AFPAK Hands- Opportunity Beckons

[Bode]

I'm in training with a guy who just finished up his tour doing this. His biggest issue is there is not structure to the program. Nobody knew what to do with him when he was "at home station." They didn't have a job for him and no one really took care of him. The exact opposite has happened as a result. His career is going nowhere. While deployed the AFPAK hands wasn't creating any credit for their work. The SOF guys were getting credit for the projects and processes he was doing.

Sounds like a great deal........ I'm good without it on my record.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[BFM this]

I seem to remember, just before the 11F issue crested the horizon, when OGs were actually saying that RPA stink was the coin of the realm; in just a few years it will be tough to get on the command list or make O6 without it.   

FISH ON!

[ThreeHoler]

Even though I'm certain Chang is a troll, I had a commander a few assignments ago who was pulled out of his command tour for the "good deal" AFPAK Hands program.


Sent from my iPhone using Baseops Network Forums

[matmacwc]

I know an 11F that did it, helped his career a lot, no joke.

[Azimuth]

1 hour ago, ThreeHoler said:

Even though I'm certain Chang is a troll, I had a commander a few assignments ago who was pulled out of his command tour for the "good deal" AFPAK Hands program.


Sent from my iPhone using Baseops Network Forums

I saw a guy deployed, get sent home early, so he could PCS because he was "hand picked" to do this program.  This was in 2014 so I think he's almost done with it.

[Guardian]

What is this program? And can we find a way to tie it to tami 22? Would love to screw those tami 21 guys a second and third time. Then stop loss. (Sarcasm)


Sent from my iPhone using Baseops Network Forums

[Fuzz]

1 hour ago, Guardian said:

What is this program? And can we find a way to tie it to tami 22? Would love to screw those tami 21 guys a second and third time. Then stop loss. (Sarcasm)


Sent from my iPhone using Baseops Network Forums

4ish year program, consisting of alternating two, year long tours at "home" (usually some staff from what I've seen) and two 365s working with the Afghanis. 

[nunya]

3 minutes ago, Fuzz said:

4ish year program, consisting of alternating two, year long tours at "home" (usually some staff from what I've seen) and two 365s working with the Afghanis. 

Who the fuck would volunteer for that?

[disgruntledemployee]

32 minutes ago, nunya said:

Who the fuck would volunteer for that?

No one.  Which is why Chang is fishing for suckers.  "You'll make O-6" and "you'll make General" and "it's a career rocket" are the corporate motivators.  I'd rather drop MOABs, which seems a bit more effective at killin' bad guys.  Besides, anyone can sell their soul and make O-6, but only a few can say they dropped the biggest fuckin bomb we have... well I'd like to see a bunch more that can say they dropped it.

Out

[ViperStud]

1 hour ago, disgruntledemployee said:

No one.  Which is why Chang is fishing for suckers.  "You'll make O-6" and "you'll make General" and "it's a career rocket" are the corporate motivators.  I'd rather drop MOABs, which seems a bit more effective at killin' bad guys.  Besides, anyone can sell their soul and make O-6, but only a few can say they dropped the biggest fuckin bomb we have... well I'd like to see a bunch more that can say they dropped it.

Out

I know Chang is just a troll staff weenie, but it does show how out of touch these morons really are with the bulk of us. Spend 2/4 years in the biggest shithole on the planet with no real strategic endgame, just so you can rub elbows with a bunch of O-6s, most of whom got there by sacrificing credibility and warrior ethos in favor of exec jobs and coattail riding. And he sells it like it's a GOOD thing!?!  We have some truly clueless management. 

[Fuzz]

2 hours ago, nunya said:

Who the fuck would volunteer for that?

I know a couple non-rated folks who volunteered for it. Most of them had degrees in international relations, experience with the CRW or some type of similar background, so for them it fit with what they were interested in. Now as to the family life yeah you can tell it takes a toll, but one guy is an O-6, SDE select so I guess it has some merits if that's your cup of tea. 

