Leaderboard

Sounds like the O-5 board Minority Report-ed your ass. It’s all starting to make sense now...

I stayed at the Turnberry last year. I've been stopping in Prestwick to/from deployments since 2002. We just tell the FBO when and how many people, and they make the arrangements. Last year we arrived right after a snow/ice storm that shut most of the major freeways for days. All of the hotels in Ayre (our usual location) and Glasgow were booked. The Turnberry, an hour drive away, had enthusiastically agreed to give us the government rate. The hotel itself was absolutely incredible and the staff thanked us profusely for our service. The bartender let us sample some of the local Scotch whiskeys. It was too cold for golf, but we toured the course which was an old WWII pilot training base, and some of the old runways/taxiways still exist on the course. The hotel called in a bagpiper to play us out the door as we departed for the sandbox at 5am. It was one of the best deployment sendoffs ever. There was nothing to it other than it was the only place with rooms available at the government rate, and the FBO was proud to have found a place that they thought we would enjoy. The media and politicians are idiots.

Thanks Obama

Keep posting because I want to see another success story.

To Moose 🥃🍻

...and when a UPT Wing Commander's job effectiveness wasn't measured using graduation rate.

Huggy, are you saying that the DoD could do a markedly better job at managing its almost trillion dollar annual budget? Does anyone have the shocked Pikachu meme handy? Maybe I'm biased due to my own cynicism. I agree with you and Clark in theory. In practice, even if there were one or two Flags that wanted to make that happen, it's not enough to turn the ship around. It's like Chuck Spinney said, "You can't simultaneously have high tech tinker toys AND have a high operational tempo." To bring this full circle: What's wrong with us? We're bankrupt of leadership. The people making the decisions on our behalf need to account for the fact that historically, even with a lower budget than we've got today, we were able to keep dudes flying 5 days a week.

This discussion misses the other end of the problem. Yeah, the platform might be fine, but how does the logistical system work? Are the light aircraft going to be on the ATO? Who schedules? Who works dip clearances? Who deconflicts port capacities? Yeah, the ability to carry palletized cargo is awesome, but if no one is on the other end to offload that cargo because the port is working a C-5/C-17/C-130, then your stuff is sitting and waiting on the ramp. What level of command will have their own organic lift? If you push it too low, it'll be like the Haiti humanitarian airlift a few years ago, when you had a bunch of private companies and NGOs trying to fly their Cessna 208s or light jets to drop off a couple boxes, which prevented larger aircraft from bringing a significantly larger amount of cargo. Or it'd be like dodging Army helicopters in theater. I think the reason we don't have light cargo is because the cost and the operational and support footprint required doesn't match the need. If a unit truly needed a widget and their mission was absolutely critical to the combatant commander, it'll get there fast. The hard truth is that most units can wait for the normal supply system, but don't want to.

We handle all 50 states and I do a lot of business in OH! Per the VA, "if you paid a funding fee at closing ..... and your VA compensation award provides an effective rating date that is prior to your loan closing date, then you may be eligible for a funding fee refund." Not sure the timing would work for you? Depends on when you close and how far into the process you are... Let me know if I can be of any more help! Amy

ADOS is/used to be used for part time dudes (or technicians) looking to go sit ACA in a title 32 status. ANG AvB (Aviation Bonus) started a new tier last year that allowed DSGs who were on continuous 1-year sets of orders in support of ACA get a 15k bonus. You’re still technically a DSG (not an AGR, not a tech, but on 365 days of orders). The DSG bonus is for no-joke part time officers (though you can be on continuous orders for it as well). Only some AFSCs can get it (11*) can. It’s for four-years of being a DSG, 20k up front. I tried to max perform and sign the 1-year DSG AvB and the DSG bonus at/around the same time. Was denied (“no stairway?”) when Change 2 of the DSG bonus said AvB guys were ineligible. cant tell you which one is better for you. You might be able to get both if you work it differently. DSG bonus has a TIS limitation where as to get the DSG AvB you just have to be done with your initial UPT commitment.

