Good news for RAF Student Pilots:
I thought that the closure of bases like L-o-O was in th ebest interest of families too, keeping them together etc...OK, the married guys will most likely be accompanied but the non-married ones in long-term relationships won't. Families feel isolated enough at Valley, unable to regularly visit their UK family and friends, how is moving the shebang to the States going o make this easier for them?
I know two pilots who went through training together here in the UK from Grobs to Tucs; their paths diverged and one went stateside, the other to Valley. The Valley pilot was only a handful of trips shy of course completion when the stateside guy took his first jet solo.
The valley pilot is now complete in training and doing a proper job, the one in the states is still in training.
Guest
Posts: n/a
bafanguy (#13),
Heavens, no ! But the first "Arnold" Course were the "Lowerclassmen" for the last US Course of "Upperclassmen", and so were treated accordingly as in time immemorial (ie as a baby treats a diaper). There was no animosity against us: they would've treated their own people just the same (West Point, you see).
Heavens, no ! But the first "Arnold" Course were the "Lowerclassmen" for the last US Course of "Upperclassmen", and so were treated accordingly as in time immemorial (ie as a baby treats a diaper). There was no animosity against us: they would've treated their own people just the same (West Point, you see).
"We've dug into the details and analyzed the issue. It really comes down to two areas that we are investing in and focused on," Goldfein said before a House Appropriations Defense subcommittee hearing alongside Wilson. "One is how many pilots we produce and then, two, how many pilots we retain, because you have to get both of those right."
He said the service is on track to reach its 1,400 pilot-per-year goal, but not for another couple of years."
https://www.military.com/daily-news/...th-pilots.html
The Air Force is also planning to move some of its lieutenants to Navy and Marine Corps squadrons ― which Holmes acknowledged have also been struggling with pilot production limitations ― to fly Navy EA-18 Growlers and Marine F-35s.
https://www.airforcetimes.com/news/y...ighter-pilots/
"...Working to increase the training pipeline. The Air Force now produces 1,200 new pilots each year and is working to get that up to 1,400, although officials say it needs to hit 1,600 to keep up.
But even with all those programs, the problem continues to worsen.
https://www.airforcetimes.com/news/y...ar-zone-fight/
Last edited by bafanguy; 28th Sep 2018 at 18:51.
The USAF has to train enough to cover what they identify as a "shortage" and they seem to have a training choke point with system capacity.
That ~12 year commitment looks formidable to someone contemplating a flying career when a civilian route can move a lot faster than that particularly in the current environment (that'll change eventually).
Maybe there's something about candidate suitability in this thread:
USAF Pilot Retention Rates & Bonuses
Join Date: May 2013
Location: Llandudno
Age: 100
Posts: 120
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
bacanguy, I feel that you think that I am advocating a return to hazing, certainly not. We had 20% American Aviation Cadets on our course18 at Terrell. And they regaled us with horror stories of hazing, eating square meals and so on.. within a couple of weeks they were calling themselves and us by their and our, Christian names, swinging their arms when marching and MATES, Lots of us were “adopted” by local families, contacts which carried on until, sadly, their demise. No, Texas will always be dear to me. I was very proud of my RAF Wings, but equally proud of my American Wings, given to me by my Texan Instructor. Thank you!
O28,
No, I certainly didn't think that. I apparently misunderstood a mention of foreign pilots and Texas. I was just reassuring everyone that no group of Brits would receive a hostile environment in Texas or anywhere else here.
The lucky bunch that gets to go on ENJJPT will have a great time. They will receive their instruction with a proper military ethos and they will be wowed by the scale of facilities and high standard of infrastructure on a typical USAF base. They will get a valuable early introduction to the culture and career aspirations of NATO colleagues. Some of them probably won't want to come back !
I will never understand why the RAF didn't fully commit to using ENJJPT when they dismantled a flying training organization that used to be the envy of the world. When I was on the HQ RAFSC Flight Safety Staff, the scale of AOC TU's empire was mind boggling: HQ CFS & School of Refresher Flying at Leeming; FTSs at Cranwell, Linton-on-Ouse, Church Fenton, Valley and Finningley; FSS at Swinderby; and Kemble / Scampton (Red Arrows) + all the RLGs.
