What's wrong with the Air Force?

[pawnman]

12 hours ago, 17D_guy said:

Had a buddy that did a gig there as SOS instructor.  Loved it.  However, you're basically forgotten from your AFSC.  Depending on the O6's that are coming around some even viewed it as "ditching the career field."  You're busy just instructing, while everyone else is "leading."

If you're career...why would you ever do that.  Lets look at the bios of a statistically significant sampling of O6's and 1-stars...how many have PME instructor as a Capt on there?

That said, Maxwell in 2017 was actually really nice.  Hard to believe.

Article pushes out some interesting ideas.  It would make SOS more like ALS, which it basically is now.  To claim the instruction there gets down into doctrine, strategy, or anything of lasting value is a lie.  Other service school are much longer, and we just don't instruct the same way.

Ironic, given the push by the last CSAF and SECAF to give additional consideration to people with "instructor" duty in their careers.

Honestly, in my community...the less time you spent in the jet, the better off you were for promotion and leadership opportunities.  It was never the guy who stayed in the jet, did 3-4 deployments, and have 4000 hours that was SQ/CC...it was the shiny penny who did one deployment back in '08, then bounced from school to staff to aide to staff before coming back as a squadron commander with 100 combat hours and half the flight hours of the youngest instructor in the squadron.  

[daynightindicator]

Honestly, in my community...the less time you spent in the jet, the better off you were for promotion and leadership opportunities.  It was never the guy who stayed in the jet, did 3-4 deployments, and have 4000 hours that was SQ/CC...it was the shiny penny who did one deployment back in '08, then bounced from school to staff to aide to staff before coming back as a squadron commander with 100 combat hours and half the flight hours of the youngest instructor in the squadron.  

That’s not an accurate statement Pawnman. Every community pushes their shiny pennies up the ladder quickly (hence the push for removal of BTZ to try and slow things down so our O-6s stop getting crushed by their sister service peers on joint staffs) and we all have anecdotal examples of those folks.

The majority of SQ/CCs in the Bone right now are on time dudes with anywhere from 3-6 combat deployments, no aide jobs, etc. I would also guess most have over 2500 hours in the jet.

[pbar]

16 hours ago, dream big said:

They could get rid of SOS and the service’s capabilities wouldn’t change nor would anyone worth their salt blink an eye.  The only positive things I hear about it are trivia night downtown, stellar BBQ and drinking games, all of which I can do at my Squadron bar anytime.  SOS DG was also a self licking ice cream cone of HPO production, many of whom didn’t have to do jack all to remain on said golden path. If they actually want to teach doctrine, keep it virtual with some reading material and essays.  There were some good lessons like the promotion board exercise (which made many of us even more jaded when some of the nonners ranked the CGOC president who hooked numerous checkrides over the Weapons Officer.)  

We'd probably be better off having everyone get a PMI Project Management Professional (PMP) certification instead of SOS.  That was more useful than anything I learned at SOS....

[BeefBears]

On 12/8/2020 at 4:09 PM, MyCS said:

https://warontherocks.com/2020/12/instructors-wanted-apply-within-why-the-air-force-is-failing-to-change-its-culture-and-what-to-do-about-it/

Nobody wants to go to Maxwell. Duh

It doesn't stop at SOS. The FTU is still viewed as a career killer in most communities. At least in AFSOC, the FTU, along with the reserve squadron (for unpromotable majors) and the new training wing, are still perceived as places for bottom tier instructors. Despite all the talk of enhancing the prestige of formal instructor positions, nothing has changed. SQ/CCs still use the FTU as an easy button for problem children and, as a result, Initial Qual students are still showing up to ops squadrons unprepared.

This being said, I'm not sure its worth sending away our best flying instructors to work in a formal training unit as its usually more beneficial to have them running tactics discussions in the ops units, as deployed mission commanders, etc. 

[jazzdude]

This being said, I'm not sure its worth sending away our best flying instructors to work in a formal training unit as its usually more beneficial to have them running tactics discussions in the ops units, as deployed mission commanders, etc. 

The good in that is those tactically minded instructors can instill that sense of mission and tactics early in a pilot's development, and build a solid foundation for the ops units later down the road.

Or they can send the bottom folks to the FTUs, and then turn around and complain about the quality of the new pilot and how the FTU sucks at producing a tactically minded pilot.

[BeefBears]

1 minute ago, jazzdude said:

 

 

The good in that is those tactically minded instructors can instill that sense of mission and tactics early in a pilot's development, and build a solid foundation for the ops units later down the road.

