What's wrong with the Air Force?

[17D_guy]

My guess is they're going for "combat related?"

[Hacker]

Or maybe they just don't consider Big Blue Inc to be part of the "American military" anymore?

[ygtbsm]

What’s wrong with the Air Force? Why can’t the Air Force change?

I spent a lot of time soul searching this question: What is wrong with the Air Force? I spent countless hours wondering why the Air Force has a “pilot crisis”. I think about my fellow officers who separate at 11 to 12 years of service who are only 8-9 years away from retirement. Is active duty Air Force really that bad to prevent a pilot from continuing to retirement? Especially considering that pilot at the end of a UPT commitment is over half way there. Why can’t Air Force leadership change policy to snap us out of the rut we are in? I think I know the answer.

Air Force has "Officers who happen to be Pilots" and "Pilots who happen to be Officers." Those two don’t understand each other. There are individuals who join the Air Force to fly airplanes. The “pilot who happens to be an officer” is only an officer because that’s what the Air Force requires of them to fly airplanes. If the Air Force required its pilots to be a warrant officer, the “pilots who happen to be officers” would all be warrant officers.  This is a majority of the Air Force pilots. They will leave the organization because of the leadership responsibilities placed upon them at the end of their UPT commitment.

There is also a group of "officers who happen to also be pilots". Those officers are excellent officers but  would have been just as content to be a maintenance officer, or an intelligence officer.  Those officers are here to be officers and lead men. The “officer who happens to be a pilot” doesn’t care about flying. He doesn’t have a true passion for aviation. The officer who happens to be a pilot will not retire or separate after their commitment ends and become an airline pilot. He or she will continue service to 20 years and beyond.  The “officer who happen to be a pilot” will become a senior Air Force leader. That officer will make the rules and values for the organization. They will continue in service and say "officer first, pilot second"

The "officer who happens to be a pilot" will drive the pilot who is an officer to separate at 10 years or 20 and join an airline. 

[ThreeHoler]

Deep thoughts by Jack Handy.


Sent from my iPhone using Baseops Network mobile app

[hindsight2020]

1 hour ago, ygtbsm said:

What’s wrong with the Air Force? Why can’t the Air Force change?

I spent a lot of time soul searching this question: What is wrong with the Air Force? I spent countless hours wondering why the Air Force has a “pilot crisis”. I think about my fellow officers who separate at 11 to 12 years of service who are only 8-9 years away from retirement. Is active duty Air Force really that bad to prevent a pilot from continuing to retirement? Especially considering that pilot at the end of a UPT commitment is over half way there. Why can’t Air Force leadership change policy to snap us out of the rut we are in? I think I know the answer.

Air Force has "Officers who happen to be Pilots" and "Pilots who happen to be Officers." Those two don’t understand each other. There are individuals who join the Air Force to fly airplanes. The “pilot who happens to be an officer” is only an officer because that’s what the Air Force requires of them to fly airplanes. If the Air Force required its pilots to be a warrant officer, the “pilots who happen to be officers” would all be warrant officers.  This is a majority of the Air Force pilots. They will leave the organization because of the leadership responsibilities placed upon them at the end of their UPT commitment.

There is also a group of "officers who happen to also be pilots". Those officers are excellent officers but  would have been just as content to be a maintenance officer, or an intelligence officer.  Those officers are here to be officers and lead men. The “officer who happens to be a pilot” doesn’t care about flying. He doesn’t have a true passion for aviation. The officer who happens to be a pilot will not retire or separate after their commitment ends and become an airline pilot. He or she will continue service to 20 years and beyond.  The “officer who happen to be a pilot” will become a senior Air Force leader. That officer will make the rules and values for the organization. They will continue in service and say "officer first, pilot second"

The "officer who happens to be a pilot" will drive the pilot who is an officer to separate at 10 years or 20 and join an airline. 

An AD OG not so many moons ago was yet again faced with that question as we BS'd amongst each other in the bread van on our way to the parking row. His response to the collective question about that proverbial technician/pilot track inquiry was : "We already have that, it's called the Guard/Reserves". As the sole Reservist in that van, I just quietly shook my head. They don't get it, and never will. 

For those who fell off the math bus, it is increasingly difficult to attain an Active Duty retirement by that metric. Not impossible, just laborious to a non-starter degree, given the nuances of double commuting and the pay/QOL deltas of major airline flying work. 

