Leaderboard

1. Too many players with too many "Red Flag-isms" (i.e. self-inflicted pile-ons to 11-214). I've been to 6 RF-A and 2 RF-N. The one's at Alaska are far better because they don't try to jam way too many jets in the airspace and they use 11-214/don't arbitrarily add on. I get it that we want to get everyone a swing at the bat, but the training factor is very watered down when you have a 20 ship SEAD package where 8 will do (as an example). It is deconfliction flag to an extent - and that is not good tactical training. Mitigate this by allowing less squadrons (may not be possible, I get it) and/or potentially lengthening vuls to allow multiple pushes....or instead of one long vul, do 2x back to back morning vuls and 2x back to back afternoon vuls. 4 vuls a day, but close enough that it really is 2x goes for MX, just with 45 min in between launch of one 4 ship and the other. Debrief each separately so the first guys aren't waiting another 1-2 hours for debrief to start. Run the debrief efficiently - stick to timeline limits, shot val rules, etc...you miss a shot by > 10", fuck off we're not going back. 2. Brecky hit PR - the CAF sucks ass at PR...probably the thing the CAF should be the most embarrassed about it's lack luster performance in...and I'm looking at every fighter pilot out there, I don't care what you fly, you have a role in supporting PR events, so put some damn work into supporting the PR plan, not being a shitty/useless OSC, etc. A pre-planned PR vul can speed things along to not drag out a training vul, but real time shoot downs can at least exercise initial OSC/AMC duties, and the pre-plan can be the next day to get that guy (i.e. for range time you can't shoot a guy down 30 min into vul west of the container and have Pedro push from El/Cal, I get it). No tanker - shit happens, wave the "ALR exceeded, I'd abort in real life" card and then go execute for training. Copy all, it'll be 2x60s and some Sandys against the world...and they'll probably get shot, but there's still training to be had. 3. Focus on basic integration in OCA/DCA/DT vuls. Johnny CAF isn't going to solve the F2T2EA problem for ALRS, in fact, he's going to fuck up the mission planning whole sale and lead an abortion the next day. That's not his fault - in real world, he'll be handed a plan, and he won't be the guy leading the whole thing anyways. Leave "next gen" problem solving to WIC advanced integration phase. Let the CAF figure out how to put a cohesive plan together that defeats the Nellis IADs, destroys appropriate-to-the-scenario targets, and gets everyone back home. I agree the threat level needs to be increased, but the point is basic integration...it is trying to do too much and has negative effects when we try to force the "WWIII" problems on the line CAF guy. There's a reason not every CAF dude is read into CW, etc...he doesn't need to be, the right people need to be who will be planning/have a unique understanding of the capabilities and can leverage those with their squadrons come execution day. 4. Airdrop guys - If they're not getting enough LFE training (are you guys really being left out of RF-N that much?), get them in there. It's not difficult to add an air assault, SOF resupply, etc. into a couple OCA vuls per week. I'm not saying it needs to be a full on JFE vul, but at least get a couple MAF/AFSOC assets doing a resupply on the west side of Belted or something along those lines. It'll be great training for them, but also for the SEAD and ESC guys who have to keep SA on a C-130 at 300 ft, protect him, and have a gas/TOS plan to not lose coverage. And at worst, the C-130 does its mission, there is zero interference with the rest of the war raging overhead and if he gets shots, well there's going to be some good lessons learned for the CAF guys who probably didn't have a good plan to begin with. To minimize the "everyone gets a trophy" thing, don't do MAF and PR in the same vul. Watch out for that dick head Roland guy. 5. Three weeks is long - but if you keep doing three weeks, consider making the third week dissimilar BFM/ACM week. When that square peg doesn't fit the round hole of airspace scheduling, etc. for every jet out there, make some CT-ish DCA vuls, i.e. smaller vuls where nobody is doing a MC upgrade, you can have a North and South vul, etc. Northern Edge in AK does a lot of this...i.e. first vul of the day is the WWIII problem, second vul is all CT. Some squadron gets tagged for MC, they're given the assets and range space/time, go from there to plan/execute whatever you want within some constraints (for safety, etc.) Airboss can make sure it doesn't get out of hand/go down some road it shouldn't. There will still be a lot of learning, but with less of the "RF bullshit" attached, and everyone is less "burned out" at the end.

3 weeks is WAY too long. Brabus, has a great idea and would be perfect. Ok, you won't shorten it back to two weeks? Then don't get all pissed off and push back when we say we're going to need a swap out. Many of us still have an alert mission to man, this eats up a lot of manpower. No swaps = same full timers flying RF year after year. Good luck getting part timers to drop a whole month of mil leave for a RF, especially when many are losing big $$$$ to do so.

This. In my corner of the world in the ANG, the rumored tech bonuses are stalling and rumors are circulating about more AGR slots. The problem is that rumors don't recruit people, actual positions with $ tied to them recruit people. Even our leadership has flat-out stated that the train needs to full-up crash into us before meaningful change will happen. The catch-22 is this: dudes with birds and stars on their shoulders need to actually say "no" and cut classes. They need to Ops CNX or MND lines regularly to show we are broken. Doing this will crush their metrics, however, and hurt their chances of promotion. It's in leadership's best personal interest to chug along on fumes rather than let the system start to show cracks, which is ironically required to enact any meaningful change. Why is NGB going to throw a boatload of cash or AD going to commit a bunch of billets (AGRs) to a problem they've yet so see can't be handled with current means/measures? This catch-22 exists in both the RC and AD and it takes a truly dynamic leader to break the mold and act on foresight rather than just react to problems. We don't have a lot of those kind of leaders, and the ones who fit the bill likely got out to work for less dysfunctional companies.

