Promotion and PRF Information

[TAMInated]

When will senior leadership realize that AAD's are ZERO ADDED VALUE? .

One of my wing commanders would occasionally get all the CGOs in the wing together at the club. He would stand in front of the crowd with a glass of scotch and answer whatever quesitons we would ask him. One flight commander had a Lt that got his undergrad in rocket surgery from MIT and was considering getting a masters in rocket surgery, also from MIT. The kid was also considering Tuoro/Trident/whatever. The flight commander asked the wing king what he should advise this young Lt to do, go to MIT or check the square. The wing commander recommended he go to Tuoro. My list of reasons for leaving the Air Force is long and distinguished, but this conversation is near the top.

Edited July 11, 2013 by TAMInated

[Herk Driver]

The Lt Col list will be released on 17 Jul. Do any of you think AAD and IDE (res or corr) should be complete prior to IPZ to O-5? Should SR, MLRs and boards consider advanced education when determining who should be promoted? I am in favor of completely masking AAD at O-4 board, but not O-5. Thoughts?

As others have said, you have to mask the information so that no one can use it for any part of the PRF process. You cannot have it on a SURF for the Sq/CC or raters to utilize for rack/stack purposes and then the SR is only told not to use it.

Big proponent of PME at all levels...implementation in the AF needs to be addressed, but yes.

AAD...one could argue either way, but really should be needs of the AF based and a pilot with an AAD versus an engineer with an AAD are separate animals.

[ClearedHot]

IMHO, until someone can show some concrete proof that the AAD's people are getting actually do the Air Force any good, it shouldn't be a requirement at anytime. At best, you're getting someone who is only slightly wasting his time. At worst, you're taking someone's attention and focus (at every level O-3, O-4, or O-5) away from their primary job to force them to prove they "care about being promoted" and nothing else. Then add in the stress that the lost time contributes to family life, and you get disgruntled individuals.

Personally torn on the value of an AAD. I believe the intent has morphed into a completely different animal. Originally it was to encourage critical thinking, to help develop your thinking about things other than the basic mission. Should it be a box you check, absolutely not, it should be a purposeful program that develops your ability to think about things bigger than yourself and the future. Honestly, flying is a young mans game...There is an old memo From Tooey Spaatz...paraphrasing here, but in short it says pilots in their late 40's shouldn't fly at night or fly tactical aircraft...anyway, what I am trying to say is as a young major you are probably as good as you will ever be in the jet. Yes there are old high time Lt Col's who can fly the crap out of a plane, but we MUST develop people that can move up with the bigger picture.

Its funny because a lot of the bitching on this forum is about the ancillary stuff, "I just want to fly"...well we need some people that just want to fly...but not a lot, there are lines of young people at the door who want to get in and fly. As our service gets smaller we also need folks who are able to think and lead from a strategic point of view. (Look at what happens we let the non-rated guys run the staff, they make some really uniformed decisions.)

It probably matters not anyways as the fighter mafia has sold it's soul to preserve the F-35. The cuts we (USAF), are about to endure are simply staggering, ultimately we will only need 189 Raptor Pilots and a couple hundred F-35 pilots, everything else will be parked in the boneyard so we can all go to school fulltime.

When will senior leadership realize that AAD's are ZERO ADDED VALUE?

[TheInner]

The Lt Col list will be released on 17 Jul. Do any of you think AAD and IDE (res or corr) should be complete prior to IPZ to O-5? Should SR, MLRs and boards consider advanced education when determining who should be promoted? I am in favor of completely masking AAD at O-4 board, but not O-5. Thoughts?

A bit repetitive of other posts since I am a slow typer.

Liquid, I think there is no doubt that the USAF wants AAD/IDE complete prior to the board. I personally think that PME is a no-brainer. My beef lies with the AAD because a degree from "Container Checking University" that was earned through credits courtesy of SOS/WIC/RTU/etc and classes "taught" by a bro somehow equates to officer potential. This wastes the time of the individual, both personally and professionally, and costs the AF a ton of TA money. I do believe education is important and the O-5 board is a logical place for it to become a discriminator but the key word is education. We have created a culture that appears to value wasting our time instead of learning at least a little something of use. I was a military brat so I know that getting a BS masters is nothing new, just pick a few bios and you are likely to find a few Golden Gate University and the like. But if the AF wants to continue to value education, they should at least care about the degree to some extent. Does the OLMP carry any weight with boards/SR? I would think that Big Blue would value a person getting a degree from the Air Force a little bit at least.

