USMA then jets

AF, Navy, and Army pilots who usually cannot handle the rigors of deployment but enjoy the mission, transfer to the CG where they can continue to fly but have a more agreeable home life. They too will remain until retirement, again decreasing the turnover rate somewhat.
Click to expand...

I have never met an AF pilot who left the AF for the CG (no insult LITS). When they leave due to wanting to be home they go commercial, regadless of being a fighter or tanker. I do know of 3 guys that left the Navy and joined the AF after their Navy committment was over for that exact reason.

Again, a percentage formula requires two inputs. We know the top number but how many truly attempted to be in the top few because they were driven to fly jets?
Click to expand...

The way the system works at UPT is that the top grads pick 1st and they go down the list, just like the SA. So it does not matter whether you want to fly heavies or fighters you strive to be the number 1 grad so you can get the aircraft you want. There are people who believe the C-5 mission is bettr than the F-15 and fight to be on top to get the C-5.

You are correct we don't know statisticlly how many number 1s request heavies. However, the bottom 10% is still going to be shown the door, and thus, the dream of flying has ended. That is the true point.

If you look around the AFA threads check out their monikers, you will notice an interesting commonality there are alot tied to fighters. Many want to become astronauts (got to go fighters than). There is a mentality in the flying world that if you are a fighter pilot you were the best because of how hard it is to get in. I have several friends that were commanders at Columbus and Del Rio, most f these commanders are ex-fighter guys...don't you think that on a Friday night at the squadron hooch they are telling their old war stories about flying fighters over hostile air and how cool it was. These younguns are motivated to do that.

As far as not being able to pull 5 G's well, that pilot might be facing another issue all together, and it could be medical. Nobody expects them to pull more than 5 G's before going to the centrifuge, they are taught how to do this to their body. When Bullet first entered after being tracked for fighters he went to Almogordo, the 1st time he did 5, by the end he was up to 8 or 9. The trainers direct them and teach them, they just don't through you in for a spin. They actually have academics on it. You keep blacking out at 5 after training you either aren't following directions or it is medical. I have seen guys medically dq'd because they got to FTU and kept vomiting...notice FTU, because that's when you really start pulling the G's, thus they elected fighters over heavies in the first place.

You do realize right now that many cadets are fearful and upset that they could get a predator. They will be deemed a pilot, wear the bag, but it will be from a video control room and not inside of a jet. However, you will also see in the future cadets electing to go this route on purpose just for the reasons you have stated earlier. The only key is they still have to make it through UPT...they still have to be qualified and graduate, which means actually landing a TWEET. You wash out and it doesn't matter that you would be flying a desk, your are still gone. Thus, in the end that dream is not a given either and if you are electing to go to the AFA for only that dream, you may find yourself upset in 5 yrs from I-DAY, when the commander calls you in and says sorry the AF no longer nees your services.

Right now, I can tell you of 3 people all at SJ in the last 18 months that were given the boot out of the AF. (I am pretty sure the STrike isn't the only FTU to incur those numbers) Not only did their dream end, but when the military downsizes and with the expected cuts, they do not enforce the commitment, you are seen as dead weight and no need to keep you, especially since you do not have a full commission. Here again, this is why going to the AFA and getting an amazing education is very important.
 
Last edited:
First off, over half of each graduating AFA class is selected for aviation. But that is only half the percentage formula. How many wanted it? No idea. Secondly, selection choice is dependent upon some form of class standing.
Click to expand...

Very true, it is about class standing, however, have you ever heard of a cadet saying CRAP I got UPT? What is more common isCRAP I got PA!

Again that is why you need to have a back up plan. The chances that they will run out of cadets before UPT slots is slim. The rule of thumb for the AFA if you want a UPT slot you should be able to get one, unless you are graduating near the bottom. I have heard of them running out of UPT slots, but never not being able to fill them.

