What is the selection boards selection rate (acceptance rate) for WOFT street to seat?

[pjakesc270]

What is the U.S. Army's selection board selection rate (acceptance rate) for WOFT street to seat applicants with a solid packet? let me add that the packet would have a degree in aeronautics and previous rotary wing flight hours.

[UD11]

I got selected as a street-to-seater roughly two years ago and the acceptance rate for my board was about 35-40%. It varies though. 

[zaurus]

Pjakesc270

Regarding Street2Seat, you must also take this into consideration. How many prior service civilians are applying in comparison to those who never served. I bet it's not a 50/50 split. Prior service WOFT applicants more than likely have an advantage in selection.

You shouldn't have any difficulty in being selected with your stats unless your ACFT/AFPT really really sucks. Flight school  averages at least a 95% graduation rate. Everyone comes out as a COPILOT. Marginal students can be passed on.

Enjoy the 11.5-12 year commitment. Have you thought of flying for another service?

 

 

[pjakesc270]

On 6/16/2020 at 6:31 PM, zaurus said:

Pjakesc270

Regarding Street2Seat, you must also take this into consideration. How many prior service civilians are applying in comparison to those who never served. I bet it's not a 50/50 split. Prior service WOFT applicants more than likely have an advantage in selection.

You shouldn't have any difficulty in being selected with your stats unless your ACFT/AFPT really really sucks. Flight school  averages at least a 95% graduation rate. Everyone comes out as a COPILOT. Marginal students can be passed on.

Enjoy the 11.5-12 year commitment. Have you thought of flying for another service?

 

 

Im only 17 and weighing my options for what I want to do when I'm older. I know I would enjoy a career in flying for the military. I want to go helicopters and the Army seems the best for it. Moving forward I'm looking at going to college for a minimum of 4 years and getting some type of degree in an aeronautics related subject. Along with a possible aeronautics degree I would get a PPL and additional flight hours. With a aeronautics degree and previous flight hours along with a solid packet (LOR's, test scores, etc) do you think there would be a solid chance at getting selected? I can't find reliable stats anywhere of the selection rates or acceptances.

[nil5038]

Yeaaaaa. Sorry man with the increased service obligation and extended time til you’re eligible for promotion I’d recommend going to a different branch. My two cents.

[pjakesc270]

3 hours ago, nil5038 said:

Yeaaaaa. Sorry man with the increased service obligation and extended time til you’re eligible for promotion I’d recommend going to a different branch. My two cents.

I'm just wondering what the selection rates are. I will decide all that stuff separately because everyone is willing to do different time and stuff. Do you have stats on acceptances with an application like the one I said above?

 

thanks 

[zaurus]

Being 17, you  may want to take this under advisement. The Army WOFT program is ONE of THE BEST enlistment options of ALL the services. Requiring only a HS diploma in being a pilot and Officer.  

But there is an underlining issue which takes the bloom off the rose with the new commitment of 11.5-12 years on ACTIVE DUTY. The new commitment will make you INELIGIBLE in crossing over to another active duty service flight program UNLESS you initially started as an Army Reserve or Army Guard pilot possibly. The other active duty services would require more than 8 or 9 year commitment before being retirement eligible at 20 years.

Prior to the increase in time, it was possible to fly in another active duty service being a former Army aviator upon completion of your obligation without waivers. 

A few years ago, a former Army Reserve Chief Warrant Officer UH-60 pilot flew the slot position (#4) in the THUNDERBIRDS. Obviously after completing college, AF OTS, SUPT and more than a few years flying the F-16 as an active duty officer.

So, my recommendation is quite simply, complete college and select 1 of the other services in being a pilot.  Each profession has a pecking order. WOFT should be your last option in having a 4yr degree. You'll find very few Army pilots would disagree if they had options in flying in another service.

Don't be concern on the WOFT stats. The Army been training pilots for OVER a HALF CENTURY without 1 minute of flight experience nor a college degree. Obviously flight experience and a degree is an added plus. Some wise and old CW5  pilot told me long ago, can't be accepted if you don't apply.

