Rusty Pipes

Looks like we have our Pentagon "Pride Month" POC volunteer! This whole thing is just weird...

1. You don't even need that incentive; just take away the threat that if you don't spend it this year you won't get it next year. "So your X budget was $100K this year and you have $30K left? Cool, here is $70K... you did a great job saving the taxpayer $30K!" 2. The flying hour program "zero out" policy is the epitome of inefficiency, but the fact that Liquid seemed surprised that this is even happening leads me to believe this won't be changing anytime soon. 3. Bite your tongue... for every TCN working at the Deid we obviously need 3 TCN escorts!!! Next thing you'll be saying we should create an organization that can control worldwide Tanker and Airlift assets from a centralized CONUS location at... I don't know, maybe Air Mobility Command headquarters!!! That would save hundreds of people from deploying to the CAOC every year, but is obviously pipe dream crazy talk to think we could ever have an organization like that!!!

You aren't seriously saying that this surprises you or that you think this is uncommon... are you? When I was in UPT I had the Sq DO come into our empty flight room on 30 Sept where I was sitting duty dawg and asked if there were any IPs around... when I said they were all flying he asked if I was sitting on CAP or a busted ride and then asked for my gradebook. He took a look at it and then told me he needed me to go see the Major at the Ops desk and that I was going to go fly a 1.2 "free flight"... "I don't care if you fly a 1.1 or a 1.3... you WILL log a 1.2!" Not gonna lie to you... was the most fun I had in a Tweet in UPT! Point is that since then, every Sept that I was a Sq scheduler, Wing Scheduler, ADO, etc in three airframes and 3 different MAJCOMs we did the exact same thing... and at the same time I'm answering calls from A3V answering the mail as to why Capt Snuffy landed at Bagram with 10K lbs more fuel than he was supposed to three weeks ago as part of the "fuel savings initiative". You are obviously a very smart guy and know this will change with airframe/MAJCOM, but I'm sure thinking back to your Ops Sq days you'll remember that it isn't always about scheduling smarter or better. You don't just need pilots there you need the right pilots there... and you also need jets there for these right pilots to fly. NOT zeroing out the flying hour program and just saying "training complete" was not an option. I've been on a staff tour for 2 years and things may have changed, but having a couple IP/EP types (because nobody else was around) burning dinosaurs for a 5.7 in the pattern on 30 Sept was pretty standard just to make the PowerPoint slide good. (Sorry to jump off the main topic... just wondering if this is still happening and if it ever gets above the Wing Level)

"But I'm a Captain... an A1C can't give an LOR to a Captain!?!" "Sir, I got two Bronze Stars for working in Finance at Al Udeid and Manas... Not only am I a Warrior, I'm pretty sure I outrank you now! Oh, the second LOR is for not having your Masters... scumbag!"

Point was more about what TreeA10 made, not the same discussion as in the thread you linked. Blows me away that a sitting Sq Commander would take the time to purpously take away from the focus of the mission to use those under their supervision to conduct a "gotcha" social experiment. She has no business commanding anything… yet this behavior is celebrated by the Big Blue management. She purposly put the picture on an Officer's desk in a predomenantly enlisted environment… for what purpose? Are we training the future "sock checkers" in the AOR at the E-1 through E-3 level?

This is why Finance is always closed for "training" apparently… Unbelievable! http://www.vance.af.mil/news/story.asp?id=123368125 Senior Air Force leaders have made clear that sexual harassment and sexual assault have no place in today's Air Force. One local commander decided to go beyond briefings and PowerPoint slides and try to catch her people doing the right thing. "I wanted to see if anyone in my unit would say something about a questionable photo in the work place," said Mazza. She picked the lieutenant's desk because she thought an airman would be easier to approach than the new officer in the organization. It needed to be a challenge for her people.

So do you agree with this then, Liquid? Its on the base webpage so it is obviously being applauded by "Leadership"… http://www.vance.af.mil/news/story.asp?id=123368125

Agreed... WTF was he thinking? I can't imagine he had any great love for the Air Force after being dragged through a court martial and the events that followed. I'm sure there are details that none of us know about that led to him staying and thinking everything would be fine, but with a giant skeleton like that in the closet why would you not cut bait? You need to be realistic here... even if his wife knew about the affair/baby you can't just say it was something that happened a long time ago and is old news; not in this environment. It isn't like he was running some illegal Texas Hold'em tournament in his basement 10 years ago... the morality police were bound to catch him on this one.