Also: if you take 1+year of ADOS orders (still a DSG) and sign the 1-year AvB, you are unable to sign the 4-year DSG bonus (as of Change 2). Dumb.

Well I'm sure we'll see the light airlift platform mother blue buys sitting on the ramp next to the light attack (AT-6B/Super -T/whatever) at a deployed location someday soon.... (yeah, right)

Before anyone asks, it was sent to me by a bud in the UK...

If you’re in flight suit version of OCP, don’t blouse.

Coming up on 30, actually. My old U-2 squadron has had guys deployed continually for over 29 years to the Middle East, starting with Taif in 1990. It's not like there is another squadron that they can trade off with.

Been a few months, but maybe my experience can help. LOR are very beneficial, especially when coming down to the wire on a interview or hire basis. Having someone of significance in an industry or who can attest to your piloting and/or professionalism is great. Thankfully I was and am fortunate enough to have met some very helpful people within the community (prior/current military aviation). If you can get a hold of someone who flew (or currently flies) in the AF and build a great relationship with them, then ask for a LOR. Being an older candidate doesn't make it more difficult, in fact, I think it's been beneficial to network and build relationships with people who may lead me in their flight formation someday. Key take-away: Don't let the age thing be a looming factor, especially with letters of recommendations, just get yourself out there. @SLeon_17 Agree with what @N730 stated, unless it was asked otherwise, I kept a generic "Dear Sir/Ma'am," so I didn't have to request a signed copy from my recommenders every time I applied to a new squadron.

You're welcome! Elena did a great job as always. I still can't believe that local guy was over 1% higher than us. We see tons of quotes from lenders across the country and that was one of the worse. We usually beat everyone but that one was not even a competition. Thanks for trusting us to take care of you and your family! We're always happy to quickly sanity check any rates people are getting quoted without a mass of paperwork or credit pull. Jon 850-377-1114 or jk@mythl.com Sorry, no OH yet. Marty is pushing to get us licensed in as many states as we can over the next year, but it can be a slow process in some states. Banks are automatically licensed in every state. I'll ask around for a good OH lender referral for you. Amy is right on the funding fee stuff. Based on your scenario, you won't be able to get it refunded if you close on the refi before the disability award date next year. The VA is trying to push through claims if you're buying a house so that the award is prior to closing even if you can't get your check until after your official separation or retirement date. You can apply up to 180 days prior to separation/retirement which can definitely help people as they transition out and need to buy a house but want to avoid the funding fee. https://www.va.gov/disability/how-to-file-claim/when-to-file/pre-discharge-claim/

Ohio posts all of their jobs (to include pilot positions for the C-130s, KC-135s, and F-16s) to their state government website. The boards (from what I've been told) are usually June or July-ish for the F-16s. The other boards are slightly earlier in the year.

You guys sure think highly of yourselves. I'm out.

To piggyback on this thread with similar questions, I'll be hitting 17 years of service this November. Currently ANG tanker dude. O-5 ROPMA for me is Oct '20. My plan is to start the 1288 process this Fall and shoot for a Cat-E job by early '20. I was rushing my local CAP unit who said they were planning on hiring quite a bit more this coming year, but I haven't talked to the CC in 3 months or so. Hopefully this hiring freeze spoken about in a previous post doesn't last too long. My question is, if ROPMA for me is Oct '20, is bailing in early '20 too early for me?

You’re 100% spot on. I spoke with Chief Wright recently and was underwhelmed. He genuinely believes that quote. Results don’t matter, only attitude. It’s based on the theory that a proper attitude will eventually produce results, but he can’t articulate that and within a bureaucracy lacking accountability the quote is correct on its surface. Gents, the USAF will not improve the way it treats people. It doesn’t care about you. They hear your comments, and don’t care enough to pay you better or change their policies. People on these forums are generally aircrew with a culture of caring about results. The Air Force does not care about your results and they don’t care that you care about results. They just want you to act happy and smile and have a thin waist, they do not care if you lose wars. The sooner you grasp the nature of our service culture the sooner you can be at peace with your decisions within it, or your decision to leave it.