Furthermore, that second class treatment of the flying track disincentivizes the retention of tactical combat corporate knowledge, and dilutes the value of it  (80 cents on the dollar by my last count, in the ARC), if one is to suspend disbelief for one second and assume 100% experience retention of separating members into the ARC component. And Lord knows it isn't...hell we have people quitting with no 20-year letters over ¡flu shots! I shit you not. Airlines are that frothy.

A true technician track would allow someone to attain an active duty retirement while remaining in ops for the duration, with the recognition that O-5 may be just as scarce as it is in the FTS component of the ARC flying unit ecosystem. But recalcitrant AD just won't barter with their human property as a matter of principle, so we have what we have today. A completely fraudulent and gratuitous apathy toward point blank hemorrhaging of the experienced demographic. It is terrible stewardship of the People's money, and completely uninspiring as a fellow "pilot who happens to be an officer". 

This particular iteration of the see-saw has convinced me that nothing will change. If they are unwilling to stem the loss in this environment, there really isn't a single additional variable that would compel them to do so. They'll stop loss and then allow it to get worse, while they continue to run the clock offense until the next airline hiccup. The only people who could take them to task would be Congress, and they seem aloof as to the criticality of this manning deficit if we were to get mouth-punched with a peer fight today.

So do your 12, fly your ass off, then punch to make whatever life and vocational priorities are the center piece of your life. We managed to pull ourselves out the ropes of Pearl Harbor like Rocky in the fourth movie, so I guess we can keep winging it like that when China sucker punches us. "Late to the melee...", the American Way it seems. LOL

 

[di1630]

The real way to fix this would be to have pilots simply fly and do minimal qweep, which would instead be done by dedicated support personnel embedded in the sq.

Imagine flying, studying and if not on the schedule, free to hit the gym, go home etc with no guilt or fear that just doing your job is going to get you and your family screwed over come assignment time.

That’s how it should be.












Sent from my iPhone using Baseops Network mobile app

[matmacwc]

4 hours ago, di1630 said:

The real way to fix this would be to have pilots simply fly and do minimal qweep, which would instead be done by dedicated support personnel embedded in the sq.

Imagine flying, studying and if not on the schedule, free to hit the gym, go home etc with no guilt or fear that just doing your job is going to get you and your family screwed over come assignment time.

That’s how it should be.












Sent from my iPhone using Baseops Network mobile app

And I want $100 million.

[isuguy1234]

5 hours ago, di1630 said:

The real way to fix this would be to have pilots simply fly and do minimal qweep, which would instead be done by dedicated support personnel embedded in the sq.

Imagine flying, studying and if not on the schedule, free to hit the gym, go home etc with no guilt or fear that just doing your job is going to get you and your family screwed over come assignment time.

That’s how it should be.












Sent from my iPhone using Baseops Network mobile app

What ifs r open!  Haven’t even called roll yet!

[JeremiahWeed]

12 hours ago, ygtbsm said:

I spent a lot of time soul searching this question: What is wrong with the Air Force? I spent countless hours wondering why the Air Force has a “pilot crisis”.

"Countless hours" and this is what you came up with.  Please tell me you're not in a position to affect AF retention policy going forward. 😉  The reason for the pilot crisis isn't the mystery you make it out to be.  Read the "Dear Boss" letter from whatever decade you prefer and you'll find your answer.

12 hours ago, ygtbsm said:

This is a majority of the Air Force pilots. They will leave the organization because of the leadership responsibilities placed upon them at the end of their UPT commitment.

Really?  They leave because of added responsibility?  A 4-ship FL or Mission Commander leading a Flag mission or doing the real J.O.B. in the AOR has accepted a pretty significant level of responsibility.  If you think that individual is reluctant to accept an ADO, DO or CC job because of the leadership responsibilities, you truly don't understand the problem.

 

12 hours ago, ygtbsm said:

There is also a group of "officers who happen to also be pilots". Those officers are excellent officers but  would have been just as content to be a maintenance officer, or an intelligence officer.  Those officers are here to be officers and lead men. The “officer who happens to be a pilot” doesn’t care about flying. He doesn’t have a true passion for aviation.

