US Air Force Reporting Pilot Shortage

An anonymous reader writes "Times sure have changed: it is no longer cool to be a fighter pilot. The Pentagon expects to be short some 200 fighter pilots this year, and is projecting that shortfall will increase to 700 pilots by 2021. Various factors seem to be involved: better paying jobs in the commercial sector with more stability, the stress of repeated overseas deployments, and the threat that ultimately the job they trained to do — fly planes — is being superseded by remotely-controlled drones. With demand for commercial aviators heating up as thousands of pilots are expected to reach mandatory retirement age (65) in the next five years, the Air Force is caught in a quandary. Where are they going to get the pilots to fly their shiny new F-35s?"

Comments

Obvious Solution

[some old guy]

Outsource routine missions to the Indian Air Force and grant thousands of H1B visas to fill the rest of the vacancies.

Re:Obvious Solution

[TubeSteak]

The Indian Air Force embarrassed the USAF in Cope India 2004 and again at Red Flag in 2008.
The first time was against USAF F-15Cs and the second time, against the F-22.

The real problem for the USAF is that the F-22 and F-35 will always run out of missiles before they run out of targets.
And when that happens, their close combat abilities cannot out-class previous generation fighters.

Re:Obvious Solution

[mapsjanhere]

There's a real problem for the air force brass behind all this. Pilots are all "officers and gentlemen", drones are flown by enlisted people. Any large swing to more drones not only changes the combat environment, it changes the whole structure of the force. If you no longer have a large collection of ex-fighter jocks to staff your higher ranks with, the whole attitude of the air force as we know it will change in the long run.

Re:Obvious Solution

[peragrin]

Good.

Because of chair force fighter jocks, our air services are divided into 4 separate competing groups for no other reason than they can't think any other combat theater is more important.

The air force has tried to retire the A-10 warthog for 35 years now. instead of having a proper ground support craft that can take all sorts of punishment(the A-10 can fly missing significant chunks of vital parts) they keep trying to put more and more advanced craft there, but none of them can take or dish out the punishment the A-10 can. The F-35 is supposed to replace it now it too will fail in that roll.

The air force only cares about speed, and flash. Sometimes slow and ugly is far more useful.

Re:Obvious Solution

[darkmeridian]

When will people understand that the U.S. military loses these mock battle so they can demand more funding? American aircraft were outnumbered 3:1 at Cope Indian. But that allows us to say, "Oh, noes, we lost to Indians. We need $100 billion in new planes." From an article: "The Cope India exercise also seemingly shocked some in Congress and the Pentagon who used the event to renew the call for modernizing the U.S. fighter force with stealthy F/A-22s and F-35 Joint Strike Fighters."

Re: Obvious Solution

[Anonymous Coward]

Sir your mistaken, drones are flown by officers. Kind of sucks for them, they through flight school and end up flying behind a computer desk.

Re:Obvious Solution

[Luckyo]

True, however as pointed out above, the real issue isn't the aircraft but the missile bay size coupled with severe issues with AIM-120C adapted for F-22 (it essentially had its wings clipped to fit into the internal bay).

The missile has already been known to have severe issues with maneuverability when fired at meidum-to-long range, which is main engagement range for stealth F-22 due to issues with how thrust is generated. It will not have enough onboard fuel to generate new acceleration run if target evades first approach and it has severe problems turning without losing massive amounts of speed to match maneuverable target it's racing head on which has been obviously worsened by clipping of wings.

Essentially it's a missile that has very bad performance against maneuverable target at medium-to-long range as it simply lacks ability to maneuver at speeds.

Russians recognized the same problem and completely reworked rear control surfaces on their "head on" R-77 missiles. For some reason, US has not done the same (yet?).

The more likely reason

[EmagGeek]

People don't want to sign up for the armed services knowing that they're just going to be shipped off immediately to one of these middle-eastern hell holes to fight some undeclared war over some bullshit "terror" campaign to "keep us safe" from that big, evil Constitution that is making government's job so difficult.

Re:The more likely reason

[couchslug]

That's been going on a very long time and hasn't stopped potential aircrew. The perception they won't get a slot for their effort IS a deterrent.

