?s on ADSC (Active Duty Service Commitment)

[Fuzz]

4 hours ago, Breckey said:

So as I see it in the excerpt IPUG or WIC will not incur the ADSC since they are not initial or requal. Also what about differences training (ie TH-1 to a UH-1) it's an initial qual course at the FTU but isn't per the MDSV2?

WIC falls in rule 16 but no mention of IPUG from what I can see.

[Chida]

I once worked for a contract outfit that had a training bond of 1 year for initial qual and 6 months for a refresher. The reason was because the owner (retired Army) was tired of his employees going to work for his competition. In theory, one could be under a perpetual bond. The only escape was to refuse or have an excuse to delay training, to avoid acquiring a new training bond.

It seems this is now the setup with regular AF.

[MooseAg03]

Looks to me like they didn’t label Flying Instructor Qualification Courses, it used to be directly under WIC in the chart. If that’s the case it’s a 2 year and will extend beyond UPT ADSC now - if Big Blue corrects the chart.

I don’t think I’d take the chance either way, so I guess no MWS IP for me.

[ThreeHoler]

“We fixed the glitch.”

[Bode]

Guess I’m opting out of my assignment next week once I get notified.

[MooseAg03]

Guess I’m opting out of my assignment next week once I get notified.

I don’t understand how this helps the retention issue at all, because this will be the result from a lot of people. All I can think is that so many people will 7 day opt now that it gives them more ammunition with Congress for stop loss.

[DirtyFlightSuit]

26 minutes ago, MooseAg03 said:

 

I don’t understand how this helps the retention issue at all, because this will be the result from a lot of people. All I can think is that so many people will 7 day opt now that it gives them more ammunition with Congress for stop loss.

 

I'm amazed people still think they are trying to work on retention!  Never once have I seen any indication of it, and every thing I've seen is contrary to greater retention.  Beyond talking points that is, plenty of talk about improving QoL and retention but as we've all seen no action.

 

[sixpack]

36 minutes ago, DirtyFlightSuit said:

I'm amazed people still think they are trying to work on retention!  Never once have I seen any indication of it, and every thing I've seen is contrary to greater retention.  Beyond talking points that is, plenty of talk about improving QoL and retention but as we've all seen no action.

 

It's all about building enough ammunition to enact stop loss after leadership said they tried to stop the bleeding by using all other means.  I honestly see it coming in the next 16-19 months.  

[pcola]

Except for note 2 which talks about in-house requals also incurring an ADSC.

Well I specifically read it as an in-unit course (ie formal course that is conducted in-unit). I’d be very surprised if AFPC tags every CC directed requal for ADSC. I know my requal (which is currently under way, in-unit, CC directed) is not gonna get me an ADSC.

 

And it sucks but isn’t surprising I guess that the C-17 sends folks back to Altus for requal. That’ll definitely get you an ADSC.

[Fuzz]

5 hours ago, pcola said:

Well I specifically read it as an in-unit course (ie formal course that is conducted in-unit). I’d be very surprised if AFPC tags every CC directed requal for ADSC. I know my requal (which is currently under way, in-unit, CC directed) is not gonna get me an ADSC.

 

And it sucks but isn’t surprising I guess that the C-17 sends folks back to Altus for requal. That’ll definitely get you an ADSC.

We requal a decent amount of people in-unit, just depends on their background and slots available at Altus. Typically airdrop is our most common in house requal.

[di1630]

It's all about building enough ammunition to enact stop loss after leadership said they tried to stop the bleeding by using all other means.  I honestly see it coming in the next 16-19 months.  

The USAF is about to learn the hard way (again) that pilots and their families will pay a big price for their freedom.

This will not help retention, I already know guys awaiting requal orders who will decline them if this holds up.

[FLEA]

I dunno. They might win big in getting a few years out of RPA returns who have no choice but to suck it up if they want a reasonable escape vector to the Airlines. 

[Guest]

I dunno. They might win big in getting a few years out of RPA returns who have no choice but to suck it up if they want a reasonable escape vector to the Airlines. 

3 year commitment instead of 2. Those guys probably need the time anyway to build hours. The UPT guys, on the other hand, shouldn’t need to go back to an MWS to have enough time under their belts.

[Orbit]

6 hours ago, FLEA said:

I dunno. They might win big in getting a few years out of RPA returns who have no choice but to suck it up if they want a reasonable escape vector to the Airlines. 

This and manpower numbers will look better if there are less people in Requal training and more staying qual’d in their current job for longer periods.  

[tunes]

So does this mean a commander directed in house requal will incur an ADSC in the reserves now?

[Sling Blade]

Any second assignment RPA folks that tack on an extra year or three at the end of their UPT commitment for the privilege of meeting airline hiring mins are chumps.  Any three letter contractor will pick them up for equal to or better than airline pay starting on day one.  The folks that do take the bait are going to end up eating 365s and other shit deals and never see the flying experience they hoped to get.  Not to mention the ops squadrons would be getting inexperienced copilots that are mostly worthless training burdens with no return...as majors...with huge chips on their shoulders.  But you know YOLO.  Let me know how it goes.  AFPC counting on RPA returns to backfill demand is a pretty dubious proposition in my opinion.  All those folks are getting out.  Ask me how I know.

