U.S. Air Force Pilots Fly Less than Indian and Chinese Air force Pilots

[rockstarIN]

I read some where 150 hr is the NATO standard. (or 250?)

And It is not only about flying hours, it will an hour or so for pre-flight discussions and more hours for after flight analysis in the class room.

 

[drunken-monke]

May be another ploy by the US defense agencies to get more funds....

 

[scientien]

Flying hours wont matter when a raptor will kill even without you knowing what hit you from that distance . Those sitting in the United States aren't a joke

ouuuu wouuuu wauuuuuu yea they don't need fly hours after all they are "YOU ***", keep you're BS to yoself dude.

 

[gambit]

It sucks...But we have gone thru this before like when the US military had a massive re-org back in the Reagan years. As always, the issues are duration and severity. Am not going to quibble on whether any hours are from simulators or not. Although like most skills in that flying is a perishable skill, in order for the USAF to match the low level of Soviet era pilots, budget cuts would have to be doubled from today and remain that low. Then morale will begin to be affected and that will lead to a lot of voluntary withdrawals from the ranks. The new recruits will be the first generation where the new reduced flying hours will be the norm and THAT will mean the beginning of the decline of the USAF. Right now, there are still a lot, some would say too much, institutional memory of skills and actual combat.

 

[janon]

It sucks...But we have gone thru this before like when the US military had a massive re-org back in the Reagan years. As always, the issues are duration and severity. Am not going to quibble on whether any hours are from simulators or not. Although like most skills in that flying is a perishable skill, in order for the USAF to match the low level of Soviet era pilots, budget cuts would have to be doubled from today and remain that low. Then morale will begin to be affected and that will lead to a lot of voluntary withdrawals from the ranks. The new recruits will be the first generation where the new reduced flying hours will be the norm and THAT will mean the beginning of the decline of the USAF. Right now, there are still a lot, some would say too much, institutional memory of skills and actual combat.

To cut costs, isn't it better for the USAF to downsize, rather than cut training quality? The size can be quickly increased if necessary, but not training quality.

As of now the USAF has quite a few squadrons of very old f-15s and f-16s, why not retire them and put them away as reserves? While retaining high quality for operational squadrons and pilots and other crew? Later on when the F-35s arrive, you can make up the numbers anyway - the US industrial base can churn aircrafts out like pancakes if needed.

For the USAF at this point of time, isn't retaining quality more important than retaining numbers?

What is your opinion on having capped F-22s to 189? Was that a bad decision? The F-35s, which were supposed to form the low cost bulk, is turning out to be nearly as expensive, taking program costs into consideration.

 

[drunken-monke]

It sucks...But we have gone thru this before like when the US military had a massive re-org back in the Reagan years. As always, the issues are duration and severity. Am not going to quibble on whether any hours are from simulators or not. Although like most skills in that flying is a perishable skill, in order for the USAF to match the low level of Soviet era pilots, budget cuts would have to be doubled from today and remain that low. Then morale will begin to be affected and that will lead to a lot of voluntary withdrawals from the ranks. The new recruits will be the first generation where the new reduced flying hours will be the norm and THAT will mean the beginning of the decline of the USAF. Right now, there are still a lot, some would say too much, institutional memory of skills and actual combat.

They say, if Lumberjack stop sharping edge of wood cutting axes, business would automatically decline...
Considering the nature of political situations arising all over the world, surely this flying hours stats might regain its previous status...
USAF always believed in Quality.. lets see their response to this scenario...

 

[My-Analogous]

Now a day technology is advance and you will get flight simulators and other advance equipment to give you real war simulation enable US to reduce on Air training

 

[gambit]

To cut costs, isn't it better for the USAF to downsize, rather than cut training quality? The size can be quickly increased if necessary, but not training quality.

You can have 10 pilots at 100 hrs/mth, or 20 pilots at 50 hrs/mth, for the same budget. The problems with force quality and capability begins when you enter the extremes, such as 5 pilots at 200 hrs/mth, or 40 pilots at 20 hrs/mth. On the one hand, you have a small but very capable cadre of pilots who can handle any opponent or several opponents, but whose effectiveness for any conflict is questionable because the group is too small. On the other hand, you have a larger group of pilots that while may not have as much skills as their predecessors, their larger numbers enables you to conduct more operations.

For US, we can afford to reduce the money available for flying because we have such a large library of combat skills and experience, ready to be used at any time. Gains in proficiency are best when attempts to gain experience is backed up institutional memory.

What is your opinion on having capped F-22s to 189? Was that a bad decision? The F-35s, which were supposed to form the low cost bulk, is turning out to be nearly as expensive, taking program costs into consideration.

Yes, it was a bad decision. The -22 is very much a revolutionary fighter that we should have at least 300 fighters to give as much pilots experience with it as possible.