Aviation Continuation Pay (ACP - The Bonus)

[ILoveScotch]

But what about the finance officer? He'll be left out? Or the Security Forces officer?

Not sure what your point is. Which would you prefer to be? Finance officer or RPA aircrew?

I'm guessing RPA aircrew, despite the suck.

Wait, or were you just taking an opportunity to take a dig at the "shoeclerks"? Classy.

Sent from my SM-N920V using Tapatalk

[Guardian]

My friends, extreme problems demand extreme solutions. We must throw every new officer into the rpa field and double pay for all rated positions if we are going to solve this HUGE problem.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I747 using Tapatalk

Sorry Scotch. I was replying to this and didn't hit the right thing to make it obvious. And yes always digging on shoe clerks.

[ned1]

Sorry but those jobs don't need the extra pay! Operating rpas isn't easy or cheap!

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I747 using Tapatalk

[Guardian]

Sarcasm. Sarcasm sarcasm.

[Tonka]

On 3/8/2016 at 7:51 AM, General Chang said:

Sky is not falling...between rapid influx of 18x and new enlisted RPA program, things will settle in the next few years.  No panic in the P-gon.

Numbers keep airplanes flying, experience keeps them from crashing... No panic in the P-gon means they are only looking at the former not the later... Maybe that is OK if no one on-board is hurt when they crash, but eventually we'll put one down somewhere where it matters and then there will be panic.

[Ram]

A1 also never seems to realize that there is a very real difference between occupied ejection seats (or containers) and actual combat capability.

I have a sinking suspicion that we have assumed the assurance of air superiority for a bit too long.

If you look at American military history, we have a pattern of behavior:

1. Overestimating ourselves while we underestimate the enemy, and

2. Being forced to bounce back and learn quickly after getting caught with our pants down.

The repetition of those 2 mistakes is continuously demoralizing. Sometimes it seems like our leadership is more concerned with maintaining the political status quo than it is with winning.

That fact can't be fixed by throwing money at it.

[HuggyU2]

39 minutes ago, Ram said:

...sinking suspicion ...

Sinking?  Haha...!

Go get my Ensure, Ram.  

[Azimuth]

19 hours ago, guineapigfury said:

We are currently trending very young for many of our new arrivals.  Lots of 1Lts and A1Cs.  Some of that is they can't 7 day opt, some of it is that younguns are all this community has to send.  On the plus side the popcorn tends to stay fresh.  The diificulties at Holloman are similar to the difficulties elsewhere in RPAland minus shiftwork.  Crappy location, tedious and unrewarding work, hard to get leave approved, better money and QOL on the outside.  Imagine Altus without grass and the median operational experience of your IPs is 3 years with no IP experience prior to arriving.  The silver lining is that lots of dudes are pushing to the Guard and contracting, often staying at this base.  However,  those dudes are often just holding at the fix waiting for a better opportunity to present itself.  We don't have trouble finding people, we have trouble keeping them.  Assignments here follow normal assignment rules, so 3-4 years for those who don't separate or PC/PF.  I'm not advocating stop-loss, but I expect it.

Altus doesn't have grass and at least on the tankers side there are IP's there who don't even log IP time before they get there to teach at the FTU.

[Guardian]

I don't get it? Why does an IP who has never taught before showing up at tanker FTU concern you? Is flying a tanker hard?

[Guardian]

Dude. That's low. I wasn't implying emotionally either. I happen to have been really good friends with one of the crew members and I know he would if he could say that flying a tanker isn't hard. Massive structural failure happens to any airframe.

Azimuth I think that was a stupid dick move. I realize you had no idea that I was friends with one of them but pulling on emotional strings just to make someone else look bad is what happens in politics and it makes them look stupid also.

I forgive you for being an ignorant person. You should retract what you said. Seriously low dude.

[TnkrToad]

17 minutes ago, Azimuth said:

Altus doesn't have grass and at least on the tankers side there are IP's there who don't even log IP time before they get there to teach at the FTU.