Do remember, if you decide on the WOFT program, it's a 1000 times better than sitting behind a desk ALL day and possibly dying of BOREDOM in looking up at the sky.

My 2 cents and sticking with it. 

[parking]

There are no statistics for the acceptance rate criteria you are specifying. Army likes the whole person concept and a lot of those statistics aren't quantifiable. A "solid packet" with flight hours and a degree can also be an applicant having no degree or flight hours.

The Army doesn't release a percentage/rate based on certain statistics, only the number of accepted versus number of applicants.

Recently they have been accepting 20 per board, but you may have 21 candidates apply (95% acceptance rate) or 69 apply (29% acceptance rate) at any given board. So the "rate" can be a crapshoot and others here are trying to tell you don't get hung up on statistics.

With the changes to the 10 year commitment, there may be less applicants. When you get older and apply, maybe there will be more applicants. If a war kicks off, maybe the Army will take anyone with a pulse. This is why the adage of "your acceptance rate would be zero if you don't apply" is used around here.

 

[pjakesc270]

2 hours ago, parking said:

There are no statistics for the acceptance rate criteria you are specifying. Army likes the whole person concept and a lot of those statistics aren't quantifiable. A "solid packet" with flight hours and a degree can also be an applicant having no degree or flight hours.

The Army doesn't release a percentage/rate based on certain statistics, only the number of accepted versus number of applicants.

Recently they have been accepting 20 per board, but you may have 21 candidates apply (95% acceptance rate) or 69 apply (29% acceptance rate) at any given board. So the "rate" can be a crapshoot and others here are trying to tell you don't get hung up on statistics.

With the changes to the 10 year commitment, there may be less applicants. When you get older and apply, maybe there will be more applicants. If a war kicks off, maybe the Army will take anyone with a pulse. This is why the adage of "your acceptance rate would be zero if you don't apply" is used around here.

 

ok thanks.

[pjakesc270]

2 hours ago, parking said:

There are no statistics for the acceptance rate criteria you are specifying. Army likes the whole person concept and a lot of those statistics aren't quantifiable. A "solid packet" with flight hours and a degree can also be an applicant having no degree or flight hours.

The Army doesn't release a percentage/rate based on certain statistics, only the number of accepted versus number of applicants.

Recently they have been accepting 20 per board, but you may have 21 candidates apply (95% acceptance rate) or 69 apply (29% acceptance rate) at any given board. So the "rate" can be a crapshoot and others here are trying to tell you don't get hung up on statistics.

With the changes to the 10 year commitment, there may be less applicants. When you get older and apply, maybe there will be more applicants. If a war kicks off, maybe the Army will take anyone with a pulse. This is why the adage of "your acceptance rate would be zero if you don't apply" is used around here.

 

ok thanks.

[nil5038]

10 hours ago, pjakesc270 said:

I'm just wondering what the selection rates are. I will decide all that stuff separately because everyone is willing to do different time and stuff. Do you have stats on acceptances with an application like the one I said above?

 

thanks 

i heard about 2/3 got accepted this board. But like others stated you have to consider prior service applicants like myself, who has prior commissioned officer experience. I probably got a leg up because of that. And also times change. This board was about 60% accepted, but i've seen other boards have 20-30% acceptance rate.

[jkray]

13 hours ago, nil5038 said:

Yeaaaaa. Sorry man with the increased service obligation and extended time til you’re eligible for promotion I’d recommend going to a different branch. My two cents.