[panchbarnes]

YMMV...On the non-rated side, Back when the program was hot and heavy, I've seen a guy get picked for DO, O-5, and SQ/CC (but still lost out the #1 strat to a GO's exec), also know of another one got picked up for SQ/CC and is now an O-6.  Then like Lstcause257 described, recently a person got passed over to O-5 and is floating around the Pentagon with no one looking out for him.

If I remember correctly, SECDEF Gates was behind the inception of this well-intentioned program, and people did get rewarded for being a Hand early on.  Now that Gates is gone, it appears as if the FOGOs don't give a sh*i*t about the program, but the requirements are still on the book...no one wants to be the bad guy to advocate for the removal, so here we are...

Slight threat derail...say what you want about Gates, but at least he had the right intentions and appeared to be focused on the mission and not social agendas.  At least in his days our #1 threat was not climate change and sexual predators.

Edited April 16, 2017 by panchbarnes

[dream big]

7 hours ago, Fuzz said:

4ish year program, consisting of alternating two, year long tours at "home" (usually some staff from what I've seen) and two 365s working with the Afghanis. 

So it's non flying, involves  50% staff and 50% trying not to be the next incident of green on blue? Awesome

If it is 4 years and you are within 4 years of ADSC are you essentially immuned? Or if you get selected, would you just incur any ADSC due to PCS and serve the rest of your <4 years in AFhands?

[Spinner]

I know an ABMer who hated his community so much that he did it. That's pretty damn drastic...

[astan777]

I'm an AFPAK Hand.  We pull folk from across the Air Force, a slight majority of them flyers.  It seems about half the cadre are non-vols.  In my experience, AFPAK Hands appeals to a narrow range of folks interested in alternative career paths such as RAS or the attaché program.  Others are seeking something Army-oriented or an assignment completely different than the norm.  Motivations for doing AFPAK Hands vary considerably.

We need to stop forcing commanders to non-vol folks.  It turns AFPAK Hands into a force-management culling mechanism for justifiably pissed-off officers with no interest being advisors for the Afghans.

Willing to candidly talk about the program, both good and bad.  Fire away.

[Motofalcon]

Last I checked, most of us signed up to be part of the military; more specifically, the US Air Force, the god damn "Fly, Fight, WIN" set of air warriors who rain death down upon the enemies and oppressors of the democratic free world. This AFPAK hands sounds a LOT like some state department, political BS that most of us specifically did NOT sign up for. If we wanted to be politicians, we would have gone into politics. Instead we are the warriors (not used sarcastically), the "blunt objects", the "politics by other means" type.  Take your double-speaking, snake oil salesman pitch elsewhere. You'll find no takers here. 

[otsap]

16 hours ago, Fuzz said:

4ish year program, consisting of alternating two, year long tours at "home" (usually some staff from what I've seen) and two 365s working with the Afghanis. 

I think people would consider this program, if their ADSC were REDUCED one year for each year they put into it.  And if the Air Force could somehow guarantee an airline gig upon separation.  With a major.  And full retirement.

Then it would be a "great opportunity".

[MechGov]

I think people would consider this program, if their ADSC were REDUCED one year for each year they put into it.  And if the Air Force could somehow guarantee an airline gig upon separation.  With a major.  And full retirement.
Then it would be a "great opportunity".

I don't think they can/will/need to sweeten the pot that much. But the AF needs to be realistic about the talent it wants or needs for these non-traditional assignments. I'm sure there are some rated folks who want to do AFPAK, just like some want to be a USAFA AOS, go be an Olmstead scholar, hell, even work on a staff. Not saying there's many volunteers, but I'm sure they're out there.

But the forum hit it on the head. You're taking an MWS IP or experienced hand out of line flying, deploying in their aircraft, and bringing air power to bear, and removing that dude from the cockpit for 2x non flying 365s, staff (if he's not sent to time out) in between. And with no promises of returning to the cockpit for a mid career FGO. Besides, is there a real requirement for rated officers?

