Let’s face it. Time is robbing our armed services of well-qualified and experienced combat pilots faster than they are being replaced, and the situation looks as if it will grow worse instead of better. The menace of bacterial warfare or attack by atomic bomb is multiplied by the likelihood of our not having men ready to defend us against such attacks.
The increased stress of high speed and high altitude flying makes it increasingly hard to find men who have what it takes to fly our modern military aircraft. To meet this problem we need larger numbers of applicants for flight training; instead, the Air Force and Naval Aviation training quotas are going unfilled. The recent publicity attendant upon the refusal to fly on the part of certain reserve pilots in the Air Force has brought to the public consciousness only a hint of a problem which has been growing in importance in military aviation for some time. The fact of the matter is that interest in flying has been fading severely in recent years.
Yet, as General Eisenhower said in his last report to NATO, “Air-power is the dominant factor in war today. It cannot win a war alone, but without it no war can be won. Our goal is to create air strength capable of answering immediately the onslaught of an aggressor and covering, at the same time, the mobilization of Reserve Forces. Since we cannot predict when an attack might be launched, our air forces must be operationally ready at all times.”
The need to keep our planes up-to-date in numbers and quality is generally recognized, but few people are aware of the parallel need to keep a pool of flying personnel in a state of modern readiness. Veterans who no longer measure up physically or mentally to the demands of modern flying must be replaced. This means if we are to keep our air forces prepared to meet any emergency, we must keep up a training program which will constantly provide new pilots.
Furthermore, the problem is even greater than it first appears, because the entire pool of pilots who were trained during World War II are fast approaching the age when they will be considered too old to fly. The average age of the Navy pilots now available is, for example, over 30, and yet the Navy is presently not calling to active duty pilots over 36 years old. Indications are, then, that the average Navy pilot flying today will be considered “too old” in about five years. The situation in the United States Air Force was pointed up when General Hoyt S. Vandenberg, Chief of Staff, told a special subcommittee of the Senate Armed Services Committee, “There is a dangerous illusion that the national pool of flying skills is unlimited. That notion no doubt derives from the tremendous aircrew training program during the last war, when approximately 193,000 pilots were turned out. But what many forget is that this war-created reservoir has been steadily drying up. The vast majority of World War II airmen have resumed their civilian pursuits. Only the relative few who joined the Organized Reserves and the National Guard have kept their flying skills alive. It is possible to put an airplane in mothballs and have it function with reasonable effectiveness when a need for it arises. But it is impossible to do the same with a pilot. Many circumstances conspire to make him unavailable or unusable. The passing of time has made its inroads; our World War II air crewmen are now seven years older.
“When we consider means of replenishing this supply of flying officers we encounter two difficulties; first, the fact that the increasing demands of modern military flying limit considerably the proportion of the male population which can meet the requirements, and second, the fact that motivation to fly military aircraft has apparently diminished greatly during the past few years.”
As General Vandenberg indicates the proportion of men who can measure up to the demands of modern military flying is seriously limited. The physiological requirements alone are formidable. Not only must the pilots of the future be as well-qualified physically as the pilots of World War II, but as planes fly higher and faster, the men who pilot them must be increasingly able to endure physiological strain. Men cannot fly at the altitude attained by modern day jet planes without the aid of breathing equipment which will force oxygen into the lungs under pressure, and many men cannot long endure this type of pressure breathing and remain able to function efficiently. There are also wide differences between individuals in their ability to endure the high centrifugal forces encountered in modern military flying. The man who pilots our aircraft of the future must be a physically superior individual.
But if the problem of finding men qualified physiologically is tough, that of finding men psychologically adapted is tougher. The modern pilot must be able to react intelligently in an emergency; he must be mechanically-minded enough to understand his airplane; he must have the educational background to handle such problems as are involved in navigation; and he must have the qualities of leadership which will enable him to direct the activities of his aircrew and other support personnel. Men possessing the desirable physiological and psychological characteristics needed to fly modern military aircraft are hard to find. Under existing standards only about 5% of potential prospects for aviation training are found qualified and enlisted. And probably standards will become tougher. Only a small part of the male population has what it takes.