Whoa. That's frightening, if I understand what you're saying correctly. I assume folks should have no problem getting their 1,500 hrs in their first assignments, given the number of deployments they're doing. Why, then, are they not going to CFIC while still in their first assignments? Are there not enough CFIC slots at KLTS, or are flying units so overtasked that they can't afford to put folks through CFIC and allow them to build a little IP time before going to Altus?

10 minutes ago, Guardian said:

I don't get it? Why does an IP who has never taught before showing up at tanker FTU concern you? Is flying a tanker hard?

Umm, yes. Next time you see a tanker on the flight line, check out the clearance between the motors and the tarmac. Next, understand that the flight controls are 1950s technology, and the airplane is kind of big and unwieldy. Imagine taking a student good enough to graduate UPT, but not necessarily the greatest, and pair him or her with an instructor who spent the bulk of the prior three years deploying to the desert, and flying most every sortie one to a full stop. The instructor hasn't gotten a whole lot of variety or quantity of experience, and the student is flying a jet that's very different from the one they flew before. Not a recipe for success. Let a student land a bit off centerline, combine the crown of the runway with minimal clearance between the motors and the runway, and pod scrapes ensue. 

TT

 

Edited March 10, 2016 by TnkrToad
grammar

[Guardian]

Altus doesn't have grass and at least on the tankers side there are IP's there who don't even log IP time before they get there to teach at the FTU.

Whoa. That's frightening, if I understand what you're saying correctly. I assume folks should have no problem getting their 1,500 hrs in their first assignments, given the number of deployments they're doing. Why, then, are they not going to CFIC while still in their first assignments? Are there not enough CFIC slots at KLTS, or are flying units so overtasked that they can't afford to put folks through CFIC and allow them to build a little IP time before going to Altus?

I don't get it? Why does an IP who has never taught before showing up at tanker FTU concern you? Is flying a tanker hard?

Umm, yes. Next time you see a tanker on the flight line, check out the clearance between the motors and the tarmac. Next, understand that the flight controls are 1950s technology, and the airplane is kind of big and unwieldy. Imagine taking a student good enough to graduate UPT, but not necessarily the greatest, and pair him or her with an instructor who spent the bulk of the prior three years deploying to the desert, and flying most every sortie one to a full stop. The instructor hasn't gotten a whole lot of variety or quantity of experience, and the student is flying a jet that's very different from the one they flew before. Not a recipe for success. Let a student land a bit off centerline, combine the crown of the runway with minimal clearance between the motors and the runway, and pod scrapes ensue. 

TT

 

Copy. Not harder than any other airplane and has normal problems that trained pilots are trained to deal with.

[Guardian]

TnkrToad. I see you thumbs up' his post of using three Air Force members deaths as justification for flying tankers is hard when they died from a massive hardware issue not through any fault of their own. I just formed my opinion on you.

It makes me sad that their are members in the AF that think like yourselves. I hope you don't take the bonus and choose to go elsewhere with your "talents"

You both make me sick. Just think of others before you go and do stupid stuff like that or even think about the logic you are trying to employ and realize that it's flawed and failed.

[TnkrToad]

11 minutes ago, Guardian said:

TnkrToad. I see you thumbs up' his post of using three Air Force members deaths as justification for flying tankers is hard when they died from a massive hardware issue not through any fault of their own. I just formed my opinion on you.

Ugh. Clearly, communicating on the interwebz is not ideal. Let me spell it out for you, since talking slowly doesn't translate well in text. I did the thumbs up to the post, because I (1) approved of the basic point Azimuth made--executing air refueling missions in the KC-135 well takes substantial skill, training and experience. The absence of these factors can, does have horrible consequences (and it clearly has); and (2) although a forum thumbs up could not possibly convey my intent adequately, I thought it a very small, but nonetheless appropriate way to remember our fallen fellow aviators. 

Beyond that, I could not care less what your opinion is of me. I personally hope that the level of experience among Altus IPs Azimuth describes does not lead to more Shell 77s. 

