Skitzo

I opted to wear the standard wings on the chest. Most of the time the collar covered them whatever. Biggest complaint for the two piece is a lack of pencil pocket that is functional like the standard one piece. Some people have had them manufactured to place on the uniform but since it is not part of the manufactured uniform I could see the shoes having a field day with it.

Holy thread revival!

Commando Gaze

I think Al sums it up nicely. And since this scene is set in a boys prep school I think it is a useful metaphor. The cancerous type of leadership that prevails all to often is developed at a young age.

Anyone else having problems with the tap talk app?

Applied Leadership and Command. Ugh... Should have just towed the company line.... Core values this and that.... transformational something something...

Oh here's another one. Increase the ADSC for the TX course for anyone returning from RPAs or from AFSOC back to ACC. If that ever happens.

I guess the first step would be getting the 352nd and 353d turned into wings.

I agree with Chuck on separating the promotion process. I've suggested that we adopt a system like the US Navy. Restricted and Unreistricted Line Officers. And now that we have senior leaders on the forum I'd like to see what they think. Simply put if the mission is to win in air, space and cyberspace then why are the operators competing with support? The day I see a MX officer in command of a flying wing is the day I change my mind on this. And before anyone gets butt hurt this change would not impact anything other than two groups of unlike people from unnecessary competition. The current system only propagates the current tail wagging the dog mentality. I've flown missions with females who have used a new level of profane and crude language. They have told jokes dirtier than I have ever heard. Was I a victim of reverse harassment?

Maybe trying to avoid what I call the reverse halo effect. Once a shit bag always a shitbag?

I would think they start to matter earlier than that... But I'll wait for liquids words. So I guess being a 2004 year group guy with an air staff push is relatively good?

The problem is that the core values as I understand them to be were created during a time where a rash of individuals made a rash of bad decisions. Sheila Widnall's answer was the core values. Please correct me if I am wrong. They also found a nifty way to place the blame of shitty deals onto the individual. Before it was simply needs of the Air Force. Now you are guilty of not embodying "service before self." The core values have always been more about guiding the conduct of the individual than the institution as a whole. As to the secret decoder ring for OPRs please liquid divulge it. Is Air Staff a good push?

Yaaaay. RIF time again. Actually before you decide to cut people start cutting commitments to programs and actual missions. Just a thought.

Lets just get rid of active duty period.

Yup I'll go to the pentagon for a staff tour sign me up. Let me know how to route my ADP

What isn't represented by this scenario is people "with duties at". I've spent the last two years in this nebulous scenario. My flying squadron commander is my commander but who I work for and am rated on by is not dependent on the flying squadron. There is a definite distinction between attached and duties at...

Take a look at the foreign clearance guide... The qataris are being dicks to us.

I think what we need to see in order to fix the issue is something beyond the traditional separation pay program. By the regs it says that twice deferred o4s should only be not continued for extreme circumstances. If the severance pay was calculated based on a good faith estimate of future earnings I think we would be making a positive step. I have 9 years in and if the Air Force gives me a pink slip at the current separation pay rate then fine. But if I am at 16 years in and twice passed over to o5 and unless I have a DUI then it is a different story. We have no problem with enticing people to leave. Heck just the thought of going to cannon AFB has enticed a shit ton of u28 folks to drop their papers...most all of them at that 11 year point. If you get to 16 and the Air Force needs to get rid of you that badly a multiplier should be added to the formula representative of sunk costs. If the Air Force would have separated the 157 a couple years ago and handed them double their separation pay you would have at least preserved the thought that at least if big blue has to screw you through ineptitude they will at least treat you better than a game changing scenario like the fall of communism. Again general it's up to you and your comrades to decide whether or not excellence in all we do is a recruiting brainwash or truly the hallmark of our organization. Truly excellent organizations don't cut people at 16 years but when they do they do it with more class than we have.

Not only are violating a truth we are depriving the majority user of the close working relationship that will ensure more positive personnel recovery results. Then again it could be a move to allow more procurement of CSAR assets. If everything that is on a helo or herc that is dedicated towards CSAR is now special and comes out of a different pot of money and makes it easier to increase capability maybe it's justified.

I don't think it's the same GC. The last VSP was released with no regard to what AFSCs were eligible. I believe people were pissed at that scenario because for an institution that holds integrity as one of its core value and preaches it every day of the week it was guilty of a force separation process that the masses assess as lacking in integrity. There is also a real problem with regard to feedback in this organization. People so afraid of a guy with eagles on his collar that they will feed and brief inaccurate bull rather than confront the problem outright. Even if the a1 responsible for the last vsp fiasco would have attempted to get the pulse of the people they all probably would have lied because they mistrust the institution... That's where we could use some help... Mistrust.

Afsoc was once under Mac too. Maybe just move everything there.

This just doesn't make sense to me. It makes sense to me to have a majority of assets designed to conduct CSAR in the same organization as those that depend on them. I'd file this under one of the SOF truths....Most Special Operations require non-SOF assistance.

ACC doesn't have a monopoly on ISR anyways.

There are plenty of 11m's filling 11s staff billets.

Hacker--agreed. If time and conditions don't permit a pvt discussion then shut your pie hole. But I think that cuts both ways. We are kinder and gentler and even though I'd like to believe I can correct any member of the service the same way I can correct a member of my crew during a debrief it doesn't work that way.