Or they can send the bottom folks to the FTUs, and then turn around and complain about the quality of the new pilot and how the FTU sucks at producing a tactically minded pilot.

 

Its an issue with priority. The top go to staff, the squadrons hold onto the leftover talent tightly, and what's left for the FTU?

I dont think any amount of messaging will fix perceptions. Ask most instructors if they enjoy instructing new students and they'll say "yes" but you ask them if they want to go to the FTU and its normally a resounding "no."

[UDEL09]

1 hour ago, BeefBears said:

Its an issue with priority. The top go to staff, the squadrons hold onto the leftover talent tightly, and what's left for the FTU?

I dont think any amount of messaging will fix perceptions. Ask most instructors if they enjoy instructing new students and they'll say "yes" but you ask them if they want to go to the FTU and its normally a resounding "no."

I think this really depends on the location of the FTU.  Co-located FTU’s requiring a PCA are usually pretty desirable because they come with a T-Code for your AFSC and a BMC status that can shield you from some of the unwanted deployments.  I’ve never been to Altus, but I can imagine for some of the MAF MWS’s it can be an entirely different experience and a bit less desirable. 

[HuggyU2]

3 hours ago, BeefBears said:

The top go to staff, the squadrons hold onto the leftover talent tightly, and what's left for the FTU?

This is NOT the case in the U-2.  

[Sua Sponte]

2 hours ago, UDEL09 said:

I think this really depends on the location of the FTU.  Co-located FTU’s requiring a PCA are usually pretty desirable because they come with a T-Code for your AFSC and a BMC status that can shield you from some of the unwanted deployments.  I’ve never been to Altus, but I can imagine for some of the MAF MWS’s it can be an entirely different experience and a bit less desirable. 

The KC-135 FTU was a mix of great aviators to not that great. Unfortunately some people got the FTU after barely becoming an IP/IB at their last (and first) assignment, so their experience was lacking and it showed when they taught. The C-17 FTU was historically older than the -135 FTU due to having people usually on their third assignment. 

[tac airlifter]

5 hours ago, jazzdude said:

The good in that is those tactically minded instructors can instill that sense of mission and tactics early in a pilot's development, and build a solid foundation for the ops units later down the road.

Or they can send the bottom folks to the FTUs, and then turn around and complain about the quality of the new pilot and how the FTU sucks at producing a tactically minded pilot.

My best tactically minded instructors don’t want to teach at the FTU.  They want to fight and do ops.  And I want to keep them in the fight inspiring and leading and teaching.  It’s a fallacy to think I could send them to the FTU and they’d sustain motivation after I crushed their career aspirations because they were good.  That’s how we lose our best, not how we fix broken systems.

I have other great instructors who enjoy teaching the basics.  Those are the IPs I wish I’d had when I was new and they are a precious resource.  Managing instructors is a matter of matching talents to missions suited to their personalities and desires.... just like managing anyone.  

Totally separate from the discussion of appropriately matching talent to task is the question of what to do about “bottom folks.”  It’s a huge challenge.  There’s more options as officers age (although never a good place) but no where I can send a bad captain without the gaining unit suffering. 

Edited December 10, 2020 by tac airlifter

[jazzdude]

 Managing instructors is a matter of matching talents to missions suited to their personalities and desires.... just like managing anyone.   

100% agree here.

 It’s a fallacy to think I could send them to the FTU and they’d sustain motivation after I crushed their career aspirations because they were good.  That’s how we lose our best, not how we fix broken systems.

Maybe it's a matter of poor career expectations management? I know when I was a 2LT, the expectation/"standard" was 2 ops tours, and one outside ops (UPT, FTU, white jet, AMLO, WIC IP, etc). Want to make Lt Col? Probably need to go to staff after 3 flying tours. If not, you probably can just fly your entire career and still make it to retirement, but likely as a major. Sure, there are non standard paths, like green door, TPS, U-2, etc, but they have their own path. So it shouldn't be "crushing career expectations" when following the career path norms.

But like you said, it's a matter of matching talents to missions suited to their personalities and desires. I think the MyVector assignments process helps here, since there's more visibility on the different jobs out there as well as the ability to bid on the desirable jobs. I'll admit I wasn't happy I got sent to be an UPT IP, especially as a C-17 airdropper, but it turned out to be my favorite assignment so far in my career. I just didn't know what I didn't know.

