-
Posts
81 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
2
kapilot last won the day on May 3 2019
kapilot had the most liked content!
About kapilot
- Birthday 01/01/1869
Contact Methods
-
AIM
bigsittingduck
-
Website URL
https://
-
ICQ
0
Profile Information
-
Gender
Not Telling
Recent Profile Visitors
7,475 profile views
kapilot's Achievements
Crew Dawg (2/4)
14
Reputation
-
Still taking reservist?
-
Guard Pilot Commitment/Bonus Recoupment
kapilot replied to The Lefty's topic in Air National Guard / Air Force Reserves
I’m hearing the same thing. Hired a guard guy to our reserve squadron. Guard unit refuses to release him citing 10yr commitment and manning issues. -
You nailed it... it’s all been heresay... no new guidance post working group. Typical AF leadership, keep comm minimal in an effort to control scuttle rather than just being honest and letting people know where things stand. If I had to guess it’s all being argued inside AFRC and with AD. If you don’t have your emer plan I’d recommend putting something together sooner than later. I have a hammer in my hand and raised ready to break the glass. I’m sure every TR with a civ job is doing the same. If this happens it’ll be an exodus. Also... AFRC 135 has always been on 120 days rotations but HQ cut them into 60s and divided them out. The memo is basically stating that they won’t do that anymore.
-
As of today... staff tours are only being fed to units that don’t deploy regularly or in mass ie C5, C17, School houses (even FTU) etc. If you go tanker, herc, fighter you’ll most likely not deal with a staff deployment. Then again I’m sure you’ve been around long enough to know that a kick in the nuts can come at any time and in any form. Dwell... it depends on how the community/wing has chosen to handle it. To clarify we’re only talking AFRC here not guard. It’s an important distinction bc they tend to handle deployments differently. AFRC tends to insist on deployments that meet the laws required to entitle benefits and dwell protection. That’s why AFRC sees longer deployments generally speaking. From what I’m told 45 days (away) is the minimum that you could be “non-voled” into and still receive dwell/benefits. To answer your question you HAVE to know how you’re being deployed by AFRC ie did you volunteer or were you a non-volunteer. The issue of dwell lies with your volunteer status. A non-vol will receive dwell whereas a volunteer does not. So generally speaking if you are correct that if a unit is tasked with a 120 day abroad that same unit won’t be tasked again unit its dwell runs out. When you here people talk about a squadrons bucket that’s what their referring to. However in reality AFRC has and will continue to (in my opinion) task units with onesie twosie crews here and there bc they won’t stand up to active duty demands and refuse to stop piecemealing crews. Up to this point I’m not aware of AFRC dwell being reduced and HQ has been adamant in their stance that it won’t be. (What did active duty do with their dwell?) So as of now The 5:1 is in place for everyone and is also driving piecemeal crews. The more AFRC breaks up squadrons the more spread out everyone’s dwell becomes and only encourages more piecemealing. To AFRCs credit they’ve been trying to correct this but it’s difficult to do until you get a break in deployments or demand a reset/rest period. That’s a long way to say that...Anyone entering AFRC in a operational squadron WILL deploy. If your in a high demand platform you will deploy as a squadron but if you forfeit dwell for a non-vol status you need to assume that you be hit with a onesie twosie. They’re so frequent where I’m at that a wise squadron commander created our own internal transparent system of handling them so the squadron wouldn’t rip itself apart from infighting about “who’s turn is it”
-
Update to 120 No one is 100% what’s going on with 120 policy at this point. They’re not off the table with Scobee policy letter just on pause. I suspect that the mass exodus from Grissom and March? gave pause to the policy. I do know that there is a last minute conference in Atlanta next week and AFRC 135 unit members were asked to attend. My question.... Currently there’s nothing in writing that exists contrary to 120 policy. If the deployment policy has already “changed back” after 4AF input, how is this going to be any different? What’s to stop them just changing it again?
-
To be clear... this is not sport bitching. These are legitimate concerns and frustrations being aired by people who are doing a job they love with people they consider a family. However everyone has a limit and 120s in the 135 AFRC will hit that limit for a lot and there will be a noticeable result. How many of you out there already have problems getting an AFRC 135 tanker for a local, much less a drag, when you need one? How much harder will that be after 120s are a reality? Blanket statements, stating that military flying is the best way to a pilot career is a biased statement and poor advice. Anyone rushing for a UPT slot needs to understand that the pilot job market has changed drastically in recent years, and what was true yesterday doesn’t make it true today. The pilot job is a true market with all the fluctuations and emotions driving it that move other markets. The only constant is change. I can promise you that the likelihood of your sponsored squadrons tempo today won’t be the same as when your return from training 2+ yrs later. Doesn’t mean you should run the other way! The reality of today, is if you want to be an airline pilot this MAY be a good path for you but then again it MAY not be. You will have to determine that for yourself by seeking conversations with honest opinions. And have enough wisdom to realize that a person further into life has a different worldview of someone in their 20s without a wife or kids. Now back to 120s please.