Liquid

Rusty, in my experience the board doesn't spend much time on APZs with a P. The stats show they don't get picked up either. I wouldn't say 4-7 are y/n, but experiences we value with differing levels depending on how well they were done. Aced combat mission command, DG SOS, etc. The lists I posted are not the CSAF's as far as I know, but recommendations we made. Not saying the HAF or the boards value them in that order, but they should.

Yes, I had 4 I/APZ DPs to give and I gave an APZ a DP and an IPZ a P. I went with who was more deserving and had a better record and considered the fact the APZ should have been promoted last time.

I agree with what you propose here and before this year, it was mostly last look or second look candidates and selects that went to IDE, for the reasons you hit on. Now we are only sending selects, even some first look with bad timing, no AAD/PME. We got one candidate at the last DT. Word is it will be that way for a few years. We need more IDE seats, but they don't make it above the cut line. That is not good news and hopefully it will change.

So are you upset that the bottom 10-15% passed over to Maj and Lt Col are the wrong people, or that anyone is passed over and kicked in the junk? How would you identify the 10-15% that need to be passed over to meet congressionally mandated grade limits? Are you saying that our best are being passed over? Boards rack and stack every record, based on the documents in the record. Breadth, depth, stratification, distinction, combat experience and deployments are valued. Recommendations from senior raters and supervisors are weighted heavily. The gray zone records are evaluated several a times to make sure the red line is drawn in the best place. It is hard to distinguish clear differences a few places up and down, but there is a clear difference between the gray zone and the top 20% (best officers). Many say the records don't match the people (square fillers, lousy Flt CCs, only got the good job because of early AAD completion, ducked TDYs and deployments, senior raters value the wrong things, etc). But the board can only evaluate promotion potential based on what the supervisors and senior raters say. I hear you, the lack of early AAD and PME may hurt you at the sq, group and wing strats, jobs and pushes, but the last major board was lenient on lack of AAD. Several MAJCOMs will leave the PRF blank for multiple APZ after continuation. Saves some time at the board, but not much. BPZ and APZ with a DP are long shots that board members don't usually spend much time on. For BPZ there is a yes no vote first to cull the thousands of records into hundreds. Most Ps fall out there. Sorry for the choppy wording. I'm dealing with movers wrecking my stuff.

Wow, strong first post. No, I take leave the normal way, a week at a time with the family. Hunting almost every October too. And usually a few weeks between assignments.

I guess you get one primary shot at promotion to manage the force levels. We are limited by law how many officers in different grades we have, so not everyone can move up. The board gives senior raters the opportunity to fix a past board mistake when the wrong person is passed over. They can give all of the their DPs to APZ eligibles if they want, their choice. I've given 4 DPs to APZ over the past few years and the board honored those recommendations by promoting them all APZ. Got one on this Lt Col board too. Had an APZ to major get sq cc and make O-6, so the option is there. The tough choice is that the DPs for APZ come out of IPZ eligibles, so you effectively give a P to an IPZ to give a DP to APZ. That is why some senior raters don't do it much, they rationalize that the APZ already had a shot and they want to maximize IPZ promotees, even if they are less qualified and deserving than the APZ. The good news is boards usually have a 100% promote rate for APZ with a DP, so senior raters know it is a good investment.

Easy dude. My point is that it is easy to acknowledge something so why are you asking for that? You think we don't know how busy and tired everyone is? If only we knew and acknowledged it everything would be ok? My point is that it takes more than ack to change. We need policy changes to drive priority changes to drive CGO behavior changes. There are some good policy change recommendations on this thread. You mentioned a few. Reprieve from bs is good. AAD and double tapping SOS are good things to hit. I already talked about eliminating mandatory PT, too many meetings, practice bleeding. The manning piece is tough. We have combat requirements, limited money and new manpower positions are almost impossible to come by. Btw, if you take leave during CTO, you won't have use or lose. Guys like you on 1 to 1 dwell, 60-90 day rotations, get up to six weeks of CTO a year. A generous program for those who deploy a lot. No leave charged if you stay in the local area. Most have the opportunity to take leave during cto but don't, so the use or lose whining in August doesn't fly with me.