I don’t know why everyone is getting so bent out of shape about the 10 year commitment. I can’t speak for what the Air Force does but in the Navy/Marine Corps, the basic ADSO is 8 years starting post flight school with more years tacked on if you go certain airframes. Also getting through the pipeline at Pensacola is a 2 year MINIMUM ordeal, so by the time you wing, you are already a senior 1stLt or a Capt. Yeah the ADSO might be lower but that clock doesn’t start for longer. The Army seems to have the shortest flight school timeline from what I can tell, which means the clock starts ticking for you sooner than the other branches. Also as was stated by Zaurus, the army is the only branch that will allow someone to fly without first obtaining a college degree. It really all evens out in the end, and which branch one goes to should be based on the mission/type of aircraft they want. Each branch does its own thing with aviation so a prospective pilot should do the research and introspective thinking to figure out what the best fit is for them, then pursue that with everything they’ve got.

[zaurus]

USAF SUPT commitment is ten years after winging. SUPT 49 weeks and OTS is 8 weeks..

[pjakesc270]

41 minutes ago, jkray said:

I don’t know why everyone is getting so bent out of shape about the 10 year commitment. I can’t speak for what the Air Force does but in the Navy/Marine Corps, the basic ADSO is 8 years starting post flight school with more years tacked on if you go certain airframes. Also getting through the pipeline at Pensacola is a 2 year MINIMUM ordeal, so by the time you wing, you are already a senior 1stLt or a Capt. Yeah the ADSO might be lower but that clock doesn’t start for longer. The Army seems to have the shortest flight school timeline from what I can tell, which means the clock starts ticking for you sooner than the other branches. Also as was stated by Zaurus, the army is the only branch that will allow someone to fly without first obtaining a college degree. It really all evens out in the end, and which branch one goes to should be based on the mission/type of aircraft they want. Each branch does its own thing with aviation so a prospective pilot should do the research and introspective thinking to figure out what the best fit is for them, then pursue that with everything they’ve got.

Thats what I'm was thinking especially if its your career choice. 10 years doesn't seem to be that bad.

[nil5038]

21 hours ago, jkray said:

I don’t know why everyone is getting so bent out of shape about the 10 year commitment. I can’t speak for what the Air Force does but in the Navy/Marine Corps, the basic ADSO is 8 years starting post flight school with more years tacked on if you go certain airframes. Also getting through the pipeline at Pensacola is a 2 year MINIMUM ordeal, so by the time you wing, you are already a senior 1stLt or a Capt. Yeah the ADSO might be lower but that clock doesn’t start for longer. The Army seems to have the shortest flight school timeline from what I can tell, which means the clock starts ticking for you sooner than the other branches. Also as was stated by Zaurus, the army is the only branch that will allow someone to fly without first obtaining a college degree. It really all evens out in the end, and which branch one goes to should be based on the mission/type of aircraft they want. Each branch does its own thing with aviation so a prospective pilot should do the research and introspective thinking to figure out what the best fit is for them, then pursue that with everything they’ve got.

I wouldn’t say bent out of shape. For me personally, the only way I’m effected is I’ll blow past the 12-14 year window for the 105k bonus. Sucks, but not the end of the world. And these things change anyways. Right now my plan is to do my 20. I left the navy to come do this and while these changes weren’t present when I first made the decision, it wouldn’t have deterred me from my choice.

 

my opinion about army aviation vs other branches for other applicants is mostly based on $ and your flying portfolio once you get out. Especially with the delay in promotion which other branches don’t do, you’re doing the same job for far less money and Now for the same amount of time. In addition, pilots in other branches can easier build a flying portfolio To their liking. A lot of helo pilots I’ve met in the Navy have their commercial in rotary and fixed wing, all given to them by the navy. 
 

I think I made it seem like I think people should run away from army aviation and I didn’t mean to put it that way. But I do think these factors should be considered and compared to other flight programs. It depends on why you’re looking to get into this job.

[Thedude]

A lot of people don't want to waste the time and money on a piece of paper in order to be eligible to fly for the other services. Regardless of the service committment that is a big factor for trying to go for Army Aviation. 

