i.o.w.a

@Royal, no personal experience but there are a lot of good options for veterans outside of using GO bill. Research what Syracuse University offers through Onward2Opportunity and also the VetTec program from the VA. And also recommend asking this same question on LinkedIn.

The $6k a month is only paid to those after their UPT commitment is up, so the number is less than 12,471 pilots. We could probably find the right number in CH's "USAF is Screwed" thread and the good idea fairy slides. I'd guess for the price of one F-35 a year it could happen. So I agree it isn't going to happen...

Only speculation, but that could also be the money needed for the new BRS Continuation Pay bonus they are handing out. Like you said, that proposed incentive pay is all Air Force officers. I hope I'm wrong.

I agree it still says $35k for 2019. If I'm reading it correctly, it also says that CGOs at Klamath falls in the 173rd get $400 a month for "assignment incentive pay", and that this year they are starting the same thing for Creech. Can anyone confirm that the Air Force is paying people extra money for these assignments, beyond whatever adjustments BAH covers?

You are good. Direct quote from the regs say you just need compensation (versus taxable income or AGI or W-2 income) of at least $11,000. They define compensation as: "Compensation includes wages, salaries, tips, professional fees, bonuses, and other amounts re-ceived for providing personal services. It also includes commissions, self-employment income, nontaxable combat pay, military differential pay, and taxable alimony and separate maintenance payments." https://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-pdf/p590a.pdf

A theory I heard goes like this... In the current system your chances of getting selected for school across your first, second and third look are 10%,1%,3% respectively. This means your best chance for getting selected for school is your Majors board when you are competing with only your Captain peers. This also means that since so many school slots are filled by Majors board selects, that the Wing Commanders only have so many slots left to fight over for their young Majors. New system, your chances of being selected probably go 3%,5%,8% (total speculation) as your package is competing with all the promoting Capts and first two year majors. One would presume that the package of a 2 year major is better <sts> than the Major selects and hence more worthy of school. It also means that if the Wing King wants to put someone back on the train to command, they have more slots for these Majors instead of having to have got their guy in on the first look where their best chance was. The intended consequence is the train leaving the station on the command track leaves two-three years later.

This thread is in response to all the healthy discussion on an unrelated thread not about the RQ-4, so now there is a thread just for the GH. Hopefully this will help my community fight two battles, the battle to be embraced by big Air Force so we can showcase our capability and the battle to address concerns that we have no capability at all, aka U2 vs RQ-4. So, we would love to integrate in a more meaningful way at Red Flag and tap into our Intel Patch's talent...As it was explained to me, the billet for an organic intel officer was established within the last year. I assume there is an Patch wearer on base but there isn't one in our squadron after former SQ/CC left. I'm relatively new to the squadron so I don't have all the info, and hopefully some other guys will jump in and provide it. What I do recognize is we have NOT demonstrated a commanding capability that cannot be ignored by Nellis...and hence we have been ignored. Maybe we need to work on ourselves before we fight at the big kids table, or maybe we get some more support and we all get better together. #thedream As far as the U2 goes, how do you have an ISR capability fight that is unclass... As a start though, sensor parity seems an inevitable certainty from the simple fact that there is no physical/electrical/aero reason it can't be. Northrup Grumman is going to do the leg work to make it happen, they have a vested interest to do so. There isn't parity now, which is why we keep the U2. Good, our Intel is better because of it, but someday we will have parity and arguing about when that day will be here is boring. My guess is 3 years cause that is what I read on CNN. As far as old fashioned pilotage exploiting U2 capability...you are right, I am not aware of what you are talking about. But I will clarify that every 11X in the Air Force is part pilot part mission manager, your Qual check proves you can pilot, your MSN check proves you can manage. In the RQ-4 you can pass your qual check if on your engine out EP you don't touch anything and just make the appropriate radio calls (phone calls if MCE only ;) Hence a Global Hawk pilot is really a mission manager and not a pilot in my framework...it is semantics. Someday an 18X or even perhaps a Enlisted pilot will use good ol'fashioned mission management skills to exploit superior HAISR capability to that of U2, if only because they can do it at a desk and not in a space suit worrying about stall speeds and that SA-2. List of current shortfalls...cough...quibbling Sensor Parity, Dynamic Inflight routing w/ weather radar (significant software update and minor hardware), reliance on GPS/Satellites I'm tired so if someone else wants to join in we can talk about enlisted pilots too. And I haven't even mentioned all the things that make the GH superior to the U2 so hopefully this thread gets some discussion going.