[Guardian]

At least you are trying to use logic and reason in an intelligent discussion instead of dragging the dead out on parade. And yes hopefully no more Shell 77's happen but who in the tanker fleet could have stopped or recovered? It was a flawed stupid selfish embarrassing argument to use them and we need to change the subject to honor the dead not trample on them as I am sure they nor their families don't deserve this inconsiderate and inappropriate usage of their deaths. I hope one of the webmasters deletes this whole exchange. That would be the most appropriate thing to do.

And if I insulted you then I truly apologize. Maybe I should have attacked it as you did. Which is to say there is a reason that people who finish last in pilot training largely get non volunteered to tankers. Because comparably they aren't as difficult to fly as other platforms. RPA's included. And not having any hours but having the required training shouldn't be a huge factor. Happens al the time in other more difficult and demanding airframes.

[Jaded]

Guardian, say quals. 

[TnkrToad]

11 minutes ago, Guardian said:

At least you are trying to use logic and reason in an intelligent discussion instead of dragging the dead out on parade. And yes hopefully no more Shell 77's happen but who in the tanker fleet could have stopped or recovered? It was a flawed stupid selfish embarrassing argument to use them and we need to change the subject to honor the dead not trample on them as I am sure they nor their families don't deserve this inconsiderate and inappropriate usage of their deaths. I hope one of the webmasters deletes this whole exchange. That would be the most appropriate thing to do.

And if I insulted you then I truly apologize. Maybe I should have attacked it as you did. Which is to say there is a reason that people who finish last in pilot training largely get non volunteered to tankers. Because comparably they aren't as difficult to fly as other platforms. RPA's included. And not having any hours but having the required training shouldn't be a huge factor. Happens al the time in other more difficult and demanding airframes.

No offense taken, and I'm sorry for your loss. I'll respectfully disagree with your description of how easy it is to fly the tanker--particularly in the landing phase, which is where Altus IPs like Azimuth really make their money, but I won't litigate that any more here. Bringing this back to the purpose of this thread, I hope the Air Force manages to grow and keep experienced MDS experts in the tankers and every other airframe. 

Fly safe, 

TT

[Guardian]

Military eval pilot. Civilian instructor pilot. Your turn.

[Azimuth]

49 minutes ago, Guardian said:

 

TnkrToad. I see you thumbs up' his post of using three Air Force members deaths as justification for flying tankers is hard when they died from a massive hardware issue not through any fault of their own. I just formed my opinion on you.

It makes me sad that their are members in the AF that think like yourselves. I hope you don't take the bonus and choose to go elsewhere with your "talents"

You both make me sick. Just think of others before you go and do stupid stuff like that or even think about the logic you are trying to employ and realize that it's flawed and failed.

Apparently you didn't read the AIB, the crew was faulted for using rudder input during a dutch roll situation (though it was a mechanical malfunction).  And I also personally knew all three crew members and was friends with the Boom for 12-years.  And since a tanker isn't "really that demanding to fly", what exactly do you fly?

[Azimuth]

1 minute ago, Guardian said:

Military eval pilot

In what?

[Guardian]

Things that don't require bottom of pilot training class to graduate. And yes I knew Trey for 6+ years.

[Azimuth]

2 minutes ago, Guardian said:

Things that don't require bottom of pilot training class to graduate. And yes I knew Trey for 6+ years.

Well since you knew Trey, and you apparently aren't a tanker guy, guess you met at Creech.

Edited March 10, 2016 by Azimuth

[Guardian]

Yes I read the Saftey privileged AIB as well. I know that your oversimplification of the findings wasn't everything found.

[Guardian]

Things that don't require bottom of pilot training class to graduate. And yes I knew Trey for 6+ years.

Well since you knew Trey, and you apparently aren't a tanker guy, guess you met at Creech.

An assumption

Which also regardless of if true or false still doesn't make your bringing them up right. So deflect all you want. You apparently are comfortable using their deaths at your convenience.

[Azimuth]

Just now, Guardian said:

Yes I read the Saftey privileged AIB as well. I know that your oversimplification of the findings wasn't everything found.

Weird, AIB's aren't privileged information.  Sounds like someone needs to be educated by their safety shop.