What does piss off pilots and ruin RETENTION (which creates shortages) is their "extra duties" and square-filling they are tasked with when not flying. If the Air Force wanted to retain pilots it would reduce the bullshit they have to put up with. It's not as if pilots aren't vocal about it. Many would be delighted with a full career "flying track" even if they weren't promoted as quickly. With command comes a desk, and that desk never empties.

Pilots do not live in "hellhole" conditions, and neither to most Airmen when deployed.

Re:The more likely reason

[Anonymous Coward]

Believe me, that may be a problem with the Army but never with the chAir Force.

No, their problem is a ridiculous "up or out" policy in the officer corps where if you can't get promoted to a higher rank within a certain length of time, you get shitcanned. Since they only let officers fly planes, they now have a pilot shortage as too many of them are now either gone or at too high a rank to actually do the whole flying thing.

Re:The more likely reason

[Anonymous Coward]

There is the fact that civilian pay for airline pilots is so low. In fact, officer pay (all pilots are O rank) is usually higher than what one can find in the civilian industry.

A lot of people don't want to be pilots just because there is no future in that field unless one wants to buy their own plane and run their own charter service (good luck.)

Almost any other profession, the amount of hours one has to log would get them a journeyman or master rank. A commercial airline captain? $40k/year. To boot, the allowances for hotels and such have been pared to the bone... airline crews end up sleeping in bunks/dorms.

Make the pay worth it, then people will consider that route.

Re:The more likely reason

[clarkkent09]

I would think one of the biggest factors is the increased reliance on unmanned aircraft. If you become a pilot today, say in your early 20s, there is no way you are going to hold on to that career until retirement, be it commercial or military. Right now, sure, we still need pilots. In 10 years you will be a dinosaur. In 20 you will be completely obsolete.

Re:The more likely reason

[Nidi62]

There is the fact that civilian pay for airline pilots is so low. In fact, officer pay (all pilots are O rank) is usually higher than what one can find in the civilian industry.

A lot of people don't want to be pilots just because there is no future in that field unless one wants to buy their own plane and run their own charter service (good luck.)

Almost any other profession, the amount of hours one has to log would get them a journeyman or master rank. A commercial airline captain? $40k/year. To boot, the allowances for hotels and such have been pared to the bone... airline crews end up sleeping in bunks/dorms.

Make the pay worth it, then people will consider that route.

Get your facts straight. A captain in a major airline makes much closer to 6 figures a year than 40k. And most are former military meaning they draw military benefits as well. 40k a year is what a pilot might make if they go through civilian flight school and have just gotten hired on as a mainline pilot (and they would not be a Captain, they would be an FO) after a few years as a pilot with a subsidiary carrier such as Expressjet or SkyWest. While working for one of those smaller carriers, yes, they will make probably $25-30k a year. Former military will start closer to 60-70k a year, and can start up with a mainline carrier immediately. $40k a year? Most other airline employees have to work for about 8 years before they get close to $40k a year base pay. And then don't forget all of the union negotiated benefits such as guaranteed pay, and other ancillary benefits(can jump seat on any carrier). And bunks/dorms? When commercial pilots are on an overnight rotation, they get put up in hotels, and rather nice ones to boot. You are way off on your assessment of the "hardship" pilots have. And I have been around the airline business literally my entire life: my mother has worked for a major air carrier as long as I have been alive, and has been a manager in charge of dealing with part of the operation relating to pilots for about 8 years now, and I have worked for the same carrier since 2006 in various capacities.

Re:The more likely reason

[Nidi62]

I worked with a couple people that were hoping to become pilots with the Air Force. Instead of enlisting into the Air Force proper, however, they went into the Air National Guard. The main reason was that, in the Air Force, once you go through flight school you essentially get assigned an aircraft type (based on ranking and possibly a little on personal preference). With ANG, you go into it as a pilot already knowing what aircraft you are going to fly: you go around to different squadrons and they have to sponsor you, almost like rushing a fraternity. It takes a lot of the guesswork out of it.