Unfortunately too many of the Sq CC's these days are not leaders themselves and are pushing to promote in their own image... and they have been pretty successful in their cloning experiments so far.

Yes and no... it depends on the Commanders. The EP upgrade in AMC is absolutely seen as a career box checker... I have yet to see a cross flow/Intern type golden boy who was not rushed to IP then EP so they could put it on a PRF and leadership was usually pretty blatant about it. With that being said, I have very rarely seen one of them be a Q-3 happy EP. I think the "bloody Form 8" tone is set by the Sq CC (sometimes the OG). When I was a Sq Chief of Stan/Eval in AMC my otherwise complete douche of a Sq CC told me that unless someone was bending metal or being unsafe that we shouldn't be talking about Q-3s. I'll give him credit for shacking that one... the year I was in the job we gave 2 Q-3s and it was for 2 co-pilots in a sim check both over speeding the "jet" and for not doing bold face (and we even had a discussion with the boss of any way we could not Q-3 the kids). I think the biggest problem in AMC comes from the old mentality still held by Commanders that "there are those who have Q-3d and those who will"... which is complete bullshit! Just an observation from my own experience here, but I usually saw that coming from a lot of bosses who spent more time worried about their PRFs and Strats than being a good pilot so they had a Q-3 or two in their own FEFs (and misery loves company). I have also seen multiple Commander directed "queep Q-3s" in AMC from the OG/CC level and below to non-golden boy crew dawgs from bosses who have a chip on their shoulder about even the idea of guys thinking about jumping ship after their ADSC is up for a possible airline job... queep they would never consider Q-3ing their golden boys for. They could care less that these guys may need to explain this Q-3 at an interview someday because if you don't want to be just like them they think you are a scum bag. I've unfortunately ran into several of those dudes over the years in the MAF.

1) 10 yrs ago I know the E-9 Chief Boom at Kadena was the senior Active Duty Boom in PACAF. Although he was stationed there vs Hickam they technically gave him the PACAF A3V Boom hat to wear... that may have changed since then, but on the books there was a MAJCOM A3V -135 Boom 2) AMC eating their own? Ummm yeah... I know back when they had lots of them still flying the #1 Q-3 item for Tanker Navs was for the pre-flight Oxygen check (not kidding in the slightest) and have seen pilots Q-3'd for reading something other than flight pubs crossing the pond. 3) Chiefing… Let’s not confuse someone reiterating the policy of the boss with gleefully usurping rank because they think a boss' policy or AFI gives them authority to do so. Maybe I'm a horrible officer/instructor/evaluator, but there have been lots of times where I was not the A Code (sometimes even just a pax with a crew from my base) and told the AC or one of the crew something along the lines of, "Hey, I agree that it seems stupid, but the OG/CC doesn't want us wearing ball caps (or insert stupid thing here) on the jet... if he sees you doing it you'll probably get hammered." I didn’t tell them they needed to comply; I just reminded them of the policy/view of the boss. Is it technically wrong to actually not enforce/direct it; yes... Do I care; no. BTW... I probably could have justifiably given out lots of Q-3's for checkride buffoonery over the years, but I have not given any (admittedly I’ve never had a cut and dry safety type issue though)... I have had plenty of very intense debriefs where they probably assumed they were getting hooked and learned just as much if not more as a result. My pointy nosed bros have said that is more in line with how they do it in the CAF which I think is more effective… I wish more AMC evaluators had that view.