Then, once we have found the right men, we must train them; and since it takes at least a year to train a novice pilot, we cannot wait until an enemy attacks our shores to do the job. Our cities and industrial centers might be obliterated by atomic bombs in much less time. The over-all supply of qualified pilots must be maintained by taking into training adequate numbers of cadets to keep replacing those pilots no longer fit for combat. However, the number of volunteers for flight training is not sufficient to meet this need.
In his address before the Senate subcommittee General Vandenberg said, “I would not like to give the impression that our youth is losing its sense of duty, or its zestfulness. But the fact cannot be blinked that the Air Force is meeting increasing difficulty in attracting sufficient numbers of young men physically and mentally qualified for flying.” Naval and Marine Corps aviation has also been suffering from similar difficulties. Early signs of fading interest in flying appeared as early as May and June, 1949, when a publicity team “toured” twenty cities of the United States displaying the Navy aircraft, “Constitution,” and exhibiting Navy and Marine Corps stunt teams. As a result of excellent cooperation from the radio and press in the areas visited, tremendous crowds attended these events publicizing naval and Marine Corps air training; but when it was all over, the expected response from the young men of the nation was not forthcoming. During these and preceding months, another program to enroll college graduates for flight training as regular Navy ensigns in a probationary status took fifteen months, instead of two, to find the required numbers. More recently the Navy and Marine Corps aviation program has been carried on with students amassed in an earlier backlog while the U. S. Naval Reserve Air Stations have generally fallen far short of filling their required quotas.
This apparent lack of interest in aviation on the part of the young men of the nation is becoming a more serious problem day after day. Yet even those who are aware of the situation are at present at a loss to discover a solution to the dilemma involved. The good combat pilot is one who likes to fly, and a man can hardly be forced to take a plane into combat against his will and do a bang-up fighting job. It might be possible to increase the number of pilots in training by drafting those with the physical qualifications, but to do so would increase the number of unwilling, poorly-motivated pilots. On the other hand, if we continue to depend upon the voluntary enrollment of qualified men, we will soon have inadequate numbers to defend our nation properly.
Needless to say our military leaders are concerned that a solution to this predicament be discovered. What has caused this loss of interest in flying and how can it be reestablished? Among those reasons advanced in explanation of this post-war military problem have been the relative decrease in economic advantages in flying careers and an increasing fear of flying induced by reports of recent accidents. General Vandenberg, for example, in part of the same statement quoted above, said, “From the studies we have made, it is plain that a number of different factors are responsible. Two, however, appear to be dominant. One has to do with the hazard of military flying; the other is economic. The plain fact is that, even with the present level of hazard-incentive pay, the income of a military pilot is no longer enough to attract as many high quality youth as we need. In other words, the money margin is no longer as effective an inducement as it once was, either in recruiting or influencing those already in the military service to choose in favor of a continuing flying career.” Now, it is true, of course, that money is an important incentive, but are those who are primarily concerned with the monetary rewards of flying the kind who make good combat pilots? It is also true that accident reports in recent years have reminded the people of the dangers of flying, but are the hazards of aviation any greater today than in times past? When one thinks about the heroes of aviation in days gone by, one recalls the exploits of men like Rickenbacker, ace of World War I; Lindberg, the first man to fly the Atlantic alone; Ely, the first pilot to land aboard an aircraft carrier; Price, the first to make a carrier landing at night. Such outstanding pilots braved the dangers before them with their eyes on achievement, not on monetary rewards. It is impossible to believe that they were enticed into flight training by the lure of money or were ignorant of the hazards that confronted them in flying the “baling wire crates” of those days. Such men sought flying careers for the sheer love of flying, and their greatness was a product of their enthusiasm.
In those early days of aviation many young men looked forward eagerly to the chance to fly and clung eagerly to that chance when they got it. In many training centers a favorite way of testing out the fortitude of the pilot was to take him up and “wring him out.” If he still wanted to fly after being given the most hair-raising experience of his life, he was “in.” Today the opposite sort of treatment is given flight cadets. They are given every inducement to fly and every reasonable sort of effort is made to keep up their motivation and morale; yet, fewer and fewer young men are trying to get into flight training and many of those who are in flying are trying to get out.
