Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted (edited)

So I hit 20 years of service on 31 May 2015, and requested a 1 June 2015 retirement date. I have an ADSC for Advanced Flying Training (MWS Requal) that takes me to 10 December 2015. I put in my retirement request with a waiver asking to waive the final six months of my 3 year ADSC. The guidelines state that the waiver has to show that it is in the best interest of the Air Force. My justification included the following:

1) Letting me go six months early saves the Air Force six months of O-4 pay + six months of flight pay.

2) The AF is actively Force Shaping. I did not take the recent TERA offer because I was deployed, and doing so would have required me to sell back 60 days of leave (the max you can sell back), and forfeit another 15 days of leave just to get out by the required separation date. I could not take any leave prior to that because I was deployed.

3) I had my squadron commander endorse the waiver with his statement that the squadron was adequately manned to allow for my early departure.

Nine weeks later (today), I received notification that the SECAF disapproved my waiver.

So, bottomline...

If you've got 19 years of service, they will waive any ADSC for any AFSC (per the TERA message), but if you've got 20 years of service, the same waiver of any ADSC will not apply.

That makes total sense to me.

:flipoff::banghead:

Edited by flyjetz
Posted

Next time don't do an MWS requal.

You try getting hired by the airlines being 7 years non-current. Nevermind, just saw this was Butters' typical trolling.

  • Upvote 3
Posted (edited)

You should have never received the 3 year commitment for a re-qual IMO. I went through two separate re-qual courses and received no extra commitment.

Edited by Tank
  • Upvote 2
Posted

You should have never received the 3 year commitment for a re-qual IMO. I went through two separate re-qual courses and received no extra commitment.

AFI 36-2107:

Advanced Flying Training (AFT): courses in the following categories:

- Initial qualification (any fixed, rotary wing aircraft, or unmanned aerial system)

- Requalification (any fixed, rotary wing aircraft, or unmanned aerial system)

- AETC Pilot Instructor Training (PIT) (NOTE: Pilots who cross-train without a break in flying between AETC non-Major Weapons System aircraft, after completing initial training do not incur any additional commitment.)

- Test Pilot School (for Pilots, Navigators, and Engineers)

- All Career Enlisted Aviators and Non-rated Enlisted Aircrew members attending Advanced Flying Training

3 years (see notes 1, 2, 10, 14, 15, and 20)

Posted (edited)

Unless you read the notes and argue they apply. I successfully avoided a requal ADSC with note 1b.

b. All manned or unmanned pilots, navigators, and air battle managers who began aviation service after 30 September 1997 will not incur any additional Advanced Flying Training (AFT)/Instructor Qualification ADSCs which extend beyond 6 or 10 years as applicable, of continuous or cumulative rated service. Rated service begins at the completion of training and awarding of wings for the rated specialty. They will still incur Permanent Change of Station (PCS), Professional Military Education (PME), and other non-AFT related ADSCs.

Edited by nunya
  • Upvote 1
Posted

Doesn't the note say that none of the above can take you beyond your 10-year commitment? Does that only apply if you incur said ADSC before your UPT commitment is up? Could be read either way. I fight my 3-year ADSC for advanced flying training, incurred before the expiration of my UPT ADSC and I won. They rewound my ADSC date to 10 years from UPT graduation. I'm now separated a full 5 months before my bogus ADSC for advanced flying traing was to expire, with no palace chase required because I was a free agent.

Posted

Same here -- had to send that info to AFPC when they automatically directed me to sign a new ADSC.

From my quick math, it seems that flyjetz probably graduated initial flying training before 30 Sep 1997 if he wasn't late-rated. Otherwise, if he requalified into the same MWS (note 1c nullifies note 1b for crossflow training), the ADSC shouldn't have been incurred.

Posted

Only the USAF would force a group of people out one door while slamming another shut on those who want to leave!

  • Upvote 2
Posted

Same here -- had to send that info to AFPC when they automatically directed me to sign a new ADSC.

From my quick math, it seems that flyjetz probably graduated initial flying training before 30 Sep 1997 if he wasn't late-rated. Otherwise, if he requalified into the same MWS (note 1c nullifies note 1b for crossflow training), the ADSC shouldn't have been incurred.

Winged on 20 June 1997. I'm hosed right?

Posted

Winged on 20 June 1997. I'm hosed right?

Looks like it. I don't know the history behind choosing that particular line in the sand, but applying the post-30 Sep 1997 rules would be up to a particularly kind personnellist. Good luck and use a lot of sweet talking if you're going to try exemption by the note 1b.

Posted

I don't know the history behind choosing that particular line in the sand, but applying the post-30 Sep 1997

I believe that's when the 10-year UPT commitment kicked in (as a direct result of the longer ADSC--a trade-off of sorts).

Posted

I believe that's when the 10-year UPT commitment kicked in (as a direct result of the longer ADSC--a trade-off of sorts).

No, that changed circa 2000.

  • Upvote 1
Posted

No, that changed circa 2000.

I was a FY 99 UPT class and I had 8 year commitment.

I think it started with FY 2000.

Cap-10

Posted from the NEW Baseops.net App!

Posted

No, that changed circa 2000.

I think it started with FY 2000.

When it started is spelled out in Note 1 (1 Oct 99, with some caveats re commissioning dates)--so, yes, FY00. I still say that this policy (no add'l ADSC) is tied up with the change to the 10-year commitment, and (going from memory) the original release of the change to the reg corresponded to implementing the 10-year commitment. Why one year prior to taking effect being the cutoff date? Dunno, but I suspect it's got something to do with the FY in which the change was released, and they had to apply a cutoff somewhere--the start of the (then current) FYI seems logical enough....

Posted

I used my Congressman. I was flying in a Maple Flag exercise when I got the word....was out the next week.

You mind expanding on your particular details in case it might help me out?

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...