Completely agree! CSAF was supposed to make a visit to our organization and do a Q&A with all of the AF types this summer. The POS shoe O-6 that is the Sr AF guy sent out an e-mail 2 weeks in advance making it mandatory that all AF members send him at least one question to ask CSAF so he could "properly vette the questions for appropriateness" and then notify who would be selected to ask a question. As stated earlier it is the O-5 to O-7 level that is mostly hampering progress that the Boss is trying to make... almost like the crappy GS-7 secretary that refuses to do things the Commander wants them to do because they have been around long enough to know that all they have to do is wait the Commander out and he/she will be gone soon enough. Those one on one sessions with any boss can be extremely productive when there isn't the shit screen middle management PC police there. I've had more than a few occasions where I told my supervisor something didn't work repeatedly and was told to shut up and color because they didn't want their boss to think they were complaining or because "that's the way we've always done it", but then got the O-6 or O-7 alone and when asked about the subject I said "Sir, this is stupid... why do we do it this way?"... and the Boss completely agreed and the policy was immediately changed. As much as we all bitch about the terrible managers out there we do actually have some good leaders who sometimes never get to hear the "this is stupid" from the field. They can't change it if they don't know about it.

I completely agree that we should keep giving the ACP to the school guys... they most definitely shouldn't be penalized for success. There are plenty of those who fit the mold of the current managers we have in power that couldn't lead a bowling ball down a hill, but there are also plenty of really sharp and good dudes/dudettes there as well. Up until this year there was a pretty big carrot of at least the opportunity for non-school selects to go to IDE as candidates... that is probably the most important group of pilots the AF absolutely needs to keep and it is probably going to take more than just the current ACP to get the majority of them to stay since going to School is no longer going to be an option.

VS... Not disagreeing with most of your points, but not sure the numbers worked out for this round. Unless I'm reading it wrong, just looking at the numbers per location the obvious IDE locations (Maxwell, Newport, Leavenworth... possibly Pentagon and USAFA) it looks like those are significantly more than just 20% of the total takers this year. Maybe that wasn't exactly your point. Admittedly, I could be reading the take numbers wrong too. Also, it could just be timing where this year's ACP eligibles may be on their 3rd school look where a larger percentage of that year group went to IDE as both selects and eligibles which could skew the numbers. When I say career aviator program I don't mean that signing the bonus gets you through 20 years (you're right, that is what this ACP does for the 11Fs), I mean that it would be like they do in some other Air Forces where you will be in an active flying position and actually flying for the rest of your career. If you tell me I can sign a 10 yr ADSC and be guaranteed to be actively flying then that is an incentive... ask me to sign a 10 yr ADSC where you may spend the last 5-6 yrs on Staff writing policy in a non-flying billet, not so much.

Is the purpose of the ACP to keep pilots in or is it an incentive to keep a certain group of pilots in? The AF would be dumb to not offer the ACP to someone who is a select because just being a select doesn't mean they have any intention of staying. I know plenty of guys who checked all the boxes and played the game that came out as selects that were either on the fence or had no intention of staying in for 20. I would say that it is a safe bet that the vast majority of those who take the School assignment are in it for the long haul (not to sound too obvious). If the ACP is partly to ensure they get as many of those selects to commit then that part of the ACP is very successful. If the other part of the ACP is to get people they need to actually be pilots to stay then I think they need to think of other ways besides money to give them an incentive to stay. Who knows if there is going to be this major airline hiring boom in the next few years, but there will clearly be far more flying opportunities outside of the Air Force in the next few years and we seem to be looking at what will be a pilot shortage in the Air Force. Maybe this has been done in small groups by a survey or something (I've certainly never been asked), but how many pilots have been asked the simple question... What would it take to make you stay? Money will obviously work for some so the current ACP will be somewhat effective, but they probably should look at other incentives... maybe even a combination? 1) Career aviator program that I mentioned earlier; do you think if the O-4 results came out and someone who was not a select was offered to stay in through 20 and just fly (some sort of conditional guarantee to stay flying) that they would get them to commit (essentially another 10 yr ADSC that would guarantee retirement with a shot at O-5 but that's it)? I know lots of guys who said they would have taken that in a heartbeat. They may not have to offer it to everyone, but I'll bet you would get a line of people willing to do that. 2) Optional homestead; If the AF gave you a set of orders saying you can go to Base XYZ and stay there for 5-6 years would that get someone to stay in? I might consider that for stability for my family or if I really liked the location (got it, some places nobody will want to do that). 3) AAD assignment; would you sign a 5 yr ADSC to be allowed to attend a 2 year AAD program at the University of your choosing to get a degree of your choosing? I know lots of guys who would jump at that in a second (my cousin is a West Point grad and said they have a program like that in the Army, not exactly sure of the details but he is a full time student as an O-3 right now). 4) Good deal incentive; I'm already kicking my own ass for even suggesting this (Chang/Liquid don't read this), but would it be worth a 5 year ADSC for that Gulfstream to MacDill or Hickam or maybe to fly cadets around at USAFA to some people? (standing by for lots of spears for that one). Maybe the ACP thread isn't the best place for these questions because it deals more with pilot retention for a no kidding empty cockpit pilot shortage, but the ACP is what I would see as just part of the solution to partly secure school selects for the long haul as well as normal retention with the other suggestions more targeted at keeping those who aren't necessarily on the command track from jumping ship when their initial ADSC ends (i.e. the AF actually needs pilots to be pilots). Big Blue has had pilots by the balls since 9/11 because if you really live to fly like many of us then you had no other options on the outside... based on the "If you don't like it you can leave and you'll be easily replaced" comments that many have heard first hand from multiple GOs, they knew it and have taken advantage of it. If even half of the supposed airline boom actually happens in the next few years then AF pilots will find themselves in a position that we have not been in a long time... where the AF needs us more than we need them.

