AFRC Force structure changes...

[Loach]

When my AFRC unit and base was closed (30 Sep 2007), we were given 3 options when they officially announced the closing:

1. Retire, if eligible;

2. Find a new base/ARC unit and continue serving;

3. Transfer into the IRR and finish your commitment there.

As far as I know, no one was "released" or just "walked away" (at least in terms of "O"'S). Most of the flyers wanted to stay in, and several of them moved (significant distances) to continue to fly. Some took non-flying, minimally performing jobs at other ARC units (as "Bush did" -- do we really have to get into this again?).

The only people I know who "walked" were in my ANG unit, and it had nothing to do with the unit closing. Most of them were guys who were well past their service commitments anyway, and weren't planning on retiring. Several of them were recalled to the unit after 9/11 -- it was funny seeing them again. They were recalled not to fly, but just to outprocess. I suppose that after 9/11, there was a need to see what the actual manning was vice what was on the books. We did have guys who were less than stellar performers, and they were generally sent to other units (and we got the same from other states) -- a good rule of thumb is if a guy is in an ARC unit and after 10-12 years doesn't get a full time job, then applies for a full time position in your unit, you probably don't want him. Or someone is a career co-pilot but his unit says "we'll upgrade him before he leaves if you give him a job" -- another bad sign (kind of like the check is in the mail or I won't blow in your mouth). We got burned twice that way -- for AGR positions no less (the one guy basically threw up the med card as he knew our Wing was trying to get rid of him. He was medically retired, and then, unfortunately took his own life).

I think if you're in training and your ARC unit closes, you'll have no problem finding a new unit, depending on your willingness to travel. There's generally never too many Lt's in ARC flying sqdns (at least not in the units I've been in -- all MAF types), so that's on your side as well.

[skibum]

He's fvckin with ya. Most people find a replacement unit or (check this out) you're released from your commitment.

SOP for my unit. If a dude wants to walk I never say a thing. It's not that common, but it's usually mutually beneficial. They usually fall into a category of 1) too many civilian job commitments 2) wife's a bitch 3) balls are too small and they get scared. Regardless of the category, why would I want to force a guy to do what he doesn't want to and a 100 guys out there who would cut off an arm to take his place? If you think it's wasting millions of tax payer money consider the cost of putting the iron into the ground because you've lost your will to stay aloft.

[Liftr]

So here's a question. If your unit gets eliminated, what happens to your commitment (presuming you can't find another unit)?

I'll expand this question. What if your unit changes MDS? What happens to your ADSC; reference the Post 9/11 GI Bill?

ie. I owe 1 year ADSC for GI Bill benefits. But the new school, and resulting ADSC would push me another 2+ years.

I will add the fact that I am retirement eligible. Only bound by the GI Bill benefits.

Edited February 10, 2012 by Liftr

[Guest]

SOP for my unit. If a dude wants to walk I never say a thing.

He's not talking about a guy who wants to quit. He's talking about what happens if the unit closes out from under him through no fault of his own.

It's not that common, but it's usually mutually beneficial. They usually fall into a category of 1) too many civilian job commitments 2) wife's a bitch 3) balls are too small and they get scared. Regardless of the category, why would I want to force a guy to do what he doesn't want to and a 100 guys out there who would cut off an arm to take his place?

Great points and highly accurate.

A couple things here. You're talking about letting a guy off the hook for flying. That is different than letting a guy off the hook for serving. You can let him go from the squadron without releasing him from the wing. There are plenty of ways for someopne to serve other than in the cockpit. In fact, 98% of the jobs in the USAF are not called pilot.

I assume you are treating Guard Babies the same as the guys who come to you off AD? Letting an AD guy walk away is different than letting a Guard Baby walk away. The former are a dime a dozen and easy to replace, like you said. Taxpayers aside, the latter have actually fucked over the other candidates, many of whom are part of the unit and want to be for 50 years, who you did not select to go to pilot training. That's totally uncool and working over in supply or services would be a good thing for them.

The real question at hand is, what does the regulation say?

If you think it's wasting millions of tax payer money consider the cost of putting the iron into the ground because you've lost your will to stay aloft.

Again, taking them out of the cockpit is very different than letting them give you the finger and walk away from their promise.