So interesting thought, I would suggest to big blue that they offer a bonus for continuation to 15 years with early retirement on the end of that, why haven't they considered that? I mean aren't they always worried about the near term threat? That buys them three years to get the next group of leaders to figure it out. What does the group think?

I love hearing single seat guys talk about what it is like to fly with a WSO.

The problem is Big Blue's head is too big to fit through a hangar door and by the time someone without their head up their arse figures out what's going on (Fingers), it's too late. Any fix.at this point requires drastic measures to be taken most likely not approved by congress for a while. Remember, this is all 15 years in the making. Sent from my SM-G935V using Tapatalk

Follow 11-214 (i.e, don't add on to it) (e.g, dynamic weapon deconfliction and block adjustment for unexpected weather not allowed even though IAW 11-214) More training for white force. If you don't "have" some information and you are withholding it to drive a DLO, recognize when to end the tailspin of planners/intel trying to dig into it and tell them "I can't give you target composition for the airport at Hiway since we have escort DLOs for there", etc. Expand airspace access as much as DoE allows. No changes post - final coord unless necessary for safety of flight (don't change the deconfliction plan just to satisfy a VMC international player) Make the security paperwork more efficient - kills learning when 50% of your squadron can't go to some meetings and briefs

So yeah that's also the crazy aspect of this scenario. For my situation assuming I get continued (haven't seen the letter yet) I don't even have to decide to continue until after the accounting date and my old unit is looking for my next PRF! As for the first board guys the same situation happened to me in Jan this year with the board release and the next board 5 months later. You essentially have 1 board unless your leadership sets you up right. In my case the board failed to see yes I didn't fit the mold of progression but I went back to fill a position you needed and I am building back up. Total oversight on big blue's part. Bottom line is if I stayed a WSO I would probably be a major but since I changed and helped you out I am looked down upon. This is the flaw of the central boards and lack of checks and balances. If the AF were a major corporation like the airlines and our leadership had a stake (stocks) in how well it performed (profits) they would think twice about this.

Or they recoup the separation pay from your VA disability. While it seems like a good deal they're gonna get it back one way or another.

The setups are far to canned...Move the Red Air Tanker...nothing like a fist fight all the way west just to have Red literally roll inverted off the boom and call a kill on you 30 seconds later.

The quick answer is there is Nothing you can do to get VSPd. You can put up basically the same PRF and get non selected a second time but whether or not you get VSPd or continued is based on "needs of the Air Force". And I bet you'd get continued anyhow and if you want to retire from reserves then my understanding is the first checks from your retirement will be paid back to Uncle Sam to make up for your separation of. So if you get the sep pay, then invest it wisely and you'll get to keep the interest basically.

Actually care about the entire PR mission set from report to reintegration. There are a bunch of times that the helos are still in the wrong side of the fence and the fighters are popping beers at the bar. If it requires cycling off the tanker more than planned to provide OSC or RESCORT then so be it. This is in the weeds but pick a survivor from a strike package flight and have their Bros on the radio talking to their "wingman" instead of random guy with a CSEL.

Give a 4 ship more than a 1,000' altitude block. If you can't, then don't ask us why we died and didn't threat react.

Meh, We're dropping multiple GBUs/Hellfires to kill a dude getting paid 200 dollars to dig a hole and bury HME. A GBU-10 for a MI series is probably a bargain by comparison. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

fify

Or go vipers and do it all ...

This is the best response to the OP's question. Don't worry about the crew aspect, choose the one that suits the mission you want. If you want an A/A mission with an aircraft that excels at that mission, go C model. If you want a dual role aircraft that is designed to excel at A/G, go for the Strike Eagle. The Mudhens can't BFM for shit against the Vipers and Eagles, but the other guys don't get to rage into a threat zone at more than 500 knots, less than 500 feet, blacked out, at night. With more than 1500 Strike Eagle hours, I can count on one hand - make than one finger - the number of WSOs who were talking luggage. They know their role, the crew duties are clearly laid out, and we have a good method for setting those straight who have problems figuring it out.

This thread.... It's good to know the one universal in all branches of the military when it comes to aviation is reminding everybody how your selection was the right one and theirs was stupid.

Aggressiveness is exactly what the GFC and 3 letter agencies driving these COIN wars don't want. It's more important to them to not kill the wrong people or do something with 2nd/3rd order effects than it is to find, identify, and prosecute targets. Tactical patience is the buzz word of the day. Not only that but overreaching the level of approval for "immediate" CAS is just a standard. Do you really think that Infantry Captain on the ground is empowered to make the decision? Short of some they're in the wire!" Battle of Wanat type scenario he/she has to call mom for permission. The second you accept that and can push feed the quicker that process becomes, especially in a War that lacks the constant TOC porn of PGSS balloons those senior commanders grew up depending on to make decisions. Real war, real CAS, real phase lines, real threat... That will not be an issue. But for COIN fight, you're an ISR platform whether you like it or not. Along with that, since we only seem to have more issue getting actual ISR because there are only so many to go around, you increase the legitimacy for the need if this low cost strike aircraft can do that job for the 97% of the time where it's just boring holes in the sky waiting for the 911 call.

The B-52 community flying with the Raider callsign probably really struck a nerve with the Doolittle Raiders because several of their bros ended up executed in China...what a slap in the face to those men that the Buff community would dare fly with the callsign Raider. Buy you know, yay heritage!........wait, that didn't happen because none of those Doolittle Raiders were a bunch of whiny SNAPs. Sounds like some of your friends need to get over themselves. Not a bomber guy, but I think the name pays a great tribute to not only a historic bomber raid in WW2, but also to the bros who were lost in 2008. Seeing it any other way is beyond ridiculous and extremely self-centered.