Leaderboard

Two things. 1) The Air Force wants more people deployed, that is the only way they can tap into that gloriously endless pile of OCO money. That's why you are going on that bullshit 365 doing something you could have done at home on staff somewhere. Fvck you and your QOL. We need the money and you are expendable, replaceable and still have a commitment. 2) Show me someone who joined the military to be rich and I will show you someone who is really $hitty at math. Not saying that it isn't a well paid job, but most of us type A, go-getters can make money on the outside. Higher QOL=better retention, easier recruiting and $$$$ savings on personnel acquisition costs. At this point either our O-6 and above senior "leadership" is either inept or incompetent. I put my money on the latter.

We paid Rand a bunch of money for this line Given current airline and Air Force pay, pilots make more money over a career if they separate from the military at the first available opportunity (near the eleventh year of service), get hired by a major airline, and fly for the ARC. The difference in lifetime earnings is literally in the millions for those who get out early vs staying in. Big Blue has to compete on QoL because they will never make up the difference from a financial aspect. Even if they adjusted flight pay and the bonus for inflation, it couldn't overcome the opportunity cost of an earlier seniority number.

I'd rather have them match the lack of outside-of-flying qweep and get paid the same.

What could possibly go wrong . . . - 6 or 8 year commitment would make it substantially more appealing to get out at earliest possible date than the current 10 yr, due to the added seniority/additional pay this would allow for on the outside - Even less experience/corporate knowledge in squadrons due to earlier separations - Less squadron experience still due to higher AETC requirements (more turnover = more pilots needed per year = more AETC IPs needed to train them) - Even less incentive for folks to attend WIC (WIC ADSC overlaps with SUPT ADSC now. Force people to extend their latest ADSC to go to WIC, and watch applications drop like a rock) - Even less money to pay bonuses/fund QoL initiatives/buy new planes, because that cash is being spent on putting more folks through SUPT - Best part, even worse decisions from HHQ staffs, because even fewer pilots with requisite rank/experience to fend off bad ideas Given that all the above would make it even harder to fill COCOM requirements (BTW, the warfighting is the reason the Air Force exists), I don't see how cutting the ADSC commitment--especially down to 6 years--would be a good idea. TT

The Rand Report was painful to read. The BL being the Airlines have no incentive to cooperate with the broke dick USAF. Fast tracking regional dudes seems appealing until you realize flying an Embraer from Valdosta to Atlanta 3 times a day has little transferability at least to the CAF. It seems the CSAF and HAF folks fail to realize is all people really want is choice and control of their life. I think the renovations to the retirement program will completely change some of these manning problems with folks not holding out for the 20 year carrot. I'd also change the ADSC for UPT back to 6 years, maybe 8 years if we also move to a 4-5 year PCS cycle. That gives someone a chance to make IP/AC in their MWS first assignment and go to another OPs for WIC/TPS consideration or ALFA to finish out their commitment. The WIC/TPS commitment will lock in folks to another gate at 10 or 12 years of service, which could be incentivized with the bonus. For the majority of AD pilots, at that 6-8 year point you need to make a choice, do I have enough hours for an ATP and go Airline/ARC route or take another assignment. Unfortunately, FAIPs would have to make the decision at the end of their first OPs assignment. With the 20 year retirement off the table we need to shift to a more frequent decision gate concept at 6, 10, 14, and 20 year points. The bonus would still be useful, but I think you're getting the folks that were going to stay for 20 years anyways. You could also incentivize the bonus to specific missions vice AFSC wide (ie. UPT, RPA, PIT), since you will have more frequent turnover and earlier departures from AD. While the turnover of this proposed system may be more frequent, giving your folks more choice and control in their life should help improve service morale to something north of pretty darn good.

I'm with you guys, but seriously, what are you realistically expecting to change? It didn't seem like too long ago when the Chief of effing Staff directed people to stop doing dumb things that are wastes of time. What happened there? Not much change to speak of in my neck of the woods. That message got diluted, at best, as it trickled through the staffs and to the O-6 and below management crowd. I say "at best" because I've mostly seen it flat-out disregarded, only to have management scoff when someone in their organization is brazen enough to say "aren't we supposed to stop doing dumb things?" So if CSAF said to stop doing it, and it's still going on, do you honestly think the queep factor is going to improve?

I think these studies and surveys are sadly necessary since the higher-ups seem to be impervious to bad news delivered in any other format. Perhaps this is laying the groundwork for making pilot compensation competitive with airline compensation as the only feasible COA for pilot retention.

Shack. It's not about money for a lot of people, it's about the horrendous level of bullshit/terrible family QoL that makes guys run. I know too many dudes who "would never fly for the airlines," and we're not driven there by the money, but ultimately by how the Air Force had mismanaged the shit out of their "work life," which directly impacted their "family life" in a negative way. It shouldn't be hard to kill bullshit deployments (especially 365s), it shouldn't be hard to knock off the queep/taskers that have zero utility to anyone, and it shouldn't be difficult to see that taking care of people on a personal level is extremely important. Keep people happy and they won't leave...it's simple.

How much taxpayer money did we pay RAND to do this, when any staffer- where the real hard work of Air Power happens!- could spend a day or two skimming a decade's worth of posts on this board and AirlinePilotCentral and come to the same conclusion? Laughable. The COAs are a stretch at best. Even RAND admits that. Proficiency advancing prior-121 pilots through UPT? Insert story of former regional guy who failed out of T-6s here. Not to mention, you're going to give them preferential treatment on OTS boards and force ARC units to do the same? Good luck! Forcing ARC units to do LFEs/deployments during winter months when airlines are less busy, and stop having UTAs on the first weekend of the month? LOL. Fix QoL/work rules and you won't have the mass exodus of talent. You wouldn't even have to pay pilots (much) more- just provide QoL/work rules close to on par with a combination of the civil sector and the ARC. Doing so would require some real leadership and some painful acknowledgements on the AF's part that they've ed up. Instead, our management comes up with 13 year ADSCs. That'll fix it!

And here I thought the Air Force existed as some kind of strange social experiment. Warfighting is what it's purpose was meant to be? Incredible! I would have never guessed!!!

If you want to see how 6 year commitments for pilots will work out, give it 2 years. Thats when 18Xers start hitting the end of their 6 year URT ADSCs in large numbers.

Sock measuring? Please...that's F-ing amateur hour. This is Army War College, we're at the varsity level of queep enforcement. TRAIN TO TIME, NOT TO STANDARD!

Look at the big brain on Spoo...send him to war college and he becomes the acronym police...what's next, off to the Deid to measure socks?

Most of us weren't around back then. Good to see you still remember it like it was yesterday.