WWII Training Stages

[warbirdguy]

I have a question on WWII pilot training. I know when cadets began training they started in the PT series then onto the BT series. Now for bomber pilots did they do the AT-6 or did they go directly onto the AT-11 Kansan aircraft? Or did they do both? Hopefully someone can clear this up for me.

Thanks in advance!

[Zachary]

I have done quite a number of interviews with bomber pilots for EAA's Timeless Voices of Aviation oral history program, and most have said that they got AT-6 time before going into twins, usually the AT-9, AT-10, or AT-11. A handful went straight from Basic into twin-engine Advanced, but not too many. Hope this helps.

Zack

[Beachy]

I've heard that towards the end of WWII, the BT stage was skipped altogether -- not just for bomber training. Can anyone confirm this one for me?

[Ztex]

My Uncle tells me he started in the, in his words, "Yellow Peril" Stearman and went from that to the AT-6...he only flew the BT-13 for exrta time. He then progressed to the "Bamboo Bomber" Cessna T-50. He spent a little time in B-25's then he became a B-24 flyer. Flew low level cross country flights till it got boring then flew a B-24 from Florida to Italy across the South Atlantic.

[wendovertom]

There are a number of records I have seen in my research for Wendover that seem to indicate that as the war progressed and bomber crews were desperately needed many pilots and copilots got into bombers with almost no time in anything but the T-6 or possibily some kind of fighter.

The accident reports are filled with hints and suggestions of green pilots trying to get a bird plane to act like a fighter.

Tom P.

[John Ceglarek]

Yes, it's true that as the war progressed, the basic training stage was dropped from the training program. I don't know exactly when that happened, though.

[Beachy]

Thanks, guys...........'Preciate it......

[warbirdguy]

I was always confused becasue the AT-11 Kansas had "AT" in the front and that meant Advanced Trainer so it was a little foggy. Thanks for the answers.

Happy Holidays!

[sdennison]

I have written a book that is a collection of my Dad's letters home during his training times at San Antonio in 43. I call it "Fire from the Clouds" as he was a member of the 60th FS of the 33rd FG in China.

His experience went: PT-19, BT-13, T-6, P-40, P-47 then off to Asia. At the end of advanced training they were queried as to the type of flying they wanted single or multi engine. Obviously, Dad took single and then was transitioned from the P-40 to P-47.

His good buddy and classmate, John Dinou, author of "Fading Wings, Faded Glory" took multi engine hoping for P-38's but wound up in B-26's in Europe.

I can't say that this was the experience of all as I believe that various training bases and different times in the war used different trainers and progressions.

Hope this helps.

[systemofadown1162]

Got a question of my own. How were you selected to be a bomber pilot vs a fighter or transport?

[sdennison]

I'm not exactly sure but I think a lot had to do with skill levels demonstrated and then perhaps need. But I think that it was like who was designated for navigators etc. If they had not demonstrated outstanding skills piloting fighters, they were redirected.

[T33driver]

I'm not exactly sure but I think a lot had to do with skill levels demonstrated and then perhaps need. But I think that it was like who was designated for navigators etc. If they had not demonstrated outstanding skills piloting fighters, they were redirected.

The needs of the Air Corps came first, but often times the top graduates had a choice--how far down in the class rankings guys had their pick varied from class to class. My uncle graduated from pilot training near the top of his class in mid 1943 but chose C-47s instead of fighters. He said most of the guys in his class got transports to the South Pacific because that was the greatest need at that moment in time. A few of the top grads did have the option and chose single seat fighters.