.

Edited July 11, 2013 by TheInner

[slackline]

Personally torn on the value of an AAD. I believe the intent has morphed into a completely different animal. Originally it was to encourage critical thinking, to help develop your thinking about things other than the basic mission. Should it be a box you check, absolutely not, it should be a purposeful program that develops your ability to think about things bigger than yourself and the future. Honestly, flying is a young mans game...There is an old memo From Tooey Spaatz...paraphrasing here, but in short it says pilots in their late 40's shouldn't fly at night or fly tactical aircraft...anyway, what I am trying to say is as a young major you are probably as good as you will ever be in the jet. Yes there are old high time Lt Col's who can fly the crap out of a plane, but we MUST develop people that can move up with the bigger picture.

Its funny because a lot of the bitching on this forum is about the ancillary stuff, "I just want to fly"...well we need some people that just want to fly...but not a lot, there are lines of young people at the door who want to get in and fly. As our service gets smaller we also need folks who are able to think and lead from a strategic point of view. (Look at what happens we let the non-rated guys run the staff, they make some really uniformed decisions.)

.

I agree that flying forever isn't realistic or safe. I'm not just talking about that. The CC's I've had don't work easy hours. I don't believe anyone in a staff job should be focusing on a bogus or otherwise degree. My point was that AAD's take everyone's focus off their real mission, whatever that is at that time.

I'm 100% willing to work late nights for the mission be it flying or staff or whatever, take crap TDY's, deployments if it's necessary etc., but once you say "do all that plus get a degree" is when I say, "no thanks." If the AF decides it no longer requires my services because I wasn't willing to do that, so be it. That's not the AF I signed up for, and there will be plenty of boot licks willing to take my place. I'm nothing special, but the AF will lose a hard worker, and someone who cared. I'll find a job doing something, and my family will be happy.

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD

. Does the OLMP carry any weight with boards/SR? I would think that Big Blue would value a person getting a degree from the Air Force a little bit at least.

.

Don't have experience with that program, but it seems like that one should be one of the only ones with any real weight. Outside of a brick and mortar university that is, but who can be good at their real job, do a real degree, deploy, go TDY, and keep a family healthy at the same time? Maybe I'm way off base here, but it's just not realistic unless you sacrifice your family or sanity (for single types).

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD

[BitteEinBit]

Flying for a career (to age 65) is realistic and safe...the airlines do it all the time (granted someone in the AF would time out long before 65, but you get the point). An NMR O-6 and above flying once a month (only with an IP nonetheless) for currency and to build hours to put a new airframe on their resume is not safe, but we do it all the time. Forcing our youngest aviators to focus on everything but their primary job of flying is very dangerous...but we do that also.

Yes, the Air Force needs strategic leaders and if rated officers want to take that route, stop flying and leave that to the younger guys who "just want to fly." In all my years of flying, I've had exactly 1 OG and 1 WG/CC who were fully qualified in the aircraft and didn't require an IP to fly their once-a-month hours-building sorties. The OG was actually an IP and a very good one at that.

Can the Air Force afford a bunch of passed over Majors to fly through 20 years of service or do we get more bang for the buck with the senior Captains and junior Majors? From a fiscal perspective, probably not the most cost effective, but real question is can the Air Force afford NOT to have those experienced aviators training the newest pilots given our current climate and "focus?" Chances are, those crusty passed over Majors flew their whole careers and didn't worry about things other than their primary job so they're probably good at it. Nowadays, the chances are the senior guys and the "young Captains" who are supposed to be training these new pilots focused on AADs and PME moreso than the mission during their developmental years all while we non-continued our experience. So, Yes...in that regard, that is dangerous.

For Liquid's question...AADs shouldn't be masked for O-5 and of course it is a no-brainer that PME is required at ALL levels. I just don't see the value of the AAD before that point unless, like others have said in earlier posts, the Air Force has sent someone to an actual brick and mortar school to specialize in something that will benefit the AF.

BT

Edited July 11, 2013 by BitteEinBit

[17D_guy]

I still think we need different promotion boards for different career fields. I don't think 13S, 13N, 17D, 61S, 62E, 63A and a few others should even make major without an AAD. We have plenty of time and opportunity to complete a degree as Lts and Capts, and honestly these career fields should be required to pursue degrees that are relevant to their AFSC. I got an MS in Space Studies that directly contributed to my operational knowledge and proficiency. Our engineers that have AADs in their fields save the Air Force millions of dollars with unique solutions to anomalies and better ways to operate.