In your scenario of being forced to take it, means they should have taken the ROTC route because far fewer UPT slots come out and they could then be guaranteed the job they really wanted. BTW at our sons det, this is very true, most went this route with the intention of never requesting UPT, but going into engineering.
 
oldgrad said:
LITS, I have no idea where you and Pima have ‘been’ and what you have ‘done’ that bears any relevance whatsoever on this discussion or what I have done that does the same so I see this simply as an attempt to draw the thread off topic and into a personal ‘flame’ war. I will not participate..




This is an example of the negativism to which I am speaking. Mixing apples and oranges, resulting in pig slop. From it, one could be led to believe that the CG, with only 5% going aviation, is the best choice for aviation in the sea-going service. Not true. Around 30% of USNA grads are selected for aviation. So, how does the CG obtain its aviators. First off, they require the majority of officers to serve a couple of years on a cutter before being accepted at flight school. Those extra few years mean that once those selectees are winged, they are closer to retirement and will be more likely to do so. Also, the CG depends heavily on inter-service transfers for aviators. I don’t know the exact percentages but it used to be about half and, running the numbers now, apparently it is close to the same. AF, Navy, and Army pilots who usually cannot handle the rigors of deployment but enjoy the mission, transfer to the CG where they can continue to fly but have a more agreeable home life. They too will remain until retirement, again decreasing the turnover rate somewhat.



Another example of the negativism to which I have referred. “Flip a coin”. Fifty percent, correct? Two major fallacies here. First off, over half of each graduating AFA class is selected for aviation. But that is only half the percentage formula. How many wanted it? No idea. Secondly, selection choice is dependent upon some form of class standing. For a “flip a coin” attitude, one would have to assume that they have absolutely no control over their class standing. Not true at all.

So, to this lopsided coin, we add the fact that from what I read recently in an Aviation Weekly that with the new T-6 trainer, 97% of primary students make it through successfully. Quite a more positive picture than a 25% double coin flip, huh? And primary training is historically where most fail.

Now for the third fallacy, we can throw in another false negativism:



Again, a percentage formula requires two inputs. We know the top number but how many truly attempted to be in the top few because they were driven to fly jets? No idea.

Several other basic concept of human nature applies here. The aviation pipeline is somewhat self-selecting. Many will decide either through familiarization flights or the battery of tests that aviation is not for them and go elsewhere to seek a career. Additionally, after primary there are those who find that they enjoy flying but not necessarily upside down pulling 5Gs and opt for helos, heavies, or patrol planes. Others realistically realize that they don’t have the mettle to be fighter pilots and opt out voluntarily. Others dream of these platforms initially. Bottom line, the 10% means nothing if we don’t know how many really tried for fighters.

This brings up another concept of human nature. If one does not want fighters, will he work as hard for a top 10% grade as one who does or will he do the gentlemanly thing and step aside and allow those for whom it means a great deal, fight it out?

Bottom line, LITS, where can I get one of your lopsided coins? I might make a little money gambling with it against a few unsuspecting Coasties.
Click to expand...

Your numbers are all wrong Oldgrad, but that's to be expected, they aren't "up to date" and don't reflect anything that you haven't read in Aviation Weekly.

Interesting time, I was aboard USS Iwo Jima off of Souda Bay, Greece not too long ago, and you know what I had? Disillusioned Marine helo pilots on a Navy ship asking how to join the Coast Guard. Their complaint wasn't "time away from home" for the "vigors of deployment", but a frustration with being in "training mode 90% of their careers". They wanted action and they appreciated the mission of the Coast Guard. I guess they wanted a challenge when landing on a ship.

It's not a surprise that my point of view would be "negative" to you. However, when your unsuspecting readers find that all of their planning didn't prepare them for not getting a flight billet, and that having not considered that, they must now do something they will hate for 5 years, that's when they'll figure it out. You have yet to say how you've "been there, done that" yourself. Please, endulge us. And I assume you know how many are still using the T-34s, right? I assume, you're assuming the T-6 is all over the place in P-cola, but I wouldn't make that assumption if I were you.
 