[SBuzzkill]

On 6/19/2020 at 12:47 PM, jkray said:

I don’t know why everyone is getting so bent out of shape about the 10 year commitment. I can’t speak for what the Air Force does but in the Navy/Marine Corps, the basic ADSO is 8 years starting post flight school with more years tacked on if you go certain airframes. Also getting through the pipeline at Pensacola is a 2 year MINIMUM ordeal, so by the time you wing, you are already a senior 1stLt or a Capt. Yeah the ADSO might be lower but that clock doesn’t start for longer. The Army seems to have the shortest flight school timeline from what I can tell, which means the clock starts ticking for you sooner than the other branches. Also as was stated by Zaurus, the army is the only branch that will allow someone to fly without first obtaining a college degree. It really all evens out in the end, and which branch one goes to should be based on the mission/type of aircraft they want. Each branch does its own thing with aviation so a prospective pilot should do the research and introspective thinking to figure out what the best fit is for them, then pursue that with everything they’ve got.

I finished up my Army time with 9 years of service, just over a year above and beyond my commitment.  

The ratings and experience you receive as an Army Aviator are not even close to a fixed wing aviator in another service.  You just don’t have the same options once you get out.  It’s not worth over a decade of service especially as a Warrant Officer.

The commitment does not match the ratings, and is an attempt to forcibly retain aviators in a historical experience gap.  Think about that.  They’re increasing the commitment because they know you’re going to want out when you get there.

Combine that with the fatigue felt over your time in service.  By the time I reached the end of my commitment I was burnt out.  I have friends who are close to retirement and were seriously considering leaving early and giving it up.  I loved the job, including the parts most guys hated, and was sad to be leaving it.  But after almost a decade it was time to move on.

Tie my hands for another 3 years?  I might have left the service bitter instead of with pride.

Pay attention to who is concerned.  It’s not the bright eyed bushy tailed applicants and students, it’s the experienced folks who have been there and done that.

 

Edited June 21, 2020 by SBuzzkill

[jkray]

3 hours ago, SBuzzkill said:

I finished up my Army time with 9 years of service, just over a year above and beyond my commitment.  

The ratings and experience you receive as an Army Aviator are not even close to a fixed wing aviator in another service.  You just don’t have the same options once you get out.  It’s not worth over a decade of service especially as a Warrant Officer.

The commitment does not match the ratings, and is an attempt to forcibly retain aviators in a historical experience gap.  Think about that.  They’re increasing the commitment because they know you’re going to want out when you get there.

Combine that with the fatigue felt over your time in service.  By the time I reached the end of my commitment I was burnt out.  I have friends who are close to retirement and were seriously considering leaving early and giving it up.  I loved the job, including the parts most guys hated, and was sad to be leaving it.  But after almost a decade it was time to move on.

Tie my hands for another 3 years?  I might have left the service bitter instead of with pride.

Pay attention to who is concerned.  It’s not the bright eyed bushy tailed applicants and students, it’s the experienced folks who have been there and done that.

 

What ratings would you like to see? When I leave flight school I will have my FAA Commercial Instrument Rotary Wing ticket, and thanks to the credentialing program also my fixed wing Private Pilots License. I’m not necessarily arguing with you but the other branches have a pilot shortage as well. Just look at the air force who a couple years ago un-retired a metric butt load of pilots.
 

I know who is concerned about it, and you are right it’s mostly those who have been there and done that, but on the other hand I’m coming up on 7 years TIS myself and I would have no problem signing a 10 year contract to fly.

Edited June 21, 2020 by jkray

[Thedude]

22 minutes ago, jkray said:

What ratings would you like to see? When I leave flight school I will have my FAA Commercial Instrument Rotary Wing ticket, and thanks to the credentialing program also my fixed wing Private Pilots License. I’m not necessarily arguing with you but the other branches have a pilot shortage as well. Just look at the air force who a couple years ago un-retired a metric butt load of pilots.
 

I know who is concerned about it, and you are right it’s mostly those who have been there and done that, but on the other hand I’m coming up on 7 years TIS myself and I would have no problem signing a 10 year contract to fly.