You can take a lot from looking at the take numbers this year, but I don't think even Big Blue will know until next year if they need to go into panic mode or not. Lots of Guard/Reserve opportunities out there apparently based on how many of my buds (both 11M/F) I see on a weekly basis posting on Facebook that they "have made the very difficult decision to leave Active Duty". The ~20% of Kool-Aid drinkers you mention is drastically underestimated based on the obvious numbers from School/IDE locations (Maxwell, Newport, Leavenworth... even USAFA maybe). If anything I'd say the ~20% would be the actual fence sitters (just a guess). Look at the big Ops bases like Charleston/McChord, Shaw, McConnell/Fairchild, Elmendorf... what was their take rate? Even at that... how many of them were school selects who may have slipped under the wire to be eligible for the bonus this year. The other reason next year may be more telling is because 1) the bonus was released so late this year which could be a legit claim as to why a few left AD this year instead of signing... especially if they were offered an assignment and didn't want to take on the ADSC past their UPT commitment 2) unless there is a major change there will be no illusions of multiple IDE "candidates" going to school next year from your typical Ops base with what was said will basically be 1 candidate per MAJCOM getting to go (read 4 Star's non-select speech writer or something along those lines) 3) Are the Airlines actually going to start hiring guys? I'm not even talking about the huge BOOM that Butters is positive won't happen... but if 2-3 guys in the Sq get hired and easily walk next door to the Reserve Squadron then the grass will look a hell of a lot greener, especially for non-school guys. Nothing is for sure, but if you have a large Ops base that had 10 eligible for the ACP and only 5 signed I'd say it is a pretty safe bet that the AF just lost 5 IP/EPs. I'd also guess that of the 5 that did sign 2 or 3 were school selects going next year. Best case the AF got 3 fence sitters; just based on the 3 points I made above... will they get those guys next year? Who knows... but since they won't say who the target of the ACP actually is we can't really determine if it was a "success" or not. Just something to thinks about... I completely agree with you, Hoss... I don't know what the answer is, but I think they need to come up with a completely different way to attack what will surely be a major problem for our pilot force without a draconian stop loss. Throwing money at the problem certainly doesn't work... something like a Career Aviator program might. Maybe homesteading? Maybe real masters degrees programs at real schools as an incentive? Hopefully someone wearing Stars is thinking about this, but based on the solution of a 10 year bonus for just some people this year I'm not too optimistic that is happening.

Would love to hear Liquid or Chang answer this question which has been asked several times... who is the AF REALLY trying to keep with the ACP? I'm guessing the stats from AFPC are not final yet, but just the takers by base can lead to some obvious conclusions. When you look at the number of takers from places like Maxwell, Newport, Pentagon, District of Washington, Leavenworth, Monterey... being too lazy to do the math it looks like about 90 takers with one or two non-takers (unless I'm reading it wrong). I'm guessing 99% of those guys are at School or a fast burner Staff position (Pentagon). That doesn't include the high numbers from Scott, Langley, Wright-Patt, Hickam, Randolph who may be on either MAJCOM Staff or flying that took the ACP. Did the AF manage to give a bunch of money to a ton of guys who already had absolutely every intention of staying anyway? That doesn't even include the random places on that list! You never know, but I'm guessing they don't give the job in Beijing or Istriana to the guy without ACSC in correspondence done! If the goal was to keep guys who were planning on staying anyway then they hit a grand slam.