Edited July 31, 2018 by Sling Blade

[tunes]

2 hours ago, Sling Blade said:

Any second assignment RPA folks that tack on an extra year or three at the end of their UPT commitment for the privilege of meeting airline hiring mins are chumps.  Any three letter contractor will pick them up for equal to or better than airline pay starting on day one.  The folks that do take the bait are going to end up eating 365s and other shit deals and never see the flying experience they hoped to get.  Not to mention the ops squadrons would be getting inexperienced copilots that are mostly worthless training burdens with no return...as majors...with huge chips on their shoulders.  But you know YOLO.  Let me know how it goes.  AFPC counting on RPA returns to backfill demand is a pretty dubious proposition in my opinion.  All those folks are getting out.  Ask me how I know.

Seniority is everything. You should do what gets you on the seniority list the fastest.

[Premo]

7 hours ago, Sling Blade said:

... Any three letter contractor will pick them up for equal to or better than airline pay starting on day one.  ...

But then I'm still flying an RPA.

[BFM this]

7 hours ago, Sling Blade said:

Any second assignment RPA folks that tack on an extra year or three at the end of their UPT commitment for the privilege of meeting airline hiring mins are chumps.  Any three letter contractor will pick them up for equal to or better than airline pay starting on day one.  The folks that do take the bait are going to end up eating 365s and other shit deals and never see the flying experience they hoped to get.  Not to mention the ops squadrons would be getting inexperienced copilots that are mostly worthless training burdens with no return...as majors...with huge chips on their shoulders.  But you know YOLO.  Let me know how it goes.  AFPC counting on RPA returns to backfill demand is a pretty dubious proposition in my opinion.  All those folks are getting out.  Ask me how I know.

Guess I’m not exactly the demographic you’re referring to since I long ago had the logbook to step right into 121, but...

I also had some RPA stink, but would gladly take regional pay and QoL for a window seat.

Never wanted to go.  Gave my best when the “needs of the AF” said to.  Would have separated within 3 years of retirement if the AF hadn’t PCSd me out.

Pay is important, but it’s not everything.  If the AF can get a little something out of someone while giving them their preferred path, that’s what good talent management looks like.  It’s not all “give me exactly what I want with nothing in return.”

[MooseAg03]

I don’t pretend to know everything about RPA contract jobs, but from what I’ve seen you will work your ass off to earn that money. Either by working 60 hour weeks stateside or spending months at a time deployed, which a lot of us are trying to avoid. Some of those gigs mean you get months off at a time between deployments, different strokes for different folks.

Another alternative to signing a 3 year ADSC would be to utilize the 750 hour R-ATP at a regional. Anyone who was non-vol’d to RPAs should meet that hour threshold (unless we’re talking TAMI guys). Prepare yourself financially for a substantial pay cut by paying off debt and saving, and/or put the wife to work if that is an option. But would you rather spend an extra year or two stuck on active duty catering to the whims of Air Force upper management, or would you rather work for a company that you choose and be able to live where you want? I know which I would pick.

[BFM this]

7 minutes ago, MooseAg03 said:

Another alternative to signing a 3 year ADSC would be to utilize the 750 hour R-ATP at a regional. Anyone who was non-vol’d to RPAs should meet that hour threshold (unless we’re talking TAMI guys). 

Most TAMI folks should meet R-ATP mins.  They were selected with 400-500 MWS hours, probably flew another 100ish hours waiting to PCS, and it’s total time, so 200 UPT hours count.  Oh yeah and it’s mil time, so + .3 a sortie!

 Knew one guy who got TAMId, then went on deployment  before he left and ended up with 750 hours in his jet.

[HuskyPilot]

How about the dudes that get tagged to go deploy to Afghanistan to fly Cessnas (or some other comparable bad deal), then have to come back and requal into the life they left 365 days ago?  Is that a 3 year ADSC for the Cessna, and then a rehack on that 3 year ADSC for the requal back into their MWS upon the completion of the deployment?

Disclaimer:  I'm not one of those dudes in this situation, just curious.

Edited July 31, 2018 by HuskyPilot
typo

[Motofalcon]

Good point - here's a few other situations I thought of that are sure to cause grief if an in-house requal costs 3 years:

1) MWS pilot gets tagged for non flying 179 or 365. The only way to insure yourself is to take an I/Q checkride right before you leave, so when you come back you aren't unqualified, just non current. That does take sq/cc approval for an out of zone check, and given what I've read in other threads about some sq/CCs, that may be easier said than done.

I don't think that would work for your Cessna problem though, because once you get the qual in the Cessna, it voids your previous MWS qual, no matter how current the form 8 (no dual qual for the average joe)

2) MWS female pilot gets pregnant - during her DNIF period, her checkride expires. So does she pick up 3 years just to requal once she pickles?  (This can also expand to any pilot who has a long term DNIF)

3) MWS pilot gets a Q3 and is directed to fly X sorties/sims before refly - does this count as an in house requal?

Again, who is gonna track down every "RQ INST/QUAL" form 8 and attach an adsc, I have no idea. But it seems like the AF didn't think this one all the way through (shocking). It used to be clear that they were picking and choosing what they wanted to follow - now they just muddied up the waters. 

Edited July 31, 2018 by Motofalcon

[Day Man]

upvote for 'pickles'

[baileynme]

How about the dudes that get tagged to go deploy to Afghanistan to fly Cessnas (or some other comparable bad deal), then have to come back and requal into the life they left 365 days ago?  Is that a 3 year ADSC for the Cessna, and then a rehack on that 3 year ADSC for the requal back into their MWS upon the completion of the deployment?
Disclaimer:  I'm not one of those dudes in this situation, just curious.

That’s an easy one, all those deployments will be filled by the guys that fell for the ATT and now have an 8 year commitment. Plenty of ADSC remaining.