Fly-Only Track in AMC

[nsplayr]

https://www.airforcetimes.com/news/your-air-force/2018/07/20/so-you-wanna-fly-air-force-pilots-can-apply-to-new-aviation-only-program/

BLUF: Majors or Major-selects with 11-13 YOS can apply starting soon. Seemed like you only fly plus work stan eval, training or tactics. PME and AAD are optional. ALso targeting 5 years at one duty station. 

[dream big]

Just now, nsplayr said:

https://www.airforcetimes.com/news/your-air-force/2018/07/20/so-you-wanna-fly-air-force-pilots-can-apply-to-new-aviation-only-program/

BLUF: Majors or Major-selects with 11-13 YOS can apply starting soon. Seemed like you only fly plus work stan eval, training or tactics. PME and AAD are optional. ALso targeting 5 years at one duty station. 

11-13 years? That’s convenient, so right for the dudes about to get out. 

[viper154]

14 minutes ago, dream big said:

11-13 years? That’s convenient, so right for the dudes about to get out. 

Just long enough to dangle the carrot to get you to stay in, then deny your application, send you on a 365/staff tour/(fill in bullshit job here) 

[Fuzz]

Not mentioned*:

- You are committed to 20 years commissioned service.

- Still eligible for "flying" 365s

-Still eligible for "flying" staff positions (i.e. MAJCOM Stan/Eval etc).

-Should still be eligible for the ACP Bonus.

*sourced from multiple Facebook pages

[jazzdude]

So how is this different than a major deciding they just don't want to play the game anymore and just fly?

[xaarman]

I put this in the other thread - I don't have access to MyPers anymore.

Are there any tools at the service members disposal to shield themselves from the BS?

Or can the AF still go for the "mission requirements and professional development" tagline?

[Fuzz]

They have yet to drop the PSDM. It "stuck in staffing" but should be out shortly.

[Danger41]

2 hours ago, dream big said:

11-13 years? That’s convenient, so right for the dudes about to get out. 

Well, yeah. This is supposedly what everyone wants and it’s a retention measure. What’s the issue?

[BADFNZ]

Why the ADSC to 20 years?  Big Blue has such a hard on for keeping guys to retirement.  How about you open this up and make it a normal 3 year ADSC like most training/career type moves?  What if guys want to try this out but don't want to be grasped by the balls for another 6-9 years?  If you make it a 3 year ADSC, you may get some takers to stick their toe in the water to see how it feels.  If they like it, they may stay to 20 on their own.  If they don't, hey at least you got an experienced dude to fly the line for an extra 3 years.  I imagine you'll have as many takers for this as you do the return to AD.  It was a good idea on paper, but of course the AF has to come in and fuck it up.

[jazzdude]

My bet is it's a temporary stop gap while they try to ramp up pilot production to "fix" the shortage, based on the year group's they're targeting and the 8ish year commitment they get from the takers. It buys them some time.

Or it's so they can say they tried everything, and stop loss is necessary.

I just don't see how this is significantly different than what it is in place now, besides an 8yr ADSC in return for nothing (or at best, not doing a non-flying staff assignment).

And I doubt commanders will care what track a major is on when it comes to assigning jobs within the unit.

[Homestar]

Everyone rants about wanting a fly only track then complains when AMC gives them a fly only track. 

[BADFNZ]

32 minutes ago, Homestar said:

Everyone rants about wanting a fly only track then complains when AMC gives them a fly only track. 

"Hey baby, I could really go for a BJ right now."

"Sure thing sweetie.  But if I give you a BJ, you have to wash the dishes for the next 10 years."

 "No thanks."

"You're always ranting about wanting a BJ but then you complain when I try to give you a BJ!"

[pcola]

The ADSC to 20 is a non-starter. Nobody has enough faith in the system to take this “deal” along with a 6-9 year commitment. F That Noise.

[pcola]

Yet another half-measure “solution “. This generation of leaders needs to realize that their instincts on what might get people to stay are all wrong. At least then they have a starting point on what not to do. If you’ve got stars on your lapel and you think you have a good idea about how to tackle the issue, just assume it’s between 90 and 180 out from the real answer. Then go ask a Major who’s actively flying the line at a Squadron. And resist the urge to either inject your own modifications to his ideas. Also resist the urge to inject staff weenie ideas into the solution.

[Sneedro]

Fly only track...sorry Air Force, a couple of organizations already beat you to this idea: Delta, United, American, SWA, FedEX, etc...  The difference is they don't have any additional duties, 365's, non flying deployments even if it is to a "flying" slot, no ADSC, and more pay/time off.

 

This ADSC to 20 is ridiculous and I don't think it will solve the AF's problems especially as bros and broettes at 11-13yrs are talking about how great their life is on the outside.  If they really want a shot at making this work, I agree with the other person that suggested a 3yr ADSC (since you can't take a shit in the AF without an ADSC).  That may be just enough to entice some to stay in and fly a little longer.  Then maybe you will get a few of those few who chose at 14-16yrs to stick it out to 20.  This fly only track is nowhere near a carrot enough to keep most in with another almost 10yr ADSC trapping you to 20.  

