Article

2018-04-02 Home Front: Culture Wars

Air Force May Approve Enlisted Pilots for First Time in 75 Years

h/t Instapundit
...It has been decades since enlisted airmen had the chance to sit in the cockpit. But as the Air Force faces the greatest pilot shortages since its inception, service leaders are contemplating a return to a model that includes enlisted pilots. A Rand Corp. study, set to be completed this month, is exploring the feasibility of bringing back a warrant officer corps for that purpose. And another, separate Air Force study is examining, in part, whether enlisted pilots could benefit from new high-tech training that leverages artificial intelligence and simulation.

With these moves, the Air Force is inching just a few steps closer to someday getting enlisted airmen back in the cockpit, on a formal basis, for the first time since World War II.
One more step to combating the tyranny of "higher" education.

Posted by g(r)omgoru 2018-04-02 04:57|| || Front Page|| [11140 views ] Top

#1 But as the Air Force faces the greatest pilot shortages since its inception

A situation created by the Air Force, no one else.

Posted by Besoeker 2018-04-02 06:46|| 2018-04-02 06:46|| Front Page Top

#2 ...When I read this yesterday, I quadruple-checked to make sure I wasn't falling for another date-appropriate story, but it appears to be accurate.

The USAF has, for the last seventy-three years, been wedded to the idea of the college-educated, commissioned pilot to the point where I firmly believed that any effort to change that would have led to the Chief of Staff His Own Self slitting every tire and throwing a thermite grenade in every cockpit before they allowed it. I go back far enough to remember a similar recommendation in the 80s, during the 'pilot shortage' of that era - IIRC only about 10-15%, depending on the aircraft type, and that in a much larger Air Force. At that time, USAF faced the idea of Warrant Officers with roughly the same attitude as the Devil being doused with Holy Water, and even then the report only suggested bringing them back to fly transports and helos.

The problem today is considerably more complex:

*The pilot shortage isn't a 'manageable' 10-15% - the USAF is admitting that only 35% of eligible pilots are staying in, and it may be getting worse. As a matter of daily ops, we are currently short something like 1200 pilots.

*There is no 'pilot career path' any more - years of administrative bloat and PC requirements have created a situation where what we actually have are thousands of highly trained administrative specialists who are occasionally allowed to fly airplanes.

*Finally, although the Fighter Mafia thought they had finally triumphed over the Bomber Mafia in the early 90s, they didn't know that as drawdowns continued - and we shrank the force even further to afford fewer and fewer aircraft that we can't fly anyways - the combat pilots would eventually be outnumbered by the transport/helo drivers and the admin types...and they're the ones making the rules these days, to the distinct detriment of the combat guys.

I hope that if the report suggests bringing back WOs, it's not dismissed out of hand - it may well be the last hope My Beloved Service has to have enough pilots in time to face an unpleasant world.

Mike

Posted by Mike Kozlowski 2018-04-02 07:03|| 2018-04-02 07:03|| Front Page Top

#3 Mike - Are you sure it's not a created shortage and a gender flushing exercise?

Posted by Besoeker 2018-04-02 07:10|| 2018-04-02 07:10|| Front Page Top

#4 Given that most mid-grade NCOs have to have a bachelors degree to be promotion eligible these days, I suspect the college educated spanking new 2LT of 1950 was probably no better than a 2017 NCO with 7 to 10 years of service already under his/her belt.

Posted by Procopius2k 2018-04-02 07:30|| 2018-04-02 07:30|| Front Page Top

#5 Okay, you guys that know of which you speak.

What good does a college degree do for a combat pilot? Seriously, are there women's studies issues, anthropology issues or even STEM issues that couldn't be spun up on a training basis?

thanks

Posted by AlanC 2018-04-02 07:39|| 2018-04-02 07:39|| Front Page Top

#6 What good does a college degree do for a combat pilot?

Operating multi-millon dollar aircraft capable of delivering nuclear weapons is a bit more complex than carrying around an M4 as an infantryman. You really do want 'your best and brightest.'

Posted by Besoeker 2018-04-02 07:42|| 2018-04-02 07:42|| Front Page Top

#7 The skills required to do well in school are the same as those required by pilots? Why aren't all our pilots Asians then?

The Army has warrant helicopter pilots and they do just fine.

Posted by Lumpy Jones3477 2018-04-02 08:02|| 2018-04-02 08:02|| Front Page Top

#8 You really do want 'your best and brightest.' I agree. But what does a college degree have to do with that?

Posted by Anguper Hupomosing9418 2018-04-02 09:28|| 2018-04-02 09:28|| Front Page Top

#9 AH, you beat me to it.

