FlyinGrunt

We'll see who puts their money where their math is at KCVS, but the stated intentions thus far point to a manning cliff on the 18X side. It's all words until they actually drop papers though.

We talked about it at KCVS, given the state of affairs. I said 500K, after taxes, to stay at Cannon. Per year. 300K after taxes even if you got me to Hurby. I then outlined, based on nominal cost to train a new "pilot" (new CP) to replace me, that offering a bonus bringing pay to 300K a year for IP/EPs would actually save the Air Force money. To my knowledge, no one listened. I'm voting with my feet. Please allow me to illustrate with a slightly modified quote from Braveheart: "You've been so busy squabbling for the scraps from [the Air Force's] table that you've missed your God-given right to something better!"

All those jokes about "AC pay" and "IP pay" . . . why not make those a thing? Again, would target exactly the folks you're looking to retain, and would prob add up to the increased ACIP we're looking for.

That's good to hear. The AF may want to come clean with a non-Sean Spicer press release soon though . . . the rumor mill may already be accelerating the run to the exits on this one.

When the board results are released, it starts the DOPMA clock for those twice passed over. Could be an attempt to keep the iron majors around just a little bit longer, especially given this anecdotal evidence that 11x continuation was not universal this past round. Not saying I couldn't come up with a better plan, because I could, even blackout drunk. (Come to think of it, some of my best ideas may have come that way.) Just saying I may see their logic.

OK, mea culpa 1: I drank a lotta beer today, so this thread is getting TL;DR. 1. Promote by AFSC ain't hard. Let's say you have a YG of 2000 officers. You need 1200 pilots. Promote them. You need 600 CSOs of various kinds. Promote them. You need 200 MX officers. Etc etc. Split the boards and don't suck. 2. As a former RA, yes, with 2-6 weeks of training, I could do the comptroller's job withe sufficient motivation. Anyone with experience in that area should understand that the motivation is inherent bc jail. 3. I don't give 2 fvcks about the cost for any support AFSC's costs to retrain. Run them all out, if that's what it takes; I sincerely believe I can find and inspire a rated officer to learn the job and kick @ss, given sufficient resources. 4. As said before, with no pilots, there is no spear, just a shaft. The kind presently given to our 4th point of contact, repeatedly. 5. The world needs ditch-diggers too - aka the entire MSG. But if I have to choose, I'll choose the OG and MXG every time and outsource the rest.

I was trying to think of a concise way to explain the reasoning of folks like me to "leadership" the other day, esp wrt voting with one's feet. Here's what I came up with: "At this point, I am thoroughly convinced that I do more for my fellow pilots and the organization as a loss to be felt than a contribution to be made." I don't know if that sounds accurate for any of y'all, and I do not think that Big Blue will actually feel my loss one iota. But when that statement is applied collectively to the huge number of us that I believe feel this way, I think it captures the situation quite well.

Confirmed for AFSOC as well. It's getting terrifying. They're not even experienced by the AFI. We used to tell AC students that their AC potential was already proven, hence being there in the first place; now, we were evaluating their ability to be IPs. It is no longer an exaggeration. I can already point to 1 or 2 AC students that I 100% expect to see back at the schoolhouse for IPUG within a year, given the outlook.

Having firsthand experience with rural inbred vampires feeding off Uncle Sam's troops, and seeing the coming exodus tsunami firsthand as well, I ask if the Nation will soon be forced to choose between its federally funded rural welfare and the all-volunteer force. NSplayer, you are committing the classic corporate finance error of throwing good money after bad sunk costs re: Cannon. All that matters is future earnings, and we both know that the massive retraining bill caused by attrition quickly dwarfs the cost of building that capacity at other, nicer bases. If the Nation wants to prevent the loss of the vast majority of combat airpower (meaning pilots and other aircrew) then they will pressure their Congresscritters to act. If they value their welfare kickbacks, they can act accordingly . . . and face the consequences when the draft comes back. Even stop-loss cannot work forever. For those saying "that can never happen," go re-look at Fingers' breakdown of pilots produced vs. airline demands over the next decade. He's not wrong. I predict that attrition of 90% or more is totally possible over that time period - and where would that leave the Nation with no one to fly the jets?

