that early. There are stated exceptions to the 3-year shore tour, but none of them look like "we need more bodies on the boat." There's an MPM that mentions -1/+3 as a standard buffer, but that's about it. So from what I can see, them writing "I am authorized" in the orders is about equivalent to the pitcher from Benchwarmers whose birth certificate was a piece of paper saying "I am 12."
(Also the Ron Swanson reference, but it's too hard to get the gif up on my work computer)

 

[Brett327]

and yet they reject very highly qualified applicants.....just sayin' ....

Pro tip - When you have absolutely no idea what you’re talking about, that’s usually a good time to keep your mouth shut.

 

[scoolbubba]

Pro tip - When you have absolutely no idea what you’re talking about, that’s usually a good time to keep your mouth shut.

You should practice what you preach.

This thread is about pilot shortages. Go to the one about the shortage of NFOs.

 

[sevenhelmet]

You should practice what you preach.

This thread is about pilot shortages. Go to the one about the shortage of NFOs.

This ought to be good...

 

[squorch2]

Someone at my command just got told, after previously being told that they'd be approved to extend shore tour to their MSR, that they are instead detaching two months early to obligate a sea tour. They put a clause in shore tour orders:

"SHORE DUTY ORDERS WRITTEN FOR 36 MONTHS TO COMPLY WITH DODI 1315.18. PERS-43 HAS THE AUTHORITY TO DETACH AN OFFICER BETWEEN 24-36 MONTHS FOR CAREER MILESTONES AND PRIORITY SEA DUTY REQUIREMENTS."

I looked through DODI 1315.18, DODI 1315.7, and several MPM references, and nothing I've found so far gives PERS the authority to detach someone that early. There are stated exceptions to the 3-year shore tour, but none of them look like "we need more bodies on the boat." There's an MPM that mentions -1/+3 as a standard buffer, but that's about it. So from what I can see, them writing "I am authorized" in the orders is about equivalent to the pitcher from Benchwarmers whose birth certificate was a piece of paper saying "I am 12."
(Also the Ron Swanson reference, but it's too hard to get the gif up on my work computer)

Time for an IG. Not kidding.