How do you know they're "excellent officers"?  There's no guarantee of that any more than there is that every pilot can be one either.  One thing's for sure:  "Leading men" 🙄 in the true sense (i.e. on the pointy end into actual combat) isn't going to happen in Intel or the Maintenance squadron.  Taking an 8-ship into true combat isn't the same as showing up for the morning Intel PPT slide show or generating tail numbers for a 12 turn 8.  The leaders required to do those jobs are not interchangeable.  Until the USAF is willing to acknowledge that lost piece of very important information, it will continue to lose its best pilots and leaders.

I have yet to meet a pilot who was truly a "leader of men" and can bring game to an actual combat mission, inspire his pilots to put their lives on the line and do what is require to accomplish the mission who didn't care or have a passion for flying and all that goes along with it.  Tactical competence doesn't just happen save for the occasional gifted savant.  Without caring or passion, a so called "officer who happens to be a pilot" will never attain that level and more importantly, understand and appreciate the mentality of those under him who are striving to achieve it.

12 hours ago, ygtbsm said:

 The “officer who happen to be a pilot” will become a senior Air Force leader. That officer will make the rules and values for the organization. They will continue in service and say "officer first, pilot second"

They will continue to try to deny it takes a very different officer AND pilot to fly daylight attacks on Germany, tangled with MiGs in the alley, go downtown in Pak-6 and take the fight to our enemies of the last 30 years.  You don't magically create those pilots from the PC, no squadron bar, no nametag, no o-club, peacetime, make everyone feel like equal war fighters USAF.  Being willing to bring game, put your life out there daily in training and combat requires a special officer and pilot.  If the USAF finds a way to keep those guys around, that will be a huge step in the right direction.  In the meantime, we have the ones that do dumbass things like take "Home of the Fighter Pilot" off the main gate at Nellis.

[HU&W]

On 12/9/2018 at 8:56 PM, ygtbsm said:

There is also a group of "officers who happen to also be pilots". Those officers are excellent officers but  would have been just as content to be a maintenance officer, or an intelligence officer.  Those officers are here to be officers and lead men. The “officer who happens to be a pilot” doesn’t care about flying. He doesn’t have a true passion for aviation. The officer who happens to be a pilot will not retire or separate after their commitment ends and become an airline pilot. He or she will continue service to 20 years and beyond.  The “officer who happen to be a pilot” will become a senior Air Force leader. That officer will make the rules and values for the organization. They will continue in service and say "officer first, pilot second"

Chang deux.  I know the last round was a troll, and well done.  I expect this one is too.  If this attitude becomes pervasive among our combat corps, we won't survive the next shooting war, and these things won't matter.

[Clark Griswold]

On 12/9/2018 at 8:56 PM, ygtbsm said:

...

There is also a group of "officers who happen to also be pilots". Those officers are excellent officers but  would have been just as content to be a maintenance officer, or an intelligence officer.  Those officers are here to be officers and lead men. The “officer who happens to be a pilot” doesn’t care about flying. He doesn’t have a true passion for aviation. The officer who happens to be a pilot will not retire or separate after their commitment ends and become an airline pilot. He or she will continue service to 20 years and beyond.  The “officer who happen to be a pilot” will become a senior Air Force leader. That officer will make the rules and values for the organization. They will continue in service and say "officer first, pilot second"

The "officer who happens to be a pilot" will drive the pilot who is an officer to separate at 10 years or 20 and join an airline. 

Then why did they become pilots?  The AF never held a gun to my head to apply for pilot and pilot was not the only career choice selectable from my commissioning source (ROTC).

If they are doing something that is highly sought after by cadets and requires much personal investment (enthusiasm, perseverance in the attainment of skill in it and professional focus) solely for future career possibilities are they really serving the AF with that choice or themselves?

If the former, is it realistic to expect them to put 100% into mastering that operational skill and if the latter then how is that inline with the Core Values?  

Did the AF select someone that is personally committed to executing the majority of its operational responsibilities or pretended to so that they would be selected for something that would help them ostensibly in their career?  Were they honest with the AF as to their intentions?   Doesn't seem so based on your proposition they would be equally happy being in MX, Intel, etc...

Excellent officers?  Hmmm, don't think you can say that based on your explanation of your thoughts and some examination of them, just my two cents.

Edited December 11, 2018 by Clark Griswold

[di1630]

I think he has a point. I know a few fighter pilots who only flew because they got a pilot slot back in the day. They are fine but it’s not their passion.

We have a saying that there are fighter pilots and there are pilots who fly fighters.