Rated folks on the other hand don't have the time nor need for an AAD until O-5 maybe even O-6 boards. So, to answer your question, it really depends on AFSC IMO.

Edit: Why does the Air Force have separate boards for JA, BSC/Med, and Chaplains but not differentiate between rated/non-rated? Are they not just as different and unique as the separate boards we already have?

I wanted to disagree with you at first, but solely for the sake of the 17DA folks. However, I don't know what they do, so I can't speak to their time requirements. I know their initial school is more intense and then they disappear into the ether. The few that I've met go TDY a lot. They also talked about getting out since they didn't want to do a "normal" comm job.

I know getting a TUI/Toro degree would be what most of my peers are going on now. I've enrolled in an upper ranked Info Assurance program at a local brick and mortar, but could be getting screwed out of my 4th year at my assignment and may have to transfer a year+ worth of work to a diploma mill.

I'll never be CSAF, nor will gravedigger, nor my finance buddy who med DQ'd from UPT. I don't know why we promote together. Has it always been this way?

At the same rank we're generally doing different jobs, with different leadership expectations. I can't tell at what level we become parallel in rank/responsibility senior O4? O5?

Edited July 11, 2013 by 17D_guy

[BitteEinBit]

Joe, that is a good idea. I've always been a fan of increasing our reserve rated forces for continuity...but did you know a twice passed over officer on active duty has to get a waiver to go to the reserves and continue service? Granted, I've never seen anyone denied the waiver, but that is my point...why have a waiver in the first place?

I think it would be in the best interest of the AF if they started strategically increasing the rated officer numbers on the ARC side of the house...make it easy for your bubbas to make the transition. Joe is right, you retain experience and continuity at a discount You'll be glad you did it in a few years.

[DFRESH]

I still think we need different promotion boards for different career fields. I don't think 13S, 13N, 17D, 61S, 62E, 63A and a few others should even make major without an AAD. We have plenty of time and opportunity to complete a degree as Lts and Capts, and honestly these career fields should be required to pursue degrees that are relevant to their AFSC. I got an MS in Space Studies that directly contributed to my operational knowledge and proficiency. Our engineers that have AADs in their fields save the Air Force millions of dollars with unique solutions to anomalies and better ways to operate.

Rated folks on the other hand don't have the time nor need for an AAD until O-5 maybe even O-6 boards. So, to answer your question, it really depends on AFSC IMO.

Edit: Why does the Air Force have separate boards for JA, BSC/Med, and Chaplains but not differentiate between rated/non-rated? Are they not just as different and unique as the separate boards we already have?

This

[slackline]

Flying for a career (to age 65) is realistic and safe...the airlines do it all the time .

BT

Tactical low level, at night, or BFM is just a bit different than the airlines.

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD

[daynightindicator]

A few puts on the different aspects of this topic.

First, I think arguing for a shake-up in the promotion process (as far as multiple looks IPZ, etc) is not what we should be focusing on. I'd rather see senior raters receive better guidance from their superiors - i.e., "do not use X/Y/Z as discriminators for stratification." I don't want to handcuff them too much, but multiple stories in this thread have proven that many SRs just don't get it and are making bad decisions.

Second, Big Blue needs to make a final decision on if and when they want their officers to have an AAD. No more "highly recommended" or "implied through promotion stats" or any of that BS. Just come out and say whether it is a requirement or not and for what rank. I would assume that most senior leaders want their O-4s to have an AAD. The merits of that can be debated but I'd rather just have a definitive answer.

My compromise on the whole thing would be...(assuming the "majors should have an AAD" would be the policy)...

- Make it mandatory for all rated and select non-rated officers to finish the Air University Online Masters in order to be selected for promotion to O-4. Benefits to this would be that the Air Force controls the curriculum and can adjust it as conflicts and doctrine evolve. The course content is applicable to all rated officers (better understanding of joint organization, command and control, leadership and history). It's free, no ADSC is incurred, and doing this might help run the diploma mills out of business (who take about $700M tax dollars from the American public per year in TA/GI Bill money).

- Open the eligibility for the program to O-3 pin on date. This gives members 4 years or so to finish the program prior to the O-4 board. It's only 11 8-week classes (88 weeks of class but you have 208 weeks to complete). This allows plenty of time to take a class, take a break for a deployment or high-tempo time period, then pick it up again later. The classes honestly don't take up too much time, and occasionally you even learn something useful.