LineInTheSand said:
Your numbers are all wrong Oldgrad, but that's to be expected, they aren't "up to date" and don't reflect anything that you haven't read in Aviation Weekly.
Click to expand...

Please 'endulge'(sic) us.

LineInTheSand said:
Interesting time, I was aboard USS Iwo Jima off of Souda Bay, Greece not too long ago, and you know what I had? Disillusioned Marine helo pilots on a Navy ship asking how to join the Coast Guard. Their complaint wasn't "time away from home" for the "vigors of deployment", but a frustration with being in "training mode 90% of their careers". They wanted action and they appreciated the mission of the Coast Guard. I guess they wanted a challenge when landing on a ship.
Click to expand...

Good point. Marines are a significant part of CG aviation. I apologize to them for omitting them from my initial comments.

LineInTheSand said:
And I assume you know how many are still using the T-34s, right? I assume, you're assuming the T-6 is all over the place in P-cola, but I wouldn't make that assumption if I were you.
Click to expand...

Don't assume. It might get you in trouble. My observations were a continuation of your AFA comments. I was referring specifically to the AF. With the 'whistling s**tcan", there was a 92% graduation rate. Not substantially different. However, with the T-6 glass cockpit, advanced training success rates are also enhanced. So washouts in the AF are down significantly. That was my point.
 
Let's not forget the Marines...any store needs the "mens department" right?

Again, how exactly have you been there and done that Oldgrad? Were you on ships? Planes? A desk?

I'm just wondering.
 
Last edited:
Washing out is still about 10%, they same it has been for decades. Our friend just left Columbus and it hasn't changed.
 
LineInTheSand said:
Let's not forget the Marines...any store needs the "mens department" right?

Again, how exactly have you been there and done that Oldgrad? Were you on ships? Planes? A desk?

I'm just wondering.
Click to expand...

Folks- wandering way off target. Reel it in. We don't have a need to have everyone's resume posted, and all have some valid points that have been made. (To summarize- set goals and follow your heart and the path most likely to help you achieve them- in this case a path that has the highest probablity of leading to a cockpit with a single seat in it). It is however also a fact that there is nothing that is 100% certain and certainly not pilot slots- so as with all other plans- a prudent indvidual should review the possible implications if you aren't able to achieve that goal and prepare accordingly.
Let's continue to make these points without insulting each other and causing the thread to get closed.
 
Thanks Bruno, for me in my polish way thart is all I want the cadets to understand...no goal is 100% GUARANTEED, just like getting into the SA these cadets made back up plans...do the same while you spend 4 yrs at the SA.

If you get the dream, GREAT. If you don't and have a back up plan you will be much happier and more positive in serving your committment

Nobody here wants to see the dream not be realized, we are just wanting every cadet to realize that the road may take a sudden turn and be prepared for it
 
Maybe we should start a resume thread, just to have an idea of who is best qualified to talk about what. There are a lot of great posters here, that many of us don't know much about, or how much their careers covered.
 
LineInTheSand said:
Let's not forget the Marines...any store needs the "mens department" right?
QUOTE]

Very Funny LITS....

Reminds me of when I told my Dad I went Marines... coming from an all Navy family, with the only exceptions being 1 Army in WWI and 2 Army in WWII, the Marines were a bit of a shock.

My Dad (Navy Gunner) and my oldest Brother (Nuke Subs) were both home when I gave the news. My Dad and Brother confronted me and said "You know the Marines are a just a Dept of the Navy, Right?"

They both dropped to the floor laughing so hard when I responded with "Yes Sir, the Mens Dept."


Thanks for the fond memory.

JB
Click to expand...
 
While I'm not really in favor of a "Resume" thread; I totally understand your angle. The biggest problem with ANY FORUM; is the anonymity of the posters. Usually it take quite a number of verifiable posts to gain confidence in what a person says. Some times it direct experience. E.g. A candidate in online asking questions for a year trying to get in; now they are in their 2-3 year as a cadet and has continued posting.