Chief Wright posted this quote on his FB and now I understand the AF’s pilot shortage strategy! “Success is the ability to go from failure to failure without losing your enthusiasm.”

If only there were a 600 year old, well developed, universally respected [sans the military] field of study that could neutralize emotion and very accurately spit out a number (that would look a lot like the RAND study number) to change behavior in a group. Economics in the military: “yeah, yeah... but the value of quality of service is up to you. If it isn’t valuable enough to change your mind, you’re not patriotic enough.” Economic behavior is a natural force. Keep trying to defy gravity, big blue. Your experience will watch the show from our new boats.

I also have given up on the AF actually caring about fitness....as I have gone a decade struggling to get a 90 or almost fail because of the waist but can still run around a 10 min 1.5 mile (sometimes 10+, sometimes in the mid 9's). I still lose 7+ points on my score due to the waist alone. I got numb years ago to the out of shape little people getting better scores than me.

USAF PFT should not be that complicated. Push-ups Sit-ups (or timed plank) 1.5 mile run Get rid of the waist measurement!

Shack. There’s A LOT of cynical sport bitching on here. Not saying there isn’t an element of truth to some of it, but young guys should absolutely pursue flying in the military. It will most likely be an awesome experience and a 1000% better way to spend your 20s flying than slugging through regionals.

I'm baffled why any new hopeful pilots even consider the Air Force after visiting this site.

I’m not sure if this book has been posted on here, looked through and couldn’t find it. Just finished the audiobook and was pretty impressed. Goes into the air war in Vietnam from an F-4 pilots perspective.

I’ve been devastated ever since I heard the news early Sunday. What a tragic loss. Hook was such an inspiring person. I got the pleasure of flying with him a few times years ago at the Eglin Aero club. Here is a pic of when he asked me to join him to fly his Champ to a local Fly-in. Nickel on the grass.

My sortie got canx’d and I’m bored, no pics of boobs on my phone but hoping if I restart this 6.9yr old thread maybe some of you have additions. Sent from my iPhone using Baseops Network mobile app

My dad flew tankers, fighters, and helos. It can be done and has been done by quite a few people. Some dudes in tankers now would make great fighter pilots. Some pilots flying fighters now should be on tankers. Your assignment out of UPT is exactly that; an assignment. It’s not your destiny.

No. Also to race Reno, the aircraft cannot be "swept wing". Lots of L-39's and one L-139. I expect an L-159 will eventually get there. A few years back, the Snowbirds finished their 9-ship demo, and instead of landing, they all took off for the pylons and did a lap. It was hilarious, and they had a good time. The jet course is small enough that if a "modern" and much faster jet flies it, it will be a constant 6+ G's around the course. 1B.

RUMINT from the March mishap was that 4 hit 3.

FWIW one of the c-17 crossflow guys was DG at IFF.

2!! Very good series. Separate but related is nearly anything by James Hornfischer. He writes USN in the Pacific during WWII stuff. Haven't read a bad one yet. In particular, "Last Stand of the Tin Can Sailors" is amazing.

Been a while since I was at OTS but what I remember is: You'll be paid as an E-5 (unless you're already above E-5, then you get your current pay). You will get BAH for where ever your dependents are while you are at OTS/TFOT. I think you also get an initial uniform allowance of ~$400, but that could have been because I was an off-the-street civilian and not a prior-E. I don't think you get any per diem at OTS since the housing and food is all provided for you. You should start getting flight pay on day one of class at UPT.