At the Corona last fall, the MAJCOM CCs and CSAF talked about what we value as an AF and what we should value at promotion boards. I helped chop on the input below that was sent to CSAF and HAF A1 from our MAJCOM CC. He sent this in Oct: "What we value in every officer for promotion (in priority order) Capt to Major 1. Job performance (AC, IP, EP, WIC, AMU OIC, FLT CC, etc) 2. Leading Airmen both in garrison and deployed 3. Combat deployments, deployed mission commander 4. SOS 5. Additional duties: exec, safety, training, current ops & scheduling, plans, etc. This provides us insight into which officers can master their primary skill set and also handle increased responsibility. 6. Optional: Masters Degree Major to Lt Col 1. Job performance 2. Leading Airmen both in garrison and deployed 3. Combat deployment mission commander 4. Joint job - GCC, OSD, JS, Inter-agency 5. HQs job- HAF, MAJCOM 6. IDE either in-residence or correspondence 7. Masters degree Lt Col to Col 1. Job performance 2. Squadron commander 3. Leading Airmen both in-garrison and deployed mission commander 4. Joint job - GCC, OSD, JS, Inter-agency 5. HQs job- HAF, MAJCOM 6. SDE either in-residence or correspondence 7. Masters degree" Not sure what the response was or if there was one. I've heard the CSAF and A1 are working on the vector and new promotion board guidance. Hopefully this guidance will include masking AAD at O-4 board, MLR and prohibit using it for DP consideration.

You are spot on Noonin. Thanks for the perspective.

Why would you have to choose one? If you can't do both you probably aren't a very good aviator either. Good AF aviators are good officers. Not all good officers are aviators. It is rare to have a bad officer be a good aviator that you want in your force. And I'm not talking about careerist officers. I mean good leaders who understand the mission, the environment, the guidance, know about risk acceptance, know about warfighting and critical thinking and know how to take care of, mentor and lead their subordinates, and set and enforce high standards. And be very good in the aircraft. Sounds hard to do it all because it is. Good aviators that are bad officers don't belong in the military.

That is some scary shit. CSAF will hear that story. I hope you put a boot up their ass. Only 10% get passed over to Major. 111 pilots on the last board. Looks like we went overboard talking about the inner workings of boards and emphasized the wrong things to the 90%. Strats cause some of that because people are more comfortable stratifying objective metrics than subjective qualities of hands, leadership, attitude, potential.

I like your distinction between whining and bitching. Sailed by or aloof. Nice false choice. Reread my response without the "you talk about yourself too much" angle. I agreed with some of your points and disagreed with others. I used personal past and present experiences to illustrate my points. I stand by my criticism that you said we aristocrats fail to acknowledge we are run ragged, get bad deals and face uncertainty when you could have used much better examples. Explain to me the you can't polish a turd comment with regard to bad deals. Isn't that something leaders are supposed to do? If a commander can't change your "bullshit" aircraft assignment (RPAs, FAIP), your undesirable base location (Creech, Cannon), the fiscal crisis (no money to train), your ops tempo (supporting unpopular and "not real" wars) or the lack of needed guidance from HAF, what is this commander supposed to do? Whine and bitch with them in the bar or just quit? Or motivate them to get the mission done with hard work, long hours, lousy conditions and no appreciation from peers? An important part of leadership is getting your people to buy into the mission (even unpopular ones), overcome the obstacles, give more than they thought they could give, take care of their families and somehow enjoy it enough to do it all again tomorrow. This requires what you call polishing a turd and what you say no one respects. I have used the "stop whining" tactic successfully. It is incredible how you can change a culture by eliminating the few toxic whiners. It creates breathing space and opportunity for the creative, talented and dedicated. I mistakenly called out who I thought were toxic whiners on this forum, when they are actually bitchers with good ideas. But I do know that there are toxic whiners who need to get the f*ck off the team because they are crushing the mission. Managers acquire new "turds", create force management policies and prioritize requirements in fiscally constrained environments. Leaders get the mission done and take care of their people with what they are given. Many times I've been given a f*ing turd and had to polish the shit out of it. I've had reasonable success getting the mission done and getting people to realize it wasn't a turd after all, it was their biases, bad attitudes and small sight picture that they needed help with. Final shot, there are a whole lot of people here who claim to be against box checking careerism, but are intimately familiar with the promotion system, like careerists are. I didn't know or care what a school select was when they told me I was one at my Maj board. I didn't want to give up flying for school and staff, but I went where my DT told me to go and did every job I was assigned to. I go where the AF needs me to go because that is why I serve. I am a believer in the concepts of duty and service, so I get a little bent over the "I'm not appreciated or adequately compensated" comments. Do your damn job very well and it should work out. If not, you did your best, served well and at least didn't get caught up with the careerist bullshit.

HAF A1 had a "practice bleeding" policy that said you should not do correspondence if you are a select. I followed that guidance because I agreed with it. My bosses said I would be more competitive if I did both, which was probably true. My MAJCOM CC said it may have cost me getting picked up 2 BPZ to O-6. I didn't care because I didn't want to do it while I was a sitting sq cc. Lots of talk at HAF and MAJCOMs about prohibiting correspondence from being in the record for selects, to keep it from being a discriminator. The advice I give is don't do it if you are a select. Most of my selects did it anyway to be competitive for fellowships and early looks. Their choice. The DT didn't care, but the DEDB might. It may be good or bad advice, depending on the senior rater bias and DT preference, but the intent to limit practice bleeding is good. I did SOS, IDE and SDE in residence, so I am consistent with the advice to get it done at every level. So you want me to be consistent with the advice every other senior leader gives? And not piss people off with my opinions, advice and personal experience? Not sure I can do that.