What then, is the reason for this loss of interest, this loss of enthusiasm? Have the young people of today less courage than their fathers or older brothers? Perhaps some people who like to find fault with the younger generation would answer this in the affirmative. However, the fact that this is not true is obvious to all who read the daily reports of the young men fighting in Korea both on the ground and in the air. American manhood is demonstrating once again its ability to face danger where the need is recognized. Certainly the diminished interest in aviation training cannot be expressed in terms of any loss of courage on the part of those who should be preparing for aviation careers. Where does the true answer lie? Apparently it rests in the fact that flying has ceased to sound its challenge to the spirit of adventure in American youth.
In days past the very dangers inherent in flying constituted a dare to our young men with courage. The glamour of flying rested not only upon the wings that the pilot wore upon his chest but upon the daring that these wings symbolized. The mere fact that a person was an aviator set him apart as one who had proved himself beyond the standards of ordinary mortals. He was the envy of all who dreamed of accomplishing the impossible.
Today the picture is changed. As flying has become more commonplace it has tended to lose this glamour. Flying became so widespread during World War II as to render the experience relatively commonplace. The pilot was no longer a rare person. He was the boy next door or down the street; he was a brother or an uncle or the “old man.” Familiarity with fliers bred contempt for their achievements. Furthermore, it is often true that the easier anything is to get the less we want it. When the armed forces didn’t need many pilots, they could afford to be “choosey.” Then, many applied and few were chosen. Now things are different. The demand for large numbers of pilots during and since the war has put the Air Force and the Navy in a position of seeking flight students rather than selecting them from applicants eager to fly.
From the point of view of the young man fresh out of school, military aviation has become a commodity in a buyers’ market. In an Air Force Information Letter, dated April 18, 1952, Mr. Finletter, Secretary of the Air Force, pointed out, “The Air Force is in competition with all the careers that the able young men of America have before them. We want to see that we get our share of the most able young people of the country; otherwise the Air Force won’t be able to do its job . . . [But] there are all sorts of pressures to make them choose a safer and easier career.”
That Navy and Marine Corps Aviation is faced with a similar situation is borne out in a recent study at the U. S. Naval School of Aviation Medicine. Naval Aviation cadets were asked to write frankly, honestly, and anonymously their reasons for entering the flight training program, and the results were highly revealing. Only about one third gave interest in aviation as their primary reason, and only one half of the cadets questioned mentioned interest in aviation as having contributed at all to their decision to enter the training program. Many bluntly stated the primary reason to be that they expected to be forced to undergo military training in some capacity and had decided that under the circumstances the Naval Aviation training program was the most desirable way of satisfying that requirement. Many other reasons were good and even patriotic, but the important thing is that at least two thirds of those questioned were not primarily interested in flying, and there is even reason to question the genuineness of the interest expressed in the remainder of the cases.
It appears that many of our eligible young men today are weighing the chance to fly on scales of economic opportunity and physical ease. I5ut obviously, our armed forces cannot compete with modern industry in terms of high income and short working hours. Experience proves this to be true.
Starting with the big recruiting programs during World War II, the Air Force, Navy, and Marine Corps have pushed programs emphasizing the attractive features of aviation training, and the tendency since has been toward multiplying these inducements wherever possible. Unfortunately, however, the high type of young man needed in present day aviation is also in great demand elsewhere. Military aviation simply cannot compete with other users of manpower on the mere basis of high income, safety, and promise of a life of ease.
In addition, the piling up of inducements can do little but diminish morale, for when we are led to expect much, we tend to be easily disappointed. Those who are enticed into flight training by extraneous inducements will suffer a loss of motivation whenever they fail to find whipped cream on their strawberries. Naval Aviation cadets in recent years, for example, have resigned from the flight training program with such complaints as: “the program is too strict”; “we should be allowed to stay out all night on Saturday”; or “I do not like to have people telling me what to do; I prefer to do things my own way.” Others have objected to being told what to wear, or to being required to study, or to the so-called limited social life, or to waiting for the weather to clear so that flying could be resumed. Obviously any military organization will function more efficiently without such “spoiled” children, and flight instructors have reason to rejoice at being rid of them. Such cases, however, demonstrate the uselessness of increasing inducements which merely entice more and more persons who have no genuine interest in flying. As long as efforts to interest prospects in flight training programs continue to be in the form of multiplying enticements, those who enter the flight training programs will tend to be opportunists who will complain whenever conditions they encounter fail to measure up to their enthusiastic expectations.
