The Air Force pilot shortage is real. If the Air Force decides to go ahead should the Air Force revive the Warrant Officer program?

The Army uses WO for helo's and possibly fixed wing. Why shouldn't the Air Force?

Thoughts?

https://www.military.com/daily-news/2018/03/31/air-force-may-approve-enlisted-pilots-first-time-75-years.html

i agree with bufrilla. It been suggested everytime there is a pilot shortage (remember it 40 years ago) but it's never acted upon.

Oh, and Phantoms Phorever!

Is the air force still using officer pilots to "fly drones?" One branch is cool with a Corporal doing a job but another tosses a Major at it... and then wonders why it has pilot shortages...

Get Off My Lawn said:

---

Is the air force still using officer pilots to "fly drones?" One branch is cool with a Corporal doing a job but another tosses a Major at it... and then wonders why it has pilot shortages...

---

The attached article speaks about enlisted troops flying drones but for photo ops only. They only allow officers to go to live fire.

Is the Air Force saying they do not trust their enlisted troops to fire at the enemy? The article states the Army career path is to turn the enlisted troops into Warrant Officers to fly. The Air Force is still a little reluctant to return to the Warrant Office route.

I remember in the late 60's the DOD recruited all services to apply to the Army for acceptance into their helo program. I applied but did not pass the vision requirement.

Speaking of F-4's, I had a friend that was accepted into an Air Force program to complete his college degree, promoted to an E-5, and went to OCS upon graduation. He did not pass the pilot training but was a back seat on an F-4.

Quote:

---

An even better avenue is to set up a pipeline career pilot/ aircrew that don't want to leave the cockpit for some staff job/command element. Many just want to fly, keep'em in the cockpit with advancement to 0-4 being max promotion and you have to select pipeline early in career.

---

This. Not everyone needs and definitely not everyone wants a staff tour

Quote:

---

Here's an idea, treat the pilots you have better, and you won't lose so many to the airlines.

---

The Air Force has been losing pilots to the airlines since 1947, the poor mistreated guys and girls.

It's not for a lack of qualified applicants that the AF is short of pilots. It's the usual, decades old, myopic planning. The pipeline has to be opened up...a lot.

I first met career "cockpit only" pilots from the RCAF about 35 years ago. It has it's advantages, but not sure how it would work in the USAF. Why do we want a group of guys that get to have all the fun and skip half a career of education and staff assignments?

bufrilla said:

---

An even better avenue is to set up a pipeline career pilot/ aircrew that don't want to leave the cocpit for some staff job/command element. Many just want to fly, keepe'em in the cockpit with advancement to 0-4 being max promotion and you have to select pipeline early in career.

Armies WO program has been outstanding
Other services to a look see and a career path of remaining in cockpit.

Phantom Phlyer with 4,000 hours/3200+ in the "Thunder Hog"

---

You just described a WO

I agree with the keeping guys in the cockpit and promoting to major with an occasional LTC if warranted
When I was flying in the Aussie Air Force, we had full up operational guys in the squadron that were 19-20 years old. They were a lot of fun to have in a squadron

My dad was good friends with Lt. Gen. Harry Goodall. He spent eight years as an enlisted man before attending OCS in 1959 for the Air Force.

He spoke of this topic some and thought it was something that could be beneficial for the Air Force.

Sadly, he died a few years back flying recreationally after taking off from the mcgregor airport outside of Waco. Heck of a nice guy who had an interesting career.

Montgomery Burns said:

---

Most Air Force pilots leave after their 10 year service commitment, and typically pursue airline jobs that offer much more competitive pay and lifestyle. Creating a new rank structure that pays pilots even less is not going to fix the current shortage.

---

Disagree. A Warrant Officer population is mostly prior-enlisted who already have 5-7 years experience. More stay through retirement than O grade officers. The Air Force is having problems filling/retaining it's pilot ranks and from what I understand. What about the lifestyle needs to be changed?

Fly Army 97 said:

---

Montgomery Burns said:

---

Most Air Force pilots leave after their 10 year service commitment, and typically pursue airline jobs that offer much more competitive pay and lifestyle. Creating a new rank structure that pays pilots even less is not going to fix the current shortage.

