Herk Driver

If I was a higher up, in this situation, I would be figuring out WTF I was doing and what kind of command climate I was setting that was causing this to happen.

That "practice bleeding" memo needs to be re-written and signed by the CSAF before it will have any value whatsoever. Until the MAJCOMS hear it loud and clear from their boss, it won't matter. Champ, the 3849 issue you address may not be true at all bases, but it is where you are...

AMC has been preaching this for years now...even when the "practice bleeding" memo was still out. They use a stop light chart...completing non-res PME within a year from pin on is green, more than 1 year but less than 2 is yellow, and more than that is red.

Don't know that we ever signed an agreement with a non-existent government, but big difference between being invited in and knocking down the door on the way in.

It's a 99 year "lease", IIRC. There were news stories published in Dec 2012 where the Qataris had offered to pay for a all US military expenses related to stationing troops in Qatar for the long haul.

GC, All of this while the AF line swine have been cut year after year and the number of GO billets stays about the same as is has been for the last 15-20 years. Recent changes not withstanding. Remind me what the retirement is for a GO that gets to the 40 year point. IIRC, there was a change in 2007 that actually allows an O-10 to make more in retirement than they did while on AD. A quick google search revealed this. https://usatoday30.usatoday.com/news/military/story/2012-01-26/military-officers-pensions/52939598/1 So, how is it that the high time O-4s and O-5s are the problem? The people making the decisions on ACP and AF personnel policy are soon to be the recipients of this windfall, right? Not saying that the decisions are driven by anything other than what is best for the AF, but maybe what is best for DOD is for this change in retirement which nearly, or in some cases more than doubled retirement pay for the GOs to be rescinded and we move back to a corporate structure that does not sacrifice the least among us for the higher ups. Just my $.02.

Funnier thing about the bonus was that 'back in the day' (before the early-2000's that you speak of) the max amount you could get was 12K...back then there was also a feet on the ramp policy. There was also a TAFMSD restriction that did not allow it to be offered to 'late-rated' guys...funny how the pendulum swings back and forth.

Variations on your orders does not mean that you can do whatever you want. This is simple...approval of the leave with an amendment to the orders is all that is needed. Be careful and just check that the leave gets charged on your LES.

The prohibition is against "adopting" local animals as pets.

Were... Had a great Chief Pilot that made terrific recommendations and most of the time, they were followed through on. Sometimes we just had a difference of opinion... Sometimes sent guys that were in line for Instructor upgrade even though they may have been going to a new assignmnet outside the MDS...normally only if there was no one else ready to go and we could get a moderate return on investment and normally only if it could/would be beneficial to the AF down the road...(i.e. easier to upgrade down the road in the new MDS or if they came back). Never to pad a PRF...

In DTS, you click the block showing that you are on leave for those days and make sure that no per diem is paid. Will have to file the DTS voucher showing all days from start to finish with leave days properly annotated in the per diem entitlements section. Will still need to sill out LeaveWeb to be charged for the leave, IIRC.

Me too...ended it when I was given the chance.

Check your PM.

Liars. Because we typically try to find a way to creatively re-create legislation to meet our desires. I cannot find anything definitive in the 2013 NDAA for maximum amounts on ACP, however, I doubt after all the work that the CSAF has done trying to restore credibilitythat he would approve a change to the name and try to skirt the rules on the NDAA to add additional money to the bonus program. If the NDAA authorizes more than the $25K that it has in the past, then no big deal. But, unless it does, I doubt you will see many changes. Still searching the document to see if there are any words on increased max amounts.

I got what he is saying...I also get that I doubt the CSAF is willing to take anymore beatings on the Hill for trying to do things without full disclosure to Congress. You do realize what we (the USAF) are known as in the Congress, right?

Probably cannot meet the TPFDD dates for all the equipment if we only ship via the "overland" route. Have you seen the routing overland, then across the water and back to rail and the customs, etc requirements to ship that way?

The maximum amount of ACP is set by Congress.

Gents, There are lots of points that can be discussed here...I would just caution you on linking cause and effect on many of the things that you have discussed here. Sometimes appearances can be deceiving. I have seen the PRF with the guy that had all the boxes checked and he did not receive a DP based on "strength of record" or lack of it. I have also seen the guy that did not have all the boxes checked but had a strong record otherwise and he got a DP. I am sure there are places where Q-3's are withheld for the favored guy, as a matter of fact, I have witnessed it. I fought against it and lost. However, I have also been at places where a Q-3 was a Q-3 and it didn't matter who the person was. The major criteria used was the flying violation and whether a Form 8 was the appropriate vehicle to document the issue. As an aside and to avoid this becoming a topic, I am not a proponent of the Q-3 in all situations, but they do have their place. Without calling anyone out, I have also watched several people volunteer to deploy at minimal dwell times and then not have time to complete their AAD. In ONE case (a case I am familiar with, so only an anecdotal story) this guy used the deployment as an excuse to not complete his AAD. As far as I know, he received a P. However, I can confirm that he was passed over. IMHO, the right decision was made. My point is that the system does work sometimes. There are always going to be situations where you believe your buddy got screwed over, etc, but I would caution you that you may not have all the information. You probably have just the information that your buddy wants you to have and not much/any of the deragatory information. Continue to rage against the up or out system and push for change. Just don't be surprised when the system that you signed up for continues to move down the road while you are left standing on the side of it. PME and an AAD are not very difficult to get accomplished...would I like to see the AAD masked for promotion to O-4? Yes. However, the idea that everyone deserves to make Major or is capable of leading multiple teams is not accurate.

Do I know you?

The cynical side of me says that he is milking this for the PTSD diagnosis and a VA disability rating...

While I don't disagree that they may, it really depends. I know dudes that have 6-9 flightsuits, not sure they need two new ones EVERY year.

You need to be given enough flight suits to accomplish your job, nothing more. While the TA "authorizes" 2 per year or six months or something along those lines, it does not mean that when budgets are running tight that your commander is obligated to provide you with anything more than required to accomplish the mission. Notice the "as directed by their commanders or other competent authority" piece.

You can be forced to PCS if AFPC waives the 2 year ADSC. Not likely, but I have seen it happen once.

Haven't heard any of that thus far. The last official word that I got was that those that were passed over will meet this years "promotion process" and be considered again under the 100% "fully qualified" criteria. Just finished spending an inordinate amount of time writing these PRFs.

This. Read the JFTR and the intro to it. It has the force of Public Law.