The Air Force (*cough* Chang *cough*) needs to do some serious expectation management about that program in general, and rated positions specifically. It's endemic to the whole pilot shortage crisis.


Sent from my iPhone using Baseops Network Forums

[AlifBaa]

I'd love to hear a critique of this from the person 

13 hours ago, astan777 said:

I'm an AFPAK Hand.  We pull folk from across the Air Force, a slight majority of them flyers.  It seems about half the cadre are non-vols.  In my experience, AFPAK Hands appeals to a narrow range of folks interested in alternative career paths such as RAS or the attaché program.  Others are seeking something Army-oriented or an assignment completely different than the norm.  Motivations for doing AFPAK Hands vary considerably.

We need to stop forcing commanders to non-vol folks.  It turns AFPAK Hands into a force-management culling mechanism for justifiably pissed-off officers with no interest being advisors for the Afghans.

Willing to candidly talk about the program, both good and bad.  Fire away.

Astan, I'd love to see a good discussion of this program that doesn't dismiss it out of hand.  Here's my theory:

 

 

In this business, one should never expect traditional success to flow from non-traditional career paths.

1.  "Post Commitment Maj."  (11-12 years of service) -- 16-17 years of service by the time you regain credibility, even if you went to IDE.  Probably too late for DO.  Definitely too late if you want to make O-6 early.  Probably too late to make O-6 IPZ.  O-7 for a guy at 16 years who isn't at least a sitting DO?  Nearly impossible.

2.  "Maj/Maj(s)" (9-10 years of service) -- You won't go to IDE without an exception to policy.  Even then, you're coming back to flying at 14 years and need a full re-qual.  You might be on time to make DO, but you'll definitely be an unknown quantity.  Maybe it will work out for you, but you'd have been better off at an OG/CC-arranged staff job, remaining a known quantity in your community and continuing to build expertise related to your mission.  If the goal is O-6 and you're not going to get sent to staff, AFPh at 9-10 years might be your best shot.  I'd suggest you ask yourself why O-6 is this important and whether there's a reason you didn't do well enough to go the traditional route.  If there's a specific adjustment you think you can make, your goal should be to find a 3-4 star willing to direct a WG/CC to put you in the gameplan.  Be ready to lead for a boss who didn't choose you in a squadron that doesn't believe in you.  Duly anointed  you'll make O-6 and maybe even O-7.  (Speaking as someone who has observed this happen a few times.) 

3.a.  "Capt" -- If you left at 8 years, your PRF went in while in Afghanistan.  Most likely your records were ineligible for a DP except for at the MLR.  Unless they were truly top 10%, your records met the board with a P and didn't get selected for IDE.  

3.b.  "Capt" -- If you left at 7, you're brand new to staff and the only rated captain  as your PRF goes in.  Good luck competing against non-rateds who manage significant parts of your general's portfolio.  Best case, you're a dude with little tactical expertise and zero operational level knowledge... what is the general going to do with you?  He doesn't know either, which is why you're doing nothing of consequence.  You might not make O-5 unless you get back to flying and get a job working for the WG/CC.  Even then, you need a full re-qual and don't know that much about the Wing's mission.  See discussion of GO above.  You'll spend your Maj years working your ass off to try and retire as an O-5.

3.c. "Capt"  -- If you left at 6, you probably left your community before you were an IP.  Your O-4 board assumed you were kicked out of flying and didn't give you an IDE slot.  You may not even make major.  Alternatively, you're now forced to do a full 4 year flying assignment to make gates beginning at the 10 year mark.  You're ineligible to attend IDE as a result.  Without in-res IDE, you're a "top 25%" guy at best and won't make the cut for DO.  

I'm sure there are great reasons to do AFPh.  Promotion probably isn't one of them.  

[Guest]

15 hours ago, astan777 said:

I'm an AFPAK Hand.  We pull folk from across the Air Force, a slight majority of them flyers.  It seems about half the cadre are non-vols.  In my experience, AFPAK Hands appeals to a narrow range of folks interested in alternative career paths such as RAS or the attaché program.  Others are seeking something Army-oriented or an assignment completely different than the norm.  Motivations for doing AFPAK Hands vary considerably.

