Shift in AF flight culture?

[jkm_101_fso]

More AF pilots want to "fly" UAVs?
Does anyone know which UAVs require an officer to fly?
Privates fly Ravens in the Army. I realize the AF UAVs are bigger and more $$$$$$.

Air Force looks to keep more pilots grounded

By Sig Christenson
San Antonio Express-News
December 23, 2008

The top Air Force flight school students often get the best shot at the hottest planes.

But instead of listing the A-10 Warthog as the first choice on her “dream sheet” of planes she'd like to fly, 2nd Lt. Raquel Dronenburg picked the plane virtually everyone else in her class of 22 had hoped to avoid — the one that will never have room for a pilot in the cockpit.

“I wanted to actually do something productive with my time instead of sitting around and waiting for training to start,” said Dronenburg, one of the top students in the class, explaining that flying a manned aircraft meant delays that could run 15 months.

Pilots typically want to fly in the air, not from a ground-based cubicle. That's why Monday's graduation from the Air Force's Unmanned Aerial System Fundamentals course, the first of its kind at Randolph AFB, was so remarkable.

It marks a shift in the Air Force's culture. The service's center of gravity has always been the pilot wrapped in a cockpit, engaged in mortal combat, but technology and insurgent warfare are driving big changes.

John Pike, director and founder of globalsecurity.org, a military information Web site, called the cultural change “fundamental, radical and revolutionary” — striking at the heart of how the Air Force sees itself.

http://www.mysanantonio.com/news/loc..._grounded.html

[William F. Owen]

2nd Lt. Raquel Dronenburg ?

That's DRONE nburg?

Am I the only one laughting?

[jkm_101_fso]

2nd Lt. Raquel Dronenburg ?

That's DRONE nburg?

Am I the only one laughting?

I missed that one...what an irony for her.

[Entropy]

Not surprising. Cultural change is a generational thing IMO.

More AF pilots want to "fly" UAVs?

Yes and no. Certainly more people at the beginning of their careers want to fly UAV's. The opinion of a lot of mid-career officers I've talked to is quite different. In one sense, flying is a part of them - they can't imagine flying an aircraft with no sensory input beyond visual and auditory cues. Can they be trained to do it? Of course, but it doesn't feel like flying to them anymore than a driving simulation feels like driving to a NASCAR driver. They are also worried about their careers, though this concern has diminished greatly over the past year.

Does anyone know which UAVs require an officer to fly?
Privates fly Ravens in the Army. I realize the AF UAVs are bigger and more $$$$$$.

There are several tactical UAV's "flown" by enlisted personnel in the Air Force - primarily the security forces. I'm not up to speed in this area, but I believe they are some of the same models used by the Army.

The larger "theater" level and weaponized UAV's are flown by officers. These are the UAV's that fly in controlled airspace above about 3000 feet. The requirement for officers in this role is certainly a cultural one, but one might argue that officer's aren't strictly necessary for much of anything.

[Umar Al-Mokhtār]

a few years back at ACC HQ at Langley AFB (not at the table, mind you). The topic of the CIA taking out AQ folks with a Hellfire armed Predator came up. The whole issue of "armed" Predators seemd to elicit a certain response from the "fighter" community. The point was made that USAF UAVs at the time were routinely "flown" by enlisted folks. In a very subtle way the discussion turned to the possibility that someday UAVs may actually down other aircraft after which it was then posited that perhaps enlisted folks were not the right people to fly UAVs. I quickly jotted down the following for my colleague seated next to me: Because we wouldn't want the first "ace" of the 21st Century to be...an enlisted person...the HORROR!!!!!

[Surferbeetle]

Bear with me, its a little off topic...

Spiegel has a video of a trimaran cruising along at 61 knots before it all goes bad (about a quarter of the way down the page on the left). Boat is toast, crew is all ok. Reminds me of the the ekranoplan

[120mm]

2nd Lt. Raquel Dronenburg ?

That's DRONE nburg?

Am I the only one laughting?

Yes, very funny. And once she retires, she could have an awesome career as a DoD Civilian Employee....

[Adam L]

2nd Lt. Raquel Dronenburg ?

That's DRONE nburg?

Am I the only one laughting?

No, you are not alone. I wonder, is it really a coincidence? LOL!

Adam L

[carl]

Times, they are a changing. Another sign is a statement by a "former Clinton administration Pentagon appointee" in the Dec 8 issue of Aviation Week to the effect that the F-35 is a superior fighter to the F-22 because its computer processors are better.

Regarding the story, it seems to be that young, intelligent, fit officers are perhaps better used somewhere else than a stateside cubicle with a big video screen in it. The same goes for young, intelligent, fit enlisted men. As the story mentions the same job can be done by middle aged, fat, near sighted civilians.

Secondly, if this trend continues, as it probably will, it will be to the benefit of the Army and Marines. The aggressive young men who would have gravitated to the jets aren't likely to be thrilled by the prospect of helping the computer fly the drone; which leaves Apaches, Cobras, tanks etc.

[Adam L]

Times, they are a changing. Another sign is a statement by a "former Clinton administration Pentagon appointee" in the Dec 8 issue of Aviation Week to the effect that the F-35 is a superior fighter to the F-22 because its computer processors are better.

I have been wondering if that was the case for some time now. Thank you for the info.

Adam L

[carl]

I should have made clear that I rather disagree with the statement of the Clinton adm. official. I am still old fashioned enough to think things like range, speed, altitude capability, number of missiles carried etc. are more important than how much the cpu wows the boys at Microsoft.

[selil]

Regarding the story, it seems to be that young, intelligent, fit officers are perhaps better used somewhere else than a stateside cubicle with a big video screen in it. The same goes for young, intelligent, fit enlisted men. As the story mentions the same job can be done by middle aged, fat, near sighted civilians.

Finally! A job description just for me!