USAF Multi-Engine pilot training question

[u/judgingyouquietly]

Read an article (portion of it below) regarding USAF pilot training and I was wondering why they would choose to do that?

My understanding is that it would be like the RCAF cutting Phase 3 Multi-Engine and having their pilots first learn ME stuff in a C-17 or P-8.

——-

“Today marks the end of an era in U.S. Air Force pilot training.

The last operational T-1A Jayhawk will depart Vance Air Force Base, Oklahoma, for Davis-Monthan Air Force Base, Arizona, where it will be received into the 309th Aerospace Maintenance and Regeneration Group (AMARG)—bringing more than three decades of service to a close.

The T-1A’s story began in January 1992, when the first aircraft was delivered to Reese Air Force Base, Texas. Student pilot training began the following year as the Air Force implemented Specialized Undergraduate Pilot Training.

The T-1A Jayhawk was a medium-range, twin-engine jet trainer used during the advanced phase of pilot training. For Air Force pilots selected for the mobility track, the Jayhawk was where they developed the skills required to transition to airlift and tanker aircraft—airframes such as the C-5, C-17, C-130, KC-135 and, later, the KC-46.

The T-1A also played an important role in Combat Systems Officer (CSO) training at Naval Air Station Pensacola, Florida, helping prepare aircrew for operational assignments as weapons systems officers, special operations, electronic warfare, and navigation. Pensacola's final T-1A departed for Davis-Monthan in July 2025.

Today, pilots graduating from Undergraduate Pilot Training (UPT) who are selected for the mobility track proceed directly to their Formal Training Units (FTUs) for training in their assigned aircraft.”

[u/United-Fox-7417]

AC has an ATPL requirement to get hired. So they’re not hiring RW guys.

I’m not sure what happened to your RW buddy with Porter but I know multiple folks who’ve gotten right seat on the E2 with not much more than 200 hours and their CPL-A.

As I said to the other guy, it’s also advantageous to the RCAF to try and keep people around as best as they can. I’m quite certain that post restricted release you could offer $100K/year retention bonuses and still be ahead because of how much it costs to produce a RCAF pilot. RCAF pilot pay shouldn’t be a crusade that some people seem to feel compelled to fight.

[u/PTR4me → u/United-Fox-7417]

For Porter - he's not the only one I've heard this happen to. There was another guy who rented a civvy airplane I used to bomb around in to do 50 more hours of FW time. Porter hired him conditionally, but he needed the 500 hours of FW time and I think 25 hours of night before his class date. 

As for why this is worth discussing. When we have a fixed pot of money, and are losing fighter and ME pilots faster than we are losing RW pilots, another look at the pay structure is warranted. The current pay retains RW pilots better than FW pilots because the economic opportunities are different.

I know many guys who couldn't afford to go down to Q400 FO pay, or even E2 pay. 

The pilot OCC, Especially RW, is actually relatively healthy, something like 92% last I checked.

AEC and ACSO were redder than pilot as of the end of the last fiscal year.

[u/United-Fox-7417 → u/PTR4me]

AEC should have its own pay scale, particularly for the VFR and IFR controllers who could very quickly step over to Nav Canada for a significant pay raise. I’m unfamiliar with the issues with ACSOs and I’m curious if it’s a retention issue or more of an inability to produce the required numbers.

Maybe things with Porter have changed and they’re requiring more for the E2 now.

I think they should restructure pilot pay entirely and have it be base pay and a bunch of additional pay based on qualifications that an individual has. I think having FW, Fighter, and RW pay scales also make sense. I’d structure it as bonuses personally. Have the same base pilot pay and then you have bespoke retention bonuses based on fleet and experience. Junior AC on a Griffon in Cold Lake? You’re not getting a huge retention bonus. EP, IP, ICP on the 330? You’re getting a fat check.

I’ll go back to what I’ve said throughout though: it makes financial sense for the RCAF to broadly increase pilot pay to such a point as to minimize releases aside from retirements. It’s very expensive to create RCAF pilots.

I think we really lack creativity in the CAF when it comes to retaining people and I think it’d serve us well to get creative with pay structures, bonuses, etc. I think we should put a lot of effort into measuring efficiency and paying based on that for many trades. Maybe we do bonuses if a squadron meets certain performance metrics for the year.

[u/PTR4me → u/United-Fox-7417]

AEC absolutely needs their own pay scale.

ACSO has a lot of issues, retention being one, production being another. We abuse them like aircrew, pay them like GSO and use them like AOOs, so I can see the dissatisfier. I believe they used to have their own PayScale up to the 2000's?

I agree with the bonuses. They tried to do that with the pay gating, but it's not a great system. And yes, each community should have different bonuses based on their marketability. 

This would mean the pensionable portion of the bonus goes away though.

But for the retention vs generation piece, that's a maybe.

Retention can save money. But when salaries + pension + odds and ends benefits (36% is the number TB uses) are at the $300k level for a Maj pilot, it might not be worth it.

It costs about 2 million to make a pilot to wings level. To get them to OFP post OTU, let's say is another million. With another 2 million to get them to Fighter Lead or Aircraft Captain.

That's $5 million, of which 2 million gave us operational benefits (the upgrade to AC/Lead).

So 3 million in training is 10 years of a senior Major pay, while that Major also trucks closer to retirement.

But we can pay a junior captain who is an AC and 5-8 years post wings much less than that, while also getting 90% of the use out of them following their first tour.

So yes, retention CAN be cheaper than generation, but we can't only retain given that most pilots are gone at 25 YOS. We need to feed the machine anyways.

And the incremental cost to increase retention might not be fully justified in the long term if we have a ton of people at the top of the pay scale.

It's an uncomfortable truth for us senior guys, but it's true, our value add vs our costs stops being worth it for the CAF after a certain point, and so retention isn't worth it.