I believe you are correct, yearly on your "anniversary". I completed another year last week, so hopefully mine will be updated. Sent from my iPhone using Baseops Network Forums

Can you explain further? There are different types of duties you can earn retirement points for while in the ARC, and indeed there's a limit to inactive duty points in one year (130). But points are points, once they're earned they all count the same. To get an active retirement, you need 7300 points and at least 20 good years, whether on AD or in the ARC 20 years of active service, whether on AD or in the ARC or a combination. To earn a reserve retirement you need at least 20 good years and once you decide to hang up your spurs your check depends on how many points you earned. http://militarypay.defense.gov/Pay/Retirement/ http://militarypay.defense.gov/Pay/Retirement/ActiveDuty.aspx http://militarypay.defense.gov/Pay/Retirement/Reserve.aspx Edit to add: fixing stuff that is wrong

@Ebony zer Not sure you got good gouge on how points work brother. Points are points when counting toward retirement. Whether it's the 4 points you earn over a drill weekend, the 83 points you earn for ACSC, or 365 points for a year's worth of Title 10 orders, they're all the same. This article is excellent at explaining how the system works. If you reach 7300 points (i.e. 365 points x 20 years), you collect your retirement right away just like if you were AD. If not, assuming you have 20 good years (good year = > 50 points), then you get a reserve retirement that you don't collect right away and that is calculated based on whatever points total you have when you retire. On your other advice, you're right that ACSC is necessary to make O-5, but you can be an O-4 for 8 years so it's not like you need to rush and knock it out on AD unless you're bumping up against that window. I would also forward that OPRs have been entirely meaningless in the Guard both in my (limited) experience and in that of much more senior dudes I've tried to learn from. It's a small, insestous family at whatever unit you're in and your reputation for quality work and being a good dude is what carries you forward rather than wordsmithing a "great" OPR. Also, as @nunya said, most dudes are finding ways to complete that PME while on pay status, so you're still doing the work somewhat on Big Blue's time while you're getting paid to be there, and you also earn the 83 points on top of whatever you earn money and points-wise just for being there at the squadron. Edit to add: One wrinkle is that there's a limit to the number of inactive duty points you can earn in a single year (130 is the current limit). That would be relevant if you maxed out UTAs (48 points), AFTPs (48 points) and did ACSC (83) in the same year. Even doing ACSC and all your drills, i.e. not working any AFTPs, you're at 131 points so I guess one of those points won't end up counting. All this to say, if you want to maximize your points for effort calculation, try to do ACSC on a year where you're working other types of active orders i.e. you're lighter on inactive duty time anyways so as to not go over the limit and waste those points. However also try not to do it in a year where you're on Title 10 the whole time if you don't have to, since the most points anyone can earn in a year is 365 or 366 for a leap year. Edit to add more: crossing out stuff that is wrong