[MSE]

This one's gonna hurt, boys and girls....

https://www.afrc.af.m...sp?id=123288641

Here's a summary of the changes:

"Barksdale AFB, La. - Drawdown one Air Force Reserve Command squadron by retiring 18 A-10 aircraft as part of the FY13 president's budget. Also, retire three other A-10s in fiscal 13 that were previously slated for retirement and awaiting to be transferred. Transfer three remaining A-10s to Whiteman AFB, Mo. End the active associate unit that hosts Regular Air Force Airmen and flies A-10 aircraft with the AFRC A-10 squadron The Air Force Reserve unit that flies B-52 aircraft remains operational at Barksdale.

Dobbins ARB, Ga. - Retire seven C-130H2 aircraft and add 10 C-130J aircraft during FY14.

Keesler AFB, Miss. - Transfer 10 C-130J aircraft to new location in FY14. Although the active associate unit ends as part of the FY13 President's Budget, the Air Force Reserve unit remains operational.

Lackland AFB, Texas - Retire 16 C-5A aircraft from FY13 through FY16. Close the C-5A training school. Add eight C-5M aircraft in FY15.

Little Rock AFB, Ark. - Retire two C-130H2 aircraft in FY17. Unit remains operational.

March ARB, Calif. - Retire one KC-135 aircraft in FY13. Unit remains operational.

Maxwell AFB, Ala. - Drawdown one squadron by retiring seven C-130H2 aircraft in FY14. Unit remains operational.

Minneapolis-St. Paul ARS, Minn. - Drawdown one squadron by transferring eight C-130H3 aircraft in FY 13. The Air Force Reserve unit remains operational even though the air reserve station is transferred from the Air Force Reserve to the Air National Guard.

Niagara Falls, ARS, N.Y. - The air reserve component associate unit - composed of Air Force Reserve and Air National Guard -- ends as part of the FY13 president's budget. The Air Force Reserve retires three C-130H2 aircraft in FY13 and eight more in FY17. However, eight C-130H3 aircraft are planned to be added to the Air Force Reserve unit during FY13.

Pittsburgh ARS, Pa. - Drawdown one squadron by retiring six C-130H2 aircraft and transferring one C-130H2 in FY13. Air Force Reserve operations end and the Pittsburgh Air Reserve Station closes. However, Pittsburgh Air National Guard Base remains open.

Pope Field, N.C. - Retire one C-130H2 aircraft and add one C-130H2 in FY13.

Tinker AFB, Okla. - Retire four KC-135 aircraft in FY13; however, unit remains operational.

Westover ARB, Mass. - Transfer eight C-5Ms in FY16. Unit remains operational.

Youngstown-Warren ARS, Ohio - Retire six C-130H2 aircraft and add four C-130H2.5 aircraft."

Is this confirmed to change or just a proposition? What happens to the 815AS at Keesler?

[nrodgsxr]

Is this confirmed to change or just a proposition? What happens to the 815AS at Keesler?

It's just a proposition.. Think of it as a first offer in negotiations.. now congress is going to have to duke it out.

What the AF wants doesn't really matter.. it's all about what congress can get to support their constituents..

[Cornholio5]

It's too bad to see what is happening to FRED. Although I am not surprised either. I think its funny, but in typical AF fashion, that Big Blue spends millions to move the schoolhouse from LTS to SKF and then just shut it down after only about five years. At least SKF will be getting the "M" though.

[alwyn2d]

If the C-5A school house is closing down, where will be the location of the C-5M school house? There was no mention. Can we safely assume it will be at SKF since they will receive 8 C-5M aircraft?

Edited February 13, 2012 by alwyn2d

[JVBFLY]

The guard has one powerful weapon that the active duty forgot about - politicians. The politicians are going to fight this one. In fact, it is already being discussed at the their level. It will be interesting to watch no doubt.

[Guest]

The guard has one powerful weapon that the active duty forgot about - politicians. The politicians are going to fight this one. In fact, it is already being discussed at the their level. It will be interesting to watch no doubt.

I love it when people spout this bullshit.

1. The AD did not forget about it. That would be impossible because the Guard is constantly bringing it up.

b. This isn't the first time the Guard has tried to play this card.

3. It didn't work last time either.

[Guest CAVEMAN]

Department of the Air Force owns the iron not the Guard so.....

[Guest]

Department of the Air Force

Wait, what?

[lloyd christmas]

I love it when people spout this bullshit.

1. The AD did not forget about it. That would be impossible because the Guard is constantly bringing it up.

b. This isn't the first time the Guard has tried to play this card.