Yeah, that 37 month average sure ain't happening at Afcannonstan . . .

Cantfly, that Business Insider article is so on-point with the Air Force it's breathtaking. I'd say all 9 apply.

So before I speak too soon . . . remind me, who wrote Darker Shades of Blue?

Or AFSOC or ACC herks.

No more -slick- H models. Give me an FE or give me death

Ugh. I'll bait him. Chang, I won't even argue with you, but do keep in mind the epic exodus that would occur the second Stop Loss was lifted. It's a net loss, long-term. There's always a better option, unless we start trading nukes with North Korea. And if something like that happens, you won't need Stop Loss - because we ARE patriots, and we WILL stay to defeat the enemy. Insert ad hominem ad infinitum, bitter Cannon comment, and Congressional corruption zinger. Close with incrimination of average American handout taker.

This is complicated, and I don't claim to have the full picture, but here is what I think it really takes. TL;DR: Congress, the Joint Staff, and the USAF all have a role to play. All must take unprecedented steps to fix this, but the potential gain is beyond anything we've ever known. Congress: 1. Eliminate the vast majority of queep driven by federal law. 2. Bring pilot pay up to 75% of airline pilot pay with similar seniority/qualification. 3. BRAC Cannon yesterday, everywhere else tomorrow, and mass forces at superbases near major metro areas. Build a DFW-worth of runways to support and make the airspace Class B if needed. JCOS: 1. Inform COCOMs that their staff requirements will be combined (Navy flyer for USA/USAF/USMC/USN rated job, etc) or eliminated, to the scale or 50-75% or more. 2. Annihilate 179s as a thing. One fvcking day? Are you kidding me? Give people the credit for their service. This is one example, but i think the trend is clear: shorter deployments, where the service pays a premium to get people home to their families, and if not credits the time served, rather than allowing a cowardly bureaucrat to steal that credit. USAF: 1. Divorce rated promotions from non-rated. Separate boards, with separate quotas. To make a long story short: you can replace an MPF 0-3 with about 30 grand. To replace a (good) pilot is 100 times that amount. Time to recognize return on investment, kids. 2. Make the non-verbal signals clear: stop the anti-ops "you're all officers and equal" jihad. I won't rant about why. 3. Man the queep positions so that pilots/rated only do DOT, DOV, etc jobs aside from flying, aka those that require their expertise. 4. In Robin Olds' words: "If I can order a man to combat 24 hours a day, he can get paid 24 hours a day." I truly do not care if MSG folks have to work 12 hours shifts; they will support. If they quit, I do not care; I will replace them for the cost of a single aircrew TDY. Run the numbers and tell me I am wrong. However, I will also massively increase incentive flights and the like to connect Ops to MX to MSG and MDG. I would unite the factions so that they would SEE what their worth ethic empowers. 5. Inform COCOMs that their "rated requirements" will be manned at about the 10% level or lower. And see [JCOS] part. 6. Start researching how to finally quit the AEF and move to a better, more cohesive, more predictable model. Don't go full Army, because that is just retarded, but find a way for families to know that "this" deployment is just the one in 4 years, or whatever. 7. Most important: CSAF has to get out there, to every base, and every squadron bar, with nametags off and interview the pilots/CSOs/STS dudes with beer in hand and no entourage. This is the hardest part. He/She MUST establish credibility by allowing the rank and file to speak truth to power at the risk of being disrespectful. This will be a self-sustaining process; if the CSAF showed up here, paid my bar tab and got me a DD, I would whiteboard out the cycle of factors, at the FGO level, that are ensuring our mission failure - but only if I trusted him. 8. I'd overhaul Lackland to look more like an Army basic training unit than the clown show it is now. Kill the "but the queep reg says" buffoonery, and make 50% or more personal combat skills. I could go on on this point, but this is the essence of "expenditionary skills" and would motivate people that want to be part of a warfighting organization. Those who don't: quit. They will be replaced at their least expensive point. Folks, it's time to steal from the USMC model and challenge our people to be part of an elite combat unit, not an office camo welfare unit. And the take-away, folks: trust. This will require huge risks by leadership to change the paradigm, but if they can restore trust, then the rest will follow. Their biggest challenge now is that no one trusts the leadership, even if they make valid arguments and really want to change the culture.