A valid question; here's my opinion based on my involvement as an AF O-6 at NSA working airborne programs for the Asst Dep Director for Operations, Military Affairs and post- retirement as a civilian in OSD (DARO, OUSD/ISR, and NIMA/NGA)at the time The answer is that in the very early 90s, Bill Lynn, the Director of DARPA (actually named "ARPA" at that point but returned to its original title of "DARPA" later in the 90s), and Bill Perry, the DepSecDef (not sure if they were in those exact positions in the very beginning, but by mid-90s they were) believed that unmanned aircraft had the potential to revolutionize airborne operations, starting with ISR, by reducing personal exposure to threats, enabling extended ISR (long duration ops) and save money by reducing the manpower costs in the systems. Additionally, they believed that a new acquisition concept called the Advanced Concept Technology Demonstration (ACTD) could speed up the introduction of new systems from the current (in the 90s) and painful 15-20 years. The idea was to marry up the contractor side and the government side early in the development cycle to better work out operational issues while designing the vehicles (sounds good...didn't work!). They married the two ideas and DARPA initiated the High Altitude Endurance (HAE) and Medium Altitude Endurance (MAE) programs in 1994. The HAE program envisioned two platforms; a high altitude "U-2-like" vehicle and a smaller low observable, craft for better penetration of highly defended areas, referred to as "tier 2+ and "Tier 3-" in their concept terminology. The MAE program started with an existing much less capable unmanned RPA called the "Gnat", built by General Atomics for another purpose. You'll note here that this effort was a DARPA technology development effort, not an acquisition effort responding to an approved DoD mission need. In fact, the Air Force was not particularly enamored with the idea of unmanned mission aircraft and did not support the effort; there was no AF money or manning in the POM to support it. In fact the HAE program plan itself says there is only one required outcome...and let me quote from the ARPA 6 Oct 1994 ver 1.0 HAE CONOP..."A dominant objective of the HAE UAV program is to obtain the maximum capability possible for a set, non-waiverable Unit Flyaway Price (UFP); accordingly, while there are performance objectives, the only requirement that must be met is the UFP." In other words, it doesn't have to do anything except fly, hold a camera, and cost less that $10 million a copy; no operational needs have to be satisfied. To many in the system, the real effort was for DARPA to develop the new acquisition concept, using the HAE and MAE as exemplars. The AF eventually got the aircraft because the outcome of an ACTD was to be either: 1) a failed program, so cancel it, 2) showed promise, so move on and correct issues, or 3) Provide program residuals to the eventual user (AF in this case) for them to decide to either keep and operate or dump. The ARPA and SECDEF seniors decided it flew, collected something, and (sort of) met the UFP goal (at about $15.5 each), so they chose option 3 and passed it all to the AF (both HAE and MAE, although the DarkStar segment of HAE was cancelled after it crashed on flight 2. Why they kept it was the usual case of political and industrial influence, I guess. Some of us suggested the best course of action was to dump the Global Hawk because it met few operational needs, would cost too much to upgrade (if it could ever be upgraded...too little space, too little power, too little payload), and met few of the original desired capabilities, We felt it would be cheaper to take the money and start with a clean sheet design, using the knowledge gained to drive the new (unmanned) platform (which we referred to as "Global Truck"). The estimated $200-400 million extra was consider too much money by leadership, so we stay on the "cheap" track...which I suspect has cost us an extra $5-8 Billion by now (just my guess). As for the ACTD experiment, it hit a few bumps, too. When the Predator program was turned over to the AF and told to operate it, they found the DARPA program provided no money or manpower in the DoD budget to do so, no tech data was ever developed for the Service (it was all contractor proprietary) so they couldn't fix it, no ground control systems built except the contractor's test stuff so they couldn't deploy or fly it fly, No additional money was provided by DoD or Congress to the AF so the AF started a program called "Predator 911" to find money (to operate and buy support) and manpower, and facilities, "robbing" it from the current and future years budgets, causing major disruptions for years. As for GH, the idea of killing the U-2 and replacing it with the GH didn't float either, because the GH had practically no operational capability as delivered and it took a decade to develop the RQ-4B with more capability and slightly better sensors. So, that's why we have it! BTW, as far as Perry and Lynn were concerned, the success of unmanned systems since then probably indicates their vision was a success, and I can't really argue that they'd be wrong. Its all in your perspective.

Vance 15-05 incorporated the speech into their patch. There appears to be multiple versions of the speech. In one, he said "dare mighty things" instead of "daring greatly." The rest of the patch is WWII nose art from some pilot training base.

The ground force commander doesn't understand anything aviation that the BAE cell doesn't feed him through AGI power point and the occasional steaming shit laid in a briefing by what is typically a CW5 with nothing to lose and enough experience nobody questions it. Seriously I'm saying that as an Army Aviator. Nobody is going to care what is dropping bombs. We care that bombs are being dropped. Just like it was never a question of whether they had 58s or 64s assigned as their time blocked teams despite the shortcomings in sensors, ordnance, and station time with the 58. Nobody is gonna stop the show because the CAS came back as F-16 assigned even though your Assistant S3 specifically put in 30mm forward firing on the CAS request to game the system and get Hawgs. The mission will go on. We did CAS (real no shit non OEF CAS) Before the Hawg, during the Hawg with other airplanes, and will someday do it after the Hawg has been put out to pasture. Honestly you guys should be jumping at getting into a new airplane like the F-35 before all the "other guys." Build that culture from the ground up day 1 with your experience so that CAS doesn't become problem number 53 to solve later ... Someday... On short notice because we put it off so long learning X, Y, & Z.