When I see a fighter pilot General with 24 years and 1,700 hours flying time, I can usually tell what the career focus was.

And f-ck you, pay me plus give me flying hours in a sweet location.



Sent from my iPhone using Baseops Network mobile app

[pilot]

36 minutes ago, joe1234 said:

This thread is almost 200 pages, but at the end of the day it comes down to 4 words: " you, pay me"

There is a price point at which enough people will tolerate all the deployments and military bullshit, and we are nowhere close to it yet.

Procurement programs out of control and eating up your personnel budget? you, pay me. Congress won't authorize a higher bonus? you, pay me. Profession of arms, service to the country, whatever, you, pay me.

Need some of these. Edited bc the link wouldn’t work. 

Edited December 11, 2018 by FlyArmy

[raimius]

2 hours ago, joe1234 said:

This thread is almost 200 pages, but at the end of the day it comes down to 4 words: "Fuck you, pay me"

There is a price point at which enough people will tolerate all the deployments and military bullshit, and we are nowhere close to it yet.

Procurement programs out of control and eating up your personnel budget? Fuck you, pay me. Congress won't authorize a higher bonus? Fuck you, pay me. Profession of arms, service to the country, whatever, fuck you, pay me.

There is that break-even dollar value, but I'd argue that reducing the causes of the "F you" part would be more cost effective than paying pilots more than Delta or United can offer.

[Negatory]

Just stop expecting me to put in 8 hours flying and 4 hours for queep, if you want to be promotable.  Yes, if you pay me 50-100k more, I’ll consider working this investment banker hours job, but it won’t make me invested in the organization - it will just keep me around for a paycheck. 

Numerous SQ/CCs and OG/CCs have told me that the expectation is that you should be working 12 hours a day.  Literally, the only point of that is so they can put a line on your OPR: “#1 Flt/CC/ADO/FGO/etc.  Totally rehauled something that didn’t need to be fixed!  He doesn’t care about the crushing hours, promote this man!”

The truth is, I want a job where I can fly and concentrate on flying, I can either eat breakfast or dinner with my family every single day that I’m not on the road, and I can make O-5 without having to jump through hoops so I can get a decent retirement.  

Current Air Force active duty value proposition is sketchy at best:  “Stay in!  We need you to stay in to become a GP/CC and WG/CC!  Did we mention that only the top 10% of you that do decide to stay will have a realistic opportunity of even having a chance at these positions?  Don’t worry about that, we won’t tell you where you stand until it’s too late, but, trust me, you’re either in or you’re not at this point in your career.  Oh, and 30-40% of you will either be passed over or relegated to do jobs that you never expected or wanted in a shocking response to your years of what you thought were decent performance reports?  Hope you enjoy the Deid/not flying - remember, service before self and this is why you joined!”  

Whereas, if you join the guard, you get promoted to O-5 damn near guaranteed, fly at the same rate of active duty guys, and often don’t even have a real queep job.  You don’t have to move, you’re pulling in extra money doing what you want on the side, and you have significantly more control over TDYs/Deployments.  Where is the value in AD if you don’t want to, or, worse, can’t and don’t even know it, become a WG/CC or GO?

I think talent management is a big deal.  Personally seeing dudes I really look up to get f*@%ed without any notice I know has scared a lot of guys about to make the bonus decision. Up or out has to go.  APZ needs to be a thing. HPOs as a quota have to go.  Fix DOPMA.  OPR/promotions have to get better so people can plan their lives.  And we need to stop working just to work.  Everyone is burned out and tired. 

[SFG]

2 hours ago, raimius said:

There is that break-even dollar value, but I'd argue that reducing the causes of the "F you" part would be more cost effective than paying pilots more than Delta or United can offer.

Reduce causes AND pay more. At the end of the day I need to know I am offering my family the best financial future possible.

Being able to pay for whatever number of kids college and being set up for stability (=$) for the last 45 years of our lives would be nice... is there any job that offers that?

If I had to choose loving my job for 10 more years or getting that future for my family, it’s the future. Airlines are offering it.

[SFG]

12 minutes ago, brawnie said:

I think talent management is a big deal.  Personally seeing dudes I really look up to get f*@%ed without any notice I know has scared a lot of guys about to make the bonus decision. Up or out has to go.  APZ needs to be a thing. HPOs as a quota have to go.  Fix DOPMA.  OPR/promotions have to get better so people can plan their lives.  And we need to stop working just to work.  Everyone is burned out and tired. 