We need to stop forcing commanders to non-vol folks.  It turns AFPAK Hands into a force-management culling mechanism for justifiably pissed-off officers with no interest being advisors for the Afghans.

Willing to candidly talk about the program, both good and bad.  Fire away.

CJCSI 1630.01B says send your best and brightest. I am paraphrasing but it goes on to say: candidates should be graduated Sq/ccs or strong potential for Command (so your High Performing Officer group)

 

Do you know if AFPAK hands leadership at the joint level (I.e. SECDEF) intend to hold the AF leadership feet to the fire with the letter of the law and send the best and not just the D Team, who Had too much ADSC to 7 day opt?

too often I have seen upper management try to shield the HPO from these kind of "great leadership" opportunity. 

Thanks for giving a voice from inside the program

[zach braff]

Ref the article on the program from the then O-5 (now O-6, maybe the program worked).  It was written as advice from AFPAK Hands towards standing up APAC Hands - same program but for the Pacific. I remember hearing about APAC Hands and even reading homeboy's article, but it looks like the Navy was the only service that has rolled with the APAC program.  I'd do that one for a few years and build some relationships over Mai Thais and sushi on the beaches across Asia.

ZB

[Crackity Jones]

Current AFPAK Hand and while I don't regret volunteering, I cannot recommend this program. It is a great but backwards idea. Instead of taking experts, teaching language and culture and placing them in like billets in the field, the program teaches experts language and culture to fill whatever billet, irrespective of previous experience or validity as most organizations viewed Hands as a free body to fill a slot. This is especially true post 2014 but talking to several cohorts, it has always been applicable and if you look at other programs out here, they all say the same thing.

The "real" advising billets are filled by contractors or other programs. For example there is a 11H pilot who instead of flying with the Mi-17s or MD-530s is in targeting. Mi-17s are advised by 6th SOS and MD-530s are advised by contractors. In fact contractors have better personnel management (to fulfill the contract), more continuity (typically stay longer than military tours) and no career penalty (no unchecked the boxes). Or several months ago there was a 12M weapons officer who instead of flying with the C-130s was in policing. C-130s of course are advised by multiple ARC squadrons. I can only think of a few people (voul and non-voul) who actually like their assignment, we do so little advising that it is more than a joke that the most useful language we use is English and I have yet to meet a Hand who honestly thinks this country is going to become better.

In exchange all of the carrots mentioned are at best half truths. Many volunteer to have an advantage for FAO (RAS in the Air Force) or FSO (State). However the AF unlike every other service treats RAS as broadening, not a career field change, so you'll still be off track from your normal progression. FSO is obviously not guaranteed and means separating from the AF. Others volunteer for NDU/NIU (IDE in res) but you still need to be "picked up" off your boards for it to count, otherwise it is just another masters.

Promotion rates depend on the service, community and board. The other services, especially the Army, use AFPAK Hands to get rid of their worst officers so that affects promotion rates. Within communities, specifically fliers, I can't imagine not flying for four years is an advantage although by the time most have met thier first or second gate they may have already topped out anyway. Boards are all different and you can't compare a O-6 board one year with an O-5 board from another.

To be fair the program's performance is average and most of these problems are endemic to everything in Afghanistan. No mission. No personnel management. Even if we were doing out performing the rest of the country, Gen Petraeus himself said (or echoed) that reconstruction and advisement only works when there is a modicum of stability and good governance.

I want the program to be better. It was a great idea, I enjoyed learning two languages and don't mind deploying for two years, but there are reasons there is a reported 50% 7-Day Op and 80% separation at the end of the program. SIGAR is finalizing a report on AFPAK Hands, likely recommending to at least change if not end the program, not that we ever concur with those recommendations. Rumor also has it that the Army, Navy and Marines each recommended ending it as well, with only the Air Force (which has the highest volunteer rates) dissenting, not that that will happen either.

