ExAF

It's been a few years, but my memories of UPT seem to recall that there was more to it than just learning to fly a plane.

Sliceback

Civilian comm/instr/CFI’s might need a month of indoc/intro to learn some of the USAF training systems, flight rules, etc, to catch up with the T-6 students. Give them a handful of T-6 flights for exposure to aerobatics, formation and USAF flight training standards and expectations.

It’s a band-aid and not a fix.

tomgoodman

I also recall that any student who told the IP that he already knew how to do something would be kicked so hard he would leave a vapor trail.

Barnstormer

Prior civilian time has no correlation to how well someone will do in UPT. Had a student that was the Chief flight instructor at a large Southern University flying program. I thought he had never flown a plane before showing up at UPT. He didn’t make it. Wasn’t the first high time flight instructor that couldn’t cut it.
Had a student from Central America, first airplane ride was to the States, second was dollar ride in T-37. Smoked the program.
If you come to UPT to be an Airline Pilot it’s not easy. People that come because they want to kill and break things do much better.

N261ND

Has increasing the max age been considered? I would gladly give up my 200K/year airline job and go active duty tomorrow to defend the best damn country on the planet if I could. 🇺🇸

Sliceback

Prior experience absolutely matters. Former ANG unit had approx 50% of candidates graduate #1 or #2 in their UPT (back when classes were 64 and graduated 45 +/-). Only one candidate didn’t get FAR’d but he did get his wings. Experience level was at least comm/inst/CFI w/800 has TT. Top was 4000 TT.

In my UPT class guys with comm/inst experience were about 15% of the class but they took about 50% of the top slots at the end. But proving that prior experience isn’t a guarantee a guy with 1500 TT washed out (Uncle Joe type of experience).

Spoke with a 17 yr UPT IP, 3yr UPT squadron commander, and asked his opinion. He said prior experience absolutely mattered but a weak candidate wouldn’t be helped. And a stud that didn’t want to adjust to the USAF expectations, or reached a personal limit like T-38 fright, or flying right next to other a/c, wouldn’t do well.

He said, with only 17 yrs of observation, that he didn’t think getting your ratings with Uncle Joe as your instructor had nearly as much value as going through a good 141 program like ERAU, Perdue, etc.

UAL T38 Phlyer

I "only" had 15 years as a 38 IP. I agree on some; differ on others.

My opinion: prior time helped with general air-sense, and was most applicable to primary. Less helpful in the T-38. Mirrors my own experience as a student (I had my private and less than 200 hours).

Most prior-time guys had no or little aerobatic experience. If they did have any, they were not prepared for the much larger radii of military maneuvers...or the humongous ones in the T-38. Airspace planning and the necessity to rapidly transition from one maneuver to the next are foreign to most civilian-background students.

I had two students who were IPs at large 141 schools. One had 3000 hours in C-172s. the other had 2000 in various GA.

The 3000 hr guy was a great kid, smart, great air sense, but so firmly established as a 110-kt pilot, he was always behind the jet.

A few years later, I told the 2000 hr student that all his prior time would actually be negative training for T-38 stick forces in the flare. His arched eyebrow said "Really? You're full of it," but he said nothing. (Great kid with a great attitude; stick and rudder skills were average to slightly above).

Six months later, when I said the same thing to the new class, and got a similar reaction, I asked him to offer HIS opinion.

"He's 100% right," he said.

Point being, sometimes, too much GA is negative transfer. Guys with prior GA jet or Part 121 time generally did pretty well.

Right now, off the top of my head, I can only think of two guys who had prior time, and graduated as the Top Stick of their class....and one was in my UPT class.

Hacker15e

My experience as a UPT '38 IP mirrors UAL T38 Phlyer's opinion.

By the time most studs got to that point in the program, there was little difference in skill between those with prior-to-UPT experience and those without.

The biggest thing was that those with experience had been able to get through T-6s with a lot less effort than they needed in the T-38 program, and they were usually shocked at how hard they had to work in Phase III. I, too, have seen the thousand-hour regional airline pilots nearly wash out, and the "I've never been in an airplane before" students get DGs at graduation. Neither of those are generally true, but nor are they outliers.

That being said...I'm surprised this thread hasn't been over-run with civilian-only folks chanting at how there's no difference between them and military-trained pilots, and how this experimental program will show once and for all that UPT is a waste.

tomgoodman

Our class had a Navigator (F-4 backseater) who somehow got a UPT slot. He graduated #1 and went right back to the F-4.

Hacker15e

I saw that quite a bit with Navs/EWOs/WSOs of all flavors. Most of them did very, very well in UPT.

Their knowledge and familiarity with AF flying regs and procedures, as well as general air sense, comm, etc, gave them a natural leg up.

One of my friends with whom I flew Strike Eagles with (and who was a former E model 'pitter) told me, "you'd be surprised what you can learn when the rest of your class is still trying to figure out what an ILS is."