Re:The more likely reason

[Teancum]

Perhaps this is just sensational journalism, but there are situations like this found with regional pilots (not major airlines):

http://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/video/inside-airline-pilot-crash-pads-12874917

http://www.foxnews.com/travel/2012/02/01/confessions-regional-jet-pilot/

Admittedly this is for people who are trying to break into the industry and become established as opposed to those who are at the top of their game working for the major airliners, but if you want to become a pilot today and go through the steps to be qualified to become a commercial airline pilot, the path you must take today runs through these "crash pads" and comparatively low salaries. Note that few pilots start out from college or a decent air training school and go straight to major carriers. Former military pilots do get to count their flight time in military aircraft in a variety of ways for certified flying time, and some military aircraft definitely have civilian equivalents or certainly can compare in terms of general types that might get you into the major carriers after flying for the military for 20 years (necessary for retirement benefits), but not everybody can or cares to go that route either.

Airlines have also been gradually cutting salaries on their pilots and doing so in a variety of ways... with many of the airlines that paid the highest salaries simply going bankrupt (like Pan-Am... to name one airline in particular). I agree that life isn't nearly so bad as is sometimes claimed and a pilot who has been flying for 30 years can expect to be earning a pretty decent salary, but that is the end of their career, not the beginning.

Re:The more likely reason

[couchslug]

"maintenance support,"

HAHAHAHA! My sides!

I was a maintainer (avionics, engines, later crew chief) for 26 years (1981-2007 on Broncos, Phantoms, F-16 A/B/C/D/CJ) and experienced highly effective non-flying DCMs (Deputy Commanders for Maintenance), the attempts to do away with them, and the return of powerful Maintenance Squadron commanders.

Running Maintenance in no way requires being a pilot and in many ways is better done by one not of a "pilot" psychology. It has everything to do with holding sufficient rank to communicate with squadron commanders on a peer level when deconflicting their needs/desires with requirements of maintenance, inspection, paint/coating, airframe availability for mandatory ground crew training and so forth.

I've had very good pilot squadron COs, but their specialty is FLYING and having them run maintenance too is (further) task-saturating them with shit they don't need to micromanage.

"contract management,"

Only in specific areas where their expertise as flyers matters.
Most USAF contracting isn't that.

PIlots don't make much

[Rich0]

Pilots have always left the air force for private jobs. I think the issue is likely that fewer are signing up to replace them, because the news is out that pilots don't make much money.

If you pay commercial pilots more, then more pilots will join the air force for 5-10 years in order to become commercial pilots later.

Sure, we're likely to see many pilots retire at 65 and all that, but with all the industry consolidation the fact is that new pilots can't make money. There are tons of people with experience flying airliners who can't get jobs flying airliners.

Re:PIlots don't make much

[Anonymous Coward]

Pilots have always left the air force for private jobs. I think the issue is likely that fewer are signing up to replace them, because the news is out that pilots don't make much money.

If you pay commercial pilots more, then more pilots will join the air force for 5-10 years in order to become commercial pilots later.

Sure, we're likely to see many pilots retire at 65 and all that, but with all the industry consolidation the fact is that new pilots can't make money. There are tons of people with experience flying airliners who can't get jobs flying airliners.

This is true. It doesn't take long to realize that decent pay only exists for pilots who work for a large carrier. I was surprised to learn that regional air carrier pilots could earn as little as $25K/year. I assume that pilots have to keep up certification and pay for certification to upgrade their skills (i.e., learn to fly larger planes). Heck 25K barely feeds you and your family.

Re:PIlots don't make much

[jedidiah]

With that kind of civilian pay, you're better off staying in the Air Force.

Re:PIlots don't make much

[Spy Handler]

nobody flies fighter jets in the Air Force and then goes on to fly for regional carriers for $25k a year. Those regional carrier jobs are filled by entry level pilots that graduated Bob's Flying School who are looking to build up their flight hours and beef up their resume in hopes of eventually flying for the majors.

Air Force pilots leaving the military are in high demand at the majors as they have thousands of hours in jets and typically have exceptional flying skills compared to Bob's Flying School graduates.

Re:PIlots don't make much

[ShanghaiBill]

nobody flies fighter jets in the Air Force and then goes on to fly for regional carriers for $25k a year.

Flying an F-16 is not very good preparation for flying a 737. What the airlines really want is C-17 or C-130 pilots, with plenty of multi-engine experience.

Re:PIlots don't make much

[ColdWetDog]

What I want is a 737 pilot who thinks they are still in an F-16.

Whoo hooo!

Re:Maybe fix them?