All great discussions not related to this thread. I will start a new thread and maybe a moderator can do some of their magic and parse out all the GH discussion into the new thread. (A moment please while I check the search function for an existing thread)

I enjoy it. It is not a pilot's aircraft, you don't fly anything, you are a mission manager. That mission is way more important and valuable than what I did in the Herk, and for me that satisfies my pilot machismo. Any unhappy global hawk pilot either misses being in the air or is frustrated by the air frame's newness and lack of standards and doesn't enjoy getting to establish the future of high altitude ISR. I start defensive because I recognize it is unpopular to not love flying here. For anyone who is tired of the grind deploying to CENTCOM, the RQ-4 won't be giving the good deals to the e's for another year or so so get in while you still can. And to answer a standard follow on question, the -4 doesn't have sensor parity with the U2 yet but when it does it will clearly surpass the U2 in capability and the spooks can ride into the sunset having served faithfully. I only hope they will let me take joy rides in the -38s and Dodge Chargers before they get rid of them or send them to the bored -35 pilots.

It rotates based on which unit is doing the "large" centcom deployment, but realistically that only applies to LR and Dyess and both share the good and bad times. Who knows about Yokota cause it is new and Ramestein is a different animal with their longer TDYs and no centcom deployments. PCS lengths are similar to other airframes, no differences. Call it 3-4 years currently. Disclaimer: I left the Herk a year ago to fly the RQ-4 cause California and Italy deployments while sleeping in my own bed every night was more appealing than Texas, Afghanistan and overnights to Pope. I'm giving you the honest truth about the Herk and I bet there is someone with rose colored glasses that will sexy up all these opinions for you. Bottom line is if tactical flying in an aircraft that actually executes its primary mission in combat TODAY is appealing...and you track T-1, fly the Herk. and for copilot development Dyess is probably better than LR, but then again Texas...

C-130J 1.Ops Tempo/Deployment goodtimes are 3 day tdy once a month and 4 month deployments every two years badtimes are no off stations, one local a week and a deployment every year 2. Lifestyle/ Family Stability nno problem at all. Some night flights but not too terrible 3. Community morale highly dependent on squadron...make it good and it will be good 4. Advancements & Future of the airframe sSlow progression compared to other AMC assets, not a good hours builder for the airlines. That being said, the flying is more fun than other heavies...cause you are not preparing for the airlines 5. Preferred PCS locations Ramstein, Yokota, Dyess, Little Rock in that order

I guess I will take that 15 year mortgage for the win. i used to invest my BAH overage in mutual funds but I guess now it is going into realestate. Especially now that I can price gouge all the military renters who rent from me when I PCS. ...talk about unintended consequences. Do any economists work for the government or are they just guessing?

On a similar note, can I refinance my mortgage so the monthly payment matches the max allotment? I mean I know I can, but in that way would one avoid giving any BAH back to the man.

My wife has had a usaa managed fund and we have since moved it to vanguard. In the good years 2013-2014 it was worse than the index funds and in the overall bad year 2015 it was even with the index funds. The experience basically proved to me that manages funds are never a good investment, that everything you read is true. Low expense index funds are the way to go, and you don't get those at USAA.

The discussion got close to this but I'm hoping someone could dumb it down for me. I'd like my future child to get my Post 9/11 benefits, but I'd like to start my 4 year ADSC clock now so it will run concurrent with the UPT commitment. If I transfer everything to my wife, it will start the clock now. Then in two years, I can move the benefit to my child "for free" as re-allocating does not incur additional commitment. Thus avoiding a transfer ADSC that extends beyond my UPT commitment, keeping my options open. Does this sound like a reasonable plan, or more like a scam? Hopefully someone has their own experience to share.