- Let SRs know that they cannot use GPA or date of completion during stratification. Allow the board to see only whether or not the member has completed the program.

- Eliminate SOS and ACSC corr since the program teaches all this anyway.

Again, this is a COMPROMISE. I hate AADs as much as the next guy but I think this is a fair meeting point that would satisfy Big Blue's desires while minimizing negative impact to the average rated officer.

That's my .02, I know some will disagree.

[Gravedigger]

I wanted to disagree with you at first, but solely for the sake of the 17DA folks. However, I don't know what they do, so I can't speak to their time requirements. I know their initial school is more intense and then they disappear into the ether. The few that I've met go TDY a lot. They also talked about getting out since they didn't want to do a "normal" comm job.

I've worked with A-shreds and I'm pretty familiar with what they are doing on a daily basis. I think it's great as a B-shred that you are working towards an IA degree, I think that fits well and will pay off. The 17DXAs on the other hand really need to get deep into Computer/Software Engineering, CS, and EE. They can get a lot better at their jobs by really understanding the 1s and 0s and the micro level of cyber ops. The things they are doing to contribute to the fight are great, but without smart people, we will fall behind. We aren't the only country that has realized how much cyber can accomplish.

Break. Rant on.

In 2001 a commission led by Rumsfeld, Peter Teets and others formed to evaluate the management of space professionals, and recommended that the selection, education and training should be modeled after the Navy nuclear program. Well, September 11th happened and priorities quickly shifted away from space cadre management to fighting terrorism, and justifiably so. The result, however, has been a career field manned with the less-than-stellar cadets from each of the commissioning sources, and absolutely no focus on technical expertise.

While pilots receive world-class specialized training that fills in any gaps in knowledge they might need to perform their duties, that has not traditionally happened in space. On the contrary, AFPC had the 13S career field as a dumping ground to send bodies, and the mass crossflow of missileers made system experts a rarity. As a result, our growth and progress has not been nearly what it could be. With new leadership, all of this has changed. Space and missiles officially split into separate AFSCs, training has been completely remodeled, and accessions must now have a technical background. Additionally, we have tons of SPEED programs, advanced courses that count as Masters classes that we attend, and multiple degree programs around the country that are specifically tailored to space operators. As a Lt or junior Capt pulling crew, you have tons of time to do school work during your swing/mid shifts, and all of the other Lts around you are working on the same classes. On top of that, what these junior officers learn during their degree programs directly relates to their jobs and makes them better operators. Moral of the story, real leaders showed up, used their positions to change things, and everything has improved.

Now compare that to the flying world. Young pilots are working their asses off to become system experts, because their lives actually depend on it. At the same time, they are getting hit over the head by leadership pushing degrees that will not contribute a single thing to mission accomplishment. They are deploying frequently and many of them are trying to deal with the stress of marriage/family at the same time. It's no wonder so many members of this forum are dissatisfied with the Air Force. Thousands of people have pushed through it and completed their AAD in spite of the other demands, but WHY? What has been the cost to the Air Force and the American public from those that choose not to deal with the bullshit any more? Are we as effective of an Air Force as we would be if no AAD was required until O-5? I would wager the answer is no. Now it's time for leaders to step up, and make some fucking changes. It's a crime that young fliers were passed over for Captain, it's a crime that they are being pushed into worthless AADs, and the leaders of the Air Force that are also pilots are waiting for what?

It is entirely possible that the Air Force could have separate promotion boards with separate requirements for different career fields, like we already do for some. How about a mission support promotion board, non-rated ops board, and rated board, in addition to the Med/JA/Ch boards? Each group sets the requirements and priorities for those in the corresponding AFSCs. It will take some work by HAF/MAJCOM/NAF staffers everywhere, but whatever they have plenty of time. It makes sense, it's good for the service, and it ensures the right people are promoted in each mission area.

/rantoff

[Rusty Pipes]

Or just save everyone a ton of time and money and accredit the UPT/UNT syllabus to a Masters Degree credit! OK... complete pipe dream, but UPT was a million times tougher than any diploma mill I've ever heard of so far! I'm sure there are lots of other programs on the same level (Intel, Space, etc).

[BitteEinBit]

Tactical low level, at night, or BFM is just a bit different than the airlines.