[Extremus]

I guess that was a problem with the almighty F-22.

Time for TOP GUN 2

[Joe_Dragon]

TOP GUN made a lot of people sign up for the navy

Drones

[hawguy]

Who wants to be a pilot and put your butt on the line every day as you enter enemy territory when you can be a drone pilot half way across the world and go home to your wife and kids every night.

Besides, it's looking more and more like "fighter pilot" is a dead end job and won't be around forever. Why send one fighter when you can send 10 drones that can outmaneuver any manned plane for the less cost and no risk to pilots life.

Well, slashdot is a great place to start

[TWiTfan]

We're in incredible physical condition, none of us have near-sightedness, or color blindness. We love the military in particular and the government in general. And combat and sports are what we excel at!

You've definitely found the recruitment pool you're looking for!

pfft

[meglon]

....the Air Force is caught in a quandary. Where are they going to get the pilots to fly their shiny new F-35s?"

And here i thought their quandary was wondering: if, when, and for how many trillions of dollars it was going to be for the F-35 to be anything more than a theft of taxpayer money by the MIC.

IMO an indirect effect

[GodfatherofSoul]

I was in AFROTC 20 years ago. It was known for a long time that the "battle boom" of pilots from Vietnam who went to the air lines was drying up, and when those numbers fell, there'd be a suction of active duty pilots lured into the civilian sector to fill in the need. There's always going to be a line of kids trying to fly fighters. This is more a Pin vs Pout issue. Couple that with a smaller Air Force of gourmet fighters and drones and now the civilian sector is going to have to get used to finding/creating other pools of pilots with 1000s of hours in hand.

Aviators

[Anonymous Coward]

They can hire some Naval Aviators. They're better than pilots.

Problem not lack of interest

[LinuxFreakus]

Many many people desire to be fighter pilots. The problem is not a lack of people wanting to sign up. The problem is that the USAF is highly selective about who can be a fighter pilot. You need to meet all sorts of physical requirements, then you need to meet very high academic standards, then you have to meet a whole bunch of psychological/personality requirements, etc, etc. By the time they go through the pool of applicants there is nobody left.

Re:Problem not lack of interest

[LinuxFreakus]

They don't have to be musclebound freaks. They need to have exceptional vision, hand-eye coordination and other sorts of spatial awareness aptitudes. It is a different set of physical requirements from what you are thinking of.

I'll gladly do it

[Atomic Fro]

I'll gladly do it... they'll have to overlook the fact I am in my early 30's and don't have 20/20 vision. If they did, I'd sign up immediately.

Re:I'll gladly do it

[jdcrayme]

Actually, that's kind of what happened to me. I was just an EE with thick glasses and bad hair, but through an unlikely series of events, I ended up as a test subject to see if people with laser vision correction could effectively fly military aircraft. 10 years later, it turns out they can.

do like airlines, GO CHEAP

[alen]

at this point to be a pilot you have to be in the top 5% of your HS class, go to the air force academy, go to flight school and then train on your aircraft

where to be an airline pilot all you need is to go to flight school and pass a test

this isn't the 70's and 80's. if you're in the top 5% of your HS class you can make a lot more money in medicine, banking, law and lots of other careers

Can't see there being a shortage of fighter pilots

[willy_me]

A shortage of pilots is possible but not fighter pilots. The jobs that will require pilots will be the boring jobs - not those where you get the break the sound barrier. For every F22 pilot I'm sure the air force requires 100 other pilots and it's those for which the air force might be hard-up to find replacements.

Too little time in the air

[Milharis]

I don't know if that's as true as in Europe, but the biggest complain I've heard by far from would-be pilots as well as pilots is that they don't fly enough. A flight is so costly that they don't fly more than a few times a month.

What's rather funny though is that in Europe the situation is reverted, there are far more people that want to become a pilot, fighter or commercial, than jobs available. A lot of airlines have totally frozen hiring for a few years.

Re:Maybe fix them?

[Anonymous Coward]

Maybe the USAF can import foreigners on H1-B visas to train as pilots. I mean if these people are the best and brightest why wouldn't the USAF want them too?

Amazing!