This is it. Plus transparency. Did anyone else know that not all jobs are going to be posted on MyVector? Ever. There are hundreds being held in reserve for hand-picked folks. I’m not against competitive selection, but they should still advertise the jobs and put whatever criteria they want in the description.

Also, AFPAK Hands. Wtf. It’s like the symbol of all that is wrong with the AF and just hearing it disgusts me. When higher leadership is asked in public about it they always say, “Oh yeah, it’s great, but... you should meet with your Sq/CC to discuss some of the... uh... career implications.” Transparency. Just say it dude. We don’t need your closed door meetings.

What do we value? It shouldn’t be the same across the board. It should depend on the job. We should match to skills not to career progression. It shouldn’t be that “this guy needs to do this job to stay on track” but rather “this person is the best for this job.”

Trash the career timeline. Tie positions to rank like they do with O-9 and O-10. You want a job with more responsibility? Go for it. Apply for it. May the best person win. F*<£ your 24-yr pole year (which I just heard a General emphasize last week with respect to developing a specific person’s career)

“But we can’t promote the most qualified for a job to that job!”

Why not?

“*computing* *wheezing* strats! *black smoke from ears* school! *uncontrollable shaking* ta ta ta timeline! nya nyanyanyanya zzzittzzzazzzait pp ppp puuuuushhh lii li liiiinnnneeesss!!! *BOOM* *Mind blown*”

[VMFA187]

19 hours ago, JeremiahWeed said:

Really?  They leave because of added responsibility?  A 4-ship FL or Mission Commander leading a Flag mission or doing the real J.O.B. in the AOR has accepted a pretty significant level of responsibility.  If you think that individual is reluctant to accept an ADO, DO or CC job because of the leadership responsibilities, you truly don't understand the problem.

To be fair, these responsibilities can be separate. And I feel more dudes would be inclined to stay if they were.

On a fighter ANG hiring board the squadron commander asked me "How would you feel knowing that you likely won't have an opportunity to be the squadron commander due to your USMC and Hornet background, as well as your year group?"

"Sir, I want as much responsibility in the airplane as possible. And as little as I can get away with outside of it."

He looked to his patch, then to the third member of the board and turned to me and said, "That is the best possible answer you could've given."

[pawnman]

1 hour ago, Klepto said:

This is it. Plus transparency. Did anyone else know that not all jobs are going to be posted on MyVector? Ever. There are hundreds being held in reserve for hand-picked folks. I’m not against competitive selection, but they should still advertise the jobs and put whatever criteria they want in the description.

Also, AFPAK Hands. Wtf. It’s like the symbol of all that is wrong with the AF and just hearing it disgusts me. When higher leadership is asked in public about it they always say, “Oh yeah, it’s great, but... you should meet with your Sq/CC to discuss some of the... uh... career implications.” Transparency. Just say it dude. We don’t need your closed door meetings.

What do we value? It shouldn’t be the same across the board. It should depend on the job. We should match to skills not to career progression. It shouldn’t be that “this guy needs to do this job to stay on track” but rather “this person is the best for this job.”

Trash the career timeline. Tie positions to rank like they do with O-9 and O-10. You want a job with more responsibility? Go for it. Apply for it. May the best person win. F*<£ your 24-yr pole year (which I just heard a General emphasize last week with respect to developing a specific person’s career)

“But we can’t promote the most qualified for a job to that job!”

Why not?

“*computing* *wheezing* strats! *black smoke from ears* school! *uncontrollable shaking* ta ta ta timeline! nya nyanyanyanya zzzittzzzazzzait pp ppp puuuuushhh lii li liiiinnnneeesss!!! *BOOM* *Mind blown*”

I'm all for more transparency.  They advertised that Talent Marketplace thing (which, to be honest, does seem like a real step up from the old ADP)...but then a bunch of folks, myself included, were removed from the VML and not even able to submit preferences because the functional already knew AFPC couldn't afford to move us.

[gearhog]

2 hours ago, brawnie said:

Whereas, if you join the guard, you get promoted to O-5 damn near guaranteed, fly at the same rate of active duty guys, and often don’t even have a real queep job.  You don’t have to move, you’re pulling in extra money doing what you want on the side, and you have significantly more control over TDYs/Deployments.  Where is the value in AD if you don’t want to, or, worse, can’t and don’t even know it, become a WG/CC or GO?

