Jump to content


Super User
  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


TnkrToad last won the day on February 1 2017

TnkrToad had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

185 Excellent

About TnkrToad

  • Rank
    Flight Lead
  1. AFSOC Leadership Drain

    Navs aren't just Wg/CVs in the MAF . . . tanker nav just took command at Scott: https://www.military.com/daily-news/2018/02/01/new-wing-commander-named-after-colonel-accused-sexual-misconduct.html TT
  2. AFSOC Leadership Drain

    If nothing else, AFSOC’s brain drain will lead to more CSOs running the show. From FY14-16 (the farthest I bothered to look back), AFSOC CSOs averaged 5-6 folks promoted to O-6 per year. In FY 17, twelve 12Ss were promoted to O-6 (double the rate a few years ago), while only eleven 11Ss pinned on the same rank (down from 16 in FY14). On the mobility side, the number of 12Ms promoted to O-6 per year has also grown from a few years ago, while the number of 11Ms promoted has significantly decreased. You statisticians will likely critique the small sample sizes, but it still seems like Good news for navs ... the ones that hang around will lead the service. TT
  3. Pilot Shortage Deepens, USAF is SCREWED.

    Had a bit closer look at the stats, and if I'm reading them right, the AF has given up on trying to retain 11Ms. Running the numbers paints a pretty dismal picture: - Per CH's posted slide deck, the AF projects losing 933 11Ms from their inventory over the next 5 years (from substantial surplus to substantial deficit)--an average loss of 187/yr - IAW the 1400/yr plan, apparently 640 UPT grads/yr will go to mobility cockpits - If we produce 640/yr, but the inventory drops 187/yr, that means 827/yr (11Ms alone) will separate, retire, get promoted to O-6, or be grounded/die/etc. -- From FYs 15-17, the 11M community only lost about 440/yr to seps/retirements/O-6 promotion/grounding/etc (with just 215 of those being folks who separated) - Problem is, there ain't that many 11Ms approaching retirement/their O-6 boards (force shaping & a-word hiring took care of that), and it's unlikely there'll be a huge spike in folks getting grounded/dying off (one hopes) - The upshot is this: the Air Force seems to be planning on three times more 11Ms separating (not staying to retirement/not competing for O-6) than in the prior three years. This is going to decimate a mobility pilot community that's already on the ropes. I'd say 11Ms are very aware of their marketability. The weird thing is, the Air Force is tacitly acknowledging this, yet is doing nothing to stop the hemorrhaging. Crappy quality of life, plus AF leadership that doesn't seem to care about their plight--seems like a winning combination. TT
  4. Pilot Shortage Deepens, USAF is SCREWED.

    [quote Will the 1-2 year bonus takers be the tipping point? Hundreds took short bonuses/commitments, will they be persuaded to stay by the AF's recent "fixes"? No.
  5. Pilot Shortage Deepens, USAF is SCREWED.

    Changing crew ratios sure is an easy way to “fix the glitch.” Even better, when the AF bought the C-17, they originally planned on a 5.0 crew ratio (AD + ARC). I heard this straight from Gen Handy when he was TRANSCOM/CC. Air Force mag quoted this same ratio much more recently. http://www.airforcemag.com/MagazineArchive/Documents/2011/February%202011/0211arsenal.pdf AMC will be an awesome place for single dudes who want to rack up ridiculous amounts of flying hours. Not so much for those who like their families...
  6. Pilot Shortage Deepens, USAF is SCREWED.

    Quoted for truth. The positive delta can only be due to creative accounting. Scary part is the AF’ plan is to let the 11M inventory drop by about 840 over the next 5 years, IOT get the other communities healthy. That kind of rapid inventory drop can only happen with really poor retention. Only thing I can figure is that AF planners are hoping they’ll be able to contract out ever-greater portions of the mobility mission—civilian contract air refueling, even more contract airlift, etc. Of course, that would drive up demand for prior-mil folks even more. 11Ms are well aware of their marketability on the outside, and abysmal retention rates are reflecting this reality. TT
  7. Pilot Shortage Deepens, USAF is SCREWED.

    So, if I’m reading the slides right, the AF has a (fictional) surplus of 437 11Ms currently. By 2023, we’re slated to have a shortfall of 496 11Ms. That’s a pretty impressive drop in inventory. This is despite the grand ideas to have regional pilots go through short courses to become heavy drivers, contract UPT instructors, etc. Sure seems to me like there’s an 11M manning crisis. Heavy drivers are getting crushed right now; can’t wait to see what life is like when the community is down another 840 bodies. TT
  8. Leadership at the 'Deid

    I was apparently too subtle...it was a swipe against those who quipped about tanker dudes building tracks in the middle of the weather.
  9. Leadership at the 'Deid

