Dupe

For what it's worth, all the crappy, yes-sir-no-sir-two-bags-full-sir leaders who didn't spend the time to listen to my problems and didn't provide me top-cover when I really needed it were WHCMs. The AF has a problem, and I don't think its anything related to this corporate EO spew.

The counter to that, we add in a healthy bonus to keep those we need, while allowing those we don't need to leave with a vested 401K. So, essentially, we use market forces to retain key skills. Crazy.

All great thoughts... we should decidedly work to find (not so hard to hide) efficiencies in the current year operations budget. Benefits, pay, and retirement still need a hard look, however... as some of those things will turn into must-pays for future years. I don't remember the numbers precisely, but we have something like a 3% troop strength increase from 1995, but personnel budget has ballooned by 50%. I think most of that is in health care costs (hence the call for increased TRICARE payments), but some is in pay as well. So should we trim the operations budget to make the personnel side be ever larger?

The DoD doesn't even know where to start. Even something as simple as flat-lining pay increases for a year gets stomped by Congress. Restructuring TRICARE or our antiquated retirement system is needed, yet will be very difficult to achieve. I found this to be a good summary: https://news.usni.org/2013/07/10/opinion-military-pay-and-benefits-unsustainable

The people we want out won't leave. The people we desperately need to stay want to bolt... The AF should work much harder to figure out why that's the case.

What makes you believe that the officer promotion section of AFPC coordinates with the AEF-tasking section?

Downrange, now 5+ years ago, the AEW/CC stood up in front of all of us and described how he got spatial-D at night. The WSO recovered the jet with a 10-11g pull. The guy bought pizza, as a keg wasn't possible. Class act.

I'm sure the view that airpower is a support function maybe also contributed just a little. Seriously, some of the crap I've heard from Army dudes about airpower sounds like its straight from 1939.

I know far more WIC grads/IDE-selects who have punched for the guard than I know WIC grads who were not selected for IDE. Patch burn-out is a real problem... I'm not sure WIC guys getting non-selected for school is as real a problem. All we have is the anecdotal "I know a guy..." to go any further. Hopefully, someone knows related stats better... The solution is so simple... Let DTs select for promotion and development opportunities. AF/A1 can just push down how many of each AFSC we need. The CAF DT is probably much better equipped to figure out who is in the top 20% (or 15% for SDE) of 11Fs than a hodge-podge collection of O-6s.

Is there a blow-hard with a PhD in charge of curriculum development? Sorry, no IDE credit. That said, I'd be curious to know what percentage of patches are not IDE-selects.

There were some in my community that worried that taking the credit would create this middle tier of IDE. I.e...In-res, credit, and correspondence. So far, I haven't seen that play out. The credit guys that I know are getting assignments on par with the in-res guys.

People don't join the Air Force to be a member of a corporation... they join to be part of a combat-capable group with a tight culture. There's more to this than sexual harassment... it's about the culture of our organization. So some of the innuendos and such should go away: that's probably fair. The problem is that folks see us transitioning from a group where combat capability is the priority to becoming more corporate. Leadership needs to stop the corporate slide and not just remove a few elements that are now distasteful/archaic.

This whole thing is just a reaffirmation that guys aren't staying (or leaving... or are willing to commit to stay) for the money.

This is the fundamental problem. The boss wants folks to break the rules, color outside the lines, or to take risks. However, the promotion and compensation system we have inherently rewards those who take a conservative approach.

As an 11X or 12X, best of luck getting released by your functional...

Right... So back to the PRF discussion. The system is retarded, but not knowing the system is equally retarded. Any questions?

There once was a billet for a CSO with a CFI rating at IFS in Pueblo. I haven't checked in a few years to see if its still there...

A VSP would just result in a bunch of rejected applications from pilots (or no applications if you didn't include them) The fundamental problem is that, in aggregate, we can't get the officers we want gone to leave. At the same time, we can't get the officers we want to keep to stay. On the short haul, I would do a mix of a RIF and bonuses. Well, we're doing half of that. On the long haul, promotions need to be career-specific. ...but nobody asked me.

I'm curious how this compares to a) AF/A1's goal or b) previous year's take-rates. I should add I'm curious, but not curious enough to look it up.

Its hard to find decent FTE information, as the job is so different based on platform and location. It could be anything from directing a F-35 test flight from a control room to running instrumentation from a test station on the back of the KC-46 to testing some new datalink test widget in the back of a 707. The real challenge with FTEs in the Air Force is that being a FTE is a position and not a career. Our FTEs are expected to see AFRL and Program Office positions in their careers, and may not ever develop the depth that a really good Industry FTE would have. FTEs still have their same functional at AFPC... they don't switch to a TPS-only functional like the rated guys do. I seem to have many discussions with young engineers that revolve around "I'm not happy: I thought I would be doing actual egineering and I'm not." There are some really interesting civilian FTE / test pilot jobs out there. Most don't require being a TPS grad either. In both the U-28 and MC-12 programs, FTEs were critical to developing new capabilities on very short cycles. Guys writing the code were often the same guys using the systems on developmental flights.

There's value in describing the rails my train has traveled so that others may decide with some intelligence to hop on or not.

Do you know what they call Test Pilot School grads who go to the astronaut board, but don't quite make the cut? Program Managers.

I don't see any Guard unit in the country other than Tucson as being willing to throw a guy in AD orders for a year to go to TPS. Let me ask you this: what makes you want to go to TPS in the first place?

I personally think the whole thing can be done by enlisted folks, but the Air Force has this paradigm of "Officers do the killing because airpower is strategic and overarching." For RPAs, I think a paradigm shift is in order.

Someone explain why we have officers doing this at all? Sure, there's the weapons engagement aspect... but I don't see why an officer shift-supervisor can't roll-in when it's time to go kinetic. If the CAOC is watching and has approved anyway, what's the point of someone on the O payscale pressing the button?