Aviation Continuation Pay (ACP - The Bonus)

[Guest]

23 hours ago, ihtfp06 said:

I'm wondering why I didn't choose UCLA

I'm a newbie and admit I haven't read the whole thread but since I "couldn't be a pilot 30 years ago" because of shitty eyesight, I would give my left nut to be flying instead of doing my boring engineering job of electronic communications between aircraft/ships and all of our bad ass missiles... Am I missing something? or is it just about the $$$? 

[sqwatch]

You are missing something

[Guest]

2 minutes ago, sqwatch said:

You are missing something

Thanks sqwatch, figured that was it. Still would rather be strapped into an F-**, even for a little while. It would be quite a bit more adrenaline rush...

[Ram]

Adrenaline eventually wears off. The hangover is staff work and 365s to Al Udied for no reason.

[guineapigfury]

 

3 hours ago, GKinnear said:

Not surprising that the two RPA signers (14% take rate) were SOF and -170s.

What's not surprising is the absence of MQ-9 guys selling their souls at a discount.

[sqwatch]

Thanks sqwatch, figured that was it. Still would rather be strapped into an F-**, even for a little while. It would be quite a bit more adrenaline rush...

Thank you for posting and asking the question. Like ram said, there's more to being a fighter pilot in the Air Force than what "iron eagle" would have you believe. Some would say being a fighter pilot has taken a back seat to a bureaucratic rat race and endless busywork that serves no purpose to better us as a military power. but you remind me that I once would have also had a left-side testectomy to do this job, and I'm thankful for the experience. I'm just not gonna give the airforce a blank check for another droid tour or one of those 365s to some country full of spoiled-brat Arabs.

[pawnman]

On 5/12/2016 at 10:16 PM, sqwatch said:

You are missing something

The Air Force should probably be asking themselves why people hate the job so much, when so many look at it as desirable, that pilots won't even stay for $250,000 extra.

[Guest]

1 hour ago, pawnman said:

The Air Force should probably be asking themselves why people hate the job so much, when so many look at it as desirable, that pilots won't even stay for $250,000 extra.

Yikes! sign me up now! I am 50+, stayed in shape, and had my eyes fixed with PRK (which sucked...). If the AF needs pilots tell me where to go to sign up! I'll even wave the bonus... I know... I am dreaming, but damn, wish I had a shot back in the day. 

Anyway, It is actually quite concerning that the sentiment on this board is so negative against the job. Is it our good buddy Obama that has pretty much dismantled the military? Can't wait till that SOB is gone.

[ViperMan]

13 minutes ago, BAMF69 said:

Is it our good buddy Obama that has pretty much dismantled the military? Can't wait till that SOB is gone.

Exactly 0.00% (repeating, of course) to do with anything.

[Guest]

A little confused now. Are you saying that it doesn't matter who is running the country AND the military??? If so, I am in total disagreement. Obama is 10x worse than Jimmy Carter.

[General Chang]

Guys, this is easy from the AF perspective...if we start having a significant long-term problem with retention, we'll stop-loss in the near term and move to 15-yr commitments long term.  Take it to the bank.  And before you pilots start whining on this forum, you knew this would be a possibility when you signed on the bottom line.

The more of your friends that take the bonus, the longer we can put off S.L. and expanded commitments.

[xaarman]

A little confused now. Are you saying that it doesn't matter who is running the country AND the military??? If so, I am in total disagreement. Obama is 10x worse than Jimmy Carter.

 

It has absolutely nothing to do with the Commander in Chief and everything to do with the personnel policies and requirements the USAF mandates on itself.

 

 

Edited May 15, 2016 by xaarman
Clarified after GC responded

[RASH]

Guys, this is easy from the AF perspective...if we start having a significant long-term problem with retention, we'll stop-loss in the near term and move to 15-yr commitments long term.  Take it to the bank.  And before you pilots start whining on this forum, you knew this would be a possibility when you signed on the bottom line.

The more of your friends that take the bonus, the longer we can put off S.L. and expanded commitments.

Typical--tactical solution to a strategic problem. You really don't get it, do you?

[Duck]

Watch how productive I will be when I am stop-lossed. Also I would make it my personal priority to tell everyone I come in contact with how terrible the AF management is and hey should join another service if they want to fly/serve.

[BuddhaSixFour]

2 hours ago, General Chang said:

Guys, this is easy from the AF perspective...if we start having a significant long-term problem with retention, we'll stop-loss in the near term and move to 15-yr commitments long term.  Take it to the bank.  And before you pilots start whining on this forum, you knew this would be a possibility when you signed on the bottom line.

The more of your friends that take the bonus, the longer we can put off S.L. and expanded commitments.

Good god, man. Surely you jest.

Flying should, by all accounts, be just the most awesome job ever created.  Tactical flying is just about as much fun as anything.  The job pays well. You get to serve your country in a meaningful way.  And airplanes... f**k yeah.

If the Air Force can only get people to do it by A) getting people too young to know better to sign an obscenely long contract, or B) by abusing the terms of the contract to keep people around, then senior leadership really needs to ask how they f***ed it up that bad and shake things up as much as necessary to fix it.

Best of all, your people are screaming the solutions at you. Just step back for a second, listen without brushing them of as malcontents, and realize that you do actually have the power to do 75% of what they're asking for, and that you can do it with precisely 0% negative impact to mission effectiveness.

[Herk Driver]

Guys, this is easy from the AF perspective...if we start having a significant long-term problem with retention, we'll stop-loss in the near term and move to 15-yr commitments long term.  Take it to the bank.  And before you pilots start whining on this forum, you knew this would be a possibility when you signed on the bottom line.