ENJJPT Documentary
Recent Graduation Videos - including the wide range of role disposal:
ENJJPT14-02 Graduation Video - a bit more content showing off-duty aspects:
I will never understand why the RAF didn't fully commit to using ENJJPT when they dismantled a flying training organization that used to be the envy of the world. When I was on the HQ RAFSC Flight Safety Staff, the scale of AOC TU's empire was mind boggling: HQ CFS & School of Refresher Flying at Leeming; FTSs at Cranwell, Linton-on-Ouse, Church Fenton, Valley and Finningley; FSS at Swinderby; and Kemble / Scampton (Red Arrows) + all the RLGs.
ENJJPT Documentary
Recent Graduation Videos - including the wide range of role disposal:
ENJJPT14-02 Graduation Video - a bit more content showing off-duty aspects:
Last edited by RAFEngO74to09; 28th Sep 2018 at 22:13.
Perhaps the heads of the RAF are finally beginning to appreciate what replacing the old training system with MFTS has meant?
The use of ENJJPT is an ADDITION to the UKMFTS AJT output. Don’t forget MFTS was designed when we thought we needed far fewer pilots (2010 and before) so what we have right now is just not sufficient if we want to GROW the Typhoon Sqns in number as directed by SDSR 2015.
We have had plenty of RAF students on ENJJPT in the past, so this is a logical step. The only issue is that to get students on the course then the Air Force that is getting a place needs to provide instructors. That is a good and bad thing, as it takes precious pilots from the RAF’s core strength requirement (bad) but it also generates more pilots and tours at Sheppard are likely to be retention-positive for our instructor cadre.
I have an ENJJPT light-weight CWU jacket and it’s still going strong after 20+ years - it’s a prized possesion!
We have had plenty of RAF students on ENJJPT in the past, so this is a logical step. The only issue is that to get students on the course then the Air Force that is getting a place needs to provide instructors. That is a good and bad thing, as it takes precious pilots from the RAF’s core strength requirement (bad) but it also generates more pilots and tours at Sheppard are likely to be retention-positive for our instructor cadre.
I have an ENJJPT light-weight CWU jacket and it’s still going strong after 20+ years - it’s a prized possesion!
Thread Starter
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Banished (twice) to the pointless forest
Posts: 1,558
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The use of ENJJPT is an ADDITION to the UKMFTS AJT output. Don’t forget MFTS was designed when we thought we needed far fewer pilots (2010 and before) so what we have right now is just not sufficient if we want to GROW the Typhoon Sqns in number as directed by SDSR 2015.
We have had plenty of RAF students on ENJJPT in the past, so this is a logical step. The only issue is that to get students on the course then the Air Force that is getting a place needs to provide instructors. That is a good and bad thing, as it takes precious pilots from the RAF’s core strength requirement (bad) but it also generates more pilots and tours at Sheppard are likely to be retention-positive for our instructor cadre.
I have an ENJJPT light-weight CWU jacket and it’s still going strong after 20+ years - it’s a prized possesion!
We have had plenty of RAF students on ENJJPT in the past, so this is a logical step. The only issue is that to get students on the course then the Air Force that is getting a place needs to provide instructors. That is a good and bad thing, as it takes precious pilots from the RAF’s core strength requirement (bad) but it also generates more pilots and tours at Sheppard are likely to be retention-positive for our instructor cadre.
I have an ENJJPT light-weight CWU jacket and it’s still going strong after 20+ years - it’s a prized possesion!
I must have missed a page...
In the 2015 SDSR, three years ago the RAF were told they needed more pilots, yet they closed 208 Squadron, and have now started to re-open it called 25 and basing it where?
So... if they knew before they closed 208, that they needed more pilots than MFTS could deliver, why close 208?
Can anyone point me at a reliable source of figures for:
How many pilots have graduated from Valley in each of the last three years?
How many QFI's have graduated from Valley in the last three years?
If all of the students destined for Valley, and currently there (if any) went to another country to be trained, would the 60 or so QFIs released from Valley be enough to allow the growth in F-35 & Typhoon force that was asked for in 2015?
@airpolice
It’s not that simple. 208 Sqn ran on for a lot longer than originally planned but had to stop as the Hawk T1a fleet hours need to be managed - burn too many more and then no Red Arrows, RN fleet aggressors or 100 Sqn. Now you could argue that manning the front line is more important, but the T2 was deemed sufficient at the time.