The point is; there's a lot of different experiences here. There are some that are retired military; both commissioned and non-commissioned officers. There are some that attended the various academies and some who came in ROTC/OTS/Enlisted. There are some that have sons/daughters currently at the academy or recently graduated. There are some that are in different levels of applications; from approved, to disapproved, to resubmitting, etc... And there's totally different experiences in different careers in the military; no experience directly in the military; and so on. There's also so who ARE ALO's; some who WERE ALO's; and some that work directly WITH ALO's. And then there are numerous combinations of those above. Then there are possibly some that stayed at a Holiday Inn Express one night. The thing is; it's sometimes difficult; especially for a new lurker/poster to know who's opinions/comments are worth a darn. The best advice I can give; which doesn't matter WHICH category I might fit into above; is to take whatever advice is given you and validate it yourself. If you are an applicant; contact your ALO or Counselor. If you are a current cadet; contact your AOC. If you've got verifiable experiences with a poster that you trust; then ask her/him if they can validate information provided by another poster that you aren't familiar with. If you're a parent; and your son/daughter is a cadet; ask them to ask someone to verify.

Anyway; forums are difficult at times. There are a lot of opinions put out. Some times the opinions are just that. Sometimes they are facts. Sometimes they WERE facts and no longer are. Sometimes it's a fact for one academy and not for another. Seek answers for verify the information. Don't take anything that anyone says here; including me; as gospel. Things change; rules change; each state has different academy procedures; each branch is different; etc... Validate all opinions, suggestions, and advice. later.... mike.....
 
Spot on.

Trust but verify.

By the way, I love the Holiday Inn Express line... forgot all about those commercials until I read your post.

He's right folks. Just because someone may have done a particular job or what not, doesn't mean that you should put your future into only their advice.

Me for example, I was ground combat in the USMC, but that doesn't make me the best person to tell you about getting jets after USNA. The only wings I got are jump wings. An ALO would be the right person to talk to about that, or your BGO.

But LITS brings up a good point though also.... it's always nice to know who your'e talking to or chatting with. I think the forum has a spot to put some info in your profile if you so choose.

JB
 
LITS

Just go to User CP, then choose Edit your Details, and you can put a little blurb about yourself.

Just be careful what you ask for, you may get it.

My experience with forums is that once you start credentialing everyone, or yourself, there are always those who think they can squash someone else because they held more rank, or a more "impressive" MOS, or some sort of thing.

The forum already has a place to put a blurb, in the User CP as mentioned above, but just be careful pushing others to fill it in, and we should all be of the mindset that all persons who serve are honorable and deserve respect.

I'm just afraid that it's going to open a can of worms if what people write will be compared to a litmus test of sorts.

I saw more than a couple of posts that approached this line. I was involved in one about recruiters without even realizing how close I came to crossing it until later.

Just my .02 cents worth. In todays economy, I think it's more like my .001 cents worth.

JB
 
Simply abiding by the CoC in most forums should suffice:

It is our desire that all information provided in response to those questions be accurate and that the threads not drift off-topic. As such, please reply only if you are certain of your answer. If your answer is based on one or more conditions, then please state them. Providing links to official or otherwise trustworthy sources is particularly encouraged.

If provided information is found or considered to be less than accurate, we will either mark the information as questionable or innacurate, or else edit the post accordingly. This is all being done with the desire to ensure that applicants and parents receive only the best information possible. The Moderators of this forum are particularly well-qualified to perform this task, and have been specifically selected for that ability.
Click to expand...
Hardly anyone does this - even when they challenge another posters information or publish their own "correct" answers.
Since this forum attracts students who are under age, I think it would be inappropriate to encourage posters to divulge personal information.
LITS if you would like to publish your resume you may do it on your Profile page or alter your signature.
I would be skeptical - most people pad their resume's for jobs. I can only imagine the padding that would occur on an anonymous internet forum.
Hopefully, most folks have the common sense they were born with and can differentiate between those who produce and offer good information and those who just like to crow.
 
Good Info.

