nsplayr

Blame the copilot, seems about right.

Story here. From the article:

With minor corrections kinda sounds like some of the gyms I've worked out at while deployed. Not that I minded.

I am a big fan of all three of the recommendations cited in the article (haven't read the book to get the full explanation, but they sounds good in the cliff notes version). 1. Commanders get hiring authority - I know several people who would love to do the job I'm doing right now. I would love to do several other jobs out there in the Big Blue world, some occupied by those same people who want to get where I am. Alas, "not releasable" from your functional on both ends means we either soldier on working a good or different deal down the road (possible if not always probable), or get out. I've known a couple who chose door #2 recently and I will strongly consider that when my commitment is up too. To me it's a desirable fix since the system we're used to is based on very long contracts where you sign away your balls to The Man, coersion to take OK jobs rather than roll the dice and get a really bad deal, etc, all things that are not particularly efficient or which lead to creativity being looked at as a positive attribute. Obviously not an easy fix, especially in the rated world but present in most career fields, due to expensive and time-consuming training pre-reqs to do many jobs and the limitations on the training pipelines where dudes often get bottlenecked even when there's a slightly above-level of accessions into a particular community. 2. Better evaluations - I don't know a single person who likes our current evaluations system, can't see why this is not an easy kill. I'd bet almost any alternate system we tried that incorporated even some components like peer evaluation, non-inflated strats, striking voodoo coding burried in push lines, masking things not related to job performance, etc. would be better than what we have now. 3. Lateral entry - I'm also totally for this; gives dudes an opportunity to take their talents to South Beach if they so choose but return to Big Blue if things don't work out or things change or especially if they gained new experiences that bring new value added to the service. Probably would need to be rid of year group promotions and 10-year commitments to make this happen but then again doing away with both of those things sounds good to me too. Promote guys when they are ready to promote (could be real fast, could be real slow, could be average), not when "their year group is up for a look." That's my bar napkin reasoning from some Capt in a flying squadron. Hopefully puzzle palace and White House types get some of this type of feedback and maybe I'll be surprised with some bold change for once! I don't think you got it quite right. Seems like in Army you need to be combat arms if you want to command at a high level, in the AF you need to fly, in the Navy you need to be a SWO if you want a ship, etc. That's the baseline and all others are exceptions to the rule. It's the same type of deal just a different flavor. Those with more wisdom on the other services feel free to chime in if I'm off base with those corrections.

Every time I log onto the internet at work, a fairy loses it's wings...

Welcome to the 22%! Don't worry, you guys can give me tons of shit when a Republican is back in the White House...I'll do my best not to be bitter

Totally agree, just was trying to clarify what I thought the other guy's point was. If wings are for "operators" in the air force then why not have them be worn by people operating out newest weapons of war? I've got no problem with it, especially for people operating UAVs. Those things are flying in the stack same as anything else, just happens that because of our technological awesomeness as a nation the guy at the controls doesn't have to be there too and is free to bang his wife at night and drink more than 3 beers. That's my view and it seems like Big AF pretty much agrees. Now "wings" for comm nerds doing hacking/WOW/whatever else they do...IDK...that really doesn't have anything to do with flying.

The dominance in airpower we enjoy today is directly related to the sacrifices they made. I bet they would be proud. Can't wait to see this on TV.

That's his point...why is it a different set of "wings" for the 18XXers and the SOs when they're not actually going up in the air?

Be careful saying "S&M guys" these days...don't wanna get caught up in the As a matter of fact, I'm offended at how unprofessional you must be just for typing that!

Yea, realized that now & deleted. Link does say out of stock though.

Lol...you know me, skim and summarize -> profit.

Do you mean title 50? Link.

Dude, you already asked this question in another thread.

Since we're bringing up bad assumptions, you sure about this?

Do you want to fly airplanes or not? That's really the only question you have to answer. Consider this a relatively thorough answer. Word to the wise, expect incoming spears...

Thought I remembered someone saying this...that $1.5T in cuts "wouldn't even begin to make a dent." Here's why our political leaders are "looking" for that level of debt reduction over the next decade. Cliff notes version: This addresses your concerns, which are concerns that pretty much every reasonable person has. So then... This is why it's still important to get something close to the $1.5T; it's not to "solve" the problem of debt, it's to stabilize it, solving will take more work, just like any major problem you can't turn the Titanic on a dime. And we'd still have a shit-ton of debt at 60% of GDP, but it's generally agreed upon that such a ratio is a favorable goal...i.e. the goal is not to get to 0% like it would be with a household budget featuring a bunch of consumer debt. The household analogies really are gross over-simplifications that aren't really helping.

It's sage advice from my perspective man...when everyone is doing X to compete on top of being legit at their primary duties it perhaps is wise to also look into X before you've been for 6 years. Doesn't come before being good at primary duties and I'm on board with wishing the requirement didn't exist or would get significantly de-emphasized, but just callin' it like it is at least in my own little piece of the AF. I've yet to talk to one leader (plenty of managers too) from FLT/CC up to MAJCOM/CC that doesn't recognize the reality of how this whole thing works and is advising anything other than "get PME/AAD done." And this is from guys I respect, who are awesome aviators and officers, and who are looking out for the best interests of their people. Tell me to fuck off all you want, the (unfortunate) truth don't lie and the truth is that even young dudes apparently need to worry about this shit if they wanna get to where they wanna go. All the SH guys I know who are getting fast-tracked for leadership/WIC/special programs/etc. are both awesome aviators and have all their queep in line and on schedule. It's not rocket-surgery and AMU and Maxwell aren't exactly Harvard either.

Holy crap, this dude is pretty thankful for whatever caused this malfunction! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P6SrH57hS2I I like how he gets kicked in the heads a couple times as he's still being wrestled to the ground on the stage.

It's a witch hunt dude, there are no rules other than find some damn witches.

Because its dangerous to wait until your 6 years in and have done nothing MA-wise in order to qualify. Most of your peers will have been DG (done & graduated) from their box checking program of choice by that point. At least based on the dudes I know.

Well played sir...my squadron didn't have anything nearly as hilariously "offensive" confiscated during the great Professionalism Witch Hunt of 2012. My hat's off to you guys, rock on out there with your genital-inspired beer opening devies.

Phew! Good thing I quietly took mine home from my desk before this all went down...

I don't think the point was that he was against PT as a concept in general (at least I don't think so). We're in the military, not the girl scouts, so we should be doing PT and there should be a test. My problem with all the PT shenanigans under the previous regime was the implicit lack of trust in creating the FAC, making civilians test us, then doing away with that in part when it was unworkable, etc. etc. etc. How about I, as a UFPM, test my squadron and if I help anyone cheat or lie on any forms you give me an Article 15 and show me the door. I'm given the keys (proverbially) to multimillion-dollar jets but can't be trusted not to lie on a freakin' PT test? That part of the reg we could do without.

Yea, I've made that point before that it's not up to Congress to determine what's Constitutional. You'd think in most cases they wouldn't pass things blatently and obviously unconstitutional, but I guess those determinations are subjective and in this case, yea, don't think any members are gonna sue to get their money or they will quickly be relieved of the burden of having to worry about getting paycheck as a member of Congress!