ENJJPT RFI for T38 Backfill
Thread Starter
Join Date: May 2003
Location: The 24th & a Half Century
Posts: 309
Likes: 0
Received 8 Likes
on
7 Posts
ENJJPT RFI for T38 Backfill
Interesting development. Tough ask unless an unsolicited proposal has already been submitted.
https://sam.gov/opp/f3eb7779a8c0402d...3b7cbc904/view
https://sam.gov/opp/f3eb7779a8c0402d...3b7cbc904/view
DD
So, if I’m reading it right, the USAF has a shortage of training slots. Is that for their own trainees? Since ENJJPT is usually the ‘go-to’ back up option for everyone else, who do the USAF use?!
BV
BV
Thread Starter
Join Date: May 2003
Location: The 24th & a Half Century
Posts: 309
Likes: 0
Received 8 Likes
on
7 Posts
I suspect this is intrinsically linked to the T38 drawdown plan and the desire that Sheppard should lose its as it’s not core USAF. Begs the question as to where all the Canadians will end up going when Hawk is withdrawn in 2025.
It sounds like "contract someone to give us more of the same"! Wondering if some of the civilian red air contractors will look to jump in on that, given the recent ditching of some of their contracts over there, or whether one of the primes/CAE will try and sew it up
Does FACTS cater for the numbers they currently send to Sheppard? Not sure whether they just went one for one replacement on pipeline numbers.
cheers
Join Date: Jul 2021
Location: Southern United States
Posts: 122
Likes: 0
Received 60 Likes
on
30 Posts
I think if you look at the trends in US Military training across all branches you will see a similar push to subcontract training. The airforce and navy have done it with helicopter training this past year.
I don’t think it’s necessarily a cost savings that they are shooting for but rather its training capacity. I understand the airforce has been struggling with availability in their training fleets across the board, maybe this is a way to plus up capacity. Could be they are also betting on low recruitment for the foreseeable future which would mean all those technical jobs required to support a training squadron are seeing a downturn as well
They may also have issues with the shortages of experienced instructors in their cadre, they may be able to tap into a pool of talent that has separated from service in the past few years.
I just can’t see cost savings as the sole driver of this effort, whenever you start paying subcontractors, who are almost universally Unionized, you will end up paying more. Ask me how I know….
FltMech
I don’t think it’s necessarily a cost savings that they are shooting for but rather its training capacity. I understand the airforce has been struggling with availability in their training fleets across the board, maybe this is a way to plus up capacity. Could be they are also betting on low recruitment for the foreseeable future which would mean all those technical jobs required to support a training squadron are seeing a downturn as well
They may also have issues with the shortages of experienced instructors in their cadre, they may be able to tap into a pool of talent that has separated from service in the past few years.
I just can’t see cost savings as the sole driver of this effort, whenever you start paying subcontractors, who are almost universally Unionized, you will end up paying more. Ask me how I know….
FltMech
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Somewhere flat
Age: 68
Posts: 5,563
Likes: 0
Received 45 Likes
on
30 Posts
"