[Anonymous Coward]

You mean telling pilots that they can't go to school or be released for staff jobs, because they are needed in Afghanistan 6 months of the year then laying them off because they haven't been to school or a staff job wasn't the best way to handle manning. Next you will be telling me that we should start giving medals to people who do things in combat instead of to people who do things in PowerPoint. Because of several factors, in the U.S. we are rapidly moving to a combat Air Force with leadership who have never flown in combat. My last 2 squadron commanders have yet to see the desert. And I recently talked to some U-2 guys who's squadron commander wasn't even qualified in the jet. (He failed out of training, but still kept his command slot) Right now if you want to get promoted in the USAF you simply cannot waste time on things as trivial as flying, and if you don't get promoted, you get fired. BTW Sorry for posting anonymously, but it is easier than having to explain this to Public Affairs.

Opposite of previous article

[vossman77]

This seems to be the opposite story of the previous slashdot article from 2 week ago, The Air Force's Love For Fighter Pilots Is Too Big To Fail

Re:Good god. Air force Obsolete.

[couchslug]

"Gone are the days of fighting cables and air pressure. It's all computers. "

I've been in the back seat of an F-16 D-model (I was a crew chief and we got rides when there was no one scheduled to go up for other purposes). The G-forces are considerable and you certainly do "fight" them (straining maneuvers etc). Flying any modern fighter takes considerable physical endurance.

A "belly" doesn't indicate lack of resistance to G's.

Re:F35 and F22

[hey!]

Overpriced death-trap it may be, but the F-22 is an elegant tool designed to do a single thing well: wrest control of European airspace from the Soviet Union.

Re:Maybe fix them?

[Jeremiah Cornelius]

I've heard the Air Force make this complaint before: No pilots, mission endangered...

My! How they do drone on.

The F-35 is not the problem

[Kozar_The_Malignant]

The F-35 is not the problem. There will always be people lining up to fly the newest, hottest fighter. The problem is finding pilots for slow, unarmed, propeller-driven cargo planes on the milk run into Kabul or Basra.

Great!

[Dcnjoe60]

Great, now the military is going to want to increase H1B Visas for their shortage, too.

Re:Good god. Air force Obsolete.

[jitterman]

Fighter pilots have always needed to be extremely mentally capable as well as in excellent physical condition. Physical fitness is not the same as being able to bench 350 pounds.

Ever notice that in order to be a fixed-wing-aircraft pilot in any service, you must be an officer? That requires a college education. It doesn't mean you're smarter, but it may imply that you're more dedicated to learning what you need to know to do the job you're required to do.

Air Force Tradition

[musterion]

Part of the problem stem from the first commandant/general of the Air Force who required all of the pilots to be college graduates. This is dumb. Israel does not require this, and I bet their pilots can whip our butts. Additionally, why do piolots have to be officers? From what I read most pilots want to fly; they don't want to lead. If they must be officers of some kind, make them warrant officers.

2006 RAND study recommending fewer fighter pilots

[Animats]

"Fighter Drawdown Dynamics: Effects on Aircrew Inventories" - a 2009 study from RAND, says "to maintain the health of fighter units, the number of new pilots entering them must be reduced, ultimately to below 200 per year by 2016." Fighter pilots are high-maintenance - they have to fly frequently to stay good. Having too many fighter pilots for the number of available aircraft results in a big pool of mediocre pilots.

The USAF seems to be having trouble balancing their personnel pipeline.

Re: F35 and F22

[KernelMuncher]

you're way off on the height info

from: www.ehow.com/about_5063412_air-force-fighter-pilot-qualifications.html#ixzz2ZoGZ1tSj

"To enter pilot training, you must be have a standing height between 64 to 77 inches"

that's 5'4 to 6'5 for the mathematically challenged

US Air Force Academy has exactly the same guidelines so I'd say they are accurate.

http://www.usafa.net/mirrored/appenda.htm

I'm sure the vision requirements knock out far more pilot candidates than their height restrictions

Re:F35 and F22

[Rich0]

Bring the warthog, the only useful plane in the US Air Force's inventory in the last 30 years.

The A10 is a great plane, and it would be wonderful if there were other aircraft to fill the niche. However, it does need support to operate. You're not going to be having a great time shooting up tanks if the sky is crawling with enemy air-superiority fighters who have free reign to drop missiles on you all day long. You can duck behind hills from SAM sites, but not when the SAM site is at 37,000 feet.