I think talent management is a big deal.  Personally seeing dudes I really look up to get f*@%ed without any notice I know has scared a lot of guys about to make the bonus decision. Up or out has to go.  APZ needs to be a thing. HPOs as a quota have to go.  Fix DOPMA.  OPR/promotions have to get better so people can plan their lives.  And we need to stop working just to work.  Everyone is burned out and tired. 

While the Guard is better, it is not a solution. The Guard is also deteriorating. It's become Active Duty Lite. However, in the Guard, when people get pissed, they simply don't show up. Try getting anything done on a base with poor morale. This is a very recent change.

I cleaned out a desk drawer the other day an on top was a document that referenced Air Force Basic Doctrine: Centralized Control, Decentralized Execution.

I thought, Big AF is applying this doctrine not to war fighting, but nearly every aspect of the organization. Many of the daily stressors that I hear about in the squadron pertain, in a very large part, to the ceding of control and authority to "data collection" organizations off base. Finance, Persco, Comm... I went down to the Comm Sq last week to raise hell. I sat down with a TSgt and just asked why everything seemed broken. "Lack of manpower, lack of funds, lack of authority to fix anything, higher level organizations do not respond." It was the same when I stormed over to Finance demanding answers recently. My anger turned to apathy when, through conversation, I realized it really wasn't all their fault and there was little they could do, even if my issue became their full time job. It's the same shit everywhere I go on base.

People want meaning in their work that comes through giving our people the means, flexibility, and responsibility to make progress. Nearly all of that has been removed and given to central authorities. The production order comes down from on high and you merely execute. We've all been relegated to double-shift factory work and few find satisfaction in that.

Trying to work through this and checking myself for both pessimism and optimism, and allowing only realism - there's no way to untangle this mess without a comprehensive overhaul that likely will not happen until the most dire of circumstances.

 

 

Edited December 11, 2018 by torqued

[ygtbsm]

21 hours ago, HU&W said:

Chang deux.  I know the last round was a troll, and well done.  I expect this one is too.  If this attitude becomes pervasive among our combat corps, we won't survive the next shooting war, and these things won't matter.

 

Thank you for your constructive criticism. Until now, I have not considered the relationship between a passion for aviation and aerial combat effectiveness. I too am deeply concerned that we will not survive the next shooting war. Here are some more thoughts. I place a lot of value in retaining experienced pilots.  Retention of experienced aviators is down and mishaps are up. Coincidence? Pilots with 10 years of experience are walking away from a bonus and retirement that is only 8 years away to start over with the airlines. What is the reason? I guess it doesn’t matter. I have a theory or two, but who cares.  We aren’t retaining experience. In addition to being safer, I believe that a seasoned combat force is more lethal than an inexperienced force.

There is probably an intelligence officer in Russia or China who is paying very close attention our experience level. The relationship of experience and mishaps and will likely be discussed and a potential adversary's intelligence analyst might advocate that our inexperienced fighting force should be exploited in some way. Those intelligence officers might comment on bonus take rates or whatever. But inexperience will probably be briefed.

Quality of life is usually mentioned as a factor for pilots or officers or whatever choosing to leave Active Duty. I have heard Senior Leaders and SECAF talk about QOL improvement. I just haven’t seen those QOL improvement measures at my level. Experienced Pilots are walking. I talk to the pilots who leave. It’s not about the money. The threat of a 365 continues to be the most efficient force reduction tool the Air Force has.

I like airplanes, that’s why I’m here. If being a warrant officer was the requirement to fly for the Air Force, I would be a warrant officer. I am mission focused. The most important thing I do for the country is flying a student training line at a UPT base. I won’t be able to change the Air Force. My record won’t promote. The wing exec will probably promote. He might be more lethal than me, but I doubt it. He is flying less than a third of the amount that I am.  Consider the mission of Columbus AFB “Cultivate Airmen to be innovative leaders, Create the world's most advanced military Pilots, and Connect to each other, our families, and community.” The first sentence of the mission statement of a UPT base isn’t even about producing pilots. Creating a leader is their first priority. Is that wrong?

[YoungnDumb]

40 minutes ago, ygtbsm said:

The first sentence of the mission statement of a UPT base isn’t even about producing pilots. Creating a leader is their first priority. Is that wrong?

If you have to ask, you already know the answer.