25 Sqn is a wholly different debate, effectively cutting IV Sqn down the middle and the 28x T2s are split. It would make sense if there were 20+ Hawks on the line each day, but normally it is mid teens or sometimes worse!
Now I am no fan of UK MFTS, but it is what it is. There is no quick replacement option and so really the best solution is to let it run and see what it can deliver - then we can backfill around it with either more of the same aircraft or outsourced solutions like ENJJPT, the L3 CTS multi engine training and maybe some more to come.
Carping on about the good old days does no one any good in this instance and the current circumstance IMHO :-)
In the 2015 SDSR, three years ago the RAF were told they needed more pilots, yet they closed 208 Squadron, and have now started to re-open it called 25 and basing it where?
So... if they knew before they closed 208, that they needed more pilots than MFTS could deliver, why close 208?
So... if they knew before they closed 208, that they needed more pilots than MFTS could deliver, why close 208?
25 Sqn is a wholly different debate, effectively cutting IV Sqn down the middle and the 28x T2s are split. It would make sense if there were 20+ Hawks on the line each day, but normally it is mid teens or sometimes worse!
Now I am no fan of UK MFTS, but it is what it is. There is no quick replacement option and so really the best solution is to let it run and see what it can deliver - then we can backfill around it with either more of the same aircraft or outsourced solutions like ENJJPT, the L3 CTS multi engine training and maybe some more to come.
Carping on about the good old days does no one any good in this instance and the current circumstance IMHO :-)
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: cheshire
Posts: 245
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
@airpolice
It’s not that simple. 208 Sqn ran on for a lot longer than originally planned but had to stop as the Hawk T1a fleet hours need to be managed - burn too many more and then no Red Arrows, RN fleet aggressors or 100 Sqn. Now you could argue that manning the front line is more important, but the T2 was deemed sufficient at the time.
25 Sqn is a wholly different debate, effectively cutting IV Sqn down the middle and the 28x T2s are split. It would make sense if there were 20+ Hawks on the line each day, but normally it is mid teens or sometimes worse!
Now I am no fan of UK MFTS, but it is what it is. There is no quick replacement option and so really the best solution is to let it run and see what it can deliver - then we can backfill around it with either more of the same aircraft or outsourced solutions like ENJJPT, the L3 CTS multi engine training and maybe some more to come.
Carping on about the good old days does no one any good in this instance and the current circumstance IMHO :-)
It’s not that simple. 208 Sqn ran on for a lot longer than originally planned but had to stop as the Hawk T1a fleet hours need to be managed - burn too many more and then no Red Arrows, RN fleet aggressors or 100 Sqn. Now you could argue that manning the front line is more important, but the T2 was deemed sufficient at the time.
25 Sqn is a wholly different debate, effectively cutting IV Sqn down the middle and the 28x T2s are split. It would make sense if there were 20+ Hawks on the line each day, but normally it is mid teens or sometimes worse!
Now I am no fan of UK MFTS, but it is what it is. There is no quick replacement option and so really the best solution is to let it run and see what it can deliver - then we can backfill around it with either more of the same aircraft or outsourced solutions like ENJJPT, the L3 CTS multi engine training and maybe some more to come.
Carping on about the good old days does no one any good in this instance and the current circumstance IMHO :-)
Back to the question by airpolice, I'd assumed that 208's disbandment was nothing to do with required training output as ASCENT were contracted to deliver this with the 4 Sqn T2s? And latterly, at least, 208 was training foreign studes only wasnt it?
All quite confusing, the salient point as mentioned being that HMG has done a fantastic job at systematically dismantling a training system that was once the envy of the world. Not something anybody responsible should be proud of.
Thread Starter
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Banished (twice) to the pointless forest
Posts: 1,558
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Carping on about the good old days does no one any good in this instance and the current circumstance IMHO :-)
The front line is absolutely more important, and has now been sacrificed for the Reds, and other reasons of course.
208 could have been given access to the T2 and carried on producing pilots, but instead, the output from 4FTS has dried up to a trickle of not for for purpose students at 29 Squadron, according to the gossip at the coal face in Lincolnshire.
Thread Starter
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Banished (twice) to the pointless forest
Posts: 1,558
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
You couldn't fork and make this up!