Because the B-1 isn't single-role the way you describe it. The ability to perform stand-off weapons, conventional munitions, dynamic targeting, naval mining, low altitude strikes, and yes, CAS, outweigh what the A-10 will be able to do on days 1-10 of a war with a near-peer

I just had my IFC1 a couple of weeks ago and everyone out there was awesome. The Flight Doc's were really cool. Everyone worked with you. If you have a problem they'll just make you retake the test. They aren't there to end your career, they're there to evaluate whether or not you can fly an airplane. We had about 30 guys in our class and I don't know of a single wash out. The optometrist was really really nice too. I could tell that she genuinely cared about all the applicants. They will tell you if you require a waiver, and what the odds are for that waiver. The only thing that I didn't like was that everyone administering the tests would not give you your results. This is probably a good thing though, to keep applicants from over stressing because you're going to be stressed enough. Don't stress out over it. There is a sandwich shop upstairs where you can buy lunch for all you guard and reserve dudes that aren't fortunate enough to receive one of those nifty boxed lunches like the ROTC guys. I do suggest looking up AFI 48-123 SUP 1. You can find it on epubs. This is where they get EVERYTHING. Knowledge is power, in the event that there is an issue. The worst part about it, to be honest, was the psych eval. A 4 hour computer test. Nothing cosmic, but really boring. I was in and out in a day and a half. Before going I starting nitpicking things out with myself as potential problems and it lead to stressing out and it wasn't worth it. Just take it easy and relax. Like I said, its nothing cosmic. With the things you can control, you already have under control. With the things you don't have control over, you can't change anyway. Make sure you don't have cavities!! If you have one it is not disqualifying but they hold your FC1 until you can provide proof that you have had it fixed. Make sure you drink a lot of water! If you are dehydrated, itll show + for protein. They'll just make you retake it but its not worth the hassle. All blood work and urinalysis is done at the hospital, everything else is done in area B of the base at the ACS ( Aeromedical Consultation Services). For the dudes that are driving, get the numbers of the other guys there and go to dinner that night. Just relax, shoot the shit, and have a good time with the guys. Don't drink alcohol because its just not worth screwing anything up. At least that's how we saw it. I don't suggest it but I'm not your mommy. There are quite a few restaurants around the area. You will wait in a break room for most of the time. They have a 50 inch on the wall for you to watch but you'll most likely be spending time talking to other dudes that are there as well. Don't sweat the red lens test, I think I saw something on that earlier. It's common sense, and the tech explains everything to you very clearly. You shouldn't screw it up. Also, no news is good news! If you don't hear anything, that's because they don't need you to hear anything. You're fine! I'm sorry if this is all over the place but I was just writing things down as I remember. If you have any questions about the appointment just PM me. I can't tell you anything about the tests but about the appointment in general I'd be glad to help you out. Again, DON'T STRESS and Good Luck!

Reading comprehension. Get it. He didn't say pay for, he said responsible for. A libertarian would rather help someone get on their feet rather than paying for them... but by putting in that effort they are still acting as a responsible party for that person. That's what society is all about. Now go up to the chalkboard and write the phrase "I will work on my reading comprehension" 100 times.

Thanks for the link, may I quote one particualr line from it? "A compassionate society will find other ways to help people who need temporary assistance" That sounds eerily similar to my line: "A libertarian would rather help someone get on their feet rather than paying for them... but by putting in that effort they are still acting as a responsible party for that person. That's what society is all about." So, in other words, thanks for backing me up and showing what I was saying was in line with the official libertarian party stance. In a society we are all, in one way or another, responsible for everyone else.

Are you seriously asking a bunch of randos on the internet what to do with the rest of your life? If this was your first ride at UPT, you’d hook for SA and judgement/decision making. You should probably stay at Lockheed Martin.

When does Homstead hold their boards for UPT? And does anyone have gouge on the fort worth unit reserve group?