The AF is trying to fix not taking care of officers who fill jobs needed in the AF that traditionally have not completed well for promotions (AETC/formal instructors). Increased emphasis on promoting formal training instructors (and maybe school selection?) should help.

The AF needs good people out in the ops units, but it also needs good people in training units as well. It also needs good people on the staff. And each one of those organizations plays an important role in keeping our AF strong.

[pawnman]

6 hours ago, tac airlifter said:

My best tactically minded instructors don’t want to teach at the FTU.  They want to fight and do ops.  And I want to keep them in the fight inspiring and leading and teaching.  It’s a fallacy to think I could send them to the FTU and they’d sustain motivation after I crushed their career aspirations because they were good.  That’s how we lose our best, not how we fix broken systems.

I have other great instructors who enjoy teaching the basics.  Those are the IPs I wish I’d had when I was new and they are a precious resource.  Managing instructors is a matter of matching talents to missions suited to their personalities and desires.... just like managing anyone.  

Totally separate from the discussion of appropriately matching talent to task is the question of what to do about “bottom folks.”  It’s a huge challenge.  There’s more options as officers age (although never a good place) but no where I can send a bad captain without the gaining unit suffering. 

I think it's not either-or.  Plenty of good tactically minded instructors wouldn't mind a two-three year break from constant deployments and TDYs to fly at the FTU.

In the B-1 at least, the problem is twofold - location sucks compared to the other base (Ellsworth > Dyess), and when people get sent to the FTU, they never leave unless it's basically demanded of them - school, for example.  I enjoyed my time at the FTU, but I spent seven years at Dyess.  When the FTU has the reputation that it's the last thing you'll ever do in your career, people avoid it.

I think if you made it a controlled tour (like they have with other instructor jobs, like USAFA or ROTC), you'd likely get more people willing to go.  But as long as you trap people there, it'll be at the bottom of everyone's list.

[Prosuper]

It seems AETC/PME/Formal instructors on the enlisted side seem to make it to the command chief billets, just saying. 

[Spoo]

14 hours ago, BeefBears said:

The top go to staff, the squadrons hold onto the leftover talent tightly, and what's left for the FTU?

 

10 hours ago, HuggyU2 said:

This is NOT the case in the U-2.  

Based on experience, I'd bet a beer that's not the case in any community.

[BeefBears]

2 hours ago, Prosuper said:

It seems AETC/PME/Formal instructors on the enlisted side seem to make it to the command chief billets, just saying. 

It shows. Some of the sharpest enlisted are teaching at the FTU. If only they could incentivize the FTU for the officer side as well.

There are plenty of good instructors that need a break from deploying but most communities still view the FTU as a dead-end. As pointed out above, this isn't always the case, but it has been based on my experiences. Making it a controlled tour is a start but it'll take a lot more to change perceptions at the squadron level. 

[pawnman]

1 hour ago, MyCS said:

I'm in a wing that's a tennant unit. Base CC is a 1 star. Seven days before X-mas the Executive Director (ED) to my wing king (O-6) made me the POC for a DoD installation award on 15 December. Base CC requested a POC on 10 December. I saw the email traffic. I tell the ED to the wing king you're not going to receive a lot of nominations from the groups at the last minute. I dropped the tasker on 16 December to the groups. We received 8 packages of which, 5 were legit. Packages were due to the base level on 23 December. 

Why does the vice wing king send me like 4-5 emails after hearing only 8 packages were submitted? The plan was for the wing king to engage with the base CC to ensure some of our packages were selected. The vice wing king attempts to reach the vice for the base and he blows her off. My vice was like let me see the tasker you sent. Then let me see the awards. She sent the tasker directly to the Group CCs on New Years Eve. I'm like is this colonel that out of touch to think other O-6s are going to just stop life to turn in a 1206 on New Years Eve? 

This is a DoD award for the base. The base level POC was like just give me two briefers to talk about your bullets for the 1206 we're submitting for the entire base. They'll talk for 10 mins via video to the judges. They want Amn/civilians only. Nobody in leadership positions.

Brief gets expanded to 50 mins with 10 mins of Q&A. I was briefing the wing king this info on Wednesday about the change via video and he tells me he doesn't want the brief to consist of just 2 people and it's not what he wanted for the brief. Excuse me? I'm like why don't you tell the General for the base that? He plans on briefing and adding other people who are in leadership positions to the brief. The primary POC at the base level was telling the wing king (tennant) we don't want you to brief. The wing king was like I've done this type of award before at another installation.