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD

Tac LL at night is not that hard. Not a fighter guy so I can't speak for BFM, but we're talking about dudes in their 40s....I'm not suggesting (as indicated in my post) that guys stay in until age 65. Yes, Guard/Reserve bubbas over 40 are doing BFM and Tac LL at night...and they also fly for the airlines. I guess I'm not following your counter point...

I would imagine Tac LL at night and BFM would be difficult for the young Capt who doesn't focus on it as much or doesn't get the opportunity to fly it as much...but I'd just be guessing.

[Guest ThatGuy]

Or just save everyone a ton of time and money and accredit the UPT/UNT syllabus to a Masters Degree credit! OK... complete pipe dream, but UPT was a million times tougher than any diploma mill I've ever heard of so far! I'm sure there are lots of other programs on the same level (Intel, Space, etc).

I was talking with a female friend and telling her the diplomas from my bachelors and masters degrees are sitting in my closet. That's because going through intel training and pilot training was more difficult and made me utilize more brain cells than showing up for class or logging onto a website everyday.

Edited July 11, 2013 by slick999

[Champ Kind]

I was talking with a female friend

Pics

[Guest ThatGuy]

How can a promotion board weed out certain individuals by PME completion dates if your SURF does not indicate when you completed correspondence in comparison to your peers? An officer can control when they complete PME via correspondence but they cannot control when they attend PME in residence. The SURF depicts your in residence completion date only.

[BitteEinBit]

Lots of good ideas out there, but I'm a realist. Even if we started "fixing" some of these things today, it is still going to take a while for it to take hold. Most of us will be retired before we ever see it in action. We pretty much have 18 years worth of this policy running through the ranks right now from the '95 year group to the newest year group. it will take some time to undo this...

Initially, I thought it was pretty scary that LTs fresh out of UPT were being told to get their Masters and PME done, but the more I thought about it, the more I realized that at least senior leadership is setting the expectation up front...even if I don't agree with it. Young guys lurking and reading these forums, you know the priorities that currently exist. Even if this current leadership tells you they are finally masking AADs and you don't have to worry about it, get it done anyway. That was probably the best advice I got as a young Capt when the CSAF at that time told us we didn't need one...and yes, while it was masked for my Major's board, history has shown that there is that future CSAF out there who still thinks it is important. Don't be caught without a seat when the music stops because you didn't do what you knew was expected of you. Realize that with the Air Force drawing down you may not have a seat when the music stops so you need to keep yourself competitive.

You should all still try to be the best you can at your primary job, find time to get your AAD/PME done, make sure your ideas are heard, and most importantly have fun doing your job. Despite what some of the posters on here have indicated, the Air Force does need you and they need you to keep your head up, stay focused on the mission (yes, the mission) and take care of yourself. Don't try to fight the system by not doing what is asked of you because you want to prove a point...your point will likely not be heard.

I still think the Air Force is going to see a significant pilot shortage from all MWSs even if the AF doesn't see it coming. The one thing they have going for them is that if we get another 9-11, dudes will be coming out of the woodworks standing in line to sign up to fight again because even with all the BS, we all still love what we do and what this organization stands for. Fly safe!

BT

[busdriver]

Liquid, I don't think AAD should be a factor at all unless the AF paid said individual to go full time. I say that because presumably that individual got a degree in something useful to the AF, and that time spent away means they're not in their primary career field and not able to get leadership opportunity there. Otherwise the system encourages the easiest BS degree possible.

The AF should be sending smart dudes/dudettes to real universities to get quality degrees in things that benefit the AF. I know we send some, but if our goal is creating worldly, broadly educated future leaders, that should be the vehicle not non-sense online degrees.

PME: I think getting rid of ASBC was a bad call, SOS should have died instead. Everything taught in SOS was better placed in ASBC or at the commissioning source. The replacement for SOS should be something like the Army has: based on occupational specialty but with the opportunity to cross the streams. In other words I as an aviation dude could attend an Intel focused SDE, except in this new system I would require dudes to attend a course outside of their specialty. It would be an early exposure to other AF specialties, that would setup IDE that is focused on the Joint-Operational level of integration. Ideally there would be no correspondence at all for this level.

[ram02]

I don't think 13S, 13N, 17D, 61S, 62E, 63A and a few others should even make major without an AAD.

I get the other AFSCs, but what kind of advanced degree does a 13N need? Nuclear physics? Graduate level key turning?

[Gravedigger]

I get the other AFSCs, but what kind of advanced degree does a 13N need? Nuclear physics? Graduate level key turning?