3. It didn't work last time either.

Actually, in some instances it did work. There were numerous examples of Guard units that were set to close as a result of BRAC 2005 that did not close. Fort Smith, Nashville and Reno are a few examples. Fort Smith actually grew in size. Point is, the list of proposed changes are not final. The list will change once the politicians get involved.

[Guest]

Actually, in some instances it did work. There were numerous examples of Guard units that were set to close as a result of BRAC 2005 that did not close. Fort Smith, Nashville and Reno are a few examples. Fort Smith actually grew in size. Point is, the list of proposed changes are not final. The list will change once the politicians get involved.

Please.

FWIW, there are far more examples of units that used their political pressure to keep their mission that went tits up. Hanging on to the "our politicians will protect us from people making the best resource decisions" dream is not a pragmatic approach.

And don't even start on the Ft Smith issue unless you really know what the fuck you are talking about.

OBTW, how's that whole Ft Smith thing working out? Smooth sailing, staying open forever and getting all the support they need from the state Herc mafia to keep flying real airplanes?

The ANGB sacrificed other units to keep Ft Smith flying. You know what happened there, right? You know who Ft Smith hired to lobby the ANGB on their behalf? The Ft Smith decision resulted in value destroyed and capability lost. An enormous amount of capability, actually. People get fired for making shitty decisions like that in the civilian world.

And I am not talking about the people at Ft Smith. Great guys, ops and mx.

The real point is, the ANGB can fuck around with some of the track switches but they can't stop the train. If you have spent time at the ANGB you know exactly what I'm talking about and if you haven't then you are just spewing the bullshit you hear in the bar on drill weekends.

Edited February 26, 2012 by Rainman A-10

[lloyd christmas]

Please.

FWIW, there are far more examples of units that used their political pressure to keep their mission that went tits up. Hanging on to the "our politicians will protect us from people making the best resource decisions" dream is not a pragmatic approach.

And don't even start on the Ft Smith issue unless you really know what the fuck you are talking about.

OBTW, how's that whole Ft Smith thing working out? Smooth sailing, staying open forever and getting all the support they need from the state Herc mafia to keep flying real airplanes?

The ANGB sacrificed other units to keep Ft Smith flying. You know what happened there, right? You know who Ft Smith hired to lobby the ANGB on their behalf? The Ft Smith decision resulted in value destroyed and capability lost. An enormous amount of capability, actually. People get fired for making shitty decisions like that in the civilian world.

And I am not talking about the people at Ft Smith. Great guys, ops and mx.

The real point is, the ANGB can fuck around with some of the track switches but they can't stop the train. If you have spent time at the ANGB you know exactly what I'm talking about and if you haven't then you are just spewing the bullshit you hear in the bar on drill weekends.

Thanks for proving my point.

I never said I was hanging onto "our politicians will protect us from people making the best resource decisions" dream. I'm just saying the list will change when politicians get involved.

[Guest]

Thanks for proving my point.

Nice try but I didn't prove your point, dumbass.

I proved my point. It wasn't politicians that made Ft Smith happen. It was the ANGB fucking around with the process and sacrificing other units to give BRAC their pound of flesh.

Paying the just retired ANG/DO $10k/mo of taxpayer dollars to lobby the ANGB to make changes to the BRAC outcome is not using the state's politicians. It is ANGB bullshit that doesn't belong in the process because it does not serve the best interests of America.

This is the first and best argument the AD has for making the Guard go away. It is also why the DoD does not respect ANGB leadership.

[herkbum]

Paying the just retired ANG/DO $10k/mo of taxpayer dollars to lobby the ANGB to make changes to the BRAC outcome is not using the state's politicians.

Do tell

[Guest]

It is no secret.

Google Brock Strom. And not the Academic All American football player from the zoo.

[lloyd christmas]

Nice try but I didn't prove your point, dumbass.

I proved my point. It wasn't politicians that made Ft Smith happen. It was the ANGB fucking around with the process and sacrificing other units to give BRAC their pound of flesh.

Paying the just retired ANG/DO $10k/mo of taxpayer dollars to lobby the ANGB to make changes to the BRAC outcome is not using the state's politicians. It is ANGB bullshit that doesn't belong in the process because it does not serve the best interests of America.

This is the first and best argument the AD has for making the Guard go away. It is also why the DoD does not respect ANGB leadership.