[ClearedHot]

[Bender]

“We’re looking … for people who can do mentorship in a squadron and bring these young kids onboard and maybe have opportunities to public speak in schools to bring those young, inspiring students to say, ‘Hey, I want a career [in aviation],’” Everhart said.

LOL...public speaking engagements at the local high school...right on, brother! Bingo! Bullseye! For Duck's sake, that right there is a ginormous wiffer.

If your commitment is done, sign another 1 year deal to stay and fly...and only fly. If you were getting out anyways, every year is a year we wouldn't have had. No ADSC, but a 1 year bonus should be on the table if Big Blue is the one on the defensive.

She just can't come to terms with being in a bad way. Have to take everything and feel like people should take it because patriotism.

Sad story, Bro.

~Bendy

[NKAWTG]

So what is the benefit for the pilot?  They won't send you to staff?  Unless its Stan/Eval.  No 365s, unless they are flying.  No queep, but get that MICT checklist done.  We'll guarantee you 5 years at Minot or Cannon.

 

How can they get this so wrong.  Smart people so disconnected from reality who can't imagine a career path different than their own.

[pawnman]

The five year thing stuck out to me.  I was already doing that back when we were RIFing people...5 years in my ops squadron, and I'm going on 5 years at the FTU.  There are guys who have been at Dyess for going on 10 years, and being told "we can't afford to move you anywhere, the FTU is half-manned right now".

[Smokin]

I still don't see how a flying only track is a good idea.  Imagine 'that guy' in the squadron that is always the pigeon and would rather work on his BS masters than study in the vault.  He always has excuses as to why he didn't make RAP or why he was unavailable for mission planning yesterday.  You really want him to be your commander in a few years?  I totally get that guys just want to fly and I'm in that boat as well, but the guy who just wants to fly is also probably the guy that has the personality to take care of their bros and wants to be leading the formation when the shit hits the fan.  That is the guy that should be set up to be the squadron commander.  Rather than set up a fly-only track, which will remove guys like this from being commanders, we need to fix the glitch.  Remove the BS AAD, SOS, ACSC, and things like that from consideration.  Go back to the way the military has promoted since the Revolutionary War.  Promote the guys who seem the be the most capable and chances are, they will be the most capable in their new job as well.  Don't promote based on who has a shot at being the next chief of staff, promote based on who is the most likely to do the job best on the next level.

Then, when that is finished, fix the staff gigs to turn them from a terrible deal into a good deal.  Make them 18-24 month assignments in Hawaii where you work 9-3.  People will say this is impossible, but I bet that so much of the staff has become a self-licking ice cream cone that if you removed some of the same BS where guys spend half their time filling out electronic staff summary sheets, you might find some time to let guys go hang out at the beach with their family when their kids get out of school every afternoon.  Suddenly a year or two away from the jet might be a nice break instead of a prison term.

[HU&W]

13 hours ago, jazzdude said:

So how is this different than a major deciding they just don't want to play the game anymore and just fly?

This way they can get pilots to show their cards.  Also, their hr people tell them that when people feel like they're applying for something, they are happier when they're 'accepted'.  Really, this just feels like AMC sanctioning a career strategy that already exists.

[ygtbsm]

11 minutes ago, Smokin said:

I still don't see how a flying only track is a good idea.  Imagine 'that guy' in the squadron that is always the pigeon and would rather work on his BS masters than study in the vault.  He always has excuses as to why he didn't make RAP or why he was unavailable for mission planning yesterday.  You really want him to be your commander in a few years?  I totally get that guys just want to fly and I'm in that boat as well, but the guy who just wants to fly is also probably the guy that has the personality to take care of their bros and wants to be leading the formation when the shit hits the fan.  That is the guy that should be set up to be the squadron commander.  Rather than set up a fly-only track, which will remove guys like this from being commanders, we need to fix the glitch.  Remove the BS AAD, SOS, ACSC, and things like that from consideration.  Go back to the way the military has promoted since the Revolutionary War.  Promote the guys who seem the be the most capable and chances are, they will be the most capable in their new job as well.  Don't promote based on who has a shot at being the next chief of staff, promote based on who is the most likely to do the job best on the next level.

Then, when that is finished, fix the staff gigs to turn them from a terrible deal into a good deal.  Make them 18-24 month assignments in Hawaii where you work 9-3.  People will say this is impossible, but I bet that so much of the staff has become a self-licking ice cream cone that if you removed some of the same BS where guys spend half their time filling out electronic staff summary sheets, you might find some time to let guys go hang out at the beach with their family when their kids get out of school every afternoon.  Suddenly a year or two away from the jet might be a nice break instead of a prison term.

Well said...

[Warrior]

57 minutes ago, Smokin said:

I bet that so much of the staff has become a self-licking ice cream cone that if you removed some of the same BS where guys spend half their time filling out electronic staff summary sheets, you might find some time to let guys go hang out at the beach with their family when their kids get out of school every afternoon.  Suddenly a year or two away from the jet might be a nice break instead of a prison term.

Shack.  Our civilian "continuity" on the staff eventually becomes malignant.  

[tac airlifter]

Staff is prison and it would take a culture change at every level to fix.  

[IDALPHA]

37 minutes ago, Warrior said:

Shack.  Our civilian "continuity" on the staff eventually becomes malignant.  

Empire Building is the term you are looking for