Is AETC toxic or is it just my experience alone? Waiting for my retirement approval paperwork so it doesn't matter. 

My wing king is not a flyer and I don't back down from him. Someone who was on the video call told me you won't see our wing king engaging with the base commander or the AETC/CC. Something happened to where we're on an island all alone. 

AETC is toxic, but you seem to have stumbled into a whole new level of jackassery.

[nsplayr]

I swear to god we had damn-near solved queep during the early weeks/months of COVID, and now we have purposely allowed it back into our organizations. After finding out what was truly mission essential and what as not, I'm just floored at the number of people that gleefully welcome back all the self-licking ice cream cones, asskissing briefings & awards, and plainly non-essential tasks back in to our everyday lives.

[jazzdude]

I'm in a wing that's a tennant unit. Base CC is a 1 star. Seven days before X-mas the Executive Director (ED) to my wing king (O-6) made me the POC for a DoD installation award on 15 December. I saw the email traffic where the Base CC requested a POC on 10 December. I tell the ED to the wing king you're not going to receive a lot of nominations from the groups at the last minute. I dropped the tasker on 16 December to the groups. We received 8 packages of which, 5 were legit. Packages were due to the base level on 23 December. 
Why does the vice wing king send me like 4-5 emails after hearing only 8 packages were submitted? The plan was for the wing king to engage with the base CC to ensure some of our packages were selected. The vice wing king attempted to reach the vice for the base and he blew her off. My vice was like let me see the tasker you sent. Then let me see the awards. She sent the tasker directly to the Group CCs on New Years Eve. I'm like is this colonel that out of touch to think other O-6s are going to just stop life to turn in a 1206 on New Years Eve? Where are our priorities during family time.
This is a DoD award for the base. The base level POC was like just give me two briefers to talk about your bullets for the 1206 we're submitting for the entire base. They'll talk for 10 mins via video to the judges. They want Amn/civilians only. Nobody in leadership positions.
Brief gets expanded to 50 mins with 10 mins of Q&A. I was briefing the wing king this info on Wednesday about the change via video and he tells me he doesn't want the brief to consist of just 2 people and it's not what he wanted for the brief. Excuse me? I'm like why don't you tell the General for the base that? He plans on briefing and adding other people who are in leadership positions to the brief. The primary POC at the base level was telling the wing king (tennant) we don't want you to brief. The wing king was like I've done this type of award before at another installation.
Is AETC toxic or is it just my experience alone? Waiting for my retirement approval paperwork so it doesn't matter. 
My wing king is not a flyer and I don't back down from him. Someone who was on the video call told me you won't see our wing king engaging with the base commander or the AETC/CC. Something happened to where we're on an island all alone. 

Eh, don't get to wrapped up in it or take it personally. You provided analysis and COAs, and the guidance/coordination instructions from the base commander. It's up to your wing king to make his decision/actions within the bounds of the tasker, otherwise he'll just look stupid (and it sounds like that happened and he was put in the corner in time out). Sucks you (and the Gp/CCs, and I assume Sq/CCs as well) went through a bunch of thrash over the holidays, but unfortunately that's what you get with crap leaders.

[ThreeHoler]

Why does everyone still engage this troll?


Sent from my iPhone using Baseops Network mobile app

[tac airlifter]

3 hours ago, ThreeHoler said:

Why does everyone still engage this troll?


Sent from my iPhone using Baseops Network mobile app

Is this the dude who kept getting banned & changing his user name to come back? 

[Sua Sponte]

7 hours ago, pawnman said:

AETC is toxic, but you seem to have stumbled into a whole new level of jackassery.

Flying AETC is toxic. Non-flying AETC is insane.

[jazzdude]

Flying AETC is toxic. Non-flying AETC is insane.

I enjoyed my time flying in AETC, and generally had good leadership, moreso than my AMC time.

[DirkDiggler]

3 hours ago, tac airlifter said:

Is this the dude who kept getting banned & changing his user name to come back? 

Yeah, previously LaneHBO and Shazzam I believe.

[MCO]

2 hours ago, DirkDiggler said:

Yeah, previously LaneHBO and Shazzam I believe.

Yes 

[Sua Sponte]

3 hours ago, jazzdude said:

 

I enjoyed my time flying in AETC, and generally had good leadership, moreso than my AMC time.

 

Same, but that’s cause it was under 19th AF. The nonners that are under 2nd AF are the worst of the worst.