I assume that "ATP" was a typo and you meant "ACP"... but if you do look at the ATP take rate it will most definitely paint the picture of future pilot manning for the Air Force! I'd venture to say that All ATPs and Higher Power have a higher take rate than the ACP!

Champ... I would LOVE to say I were even exaggerating in the slightest, but I'm not. This jackass is the epitome of the box checking mentality (he is a shoe, which shouldn't surprise anyone). I don't have any guys in my shop that this matters to so I don't really have a dog in the fight, but the fact that there is an O-6 that is flat out promoting that an online AAD completed by a certain date (specifically as a 1 LT or young Capt) equates to leadership potential pisses me off to no end and is exactly what is wrong with the Air Force today. I absolutely agree that this extreme case is the exception to the rule, but there are approx 40 Capts (from what the Exec told me) in my Agency that this applies to who are competing for SOS in Res slots and it is very real for those poor bastards.

Not a single day in my entire career (including ROTC) have I even worn anything other than white socks with a flight suit, ABUs, DCUs or BDUs. Granted it was some SNCO and not my boss, but I was walking into the chow hall at the Deid once and had some douche E-8 First Shirt ask me if he could do a sock check on me... I said, "Hey Senior, if you want to check my socks then I'm dropping my pants right here for you to do it... and don't think I won't!" He decided that a sock check wasn't necessary... and my 1 Star boss that was in PTs who I was having lunch with had a little impromptu "counseling session" with the Shirt about harassing airmen.

That's essentially what we do anyway isn't it? My last OG/CC was doing his rack and stack for O-4 PRFs and he showed me his "criteria list" on his notes page. One of the notes said, "Non-Res SOS = Scumbag". He was laughing when he showed it to me, but not one of the non-res SOS types got a DP. So basically if this new douche bag O-6 in my agency now is saying no SOS in Res without an AAD completed he is basically telling these young Capts and Lts that if you don't do what he says and get your Masters now you probably won't make Maj and definitely won't make Lt Col. Again... he is basically requiring an effing Masters before pinning on Capt and deciding at that point who will get promoted to FGO!!!

You can't compare the two... it isn't realistic, especially for a pilot to expect an AAD for SOS. 1 Year sitting around casual waiting to start UPT, 1 year in UPT, minimum of 1 year between Land/Water survival... RTU... PCS... Mission Ready program. So now you have a 1 Lt who knows just enough to be dangerous and through no fault of his own probably sucks at flying the jet just because he is new/little flight experience and we have these douche bag Commanders basically telling them they better not only start, but finish their AAD immediately or else?!? Not sure what the 100% SOS in residence plan is, but I can tell you that we have many more Capts in our Agency that have not been than there are in resident slots... granted there is obviously a 3 year window, but with the averages there will still be a decent amount that will not be able to go unless our slots increase.

It has been the norm to tell LTs that it will be a requirement to have their Masters complete to go to SOS? What Base are you at??? OPRs and CC's ranking makes sense, but selecting who goes to SOS based on who has their Masters done has absolutely zero to do with leadership or leadership potential. This moron is essentially telling every LT in our organization that their stratification and future promotion potential will be decide by whether or not they have a Masters degree before pinning on Captain. This is exactly what is wrong with the Air Force today.

Just heard the "deciding O-6" in our Agency tell us that he will be selecting those who attend SOS in residence for his upcoming board based on completion of SOS in correspondence (whatever, standard) and masters completion!!! Not for O-4 or O-5 promotion boards of even IDE... masters completion to go to effing SOS!!!!! For an O-5 board; sure... O-4 board; maybe... to go to SOS?!? Why are these incredible morons who now sit in what used to be leadership positions so hell bent on picking future Colonels and Generals when they are just LT's and young Capts?!? I give up...

Took me a few months, but just got a $3900 credit from AMEX for my Skymiles Platinum from the past 10 years... I called customer service and they just cut a check and put it in the mail.