You'll have those ratings but even after a six year ADSO many pilots don't have the required hours to use those ratings at a decent civilian job. If things go the way they are heading we will fly even less as deployments to the middle east are just about done and the flying hours there are already significantly reduced. After a ten year ADSO in what may potentially be a relatively peacetime army you'll get out with maybe 2000 hours if you're lucky. 

Ten years is a long time when the majority of people going into army aviation don't actually know what they're getting themselves into. The army doesn't care that you're a pilot and your primary job is not flying, anything at all aviation related is only about 30% of what you really do. 

[nil5038]

I was just about to mention that mr Kray is no cherry either. He’s been around the block as well.
 

But Having the ratings and having experience using them makes a big difference in how valuable you are.

 

someone correct me if I’m wrong, but to my knowledge we have some birds not even capable of flying IFR. And even with the ones that are, (Minus the c-12) you’re leaving the army with very little instrument time in your logbook.

[SBuzzkill]

7 hours ago, jkray said:

What ratings would you like to see? When I leave flight school I will have my FAA Commercial Instrument Rotary Wing ticket, and thanks to the credentialing program also my fixed wing Private Pilots License. I’m not necessarily arguing with you but the other branches have a pilot shortage as well. Just look at the air force who a couple years ago un-retired a metric butt load of pilots.
 

I know who is concerned about it, and you are right it’s mostly those who have been there and done that, but on the other hand I’m coming up on 7 years TIS myself and I would have no problem signing a 10 year contract to fly.

You’re leaving with the same ratings everyone has.  I’m telling you what they’re worth, which is the current ADSO.  

For ~12 years committed to the service you better leave with the certifications and experience to guarantee a follow on career that allows you to at least match your military pay and increase your quality of life.  You’re not going to get that as a rotary wing Army Aviator, so why pay such a high price for it?  

I’ve given a lot of encouragement to future aviators through my time, but with things the way they were when I left Army Aviation mixed with the large commitment being asked I can’t recommend it anymore.  There are better paths to serve and fly.

Edited June 22, 2020 by SBuzzkill

[jkray]

10 hours ago, SBuzzkill said:

You’re leaving with the same ratings everyone has.  I’m telling you what they’re worth, which is the current ADSO.  

For ~12 years committed to the service you better leave with the certifications and experience to guarantee a follow on career that allows you to at least match your military pay and increase your quality of life.  You’re not going to get that as a rotary wing Army Aviator, so why pay such a high price for it?  

I’ve given a lot of encouragement to future aviators through my time, but with things the way they were when I left Army Aviation mixed with the large commitment being asked I can’t recommend it anymore.  There are better paths to serve and fly.

Understood, ultimately it doesn’t affect me because I have a 6 year contract, and of course not having served in an Army Aviation unit I did not know about lack of flight time.  I was interested to see the reasoning behind all the hullabaloo over the new stuff as my viewpoint didn’t change that much. Let’s see what the next 6 years bring and I can make my decision then

[SBuzzkill]

6 years after flight school is perfect for what you get.  If you end up with a similar experience to what I had you’re going to really enjoy your career.  If you’re coming from the Army you have a good idea of what to expect from the big Army side, which means you’re set to enjoy the perks of being an Aviator.  I was street to seat, but for whatever reason I had a much easier time adjusting to the “green” side of things vs. my Navy/Air Force peers.

 

Edited June 22, 2020 by SBuzzkill

[flanker]

On 6/19/2020 at 9:47 AM, jkray said:

I don’t know why everyone is getting so bent out of shape about the 10 year commitment. 

Look man it's very simple as far as the active side is concerned... You have overall an organization that does not treat well/doesn't care about its highly trained and specialized professionals. Proper Aviation heritage and culture left with the AF a long time ago. To quote one of our own again...   " The Army will still be the Army without it's pilots" 

6-8 years is bearable... 10-12 is a whole different ball game. 

AF NG/Res components are taking prior Army aviators now with age waivers to fill slots. Good news for those of us coming up on the end of the commitment.