Ha! I actually threw that one in there because with 24-hour alerts in the capsule and very little to do, how could you not have the time to knock out an AAD?

[17D_guy]

I get the other AFSCs, but what kind of advanced degree does a 13N need? Nuclear physics? Graduate level key turning?

Checklist creation.

[slackline]

Tac LL at night is not that hard. Not a fighter guy so I can't speak for BFM, but we're talking about dudes in their 40s....I'm not suggesting (as indicated in my post) that guys stay in until age 65. Yes, Guard/Reserve bubbas over 40 are doing BFM and Tac LL at night...and they also fly for the airlines. I guess I'm not following your counter point...

I would imagine Tac LL at night and BFM would be difficult for the young Capt who doesn't focus on it as much or doesn't get the opportunity to fly it as much...but I'd just be guessing.

I don't think you've ever done it at 50-100'... Different story unless you're just full of it.

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD

[slackline]

You should all still try to be the best you can at your primary job, find time to get your AAD/PME done, make sure your ideas are heard, and most importantly have fun doing your job. Despite what some of the posters on here have indicated, the Air Force does need you and they need you to keep your head up, stay focused on the mission (yes, the mission) and take care of yourself. Don't try to fight the system by not doing what is asked of you because you want to prove a point...your point will likely not be heard.

BT

Now I just feel like you're screwing with everyone. Maybe my sarcasm detector is inop, but are you really saying, "eh, just do it anyway. Why bother fighting it?" I agree that there's a chance you're screwing yourself over if you don't do it, and you can say all you want that the only reason I'm saying, "roll the dice," is because it worked out for me, but I didn't know it would at the time. I just always accepted the fact that it might not work out for promotion, but I wasn't wasting time on other crap that would make me less of a tactical expert than I should be.

Your post is an example of why it will never change. Ugh...

[BitteEinBit]

Now I just feel like you're screwing with everyone. Maybe my sarcasm detector is inop, but are you really saying, "eh, just do it anyway. Why bother fighting it?" I agree that there's a chance you're screwing yourself over if you don't do it, and you can say all you want that the only reason I'm saying, "roll the dice," is because it worked out for me, but I didn't know it would at the time. I just always accepted the fact that it might not work out for promotion, but I wasn't wasting time on other crap that would make me less of a tactical expert than I should be.

Your post is an example of why it will never change. Ugh...

I'm not screwing with anyone...it is the reality right now. There were a lot of bubbas caught with their pants down after the Gen Jumper road show because they thought AADs were a thing of the past. What I'm trying to say is there is always that future CSAF (probably lurking this board now) who will change it back. Believe me, I don't think there is a single person on this forum who thinks AADs are worthless wastes of time and money more than me. I think most of my posts on this forum address worthless AADs. Like I said in my post, even if Gen Welsh were to change it tomorrow, it is going to take a long time to get it out of our system. I said exactly what you just said, get it done because it is today's requirement, but if you choose to be a tactical expert I support that, but I'm not their commander. I won't give dudes "fight the system" advice when I know their fight won't be won or probably even noticed.

I'm glad you decided to be more of a tactical expert and not waste your time on something that doesn't benefit the AF. You also understand the potential consequences. The young dudes on this forum can make the same choice. I just want to make sure they understand the consequences. While I will continue to be vocal about the worthlessness of the AAD requirement, I'm not going to give a dude bad advice against current policy. I still put "mission first" as a priority in my post, and I stand by it.

Liquid, I don't think AAD should be a factor at all unless the AF paid said individual to go full time. I say that because presumably that individual got a degree in something useful to the AF, and that time spent away means they're not in their primary career field and not able to get leadership opportunity there. Otherwise the system encourages the easiest BS degree possible.

The AF should be sending smart dudes/dudettes to real universities to get quality degrees in things that benefit the AF. I know we send some, but if our goal is creating worldly, broadly educated future leaders, that should be the vehicle not non-sense online degrees.

PME: I think getting rid of ASBC was a bad call, SOS should have died instead. Everything taught in SOS was better placed in ASBC or at the commissioning source. The replacement for SOS should be something like the Army has: based on occupational specialty but with the opportunity to cross the streams. In other words I as an aviation dude could attend an Intel focused SDE, except in this new system I would require dudes to attend a course outside of their specialty. It would be an early exposure to other AF specialties, that would setup IDE that is focused on the Joint-Operational level of integration. Ideally there would be no correspondence at all for this level.

This ^^ Another good idea. I really hope someone is taking notes here to brief the boss...