Promotion and PRF Information

[Muscle2002]

4 hours ago, tac airlifter said:

Regardless of the viability of our strategic objectives, we simply aren't doing our best to accomplish them.  

Therein lies the problem: if the policy aims are not attainable or reasonable, then no level of effort will secure the ends.  Forcing some of those experienced operators into school and staff may actually be the remedy for the ills of the AF.  People with firsthand experience working to influence strategy...seems valid.

[tac airlifter]

1 hour ago, Homestar said:

I think he means: we're using a $138 million jet to drop a $1 million bomb on a  $20 tent killing a couple warriors for Jihad at a time but scattering all the rest of the cockroaches and creating ten more Twitter Jihadis in the process.

We are the ones choosing to use 138$ mil jet to do what simpler & cheaper platforms can do.  And we're hitting them in small numbers because we chose not to strike when they were in massive convoys in open territory.  So I copy that frustration, but that isn't an "unwinnable war," that is us making stupid decisions about how to wage war.

21 minutes ago, Muscle2002 said:

Therein lies the problem: if the policy aims are not attainable or reasonable, then no level of effort will secure the ends.  Forcing some of those experienced operators into school and staff may actually be the remedy for the ills of the AF.  People with firsthand experience working to influence strategy...seems valid.

I don't disagree, but it's presumptuous to assume the policy end is unattainable before we even give it our best shot.  And giving it our best shot means, partly, keeping our best talent in the fight.  Do you think that experienced school grad will influence national security strategy from a position on a staff?  We're already sending credible guys to staff but our approach to VEOs hasn't been changing.

 

I get where each of you are coming from, but we're all products of our experiences to some extent.  And my experience is constantly working for commanders downrange who are unwilling to change their approach but repeatedly disappointed in the outcomes.  This isn't an "I'm right & you're wrong" discussion and I appreciate your views.  Big picture all I'm saying is: after 14 years of failing to produce desired results from combat, and doing so with the most educated force in history, we might entertain the potential that something about our officer production formula is wrong since we seem to be producing people who do the same things.  And those things aren't working.  And if those things can't work.... Why aren't we producing people who have the balls to say that at expense to their career?

Also I don't want to go to staff!

[HU&W]

17 minutes ago, tac airlifter said:

We are the ones choosing to use 138$ mil jet to do what simpler & cheaper platforms can do.  And we're hitting them in small numbers because we chose not to strike when they were in massive convoys in open territory.  So I copy that frustration, but that isn't an "unwinnable war," that is us making stupid decisions about how to wage war.

I don't disagree, but it's presumptuous to assume the policy end is unattainable before we even give it our best shot.  And giving it our best shot means, partly, keeping our best talent in the fight.  Do you think that experienced school grad will influence national security strategy from a position on a staff?  We're already sending credible guys to staff but our approach to VEOs hasn't been changing.

 

I get where each of you are coming from, but we're all products of our experiences to some extent.  And my experience is constantly working for commanders downrange who are unwilling to change their approach but repeatedly disappointed in the outcomes.  This isn't an "I'm right & you're wrong" discussion and I appreciate your views.  Big picture all I'm saying is: after 14 years of failing to produce desired results from combat, and doing so with the most educated force in history, we might entertain the potential that something about our officer production formula is wrong since we seem to be producing people who do the same things.  And those things aren't working.  And if those things can't work.... Why aren't we producing people who have the balls to say that at expense to their career?

Also I don't want to go to staff!

It's been quite a few years, but there used to be a phrase written in huge letters on the wall of the USAFE HQ CAG... "War isn't won with PowerPoint.  War is won by making the enemy do powerpoint!"

[ATIS]

 

Commit forces and "winning" wars start at the top. 

Edited January 6, 2016 by ATIS
Dummy Navy guy can't figure out YouTube.

[17D_guy]

For awhile SURFs were showing RES/NON-RES for SOS after the CSAF changed the rules for attendance.  

Anyone notice they've gone back to showing RES or NON-RES indicating actual attendance?

[ThreeHoler]

SURFs always show Res and/or Corr. OPBs do not. OPBs show complete or not.

[bennynova]

Yes, surfs are not the same as OPB

 

for now, OPBs still show "complete" 

    The only way to differentiate res is by a training report

[jmathis3207]

O-4 board release 27 Jan 1200 to the public

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[bennynova]

I heard release was 0800 on Tuesday the  26th of jan

 

 

 

[stract]

usually  public release is 24 hrs after folks have been notified.  So both are probably true.

[HU&W]

Well, Mypers says 26 Jan is the public release date, but it doesn't list a time.  We'll see in about 10 days.

[zmoney]

Commanders will notify affected officers on the public release date (26-Jan).  The list will be posted on myPers on 27-Jan.

[PlanePhlyer]

When asked, my CC stated that he just received an email that the release was delayed 2 months. I'm 99% sure he is messing with me. I told him that I think he's full of $hit, he said "we'll see."  I guess he's trying to kill boredom in AETC. 

[bennynova]

Results are out

In order for PRFs for CY16 board to be made, commanders know who made it and who didn't.

 

they may deny it, but they know 

[SnapLock]

4 hours ago, bennynova said:

Results are out

In order for PRFs for CY16 board to be made, commanders know who made it and who didn't.

 

they may deny it, but they know 

Prove it.

[ThreeHoler]

The list always gets out about a week before public release. Usually through the bro network.

[Spoo]

8 hours ago, SnapLock said:

Prove it.

I know it's completely unfathomable, but perhaps the Air Force has a plan to give Commanders SA?  You know, so they aren't blindsided and are better able to inform their folks and deal with the good or bad consequences?  There's a reason it's called a PUBLIC release.   

Edited January 20, 2016 by Spoo

[bennynova]

This is one of the few years where a board result has been delayed and the next board has been moved earlier by 5 month, so they overlap

wing kings don't want their people spinning their wheels making PRFs for those they don't have to

 

its a lengthy process

 

Edited January 20, 2016 by bennynova

[celtic020]

List is definitely out.  Bro Comms are occurring.  Texts are being sent....

[Duck]

Metrics (unconfirmed RUMINT) to spread. All pilots with DPs were promoted. 78% of pilots with a P and SOS complete were promoted. 27% with a P and APZ were promoted.

[jmathis3207]

Any word on CSO APZ

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[ThreeHoler]

I just saw the first "yay got promoted" post in my Facebook feed. Apparently at least one CC is notifying people pre-release.

[Guest]

I saw one too, but it was for promotion to O-3

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Because we all know that is an accomplishment.

[di1630]

Yeah but these are millenials...they have been celebrating "participation awards" since their pee-wee soccer days as if they were in the NFL draft.

[celtic020]

Might not have been a CC...Wing execs, MLR recorders, etc have the list.