Military flying is neither safe nor easy, and never will be; but in this very fact is to be found another potent source of motivation that has proved itself in the past. The worthwhile young people of this nation have always responded to any real chance to prove their mettle.
This nation was founded and developed by men and women of strong will, who shirked no obligation for mere attainment of ease and economic security. They accepted the challenge of life with confidence in their own ability to overcome its hardships and often with the conviction that comfort for comfort’s sake was a sin.
The early settlers would have scoffed at their now proud descendants who speak of ancestral inheritance as though it were loftier than current achievement. To them work was the greatest of virtues and the cure of most ills, and hardships were considered an aid to character growth. While it is true that many came to this continent to avoid persecution in Europe, they did so because they were unwilling to accept the easy way of forfeiting the principles they believed in. They preferred to face the rigors of a strange and undeveloped land in order to cling to what they conceived to be right. Again those men and women who continued to press our frontiers ever westward went forth with full recognition of the dangers and discomforts that lay before them, undaunted by what the future held and untempted by the relative comfort and security they left behind. It would seem, as we read of those forebears of ours, that their least consideration was the attainment of a safe and easy life.
Are the Americans of today different? Recent history does not show it. Three times in forty years noble young men have left the comforts of their homes to fight for the same freedoms their ancestors fought to gain. And the history of aviation itself shows that many Americans would still rather take up the gauntlet of danger and adventure than to toss in the sponge of lost self-confidence. The Wright brothers, Curtiss, and other beginners in the game ran terrific risks just to be able to overcome the limitations of nature. Since then others by the thousands have faced similar dangers in man’s struggle to conquer space and time. Transoceanic flights have become routine, but they once demanded great courage. Supersonic speed is not startling today, but much lesser speeds required stripped-down aircraft and pilots of great daring just a few years ago. Why, when parachutes were first invented, many of these earlier aviators wouldn’t wear them. They considered them too “sissy.”
Neither is it hard to find examples of courage among those in aviation today. Tests pilots daily risk their lives to push the frontiers of flying further back. Other pilots strive to go further, higher, or faster than anyone ever went before. And in the military world, not only have the Air Force pilots proven their mettle in combat with MIGS, but Navy and Marine Corps pilots have actually been criticized for being too daring. It has been claimed that they have taken too many risks in their low-level strafing and dive bombing of enemy supply lines and rendezvous centers.
No, Americans today are no different. We can rest assured that if they see a real challenge, the young men of our nation will have the courage to take a chance. Today as always they will, welcome an opportunity to show the kind of stuff of which they are made.
The frontiers that challenged our young people a hundred years ago are no longer existent, but there still is within each of us a desire to test ourselves in the face of new experiences: Nowhere else in modern American life can this desire be met so adequately as in present day military aviation. Here is a new frontier in the third dimension to try the spirit of modern American young men.
The pilot who takes off on a combat mission today in modern jet aircraft sets forth on a wilder, bluer, and “more yonder” mission than was ever dreamed of by the men in the early days of aviation. He travels at speeds so fast that another aircraft appearing in his range of view could be encountered in collision before a slow-witted pilot could make adequate moves to get out of the way. He may fly at altitudes so high that he can see hundreds of miles in any direction and where the airfield or carrier deck on which he intends to land is virtually invisible. He flies in a weird milk bowl of illumination where the sky overhead is more black than blue and the light that does come directly from the sun is reflected to him from beneath. He survives only because of modern mechanical devices which keep him supplied with oxygen and heat, and he knows that the odds are strongly against him should an emergency require that he abandon these gadgets upon which his life depends. Without oxygen he can live only a matter of seconds, and without the heat of his plane he might freeze to death before he could reach altitudes low enough and warm enough for the human body to survive. Psychologically as well as physiologically he must be a superman.
Where are we going to get enough of these supermen to fly our planes in the future?
The answer appears to rest in making our young men aware once more of the heroic demands of modern military flying. Economic inducements and promises of comfort cannot suffice to lure high-caliber men into flight training. However, flying with the armed forces of our nation can once again be made to present a challenge to those with the traditional fearlessness of our pioneer forefathers. Such a challenge will appeal to the high type of person who is needed to fill the cockpits of tomorrow. There is also reason to hope that there are sufficient numbers of such courageous, high-caliber men to pilot our planes of the future. If not, we face a bad situation indeed.