[soupafly06]

15 hours ago, brawnie said:

Current Air Force active duty value proposition is sketchy at best:  “Stay in!  We need you to stay in to become a GP/CC and WG/CC!  Did we mention that only the top 10% of you that do decide to stay will have a realistic opportunity of even having a chance at these positions?  Don’t worry about that, we won’t tell you where you stand until it’s too late, but, trust me, you’re either in or you’re not at this point in your career.  Oh, and 30-40% of you will either be passed over or relegated to do jobs that you never expected or wanted in a shocking response to your years of what you thought were decent performance reports?  Hope you enjoy the Deid/not flying - remember, service before self and this is why you joined!”  

I think talent management is a big deal.  Personally seeing dudes I really look up to get f*@%ed without any notice I know has scared a lot of guys about to make the bonus decision. Up or out has to go.  APZ needs to be a thing. HPOs as a quota have to go.  Fix DOPMA.  OPR/promotions have to get better so people can plan their lives.  And we need to stop working just to work.  Everyone is burned out and tired. 

Post of the year IMO, well said.  I can see the appeal of a new OPR process with a top, middle, and bottom third hard strats (similar to how the E's do it) and static close outs.  At least then you'd know where exactly you stand and shouldn't be surprised when you don't get promoted, miss out on some developmental "opportunity," or not put on a command track.  I also believe the HPO system as it stands now is poisonous and creates a "haves vs the have nots" culture that disincentivises those not on the track by removing any chance of moving into meaningful higher leadership roles (if that's what one desired) while not holding those on the HPO track accountable if they screw up.

[ygtbsm]

21 hours ago, Clark Griswold said:

Then why did they become pilots?  The AF never held a gun to my head to apply for pilot and pilot was not the only career choice selectable from my commissioning source (ROTC).

If they are doing something that is highly sought after by cadets and requires much personal investment (enthusiasm, perseverance in the attainment of skill in it and professional focus) solely for future career possibilities are they really serving the AF with that choice or themselves?

If the former, is it realistic to expect them to put 100% into mastering that operational skill and if the latter then how is that inline with the Core Values?  

Did the AF select someone that is personally committed to executing the majority of its operational responsibilities or pretended to so that they would be selected for something that would help them ostensibly in their career?  Were they honest with the AF as to their intentions?   Doesn't seem so based on your proposition they would be equally happy being in MX, Intel, etc...

Excellent officers?  Hmmm, don't think you can say that based on your explanation of your thoughts and some examination of them, just my two cents.

Thanks for the feedback.  

Here is the recruiting pitch of the Air Force: “Pursue your interests, find your strengths and elevate your skills while serving your country in the U.S. Air Force. We provide unparalleled career options, growth opportunities and challenges to set you up for success and bring out the greatest potential in every one of our Airmen.” -AF.com

Here is the recruiting pitch for Air Force doctors: “When you become a doctor in the U.S. Air Force, you can care for your patients without the red tape of managing your own practice or dealing with insurance claims. Our doctors receive a top-notch education and serve around the world in their chosen profession.” -AF.com

Recruiting pitch for Pilots: “We employ some of the most advanced aircraft in the world to complete our missions and defend our country. Utilizing extraordinary skill and precision, Air Force Pilots push each aircraft’s limits with complete control. While successfully completing their missions is paramount, their role as leaders and character models, training and commanding crews, is just as important. These skilled professionals deploy around the world to wherever there’s a need as fighters, trainers, bombers, advisers and more.”

What??? Role as leaders?  Why is employing a fighter aircraft in combat as a 4 ship flight lead is not seen as being a leader in the Air Force?

The Core Values are an interesting part of this discussion. Who gets to choose what our core values are? Who writes those values? Does a pilot that gets out at 10 years get to write the core values? How about the squadron commander who only stays in for 20 years? Nope. The officer first who stays in to 40 years of service. Maybe. What year were the core values incorporated? Any idea?   

Core values were written in 1995 and formally published 2 years later in the “little blue book”. 1997 was an interesting year for the Air Force. Version 2 (or 3?) of the dear boss letter was written. A mass exodus of pilots was occurring.  1997 was the same year the UPT commitment was raised from 8 to 10 years.

