Leaderboard

I'll bite, but have to clarify a few things first. 1. Not an O-6 to O-8, haven't even pinned on O-5 yet. 2. Will embark on the sq/cc experience next summer. 3. Never been an exec, but spent the last two years close enough with enough GOs to speak from that experience. 4. Lastly, I stopped commenting here so much largely due to the many who refuse to engage in discourse in which there is an actual conversation. That and there's just not enough hours in the day. Opinion: There's too much TL/DR bullshit on this site. While brevity is the soul of wit, these problems won't be solved in 140 characters. To solve them, even to understand them, you have to engage your brain. That takes effort, god forbid. But... I still read this site everyday... Seriously! That said, retention of the right people-aviators-is one of many problems facing the officer corps in the USAF today. It's is a nasty problem that the USAF has no clue how to fix and that's going to deepen before it eases. This is evident in the hamfisted closing of loopholes fits and starts we've seen thus far. The USAF as the tech force throws money at problems (or punts), whereas the Army for example throws people at problems... There's more to it than money or easing the add'l duty burden or reinvigorating the squadrons. QOL plays a part, and part of that is morale - the feeling that your work matters, that you are accomplishing the mission. When you treat people like crap, overwork them, and give them no hope that things will change, morale plummets. That's what's happened. Read General Tunner's description of aircrew morale in China-India when he arrived there in his book 'Over the Hump' and you'll see. We have a morale problem manifesting as a retention problem. Period. (Though it is not universal, this is what is killing the squadrons...) Next let me clear up a common misconception... Colonels and low ranking GOs have far less power to affect change and make things better than you'd think. Not all colonels are equal, just as relationships (at least in public) between GOs shows that they are not all equal. (Reference: any staff, anywhere) While in some aspects their words are holy writ, in much of their daily duty they have very little power to make changes. Everyone gets a say, so consensus building logically takes time. You better get it cleared with your boss and your bosses boss and the the lawyer, etc. or else your neck is on the line... this manifests in bureaucratic delay and stagnation of decisions, at the worst case it shows up as risk aversion. Rarely are "go-do" orders so easily given, thus change is slow. This reality can be frustrating for the young. For the most part it's good that change is slow (ironically) because we have a lack of depth, experience, and real education out there at those ranks. Yes, people have been to the schools, but many retain little and few are genuine experts (not to mention the wide variety on quality of the school experience). We use variance of assignments to get people "experience" thereby producing an effect that broader and broader officers are seemingly always in charge, always getting their feet wet. General Officers are for the most part exactly that: generalists, by design. Some communities have taken this to the extreme, my own included, in making younger and younger officers as broad as possible - with the result being a lack of depth in the general population, but especially at the senior ranks, again with few exceptions (WOs - take a look at how many MAF GO WOs there are out there...). That reality is only further exasterbated by the fact that we don't expect pilots to just be pilots, nor do we reward, promote, or encourage expertise in that narrowest of measures. We evaluate and promote everything else, and what gets measured gets done. We've done this to ourselves, simply by allowing it to be accepted as the norm. You fix the morale problem with a focus on what matters - job performance and mission accomplishment. And I don't mean job performance like as in "Captain X, who is scheduler # 12 is really good, I think he's our CGOQ..." I mean take a look at who the best is in their primary job - start with the flyers and work your way from there. Stop with the "well all he did was fly missions, no volunteer hours or anything in self-improvement." That's how you reinvigorate the squadrons. MAF dudes - how many units out there have a "top hauler" or "top boom" award for the most missions/tonnage flown, hours flown, or gas passed in a month/qtr/year? My guess is few to none - I've never seen it. That speaks volumes when everyone knows who the Volunteer of the Qtr is for the wing because they have a parking spot at the commissary.... Now then, as for the bonus - I tell guys to follow their hearts, do what's right for the family. And I don't mean the USAF family. I've had a lot of success in my career, and struggled as much as I've done well. I earned a divorce out of it, and don't have kids. As an "old" major, about to be sq/cc, that makes me the oddball. I have a wonderful woman in my life now and that's made me reevaluate what and how I operate. But I don't wish the lousy parts on anyone. I nonetheless have no regrets, even though I'm facing a one-year remote amid a budding relationship. But my situation is not the norm, and I take that into account when advising my guys. If you come for career advice, you'll get it with the bark on - that's what you're owed for asking. And some people don't like hearing they're not the best or that they should pursue other endeavors. While I won't temper my fire, I've never scoffed anyone who wanted out or to take care of their family. I won't. My own experience made the difference, and I'm not sitting here chugging blue kool-aide. You must do what's right for you, regardless of if it aligns with big blue's plan.... This problem is bigger than the O-6 to O-8 crowd indicted in the post above... and none of us can change it alone. You'll never push over the wall, but if you try you can find loose bricks... Chuck

I think the real question is not why people don't want to go to school, but rather why do people not want to command. Having worked directly for Sq, Gp and Wg Commanders it's amazing how little power they actually have over their own people. Give the right Commanders back their power and watch the good guys want to stick around because they think they can make a difference. As long as people see their Commanders wasted time and effort, few will want to be in Command, except for those using it as a stepping stone to another level. Sent from my iPhone using Baseops Network Forums

Probably the later 80's I saw him at a mid-sized airshow in the SE USA.