Posted by AlanC 2018-04-02 09:29|| 2018-04-02 09:29|| Front Page Top

#10 #5 Okay, you guys that know of which you speak.

What good does a college degree do for a combat pilot? Seriously, are there women's studies issues, anthropology issues or even STEM issues that couldn't be spun up on a training basis?

thanks
Posted by: AlanC 2018-04-02 07:39

Alan,

The overwhelming majority of USAF pilots today have an Engineering degree of one sort or t'other, and most of them are Aeronautical or Mechanical - the USAF feels that in order to properly fly the airplane, you have to be able to understand why and how it flies. This has changed drastically since the old days - I knew one of the first F-15 pilots with 1TFW at Langley, and his degree was in Theatrical Arts.

The thing to keep in mind is that the US military gets its officer training philosophy from the British - the well-educated gentleman. (or, of course, these days a well-educated Lady.) It's going to take a hell of a jolt to change that, and I suspect that even if the USAF accepts the RAND report, they will still insist on the college degree requirement.

Mike

Posted by Mike Kozlowski 2018-04-02 09:50|| 2018-04-02 09:50|| Front Page Top

#11 Okay Mike I can see that. However when I think of British Gentlemen in the services I immediately flash on Kim Philby and the Cambridge 5.

Given the indoctrinalization trend in US Unis. I'm afraid that there is no distinctions to draw.

Posted by AlanC 2018-04-02 10:14|| 2018-04-02 10:14|| Front Page Top

#12 Hey, if you can make it through 4 years waking up nearly every morning after hitting the frat bar/club and making the grades, you too have completed one of the rites of passages. /sarc (well, sort of)

Posted by Procopius2k 2018-04-02 10:36|| 2018-04-02 10:36|| Front Page Top

#13

when I think of British Gentlemen in the services I immediately flash on Kim Philby and the Cambridge 5.

Given the indoctrinalization trend in US Unis. I'm afraid that there is no distinctions to draw.

I have the same concern. Whenever I even hear "best and brightest" my teeth are on edge.

Posted by Anguper Hupomosing9418 2018-04-02 10:43|| 2018-04-02 10:43|| Front Page Top

#14 Warrior. Soldier. Officer. Three different Skill Sets described by using the following examples from ancient Rome: Gladiator (Warrior), Soldier (Centurion), and Legate (Officer).
The Air Force establishment seems to believe that by some mysterious alchemy that an Act of Congress can make a pilot an 'Officer and a Gentleman' when most of the pilots Just. Want. To. Fly. Jet. Aircraft. (...and in many cases honorable serve their country, of course)
The irony is that as they focus on being more and more "Transformational" and "Network Centric" there is less and less reason for pilot/officer/warriors to exist.

Posted by magpie 2018-04-02 12:56|| 2018-04-02 12:56|| Front Page Top

#15 the combat pilots would eventually be outnumbered by the transport/helo drivers and the admin types

Don't forget the Loggie pilots romanced by commercial carriers, Mike. FedEx, DHL, et. al. are all replacing their aging boomers.

Posted by Skidmark 2018-04-02 14:12|| 2018-04-02 14:12|| Front Page Top

#16 So, what do safe spaces, microaggressions, and trigger warnings have to do with flying an iPhone?

Posted by Sock Puppet of Doom 2018-04-02 14:49|| 2018-04-02 14:49|| Front Page Top

#17 And what about drone pilots? I agree that to fly a high performance fighter you need to be in excellent physical condition and have excellent eyesight.

However, to fly a drone, you still need to be smart enough to absorb the math behind flight physics. But you are unlikely to need to be able to withstand 7-9Gs, and spot a gnat on the ground from 35000 feet. So why not let us wimps fly drones?

When I was a kid, I wanted to be a Navy fighter pilot. Then I got my first pair of glasses after 8th grade, and barely passed phys ed. So there went the dream. Of course, I also didn't have the obnoxious macho jock personality that a lot of fighter pilots have, but still...

Posted by Rambler in Virginia 2018-04-02 21:42|| 2018-04-02 21:42|| Front Page Top

22:21 DooDahMan
22:20 DooDahMan
21:54 trailing wife
21:25 Anomalous Sources
21:05 swksvolFF
19:54 Rambler
19:53 Rambler
19:17 Pancho Poodle8452
18:47 Pancho Poodle8452
18:32 technochitlin
18:19 Angstrom
17:48 49 Pan
17:38 Lord Garth
17:29 alanc
17:09 BrerRabbit
16:13 Pancho Poodle8452
16:08 Beavis
16:08 Lord Garth
15:52 Lord Garth
15:28 trailing wife
15:26 Pancho Poodle8452
15:26 trailing wife
14:34 Frank G
14:28 Melancholic