Extracts:
"The ENJJPT is a uniquely manned multi-national organization with a USAF wing commander and vice commander and an operations group commander in the top three leadership positions. The OG commander is based on country participation. Command and operations officers' positions in the flying training squadrons rotate among the participating nations, while the commander of the 80th Operations Support Squadron is always from the USAF. Additionally, officers from all 14 participating nations fill subordinate leadership positions throughout the wing. Five nations -- Germany, Italy, The Netherlands, Norway and the United States -- provide instructor pilots based on their number of student pilots. Canada, Greece, Portugal, Spain and Turkey do not have student pilots in training, but do provide one instructor pilot. As an example of this totally integrated structure, an American student pilot may have a Belgian instructor pilot, a Dutch flight commander, a Turkish section commander, an Italian operations office, and a German squadron commander."
"ENJJPT is also unique with its four distinct training programs. In addition to Undergraduate Pilot Training, ENJJPT also provides for its own Pilot Instructor Training (a program that teaches pilots to be instructor pilots), Introduction to Fighter Fundamentals, and IFF Upgrade Instructor Pilot training. About 200 student pilots earn their wings at ENJJPT annually after a 55-week, three-phased training regimen. About 80 new instructor pilots are trained annually and up to 150 pilots transition through IFF each year. All this training is supported by a staff of more than 1,400 military, civilian and contract personnel employing 201 T-6A, and T-38C training aircraft."
"The benefits of the ENJJPT Program are many -- lower cost, better training environment, enhanced standardization and interoperability, to name a few. Another important aspect of ENJJPT is the bond of friendship and respect developed among all participants in the 80th FTW. The student pilots and staff instructors of today will be the leaders of NATO's air forces of tomorrow. Having trained together, they will be much better prepared to fight and win together when the need ever arises."
https://www.sheppard.af.mil/Units/80...Training-Wing/
https://www.sheppard.af.mil/Library/...rogram-enjjpt/ Updated July 2017.
Last edited by RAFEngO74to09; 29th Sep 2018 at 22:03.
208 could have been given access to the T2 and carried on producing pilots, but instead, the output from 4FTS has dried up to a trickle of not for for purpose students at 29 Squadron, according to the gossip at the coal face in Lincolnshire.
Any ‘trickle’ of students is for many different reasons than you state - sacking nearly 200 student pilots in 2010/2011 after SDSR 2010, ceasing recruiting, slowing flying training for 3 years and then having a slow start for MFTS is more likely to be the issue. Oddly enough after a 3 year hold the few that escaped the redundancy in 2011 are now your so called ‘trickle’ with a ‘flood’ quickly queing up behind them! Oddly enough if you add even the legacy zero-to-hero FJ pipeline, that was around 4 years, to this 3 years onto 2011 then you get 2018 - that’s odd, that’s where we are now! FJ flying training is like a supertanker that takes 4 years to turn on and off...regardless if it is contractor assisted or not.
Thread Starter
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Banished (twice) to the pointless forest
Posts: 1,558
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thread Starter
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Banished (twice) to the pointless forest
Posts: 1,558
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Mate, you are so wide of the mark. The number of aircraft and QFIs is pretty much the same with one T2 squadron as it is with two - the reason why IV was split and XXV was stood up was for easier command and control of a very large sqn. If I recall correctly IV was around 40-50 QFIs and 28 jets so it kind of made sense to split it in half to make it easier to manage - 14 jets and 20-ish QFIs is kind of more the normal size of a FJ sqn.
Any ‘trickle’ of students is for many different reasons than you state - sacking nearly 200 student pilots in 2010/2011 after SDSR 2010, ceasing recruiting, slowing flying training for 3 years and then having a slow start for MFTS is more likely to be the issue. Oddly enough after a 3 year hold the few that escaped the redundancy in 2011 are now your so called ‘trickle’ with a ‘flood’ quickly queing up behind them! Oddly enough if you add even the legacy zero-to-hero FJ pipeline, that was around 4 years, to this 3 years onto 2011 then you get 2018 - that’s odd, that’s where we are now! FJ flying training is like a supertanker that takes 4 years to turn on and off...regardless if it is contractor assisted or not.
I think it is true that HMG/RAF have managed to destroy a training system that was once regarded as the best in the world but I am not sure that it is all the fault of MFTS. I trace it back to the 90s when the organisation was renamed TGDA - Training Group something Agency. And the officer in charge was called- really- the Chief Executive. I had to try to explain it to a visiting Norwegian General who was bemused. “Chief executive? - surely it’s a military organisation?” That was the moment that the ethos was lost.