    I'll add: - Plan massive tanker plans for OEF, OIF, etc., in the CAOC, while other tanker patches in WOCs build Night 1 packages for their crews and/or lead Night 1 missions. - Deploy to CAOC (too often) . . . and talk really slowly to CAF/other users who come up with grandiose/unexecutable plans refueling-wise - Plan large, refueling-intensive exercises, act as tanker SMEs in white cells, and/or lead exercise execution - Command ARWs (100 ARW/CC at Mildenhall: two in a row are tanker patches) . . . although this is the exception thus far - Advocate for maintaining standards/work to build & maintain critical skills, in the midst of an opstempo and leadership model that militate against developing expertise - Build AR tracks where users request them NKAWTG's assessment is accurate; those who volunteered for the WIC in the early 2000s in effect volunteered for huge arse pain. Aside from those who were clearly on the HPO track, those who graduated got the dual bonus of alternately deploying as aircrew or staff, followed by a deployment to the CAOC as a tanker planner, followed by another aircrew/deployed staff requirement . . . ad nauseum. Making oneself more eligible for deployments was hardly a selling point for the WIC early on. I'd say we're past that stage at this point; enough tanker patches to spread the wealth a bit more, and folks have a better idea what they bring to the fight. TT
  10. Leadership at the 'Deid

    My point is not about whether or not J O and Smokey Currin, in this case, are good dudes. I assume they are. If you combine folks with minimal tanker experience at the wing level, with folks who have minimal tanker experience at the group and squadron levels, you’re going to get clownish decisions—even if they’re all good dudes. Sprinkle in a bad apple here and there—it’s inevitable that at least some will end up as golden boys—and your odds of clownish behavior increase all the more. In sum, if tanker leaders come across as clowns, they’re directly reflecting the MAF leader development clown show. If you want competent tanker leaders, you need folks who’ve spent substantial portions of their careers in the tanker community. Furthermore, you need competent, experienced tanker bubbas to steer young Wg/CCs away from bad decisions, before they make them. Unfortunately, AMC doesn’t seem to have gotten that memo. TT
  11. Leadership at the 'Deid

    My guess is it has something to do with the youth movement in tanker leadership, combined with the lack of tanker experience among those leaders. Case in point: the ARW/CCs at both McConnell and Seymour Johnson are dudes who pinned on O-6 at 18 yrs and are Wg/CCs at 20 yrs into their careers. Both assiduously avoided the air refueling community for at least a decade. The McConnell CC never previously flew the KC-135, and the last time he flew the KC-10 was 2005. The SJ commander is slightly better; he actually started in the KC-135, but was gone from the community for 13 years, from ‘03-‘16. If the Wg leadership’s dearth of tanker experience is any indication of group & squadron CCs’ backgrounds, clueless/clownish leadership should come as no surprise. You want good leaders? Put people who know what they’re doing in those jobs. TT
  12. Just checked the ACP take rates, and thought I'd note a couple things: The overall take rate for initial bonus eligibles is still pretty abysmal--barely over 40%. The initial take rates for 11Fs & 11Rs are especially poor--both less than 40%. A glimmer of hope is that take rates for 11Ss & 11Hs are high (both over 55%). Their take rates have historically always been high, though, so this is hardly cause for celebration. If one factors in the old guy (NC & CE) bonus takers, though, things change a bit. More 11Fs have taken the old guy bonus than have initial eligibles; even though the 11F community is undermanned, at least its old farts are willing to hang around. This provides at least some hope that the 11F community might eventually get healthy. The 11H & 11S communities likewise had healthy old guy bonus take rates. Even though (last I checked) they're chronically undermanned, they will have substantially more stability than they would have otherwise without the old guy bonus. The 11R & 11M communities are screwed. Not only do they have low initial eligible take rates, but their old guy bonus take rates are abysmal, too. If neither the mid-career guys nor the grey beard O-5 types want to stay in, then all that'll be left in the squadrons will be high career-potential CCs & DOs leading a bunch of O-1s to O-3s who're merely biding their time until they reach the ends of their respective SUPT commitments and can get out. Not a recipe for success, in the near or long term. It'll be especially interesting when AMC starts picking its O-6s and above, not based on quality, but rather on simply who is left and can fog a mirror. Based on the stats, I presume the same is or will be true in the 11R community--leadership selection by virtue of one's mirror-fogging ability--but as an 11M, I'll just stay in my lane and hope for the best for the C2ISR types. TT
  13. I don't think it's public. All the data, down to each airframe, is posted on AFPC Secure, though. Go to AFPC Secure, then select RAW. In RAW, select Static Demographics. From the list of all the docs, you'll find one that says FY17 ACP Take Rates (or something like that--I'm not using a CAC-enabled computer right now). They break the data down in about 69 different ways--to include numbers of eligibles and takers (both short and long) for each individual MDS.
  14. The take rate listed on RAW is only for long-term (3+ yr) contracts. The overall long-term take (short term take rate doesn't much matter) is right around 40%. If short term contracts were included, the overall rate would be a little over 50%. Still not good news. It's noteworthy that for Tier 2, the 11Bs & 11Ss are bringing up the average. 11Ms are still below 40%. Tanker and C-17 bubbas (the two largest MDS pilot communities) seem especially inclined to get out--they're at about 35% right now. TT