No they aren't. Ignore the stupid shit and focus on the important things. Someone gives you a hard time for hands in your pockets and not wearing a reflective belt and you care enough about it to actually write about it later? Here is some guidance, don't give a shit about the stupid shit. What cultural identity crisis are you talking about? Do you think our joint force doesn't appreciate airpower or that our enemies don't fear the sky?

Ok, good stuff here. I respect your perspective. Let me take a shot at a retort. Dudes in my year group were leaving in '98 after our 8 year UPT commitments were up. No much bitterness or frustration, most were looking for a better life in the airlines. I stayed partly because so many were leaving, but mostly because I really enjoyed flying for the AF. Morale was high with my crowd, but most got out anyway. All good Americans, no hard feelings from anyone when they separated, it was their choice and they served their commitment. So when I say separate if you don't like the AF, I'm not threatening people or looking down from my high horse. I'm suggesting that you shouldn't be miserable in your job and the AF career isn't for everyone. I have very good AF friends who are in the reserves, flying for airlines and running businesses. A GO taught me what you talk about for the first two minutes is your priorty. If you don't lead every meeting, discussion, talk, etc with the mission, you are wrong. I engrained that and have lived it since. Mission is the most important thing, above people, morale and money. If you are good, you can get the mission done, get morale high and take care of your people. But I have made mission focused decisions that ruined careers, cost marriages and hurt feelings. Telling someone they don't have what it takes to fly combat missions or command combat squadrons is tough, but necessary sometimes. It is too bad you don't hear more about mission focus from your leaders. I hear it and say it all the time. I agree, requiring AAD at Maj board is bad policy and a misprioritization of time. I told CSAF and my MAJCOM CC exactly that. Hopefully it will change. The reality now is, the board uses it to discriminate in the grey zone, so commanders want good dudes to get it done and get promoted. Most Capts that didn't have it done got promoted. My number one Capt and #1 DP did not have it done and was a select on the board. The 10% of the pilots that didn't get promoted were the bottom ten percent. A few outliers may be below the line that should be above, but the board and senior raters and commanders do a decent job of identifying the xx percent that can't be promoted (by law numbers wise). Obviously there are commanders and raters that value the wrong things, but I haven't seen it. If they do they should change. Let them know what you think. I always have. Bitching in public (at work, not on forums) is toxic and hurts the mission. It is usually full of disloyalty and selfishness. Sometimes you get constructive criticism, but most of the time it is toxic. There are bad assignments and bad deals, but corrosive behavior and attitudes don't always make it better. Sometimes people need to be told to shut the f*ck up and get the mission done. Not always, the carrot works better than the stick, but sometimes it is appropriate. For instance, ###### all of the assholes that denigrate RPA crews, their mission and the value of their mission. The shit RPAs catch is mean spirited, wrong and hurts our mission. Knock it off. Not sure how a wing commander or GO does a better job acknowledging how ragged our force is. We know it, but don't say it enough I guess. We just finished a four day weekend (for most, but not all). We (I) try to give a much down time as possible, since time is very valuable these days. I haven't done a single wing run or mandatory PT, ever. A waste of time. I cancelled all meetings on my first day of three commands. I hold people accountable for missed suspenses, but don't dwell on metrics. You should get a masters degree to be a Lt Col. Should, not must. It would be nice if it was a valuable degree. PME at every level should be mandatory, period. I was a select at both levels, and didn't do correspondence either time, against the advice of my bosses. It worked out fine. Uncertainty is more frequent now, but we are also at war and in the midst of a financial crisis that threatens our national security. Risk is high, good people die and this shit is hard. We are out of money and tough choices need to be made. I would cut the Thunderbirds, all bands and advertising before PME slots. Commanders and wing level support does the family stuff. HQ does the management stuff. Not sure what Joe 1234 went off on. Big Blue makes big management decisions. Some good, some bad, all well intentioned. Job performance and leadership are king in my world and in my experiences down range, and with other senior leaders. It blows that it isn't true everywhere, it should be. I made several points earlier, that the bottom ten percent aren't great performers, regardless of the boxes they don't check. My observation, not naive enough to say it is true everywhere. Bad assignments, give me a break. People complain about wherever they are sent. During my first assignment overseas, half my squadron bitched about the cost of living, language and culture and couldn't wait to go back to conus. They are called orders, not suggestions. Go where the AF needs you and spare us all the drama. If you wanted to live in a certain area, wtf did you join the AF? Make the best of every assignment and don't be a part of the negative bullshit that dogs bases. Three of your four observations about how senior leaders don't get it is that we don't acknowledge things. Acknowledged. You can do better than that, but it was a good start. My opinions only. Several whiskeys down, watching tv and talking to the kids, so bear with the bad grammar and choppy wording. I don't write AF policy but I get to lead talented men and women who accomplish great things. And I'll be around for a while, so fire away, I'm listening. And I'd kick anyone's ass who suggested I get on my knees. Just saying.

