osulax05

I received the AFPC spam bot today trying to sell the ATT. The last sentence said that selectees will go TDY to Scott for a signing in “ceremony.” The Bobs just can’t wait to congratulate themselves on this one.

Checks... by my herc driver math I’m owed ~$1.1k.

Checks

Also to “us” in 08/09. Z flight!

Checks.... both chambers passed their version in early July.

My assumption is that if rated folks split from the LAF, only rated officers would sit on their promotion board. No guarantee that all rated officers would value "the right things" but it sure couldn't hurt.

Splitting rated officers from the LAF below O-6 would probably negate the need for two tracks. It would alsokeep random MSG clowns from passing over WOs, SEFEs, etc for not checking all the right boxes.

Eielson is definitely less congested than Seattle but you'd have to deconflict with RF-A that consumes most of the summer time resources up there (airspace, threats, AGRS). I guess the point I was trying to make is that TCM can work, as long as you find fight airspace well outside the Class B and do some solid ATC coord in advance.

I wasn't a part of this exercise but it sounds like a lot of lessons observed from other large scale exercises. ATC can withhold IFR release for congested airspace and controller manning. I don't think it is because they are unionized. They have to have a certain number of controllers on shift to handle the number of aircraft flying. Note I said aircraft. If you have a 20-ship formation, their manning has to account for those 20 as if they were single ship. Nellis isn't a suitable fix for next go either. The NTTR is always at max capacity with Red Flag/DOE/USAFWS. LFEs at Nellis require ATC coord ahead of time to get folks into and out of the airspace efficiently just like any other location. Planners need to simply solicit feedback from ATC and adjust their flow in/out of TCM accordingly. A telecon 2ish months out never hurts either.

Data point: House version of the FY18 that passed today authorizes bonus increase to $50K. I imagine that will quickly get squashed in the Senate.

Senior raters have been read in for a while.

Your SURF only updates once a week, so don't waste time checking that. I've had luck clicking through initial assignment notification pages on vMPF. The last page had my assignment a few days before I got the email or CC notification (which is a huge foul).

Hitme FTW!

DFAS posted the 2017 paychart. No increase to ACIP.

Any insight on if monthly flight pay (ACIP) is going to go up? I saw that the services CAN pay up to $1000 per month now.

Down $100 for O-3s in Little Rock.

The standard mantra applies here, timing is everything. I left the viper (GLOC->FEB waiver) in 2010 and was offered nearly every AMC type aircraft to choose from; not an ISR platform to speak of. I'm now a C-130 patch. Whatever your circumstances, keep your head up and bloom where you are planted.

In my corner of the AF patch wearers that become execs did not choose to do so. They were told that is their job. Not saying that is the case everywhere, just my observation so your take on WOs that would "rather" be an exec is a miss IMHO. I agree that the "best" use for a patch at the tactical level is in the Sq teaching the punks. However, I'd rather the Bobs be surrounded by folks who have the critical thinking/problem solving skills and a willingness to call The boss out that a 1ea patch has than the cock gobblers who would "rather" be an exec. The WG/GP exec is always going to get ahead and have the ear of the boss, who do you want filling that role?

I agree and wish new WOs in every community were given the chance to work in a true tier 1 billet where they will build, teach and lead the folks around them. However, I will never scoff at the idea of a WG/CC trying to improve the promotion/school chances of a patch. WIC grads for the most part have proven themselves to be the type of leaders we want running things in the future. Being an exec or DS is all part of the AF game to advance. We can hate on it as much as we want but very little will change until we get the right folks into WG/GP/SQ command positions. Positioning a patch wearer to fill those positions is never a bad thing IMHO.

I think with an increase in allowable bonus the AF should (will?) try to tailor the bonus offered to folks based on core AFSC and manning for that year group. 11F and RPA folks will go straight to $60K. I've heard some discussion on this as well as an even more "personal" bonus where WOs or folks with other specialized skills may be offered more than a standard line flyer.

Pawnman, I think matmac was talking about the old whiting pilot trng program, not the Pensacola Nav err CSO school.

This was posted over in the next CSAF thread by deaddebate but thought it Pertinent to this thread as well. Fingers' testimony: Do you agree, if confirmed, to reevaluate the Air Force’s practice of offering the aviation retention bonus equally to all platforms, as a way to better shape and manage the Air Force’s pilot force across disciplines? We will tailor any potential bonus based upon specific platform and overall Air Force requirements. The requested increase is not a set amount. If approved, this will give us the flexibility to tailor bonus amounts and contract terms by platform.

No mention of increasing the bonus or flight pay in the senate text. SEC. 616. CONFORMING AMENDMENT TO CONSOLIDATION 8 OF SPECIAL PAY, INCENTIVE PAY, AND 9 BONUS AUTHORITIES. 10 Section 332(c)(1)(B) of title 37, United States Code, 11 is amended by striking ‘‘$12,000'' and inserting 12 ‘‘$20,000''. https://www.armed-services.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/S2943%20-%20Committee-Passed%20NDAA.pdf edited to add link

They did the same thing with Raptors back in the 09ish timeframe

Absorbtion is also a problem at the Ops Sq's. Even if the B-courses could churn out an unlimited number of students there is limited capacity to get them MR, experienced, upgraded etc.