---

Disagree. A Warrant Officer population is mostly prior-enlisted who already have 5-7 years experience. More stay through retirement than O grade officers. The Air Force is having problems filling/retaining it's pilot ranks and from what I understand. What about the lifestyle needs to be changed?

---

The vast majority of army pilots are helicopter pilots. While there are lucrative civilian helo jobs, it doesn't compare to the pull of the airlines.

Also, I as an AF IP I have retrained former army fixed wing pilots. Let's just say the two services have very different standards in aviation. Not in quality of people (all my former army guys are awesome), but in quality of training.

As far as what needs to be changed in lifestyle? AF pilots spend most of their time doing desk jobs. They also have to move every 3 years and spend time away on deployments. Airlines offer more money to live in one place and do one thing: fly. Warrant offers only solve one of these problems (decrease in non flying related duties), while making the pay difference even worse.

This is a really great thread with lots of good ideas. But I think the thread reveals lots of reasons why there isn't an easy solution for the AF. I do have some questions/thoughts of my own, but first, some background:

Grew up an AF brat in the 50's and 60's. My dad retired as an E-8 in 1973. He had a lot of AF WO friends in the AF before the program was terminated and I met many WOs when I was very young.

Got an ROTC commission in 1970 and retired in 1991 as an O-5. During my AF time I saw a LOT of changes in in how "educational level achieved " became more and more important for promotion in the officer corp AND for the senior NCO ranks. I got my Master's degree courtesy of the AF AFIT program. And that leads to my questions/thoughts on the subject.

Wasn't "education" the real dividing line between NCOs and Officers for many, many years? I seem to recall it was that way when I was growing up as an AF brat. It was very rare for a NCO to have a bachelor's degree and I'll bet that most AF WOs didn't have one either.

But it was my observation that during the first 10 years of my AF career (70-80) more and more NCOs were getting bachelor's degrees - mostly off duty and with a TON of help from "Community College of the AF" credit hours.

So by 1980, having a bachelor's degree became more and more a prerequisite for advancement to the AF top 3 grades. And I saw a similar slow escalation in the Officer rank educational requirements as well. There were almost NO officer's without college degrees when I got my commission in 1970, but again, by 1980, it seemed than an O-3 bucking for O-4 better have a master's degree to be competitive. And most officers had to obtain those degrees on off duty time, correspondence, etc.

Note: During my AF career I never observed that having a PHD was an advantage for promotion past O-4. In fact, it could actually hurt your promotion chances because you often got assigned to non-operational type jobs that weren't very sexy sounding to promotion boards.

Also, after I retired in 1991 I got a Civil Service meteorologist job at the tri-agency (NOAA/FAA/DOD) NEXRAD Radar Ops Center in Norman, OK. I worked there for 20 years and we always had 20 or so active duty AF folks (and a handful of Navy folks), ranging from O-5 to E-4. And during that time I noticed that several of our AF E-6's and above (and a few Navy E-6's as well) were working on - and getting - master's degrees so they would be competitive for promotion.

So, I ask these questions:

In this day and age, what distinguishes an AF Officer and an AF Senior NCO?

What distinguishes an Army NCO/WO/Officer? Is it common for an Army WO to have at least a bachelor's degree? Do Army O-3s need to have a master's degree to be competitive for promotion? Note: I did get to interface with several Army PHD level scientists when I worked in AF R&D management in 84-88. It was my observation that in the Army a PHD WAS a plus for promotion.

What is the lay of the land in the Navy/Marines when it comes to college degrees? The Navy Senior NCOs I worked with at the NEXRAD support center all had at least a bachelor's and a couple had master's as well.

Thoughts?

Montgomery Burns said:

---

Fly Army 97

Montgomery Burns said:

---

Most Air Force pilots leave after their 10 year service commitment, and typically pursue airline jobs that offer much more competitive pay and lifestyle. Creating a new rank structure that pays pilots even less is not going to fix the current shortage.

---

Disagree. A Warrant Officer population is mostly prior-enlisted who already have 5-7 years experience. More stay through retirement than O grade officers. The Air Force is having problems filling/retaining it's pilot ranks and from what I understand. What about the lifestyle needs to be changed?




The vast majority of army pilots are helicopter pilots. While there are lucrative civilian helo jobs, it doesn't compare to the pull of the airlines.