Why can’t we change? Because “yes men” get promoted. Its Doctrine: Air Force Doctrine on Service Before Self: “This value also demands each Airman keep “faith” in the system. This does not mean we may not question what we are doing or that we will blindly follow our leaders without a second thought. It means that we place our trust in the processes, procedures, and other Airmen to get the job done and in the right way”

[Clark Griswold]

1 hour ago, ygtbsm said:

Thanks for the feedback.  

Here is the recruiting pitch of the Air Force: “Pursue your interests, find your strengths and elevate your skills while serving your country in the U.S. Air Force. We provide unparalleled career options, growth opportunities and challenges to set you up for success and bring out the greatest potential in every one of our Airmen.” -AF.com

Here is the recruiting pitch for Air Force doctors: “When you become a doctor in the U.S. Air Force, you can care for your patients without the red tape of managing your own practice or dealing with insurance claims. Our doctors receive a top-notch education and serve around the world in their chosen profession.” -AF.com

Recruiting pitch for Pilots: “We employ some of the most advanced aircraft in the world to complete our missions and defend our country. Utilizing extraordinary skill and precision, Air Force Pilots push each aircraft’s limits with complete control. While successfully completing their missions is paramount, their role as leaders and character models, training and commanding crews, is just as important. These skilled professionals deploy around the world to wherever there’s a need as fighters, trainers, bombers, advisers and more.”

What??? Role as leaders?  Why is employing a fighter aircraft in combat as a 4 ship flight lead is not seen as being a leader in the Air Force?

The Core Values are an interesting part of this discussion. Who gets to choose what our core values are? Who writes those values? Does a pilot that gets out at 10 years get to write the core values? How about the squadron commander who only stays in for 20 years? Nope. The officer first who stays in to 40 years of service. Maybe. What year were the core values incorporated? Any idea?   

Core values were written in 1995 and formally published 2 years later in the “little blue book”. 1997 was an interesting year for the Air Force. Version 2 (or 3?) of the dear boss letter was written. A mass exodus of pilots was occurring.  1997 was the same year the UPT commitment was raised from 8 to 10 years.

Why can’t we change? Because “yes men” get promoted. Its Doctrine: Air Force Doctrine on Service Before Self: “This value also demands each Airman keep “faith” in the system. This does not mean we may not question what we are doing or that we will blindly follow our leaders without a second thought. It means that we place our trust in the processes, procedures, and other Airmen to get the job done and in the right way”

Agree with your sentiment (incredulity that the AF does not view tactical operational leadership as "leadership" per se or a demonstration of ability that is indicative of future leadership potential, that it mistakes management of the day to day and admin of the AF more highly) and that yes men, shoe clerks, some other disparaging epithet, etc... are the impediment to change but in other news water is wet.  

We know what "the problem" is but it is the questions that arise from "knowing" that are important (IMHO):

Is the problem cultural or procedural / structural?  Both?

If so, then what can be done?  By whom?  

How do you convince an authority that could change / fix the "problem" that:  

a) the problem exists when the institution is basically functional (engine runs but sometimes backfires and belches smoke but it runs) and symptoms that would be recognized by someone not in the institution exist when it appears from the outside looking in that it works?  Planes still fly, missiles are on alert, satellites are controlled, wrenches turn, gates guarded, etc... yeah, stories of cluster-foxes make the news occasionally but to the average citizen, reporter, congressman / staffer... the AF still works seemingly well.  How do you transmit your insider perception to someone who could change things but has an outsider perspective?

b) if you do get the traction to get the "problem" fixed, can the AF do it in a vacuum or do you need / have to get all the branches fixed?  If the AF is changed in a way that is more operationally focused but very different than the way the other 3 branches matriculate their leadership (particularly the officer cadre) will that put the AF at a disadvantage in the arena of Joint Leadership?  Will their be enough guys with enough staff experience and rank that the AF would have equal representation? 

c) if you get the authority to change, do we really know what to do?  dog finally catches car and now wtf?  We can all rattle off any number of immediate actions but I would guess that those would either be highly specific and limited to the little corner of the AF we are in or too vague to be implemented and have a desired effect institution wide.  "Stop all the PC crap", "Focus on the mission", etc... are good ideas but what are they really?  Start at the bottom or top?  How do you change but are still ready for the call over the number of years it will take?

That's a lot questions without a lot of answers / suggestions but the proponents of major change / reform (count me as one fwiw) need to say why we need to change, what we want to change to, how we are going to change and why going thru the pain / cost of changing is worth it.  

Until then, we're just going to be yelling into the void.