It's no longer honorable

[Rubinhood]

I heard that people no longer enlist to the armed forces anymore because it's no longer the noble thing to do. They have too much precedent that they will just become toys of corrupt politicians.

They can see how many have ended up helping the slaughter of a million innocent civilians in the Middle-East. Others helped with the assassination of legitimate leaders who genuinely cared for their country, and installed puppet dictators who were willing to help maintain the Empire while pushing their own citizens to poverty. Yet others ended up regularly spying on half the world...

Apart from 5-year-old children who were mesmerized by the latest G.I. Joe or other propaganda film, I don't know anyone in their right mind who would willingly sign up to be such a puppet.

(Now cue the obligatory government agent trying to sway public opinion in a response post:)

Re: It's no longer honorable

[cold fjord]

Vice President Cheney, Meet the Press, September 16, 2001: "[Interviewer: Do we have any evidence linking Saddam Hussein or Iraqis to [the 9/11 terrorist attacks?]] Cheney: No "

President Bush, White House briefing, September 17, 2003: "We've had no evidence that Saddam Hussein was involved with September the 11th."

Saddam was involved with terrorism, but not with the 9/11 attack.

Re:Not pilots , assassins.

[manu0601]

There is a difference

.

When you kill with physical presence, your enemies can try to kill you.

When you kill remotely, your enemies only possible retaliation is exploding bombs on your territory, because you are not the battle field anymore

Drone killing and terrorist bombing are two sides of the mirror

Re:Maybe fix them?

[davester666]

The AF only wants the best that can follow orders. The bright do a little too much free thinking.

Re:Maybe fix them?

[cold fjord]

They would need a security clearance?

Re:Maybe fix them?

[hairyfeet]

That was the F-22 and the bigger problem is that all the MIC has been able to build since the early 90s is large clusterfucks and huge bills, the tech has been crap!

If the USAF wasn't run by brown-nosing MIC asskissers they would scrap the F35, use the F22 for as long as its worth using then dump THAT turkey as well and take a page from the Israelis and buy more F-15s, F-16s, and F-18s. The lines are still popping them out and they even have the Stealth Eagle if you decide you HAVE to have stealth but frankly the enemies we are likely to face? stealth isn't gonna matter, goat herders in caves aren't using advanced radar, in fact nearly all of our realistically possible enemies are using old as hell Soviet era stuff, just look at North Korea getting busted trying to buy old surplus Mig 21s from Cuba.

Sadly I look at the current "strategy" of our armed forces and you know what it reminds me of? The Axis powers in WWII. The USAF like The Germans is betting waaay too much on "Wonder weapons" that spend more time on the ground than flying, are incredibly expensive so we can only afford a handful (thus making sure you can NEVER get economies of scale on planes or parts like we have on the Teen series, and because of the crazy price per unit most likely won't be flown against anybody where its tech can be useful for fear of losing it) and take a hell of a lot to maintain. Compare this to the fact you can get the SU27 at 30 mil a pop, the MiG 29 at 27 mil a pop which means any enemy with real resources will be able to spam us.

Then you have the USN which seems to be taking a page straight from the IJN in that just as the IJN stuck with outdated tactics and weapons (didn't have much choice really) likewise the USN is acting like its the late 50s and going carrier batshit. I mean when the next nearest potential enemy has a grand total of two (and last I checked one of the Chinese carriers was nothing more than a hulk) and you have ELEVEN? That is fricking dumb and it gets even worse when you realize that the Chinese have a sea skimmer now that will reach out 900 miles at 1 foot off the water (thus making the Phalanx useless) and they are already working on a 1200 mile version. Again unless you are going after goat herders which aren't a threat to carriers so no more than five TOPS would be needed carrier groups will be sitting ducks, the enemy could just spam sea skimmers and turn the task force into nothing but debris without risking a single pilot.

At the end of the day we need to go back to the pre WWII way of buying weapons, where we put out a spec and they weren't getting shit until a prototype was available for testing, stop giving the MIC blank checks for turkeys like the F-35, and finally use some of that money they have been throwing at the MIC to offer ALL of our brave men and women better pay, thus increasing the chance to get pilot butts to put in those seats.