Also, I as an AF IP I have retrained former army fixed wing pilots. Let's just say the two services have very different standards in aviation. Not in quality of people (all my former army guys are awesome), but in quality of training.

As far as what needs to be changed in lifestyle? AF pilots spend most of their time doing desk jobs. They also have to move every 3 years and spend time away on deployments. Airlines offer more money to live in one place and do one thing: fly. Warrant offers only solve one of these problems (decrease in non flying related duties), while making the pay difference even worse.

---

Army Warrant Officers leave to helicopter jobs and the airlines. The value of our FW training has nothing to do with the AF ongoing problem of attrition and ability to field a force of UAV/UAS operators. The argument being made is that you have a retention problem....you aren't going to change folks needing to fulfill 'desk' jobs or rotating out to fill an ALO position elsewhere. Moving three years and deploying? Grab someone who already have five years in, and they have a high probability to stay in for 20 years, collect a retirement, and then also apply for the airlines. I'll concede they give up future seniority....

The Air Force has looked at enlisted operators and bringing WOs over from the Army so I know as a branch of the DoD, they know it's an option. The culture won't take it. Meanwhile, there are people out there in your ranks who want to serve and don't have flying in the airlines as the #1 goal in life.

Fly Army 97 said:

---

Montgomery Burns said:

---

Fly Army 97

Montgomery Burns said:

---

Most Air Force pilots leave after their 10 year service commitment, and typically pursue airline jobs that offer much more competitive pay and lifestyle. Creating a new rank structure that pays pilots even less is not going to fix the current shortage.

---

Disagree. A Warrant Officer population is mostly prior-enlisted who already have 5-7 years experience. More stay through retirement than O grade officers. The Air Force is having problems filling/retaining it's pilot ranks and from what I understand. What about the lifestyle needs to be changed?




The vast majority of army pilots are helicopter pilots. While there are lucrative civilian helo jobs, it doesn't compare to the pull of the airlines.

Also, I as an AF IP I have retrained former army fixed wing pilots. Let's just say the two services have very different standards in aviation. Not in quality of people (all my former army guys are awesome), but in quality of training.

As far as what needs to be changed in lifestyle? AF pilots spend most of their time doing desk jobs. They also have to move every 3 years and spend time away on deployments. Airlines offer more money to live in one place and do one thing: fly. Warrant offers only solve one of these problems (decrease in non flying related duties), while making the pay difference even worse.

---

Army Warrant Officers leave to helicopter jobs and the airlines. The value of our FW training has nothing to do with the AF ongoing problem of attrition and ability to field a force of UAV/UAS operators. The argument being made is that you have a retention problem....you aren't going to change folks needing to fulfill 'desk' jobs or rotating out to fill an ALO position elsewhere. Moving three years and deploying? Grab someone who already have five years in, and they have a high probability to stay in for 20 years, collect a retirement, and then also apply for the airlines. I'll concede they give up future seniority....

The Air Force has looked at enlisted operators and bringing WOs over from the Army so I know as a branch of the DoD, they know it's an option. The culture won't take it. Meanwhile, there are people out there in your ranks who want to serve and don't have flying in the airlines as the #1 goal in life.

---

"Grab someone who already have five years in, and they have a high probability to stay in for 20 years."

No. They do not have a high probability. AF pilots have a 10 year active duty commitment that starts AFTER they graduate pilot training. They are walking away with 11-12 years of active duty time. Again, WOs do not address this at all.

Also, I do not have data on what airlines soldiers get hired by, but it would be interesting to see the difference. It is competitive for an AF pilot with over 3,000 hrs and 10+ years to get hired by a major airline, and there is a huge difference in pay between a major airline and a regional. If army officers/WOs are leaving with less than 10 years of time, I doubt they're often competing for a major airline job.

Lastly, yes. There is a big difference between hours in a helicopter or a C-12, than hours in a C-5, C-17, KC-135, etc, especially when you want to fly a big multiengine airline. Airlines care about this.

5 years + 10 year ADSO. 15 years. Higher probability to retire.