I'll leave you with excerpt from Foreign Policy https://foreignpolicy.com/2016/10/18/our-generals-failed-in-afghanistan/:

"The premier example of this mismatch between what military leadership said we were doing, and what the bureaucracy was actually prioritizing, can be found in the story of the AfPak hands program. The program was launched by the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs, Admiral Mullen, and lauded as the key to shaping Afghanistan by creating a cohort of expert officers from across the services that would have the language skills and experience to build the kind of long-term relationships needed to build an effective Afghan security apparatus. While a priority for the Chairman, the effort was never embraced by the services.

Despite the fanfare and stated importance of the program, mismanagement and mis-utilization were rampant as this specialized cadre encountered personnel systems unable to support non-traditional career paths. Caught between career managers that saw the program as a deviation from what officers “should” be doing – leading tactical units – and a deployment system that often led to random staff assignments instead of partnered roles with Afghan leaders, the program quickly became known as an assignment to be “survived” if not avoided altogether.

A leaked briefing from the Army G-1, the service’s head personnel officer, to the Chief of Staff of the Army in 2014 confirmed that the AfPak Hands program had become a dead end for military careers. Officers who had participated in the program were being promoted at a fraction of the rate of those who had not. There are only two explanations for this outcome: Either the Army was sending sub-par officers to serve in the program, or officers were being punished for deviating from the traditional career track. Whichever it was, both explanations reveal that the effort to train and advise the Afghans was simply not a priority for the Army.

Similar challenges faced those who served on Security Force Advise and Assist Teams. These teams, like the AfPak Hands program, were always ad hoc and widely considered assignments to avoid, as they did not align with traditional career paths. And in the end, the rigidity of the military’s 1950’s-era personnel system simply overwhelmed any desires to prioritize the counterinsurgency mission. Centrally managed and organized around rigid career development templates, this personnel system does a magnificent job of sustaining a peacetime military that is prepared to fight and win tactical battles at the onset of a conventional war, but is not built to go beyond placing square pegs in square holes."

[Chuck17]

7 hours ago, AlifBaa said:

I'd love to hear a critique of this from the person 

Astan, I'd love to see a good discussion of this program that doesn't dismiss it out of hand.  Here's my theory:

Total shack words....

I'm sure there are great reasons to do AFPh.  Promotion probably isn't one of them.  

Great post. The problem is that it IS dismissed out of hand. Discussion is great, as is understanding... but it's the GO and promotion board level dismissal that make this program radioactive.

Thanks to you and CJ for the great posts. They help expose Changs bullshit for what it is.

Chuck

[astan777]

On 4/16/2017 at 11:56 PM, AlifBaa said:

In this business, one should never expect traditional success to flow from non-traditional career paths.

AB - I agree with the majority of your assessment with minor dissenting remarks not worth quibbling about here.  The bottom line is APH is not a path for command-oriented flyers, period.  If your community non-vol'd you, I'd suggest it is a message about where you fit in the future hierarchy.  If you volunteered and didn't get strong counselling from your commander about the repercussions, I'd suggest that is a message also.

Anecdotally, if you came into this program a strong performer, you'll leave this program in shape for O-5 with minimal command prospects.  The are outliers, especially in the non-rates community.  If you came into this program with weak records and hoped APH would give you a boost, you're going to be disappointed.

CJ nailed it in his assessment, I will provide more later but bottom line is this program has a high risk/reward ratio.  There are some truly unique jobs downrange, but it's pure chance you'll be assigned to them.  The AHOB process is broken, and for the most part GO's at RS treat Hands as free-agents to pad their staff.  I know of no less than three C-130 WIC grads in the program, none of which advised Afghans on aviation-related issues.  WTFO!

Edited April 19, 2017 by astan777
Credit for CJ

[cantfly]

I was passing this program around because we all delete these emails. I was asked would you do this program. I tell the guys not at all. End of story.

Sent from my HTC6545LVW using Baseops Network Forums mobile app