Leave it to a "MOM" to make total and complete sense out of this.:smile::smile:
 
Alright, this is almost hilarious.
First of all- you cannot possibly start a legitimate "resume" thread. I could easily make up a new screen name called Joeafaclass97 and post a gigantic resume that anyone will eat up. That is just absolutely ridiculous.

Second- I LOATHE when people bring up other people's backgrounds into a conversation especially when they know absolutely nothing about that person. Not to be rude, but I take every single one of your (in general) opinions with GALLONS of salt. Everyone of you might as well be a peer my age. (Including the moderators...again...no offense.) Until I meet you, and are able to know you more than I know you right now, I will treat you as such. This goes back to that thing where not all doctors graduated from Harvard are geniuses. (We all know that Yale turned up a questionble character that somehow made it to the white house).

Third- LITS' statistics are screwed up, from what I have researched about the Air Force Academy and the stats that Oldgrad gave are NOT outdated, and it is completely true that 100% of the class ISN'T eligible for UPT or doesn't want UPT. You cannot assume that because 60% of the candidates got a shot at flying, that the remaining 40% were mad. Also, someone that absolutely wants flying, and is physically able to his junior year WILL try his best to be in that group of graduates that will get a spot. Otherwise it is 100% their fault for not keeping up with their side of the deal.

Fourth:


Just_A_Mom said:
Simply abiding by the CoC in most forums should suffice:


Hardly anyone does this - even when they challenge another posters information or publish their own "correct" answers.
Since this forum attracts students who are under age, I think it would be inappropriate to encourage posters to divulge personal information.
LITS if you would like to publish your resume you may do it on your Profile page or alter your signature.
I would be skeptical - most people pad their resume's for jobs. I can only imagine the padding that would occur on an anonymous internet forum.
Hopefully, most folks have the common sense they were born with and can differentiate between those who produce and offer good information and those who just like to crow.
Click to expand...


(although I take part in this, you're absolutely right)

THANK YOU JUST A MOM. All of us here are speaking from what we THINK we know. I will not point fingers, but I read in one of the replies that someone DIDN'T MEET AN AF PILOT THAT DECIDED TO FLY FOR CG and so therefore THAT SORT OF STUFF CANNOT POSSIBLY EXIST. (??????????) Alright so, if I close my eyes, nobody's really alive and the world is just completely dark? WOW. That right there is some legitimate evidence to back up a claim.

I just think that many of us are not GETTING THE POINT we have arrived to countless times in this stupid discussion:

YES- NOTHING IS CERTAIN, BUT NOTHING IS IMPOSSIBLE. WE SHOULD LOOK AT THINGS IN EITHER A POSITIVE WAY (glass half full) OR HOW CC SAID (look at things for what they are) How about we (including me) leave it at that and stop attacking each other?
 
I may need to start a Lightning Rod thread, and caution future cadets whose names have been divulged on putting too much "ammo" out there for their future cadre.

Good advice JAM.

unitedstatesAFA2013....having been through more than one assignment process, I'm going to put some more weight into what I've said than in what you hope to see in 4.5 years. I assume once you get there you will begin to understand. And although I'm sure you have plenty of salt there to take, you're going to want to remember that MANY of the people you want to contradict have already done what you hope to do in the future. So while you may have some opinions, it is important for you to remember, everything you know up to the point you check in and some big mean cadre gets in your face, you learned from someone else. That first reality check can be quite the eye opener, trust me on that one.
 
unitedstatesAFA2013 said:
YES- NOTHING IS CERTAIN, BUT NOTHING IS IMPOSSIBLE. WE SHOULD LOOK AT THINGS IN EITHER A POSITIVE WAY (glass half full) OR HOW CC SAID (look at things for what they are) How about we (including me) leave it at that and stop attacking each other?
Click to expand...

No, that would be kidding yourself. There are PLENTY of impossible things, especially relating to health, billet options and crossing over....

I don't really want to burst the fantasy bubble, but this isn't Utopia. Not all things are possible. Reality check? Hopefully not, but based on the statement above, maybe.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top