Opportunity to move on to a different life is opportunity to move on to a different life. You are filling UAV operators with pilots are you not? Flying an aircraft isn't rocket science...more advanced airframes, missions, and collectively complex tactics require better trained and experienced aviators...but my question is this...do you need a fully qualified aviator to fly every one of your UAS? How are you going to address your attrittion problem assuming there is one? Our job is to deploy and make leaders along the way. That involves moving and deploying. We are doing it with many airframes one year on and one year off. What's your dwell like?

When I say five years...I mean 5 prior enlisted and flight school. Plus or minus.

Are you asking if people are going through pilot training and ending up in drones?


It's been a few years since that's been common,at least to my knowledge. At one point there weren't enough pilot positions floating around and people were graduating from pilot training and getting dropped drones but flying drones is a separate career field with a separate training pipeline.

CharlieBrown17 said:

---

Are you asking if people are going through pilot training and ending up in drones?


It's been a few years since that's been common,at least to my knowledge. At one point there weren't enough pilot positions floating around and people were graduating from pilot training and getting dropped drones but flying drones is a separate career field with a separate training pipeline.

---

This is correct. Pilots were moving to UAVs to fill a temporary shortage while the RPA training pipeline was brought up to full speed.

Fly Army 97 said:

---

Quote:

---

You are filling UAV operators with pilots are you not?

---

---

Only as a temporary measure while the RPA training pipeline got to full speed

Quote:

---

do you need a fully qualified aviator to fly every one of your UAS?

---

Absolutely not. Pilot's who got pushed into RPA's were definitely overqualified.

Quote:

---

how are you going address an attrition problem assuming their is one?

---

A couple thoughts that pilots are interested in:

1. Yes paperwork and desk jobs will always be necessary, but that does not mean they have to be done by pilots. They have started experimenting with adding civilians to run the training, programming, and standards/evaluation shops at certain units. This alleviates a lot of work and let's pilot fly.

2. People are really interested in a "Fly Only" career track, verses a "Command" career track. Essentially, people are willing to forgo promotion opportunities (maybe get capped at O-4) in exchange for more flying opportunities and fewer PCSes. This is essentially what the reservists pilots are doing anyway.

Quote:

---

5 years + 10 year ADSO. 15 years. Higher probability to retire.

---

I agree with this. There are a lot of prior enlisted guys who come through Pilot training, and they make excellent pilots.


There are a lot more ideas out there, and there definitely is a serious retention problem. My point in all this is: I do not think Warrant Officers or enlisted pilots really solve the problems that push people to leave the Air Force.

If I was offered a fly only path when I graduate UPT in 2019 I'd be all over it.

Montgomery Burns

Quote:

---

how are you going address an attrition problem assuming their is one?

---

A couple thoughts that pilots are interested in:

1. Yes paperwork and desk jobs will always be necessary, but that does not mean they have to be done by pilots. They have started experimenting with adding civilians to run the training, programming, and standards/evaluation shops at certain units. This alleviates a lot of work and let's pilot fly.

2. People are really interested in a "Fly Only" career track, verses a "Command" career track. Essentially, people are willing to forgo promotion opportunities (maybe get capped at O-4) in exchange for more flying opportunities and fewer PCSes. This is essentially what the reservists pilots are doing anyway.

Interesting...in the Army my senior Warrant Officers run the day to stands/eval shop at the direction and guidance from the commander. As O grade officers move on, typically the WOs remain the continuity. While most O grade Officers move frequently the WOs can move from 3-5 years depending on their track and needs of the unit.

I'd like to hear what the forthcoming report says about the matter...is it released?

" Lt. Gen. Gina Grosso, the Air Force's personnel chief, said in a March 22 interview at the Pentagon that a long-awaited reporthttps://www.airforcetimes.com/news/your-air-force/2018/04/06/air-force-inches-closer-to-warrant-officers-could-they-fix-the-pilot-crisis/ on the feasibility of re-establishing warrant officers is expected to be finished in April and provided to Congress.

The RAND Corporation was brought in to provide the Air Force with needed "analytical bandwidth" to help inform the service's study, and the group has been researching the issue for months. Rand's findings were due to the Air Force at the end of March."

https://www.airforcetimes.com/news/your-air-force/2018/04/06/air-force-inches-closer-to-warrant-officers-could-they-fix-the-pilot-crisis/

I have not heard a released report, but I'm really interested in what their findings are.