Don't get me started on Everhart's screwup. Ironically, Goldfein and Grosso nailed it: talking about it only makes the fence-sitters run like hell. But I disagree that a national pilot shortage is outside the CSAF's lane. You can't argue with his numbers. Even if the airlines took ALL out UPT production, they'd STILL be short. We have a problem, and if the military has to lead the charge to fix it, so be it. That having been said . . . we sure aren't fixing it on our end.

OK, so CH mentions in the other thread that there are rules for stop-loss, such as a time period, etc. Looks pretty unrestricted to me . . . https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/10/12305 (USC Title 10 12305) Am I missing something? Are there some EOs out there putting out more guidance?

redshift: While I hate the Air Force, I have one very appropriate credo: Do unto others as you would have others do unto you. You, clearly, have no such moral compunction. Your words, while making some rational points about risk management, are completely fvcking off base when it comes to whether what these Marines did was right. How would you feel if one of these women was your daughter? Your sister? Your wife? Your attitude disgusts me, and I for one would move for banning you for it. That having been said, I doubt our mods would be willing to do so for a single post. Fix yourself.

Hope my sarcasm detector isn't inop, but did you read the TAP article? A large number aren't hardened combat vets, but POGs themselves with no combat or deployment experience. This is just misogyny at its worst.

My time in the military has told me this: 1. Big Blue will violate all kinds of laws, etc in Big Blue's interest. 2. Even if the barracks lawyer is correct, said lawyer usually pays for it in the end. 3. The best strategy is usually say "yes, sir" and then do whatever the fvck you want and fly under the radar. disclaimer: anyone who knows me will tell you that I had to learn most of that the hard way

If I understand your point correctly, that is to say that CDRCOCOMs want to have the individual sign-off on every strike in every theater, then I will respond with this: 1) Your concern is valid. 2) If they refuse to delegate approval to the PIC or at least GFC, then they are micromanaging cowards. WWII was not won by Eisenhower confirming LOAC requirements for all the targets on the ATO, much less the CAS furball. Not that such a possibility would surprise me.

1) Lawman, thanks for acknowledging that it doesn't take an 11F to deliver all the bombs. It's not just the 6th SOS that is ready for this, btw. I love my fighter comrades, but those who think only that they can deliver ordnance should read up Apollo's Warriors. Google is your friend. AFSOC is just a late 20th century name for what AF Special Operations has been doing for decades. 2) CH, as usual you are also right. However, if we got a CSAF level of priority in terms of quantity (as well as quality) folks, we could train those folks pretty quick per AFSOC firehose standard. (though, in the gunship world, hardware is at a premium) AvFID takes more training, I know, but from a schoolhouse perspective, if we just had more folks who didn't suck available to speed through, there's so many ways to accelerate training and experience. As you know, often combat IS part of our training plan, and those opportunities are widespread. 3) To that end: reviving Commando Look has been met with a wall of opposition in the past few years, as I'm sure you know better than I. However, given the number of students we hook across MDSs, if we WERE to get support for bringing that back, along with the resources to make it feasible, we could fix our manning and proficiency levels quickly. I'd say 1 year, if we got some more RPA tenant units in non-Cannonistan locations; 2 years, if not. 4) The problem is, our fighter comrades are hurting badly, as is the UPT capacity to train more raw material. This is absolutely a zero-sum game, and I realize that priorities are not SOCOM-centric. That having been said: UPT studs, if you want to kill bad guys, come to AFSOC. Our exponentially smaller size, given the number of carnivore assets/units we have, means that you WILL do that. A lot. ACC kills people, but ACC is huge. And we offer a FAR closer relationship with America's best on the tip of the spear . . .

Close to home is an understatement. My thoughts and prayers go out to their families; to the men, a toast. And Godspeed to those conducting the investigation. If there are lessons to be learned for the safety of our U-28 comrades, I hope they are found as quickly as possible.

Spill-over . . . good point. There is definitely a visible line between "nice area" and "full battle rattle territory" . . .