Bacon. Coffee. Nicotine. Everything that makes you drop dead at age 40 is generally good for g tolerance. Of course the best exercise for pulling g's is .... pulling g's

Well, then I'm set! Big, dumb and slow.

Thanks for chiming in Chuck. The "O-6 to O-8" comment was in regards to Duck's previous post about them not getting it and making any significant change under their watch. The point was it would be nice to get a peek behind the curtain a little more often from those in that demographic (or close to them, in your case), given that the AF's overall answer to the talent exodus is full-on Baghdad Bob... "nothing to see here, folks, all is well". I agree with you that they're powerless to do anything, assuming they even wanted to. We've destroyed the ability for most commanders from making any decisions on their own- everything, no matter how small, must be vetted by their boss, all the way up. Even the most promising CSAF in a generation was unable/unwilling to make significant change beyond quasi-eliminating Blues Monday. It would be hilarious if it weren't so sad. Institutional inertia is crippling this service. And then they wonder why their "HPOs" are 7-day opting out of IDE and nobody wants to be a Sq/CC anymore- it's just not that appealing. While a "(insert mission here) of the quarter" would be nice, not sure that would change many minds- but it's a start. Separate promotion boards for 11xs, more money, elimination of bullshit 180/365s and additional duties, less SJW engineering, and an overall improvement in "work rules" might, though.

Spot on. We're starting to see the same thing impact the "cyber ops" side of the force as well. Except the breadth is huge, possibly bigger than what you flyers are facing. I can have a Lt-Capt sit and do COMSEC inspection, Flt/CC stuff at a base, or do no-shit ninja stuff against nation states. 2 of those 3 know they're not doing the sexy job, and the sexy guy isn't looking forward to doing the non-sexy stuff. None of these guys have the ADSC to retain past about 8 years once done with even the most vigorous of training (CNODP/WO) and the tech side is throwing insane amounts of money, faster tech, faster training and better QOL. They've pulled "non-ops" AFSC's into ops slots, without the recognition or all the training because a "body is a body" and they just need someone. It's working ok for now, but all of this is going to come to a head, and faster, than the pilot retention side. And having worked at a couple different staff levels, it's amazing how much a 3-star on down lack in power to get anything done. Downright unmotivating when you see them champion for the right thing, to only get shut down due nonsense.

Chuck would you say it's due to the need to be broad (Phoenix programs etc) or the fact that the WOs have been low density due to the fact that the MAF WIC has only been around a little over a decade? Right now 3 of 4 squadrons at McChord, several squadrons at Charleston, Hickman and I believe Elmo and Altus all have WOs as commanders. Talking to my buddies in the Herc world several of their SQ/CCs are also WOs (or were at least as of a couple months ago). It seems that the program has started to reach a maturity level that "should" start producing more WO GOs than just Smokey. Also Mcchord has an Ops Leader of the Quarter award but it doesn't go above the Group Level and seems to rank below JCGO/CGO/FGO (all which require volunteer/self improvement).

THREAD REVIVAL! For those who haven't read this, it's worth the time and effort... https://www.jhuapl.edu/ourwork/nsa/papers/ARIS_LittleGreenMen.pdf Cheers! M2

Time to leave Incirlik? https://www.defenseone.com/ideas/2016/10/get-ready-walk-away-incirlik/132585/ My suggestion for a new location...

Doors that absorb light primarily in the center of the visible spectrum.

Thanks, Spoo. Right now my SURF doesn't show any JPME credit, although it does show IDE non-res complete. I'm planning on calling AU tomorrow about it, and I'm definitely going to talk to my service advisor here. It's not a huge deal but my main concern is that I would be taking up a JPME slot that someone else could benefit from. To your question, I think the answer is no, especially now that you can't even sign up for correspondence until your third look.

Fighters are terrific overall and I've never met a fighter pilot who regretted flying them vs something else. The only bad part of flying fighters in the USAF is the USAF. I've seen a constant erosion of lifestyle fun and reward but it is still the best job in the world....just not as fun as it used to be or "could" be. Once you figure out the USAF game/system and realize the USAF needs you as an 11F more than you need it, the work drops off and the lifestyle quality dramatically increases. If you are willing to stab your bros in the back and sell your soul to climb the exec ladder into rank/school/Job etc. you will be miserable, hated or burn yourself out.