BFM this

Hmmm...so does that mean that assignments are given based on IFF performance? That's a first for an IFF performance being anything other than proceed/divert to heavies.

Seen a number of IPUGs rammed through in min time, only to watch the newly minted IP go up to wing and occasionally log some IP time on the 781 to maintain currency for the next year or so, and then it's off to school. But hey, got that K prefix...check.

I hadn't looked at it that way. In sarcasm font, what he said makes perfect sense.

Don't post drunk.

That would have been awesome. We had a similar guy in a sq I was in. The thing is: rated officer gate months are rated officer gate months; AF has nothing to say about it. So, as. 2Lt, he was getting full 650 flight pay, and before he pinned Capt, he had a star on his wings.

365

Style points for emailing 1FW/ALL with your question. ...that's one technique, I guess

You can use you Post 911 GI Bill for any flight training you want as long as it is Part 141/142. I have yet to find a qualifying school for the Seaplane rating in the Northwest. Lost of schools you can get extra type ratings. GOTDAMMIT! That's three hours of my life spent Googleing GI-Bill Seaplane, then GI-Bill Helicopter, the GI-Bill Super-Constellation type rating course, then...

Just in Asia, Africa and the Middle East. Here we are much more civilized...

Can't imagine that's going to be sustainable for much longer, unless O3 and below double up. The FY16+ production is eye watering.

Not really a stop loss, as far as I can tell; appears to be a standard force management paper drill from one FY to the next. Reading the memo, one could request transfer to IRR of 30 Sep and get an approved date of 1 Nov. Not very stop-loss-ey, imo.

Lot of comments along the lines of "this is SOP, happens every year." By the letter posted, someone approved for separation on 30 Sep could separate 1 Nov. That, by definition, is not Stop Loss.

When I knocked out my ATP and it came tax time, my exhaustive research pointed to a lot of others that had researched the question before me, and all arrived at the same "no" conclusion.

Because... SERVICE! I don't entirely disagree with you, but I don't think it's a moot argument either.

Not a new idea, really. Back in the middle of the last century, the Marine Corps recognized that, absent Mission Commander or any weapons release duties, Navigation was just another process oriented set of skills. A slice of the career field was carved out for line leadership (WOs), but otherwise Marine Navs, from WWII and through legacy KC-130s, was an enlisted MOS.

In all fairness, GA is often painted into the corner of delivering a crap product. GA: hey we have this new capability we're developing that USAF: GREAT, FIELD IT NOW! GA: well, like, yeah, but we weren't quite finished with the GUI and USAF: don't care, need it now Ops: wft? GA SUCKS! Safety: [alarming mishap rate ensues] wtf? GA SUCKS! OGV: what is this, like 8 -1 changes in the last month? GA SUCKS! But in all fairness, GA sucks. But in a bigger sense, if weapons were developed by the same special olympics team that fielded this tech, troops would be hoofing around M-14s with picatinny rails. [braces for the resident gun nutz to post picatinny equipped M-14 pics...]

Check your vol 1. Nowhere does it say that a guy coming back via tx is MQTd as a wingman. That's the commanders discretion, and I've seen plenty MQT right back to IP. I've also seen the "kids table" approach, and I think it's a shitty way to treat returning experience. And, oh yeah, fuck my career, I'm flying (though I've been lucky that circumstance has blunted the consequences of my poor choices)

You're right; if that myopic mindset prevails over the next 3-5 years, then the enterprise has no hope of recovery or establishing the objective 11/18 ratio, or a sustained leadership production rate. To some degree, that's the canned message that every porch roadshow has pitched in the 10 years that I've been paying attention, actual results may vary.

Done properly, it should be no different than a white jet or ALO tour, MWS credibility wise. I saw a former FWIC IP come back from school and MQT as a 2FL--its community/commander specific. If the Viper world is getting their retreads back and putting them at the kids table, that's the choice the community/commander is making. I've seen 11F's find a lot of success post RPA, either tx back and IPUG in about a year, AGR at either reserve or Guard units, or go on to some niche assignments like aggressor exchanges. When it came time to make my desires known to my RPA commander, I and most of my peers weren't mewling over "being behind our peers" or, FFS, our airline potential; we just wanted to get back to our first love. We were lucky: being 11F's, big blue listened. And it appears that 11M's are starting to get some love as well, from what I'm hearing. On that note and the "kids table" mentality, I had a good friend go back to Altus as an IP from Creech--different communities treat their retreads differently.

This is the opposite of what I heard on the last VML webinar I listened to (spring 2015). The gouge then was some, definitely not all, might go back "2018ish". With the ramp-up and the impending 18Xodus, I find it difficult to believe they'll let anyone go in the next few years. Where is this new info coming from? The Tell would be an auto recat with the assignment (remember the recat board in 2010 with something like 75% "volunteers"...of course you do). Instead, 11-functionals still own the pilots. That's not to say that the functionals aren't using those pilots to fill another RPA bill (HMN)--hopefully that will continue to taper off. Of the many long term metastatic problems that this 20+ year community is dealing with is a lack of development among the core talent group. Recycling 11's and kicking the 18x can down the road has been causal, among other things. But it's all good, there's plenty of shiny pennies to pluck from outside sources (Fighter Squadrons), and that will not continue to be a cyst on the ass of the enterprise...

Sensing some confusion. 11's are all expected to go back to fly, unless they recat by request or some other specific circumstance (WIC); this includes UPT directs. HAF seems to have fully embraced this policy, recognizing the lesson learned and toxicity of former policies--I haven't heard any of the one-way-door bullshit recently (with the ramp-up, we will see if they keep their money where there mouth is). Since I've been in/around the enterprise, I hadn't heard of 12's going back to their former communities, either by request or needs of their functional. 18's, (which 12's sometimes get lumped into for discussion purposes), would never be expected to go back to any former job, anymore than you would expect a late rated pilot to go back to CE or MX at some point.

Yep; forgot about that, thanks!

-111

Didn't see any other changes from last year. Early enrollment still offered, $25k/yr for either 5 years or up to 9 to get 20. Just getting the email (as I'm prior E) threw me off.

If I'm reading the FY16 implementation message right, the requirement for less than 16YAS is gone. ...and still, no.