There have always been pilots who leave for the airlines. Not sure it says anything other than not everyone wants to make a career out of it. Not sure there is any way to make everyone happy. What am I so out of touch about? Promotion rates, AAD/PME, the upcoming mass exodus, retention? Seriously, what are senior leaders missing on their high horses with their aristocratic beliefs?

Not sure what you mean. It was probably more fun being a Capt flying the line in the 90s than today. Training TDYs, few deployments (didn't do N/S Watch). Post 9/11, it all changed. Multiple command tours in Iraq and Afghanistan were much more rewarding than training. Better off? Probably not. We failed to take advantage of the enormous amount of money given to us since 9/11. Now we are out of money with few new weapon systems to show for it. We pay contractors to fix and fly airplanes. What an embarrassment. Our combat experience is high and we are very good at killing people, moving things, finding people and building bases. Probably not as good as we should be at the high end conflict. Grounding our force because we are out of money is about as bad as it gets. Future cuts will hurt more. 12 years of conflict has taken a toll and we are hurting in a lot of areas. Morale is low. Some people are fed up and bitter. I don't have the answers, I've been at the tactical level for most of my career. Looking forward to tackling these big challenges though. Somebody has to do it. Edited to replace people with contractors for clarity

Ok, that is a real war. Got it.

Bullshit. The warriors will be just as deadly without the words games, songs and sexist behaviors. Racists and homophobes made/make the same lame arguments about how integrating destroys our fighting culture. Not a real war in Afghanistan? Unbelievable.

I do enjoy reading this forum. Great wit, useful insights and a few knife fights.

Nice. Start with "cram them up your ass", follow with advice on how to engage on this forum and then tell me how to spend my time. I'm not impressed.

Ok tough guy, how would you have responded to the SECDEF guidance and Senate criticism about how we handle sexual assaults and harassment? The AF is a thankless organization who doesn't support those who give decades of their lives? You are f*ing kidding me. What could the AF have done to keep you from being so bitter? Not tell you AAD/PME is important? Give you a few more ribbons, pay and praise. How about more tax free pay, cheaper health insurance, more MWR programs, cheaper beer at the Deid or a better retirement plan? Service during war is hard. Good people die, we deploy too much and we get tired. Now we are out of money, so it gets harder. Maybe you should just go find an easier job. Sounds like this one gets you too stressed out. Thanks for your service.

No, your record is compared to those going to school in residence. If you rank above the line, you get credit. This does not affect the number of seats or those going to school. It is just a quality check to make sure we give IDE equivalency credit to high quality officers. Most I've seen get approved. I don't have the current red line, blue line charts or supporting data, not in my wheelhouse. I can get them and will post if they aren't FOUO. They usually are. AFPC and HAF A1 prefer to officially publish force management policy after it has been approved rather than while it is being developed. I'd say the value of the training and experience goes up when the demand is high and the supply is low. I should have made a value argument rather than a cost argument. An IP/EP with 7 years of experience is valuable. We protect that value with ADSC and retention bonuses. When low demand or high supply put the force management machine out of synch, they adjust. I'm not A1 and have very little to do with force management policies. I do recommend approval and disapproval requests for early separation and needs of the AF and unit are always considered with need of the individual. I think AFPC has been disapproving most Palace Chase requests, even the several I recommended they approve.

You seem like a smart guy. Figure it out. Yes. In uniform in a federal building. So would in uniform at a downtown bar/event, representing the AF anywhere, or performing duties in/out of uniform. You are always of course subject to our laws and the UCMJ, so there aren't many places where you can sexually harass someone with impunity. Probably best to steer clear all together and take the hit to your morale. Growing up isn't all that bad. We do have wars to fight.

Not in my repertoire, just examples of inappropriate songs: The engineer's dream, bridge at midnight, S&M Man, my Bonnie, Rawhide, South Atlantic Hornpipe, the gang bang song, the old department store, and why was she born a bitch are a few. Popular at rugby games, hash runs and frat parties. Should not be sung at work or in uniform. Should not be in squadron songbooks. Should not be defended as tradition and key to war fighting ethos.