The more of your friends that take the bonus, the longer we can put off S.L. and expanded commitments.

Standard. The beatings will continue until morale improves.

[TreeA10]

5 hours ago, General Chang said:

Guys, this is easy from the AF perspective...if we start having a significant long-term problem with retention, we'll stop-loss in the near term and move to 15-yr commitments long term.  Take it to the bank.  And before you pilots start whining on this forum, you knew this would be a possibility when you signed on the bottom line.

The more of your friends that take the bonus, the longer we can put off S.L. and expanded commitments.

I guess this is what substitutes for leadership these days. You will solve the problems you created with endentured servitude and forced labor.  Best. Morale. Plan.  Ever. 

[NKAWTG]

5 hours ago, General Chang said:

Guys, this is easy from the AF perspective...if we start having a significant long-term problem with retention, we'll stop-loss in the near term and move to 15-yr commitments long term.  Take it to the bank.  And before you pilots start whining on this forum, you knew this would be a possibility when you signed on the bottom line.

The more of your friends that take the bonus, the longer we can put off S.L. and expanded commitments.

 

Implementing stop loss would be "Michael Jackson eating popcorn" worthy congressional hearing.  You need a better reason than mismanaging the rated community. 

Now my tin foil hat is telling me if we have some external event like a terrorist attack or heightened tensions with a near peer, stop loss is guaranteed because of the built in excuse.

So it couldn't happen.  Unless it does. 

[ClearedHot]

9 hours ago, gearpig said:

"Senator, the sole reason for the Air Force's inability to retain pilots is the sudden and unexpected surge of hiring in the airline industry. The Air Force has no control over these external factors and it cannot, and should not be expected to compete with the work rules and compensation of the airline industry. This temporary threat to pilot retention is detrimental to our readiness and national security. Because the Air Force has invested millions upon millions in the training of each pilot (the same training that also makes them eligible for employment outside the Air Force) we must implement measures to temporarily slow the loss of pilots until the hiring boom in the airline industry has completed its cycle."

I think I've posted this story before but not too long ago I was in a meeting when this very subject came up and a then MAJCOM Commander turned to his senior staff and said "Stop Loss is a viable retention tool." 

What makes the current situation different from past peaks and valleys, the end of this "hiring cycle" could be ten years away...do we really think Congress will allow people to be held hostage for an additional 5-10 years?  I can see an argument for a year or two... especially when some soulless mind f@ck like Chang helps build the argument that we are at war with groups like ISIS, but going beyond that has real legal issues.  The 15 year commitment won't fix the problem, it still takes time to season guys...it will be interesting to watch from the sidelines as I pray for Chang to get ass cancer.

Edited May 16, 2016 by ClearedHot

[di1630]

Jeeezus, stop loss? What a mess us pilots have talked about for 6-9+ years. I just checked the 9 May acp update....most takers were 2015....hardly any signed up late. I have very little faith the fence-sitters are giving up $69 per day in lost bonus to hold out until last minute so I'm betting rates don't change a lot.

[SurelySerious]

And before you pilots start whining on this forum, you knew this would be a possibility when you signed on the bottom line.

I knew signing up that flying is inherently dangerous and death is possible, but I usually try avoiding it.

Also, no shit. Everything is possible, unless it involves AFPC acting smartly.

[T Pain]

nice little article summing up the AF's issues... and how our leaders don't realize it

https://www.newsmax.com/US/Budget-Cuts-Hurt-Air-Force/2016/05/14/id/728865/

[Sprkt69]

On May 15, 2016 at 9:08 PM, General Chang said:

Guys, this is easy from the AF perspective...if we start having a significant long-term problem with retention, we'll stop-loss in the near term and move to 15-yr commitments long term.  Take it to the bank.  And before you pilots start whining on this forum, you knew this would be a possibility when you signed on the bottom line.

The more of your friends that take the bonus, the longer we can put off S.L. and expanded commitments.

The only reason longer commitments and stop-loss are a possibility, is because of poor leadership/management from the AF. Not because of the money in the civilian sector as indicated by the RAND report. I'm sure a stop-loss is going to convince a lot of people that staying in is a much better choice.

Poor decision making has consequences, especially when there are options available to those subjected to servitude.

[pcola]

I've said it on here before. Good ing luck hacking the mish with a force of stop-lossed pilots. Do you think I'm going to bend the rules or pencil whip any beans to stay current or MR if I'm stop-lossed and pissed? Do you think the mission actually happens without that shit? Do you think a disgruntled, stop-lossed pilot is going to put in 60 hours a week keeping DOK, DOT, or DOV programs afloat? The sad thing is that these out-of-touch staff weanies and shoe clerks are actually clueless enough to think its a viable option.

[Karl Hungus]

5 hours ago, gearpig said:

"Senator, the sole reason for the Air Force's inability to retain pilots is the sudden and unexpected surge of hiring in the airline industry. The Air Force has no control over these external factors and it cannot, and should not be expected to compete with the work rules and compensation of the airline industry. This temporary threat to pilot retention is detrimental to our readiness and national security. Because the Air Force has invested millions upon millions in the training of each pilot (the same training that also makes them eligible for employment outside the Air Force) we must implement measures to temporarily slow the loss of pilots until the hiring boom in the airline industry has completed its cycle."

Followed by the airlines complaining to congress about not having a pool of trained pilots to hire from... and then Age 70.