Why do you have such a hard on for this Ft Smith case? I am not and was not arguing the Ft Smith case exclusively. The Ft Smith deal was fucked up. That is a fact. They literally bought themselves a few more years.

I am simply saying that this is far from over as the politicians have not had their say in it yet and the list will probably change.

[Guest]

Why do you have such a hard on for this Ft Smith case? I am not and was not arguing the Ft Smith case exclusively.

Seriously?

You brought it up, not me.

But to answer your question...because, in your words:

The Ft Smith deal was fucked up. That is a fact. They literally bought themselves a few more years.

And that is not right. It does not respect the process, it is a waste of taxpayers dollars and it destroyed value and capability.

People (in and outside the ANG) should be outraged but instead they just write/laugh it off as just another example of the Goofy Grape Guard shenanigans.

That bothers me because I think the ARC has a legitimate and valuable place in our nation's defense strategy and this kind of shit fucks it up.

I am simply saying that this is far from over as the politicians have not had their say in it yet and the list will probably change.

Again, this was not politicians. This was ANGB bullshit.

FWIW, politicians making basing decisions based on money and votes is also sickening.

[lloyd christmas]

Seriously?

You brought it up, not me.

But to answer your question...because, in your words:

And that is not right. It does not respect the process, it is a waste of taxpayers dollars and it destroyed value and capability.

People (in and outside the ANG) should be outraged but instead they just write/laugh it off as just another example of the Goofy Grape Guard shenanigans.

That bothers me because I think the ARC has a legitimate and valuable place in our nation's defense strategy and this kind of shit fucks it up.

Again, this was not politicians. This was ANGB bullshit.

FWIW, politicians making basing decisions based on money and votes is also sickening.

I did bring it up. I also brought up Reno and Nashville. I wasnt only talking about Ft Smith.

We can agree that "politicians making basing decisions based on money and votes is also sickening". That is why the proposed closures/realignments will change.

You have the last word.

[Guest]

I did bring it up. I also brought up Reno and Nashville. I wasnt only talking about Ft Smith.

Whatever. You say you weren't only talking about Ft Smith but you were talking about Ft Smith. In fact, you added amplifying remarks specifically about how Ft Smith.

FWIW, I don't know shit about Reno or Nashville so it doesn't make sense for me to talk about them. To do so would be as much bullshit as you talking about Ft Smith and claiming the decision to keep them open was somehow related to politicians when that could not be further from the truth.

You also didn't bring up Willow Grove or any of the other bases that tried the full court press with their elected officials, claimed they would never shut down because they were going to get their politicians involved and now have tumbleweeds rolling across their ramps.

You have the last word.

LOL

I'll believe it when I see it. You seem to be strangely attached to defending your mistaken statement.

[skibum]

Again, this was not politicians. This was ANGB bullshit.

I'm not sure you can actually seperate NGB from politicians. The working reality is that pretty much 100% of the O-6 and above bubbas at NGB are political lobbyists. Although not tied as closely to state political leadership, AFRC units have political advocates that also will have say (e.g., Niagara and Hillary last time around).

I'll believe it when I see it.

Me too, but I believe I'll see it. I think Llyod's point is that this is likely not the final list. Emotion and sense of justice aside, I think he's probably correct. If this list were left intact it would likely be the first time that BRAC type decisions sailed through without political influence resulting in changes.

[JS]

The guard has one powerful weapon that the active duty forgot about - politicians. The politicians are going to fight this one. In fact, it is already being discussed at the their level. It will be interesting to watch no doubt.

Well, skibum saved me the trouble of typing 50 % of what I was going to say in response to the above post:

AFRC units have political advocates that also will have say (e.g., Niagara and Hillary last time around).

Does anyone think that Active Duty, just like the Guard and AFRC, also has a tad bit of political clout and lots of lobbyists in DC?

So in summary, all three parts of the Air Force have political clout that is going to prevent the other two parts from taking "their iron" and closing "their bases," right?

This is going to get ugly and not make a lot of strategic or operational sense within the Air Force, but that is how it has always been - politics will primarily decide how this shit pans out.

[Guest]

So in summary, all three parts of the Air Force have political clout that is going to prevent the other two parts from taking "their iron" and closing "their bases," right?

Probably wrong. This isn't a standard day environment we're talking about.

This is going to get ugly and not make a lot of strategic or operational sense

Probably correct.