Jump to content
Baseops Forums

Chuck17

Supreme User
  • Content Count

    622
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    17

Chuck17 last won the day on January 13

Chuck17 had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

295 Excellent

About Chuck17

  • Rank
    Gray Beard

Contact Methods

  • Website URL
    http://
  • ICQ
    0

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    Close to home...

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. I mean if you took the combined total courseware length of all the courses and experience that went into building the 13O curriculum alone, it would take you nearly five years to complete it the traditional way. They’ve frankensteined the 13O curriculum together from AOC/C2, Joint planning, AFFOR staff, WIC, ASG (and more) courses, and are doing it at a breakneck pace that doesn’t remotely enable a basic understanding of the operational level of war, let alone “Multi-Domain C2.” But the CSAF wanted something quick. (Fast, cheap, good. Pick two.) So this is what we got. Don’t get me wrong, I’m not totally scoffing it. I am simply saying you can’t mass produce experts at the operational level like you can from a traditional training pipeline. It takes years AND education to build the required level of understanding. Chuck
  2. Concur. So far the program is designed to not only create a new AFSC and MDC2 experts, its designed so that in the future the vast majority of GOs and C2 leadership will be 13Os (at some point) via one of several on-ramp timelines... which doesn't pass the sniff check as yet. This one still has some baking to do, and its going to take some strong advocacy to live in the future. If you're willing to step out and try something new, break new ground, and don't really care about glass ceilings, this is an option. IMHO, its a particularly good option to get some smarts and training that would otherwise take over 5 years to get by a conservative estimate (Operational level of war education + ASG level planning education + Doctrine/C2 education) through a number of selective courses and assignments. But the bumpersticker is still attached - new is different, different is odd, odd is non-essential, non-essential gets cut when the belts tighten - and you can bet the belts are going to tighten. Chuck.
  3. Close -- try a narrative only PRF for an In-Res IDE student with a 1/XXX strat - say from a NAF/CC - that will get you there. (I saw 2x like that with Ps from the student MLR when I was at IDE -- both were great folks) I bet historical averages is a good place to start - especially given this years results. This BS is why the Line split has to happen ASAP. Chuck
  4. It's one of the benefits of the split line competitive category.... Flyers wont be competing with graduated Sq/CC's for O-5 promotions. It wont fix everything but it will fix that. Chuck
  5. The selection rate for APZ was 6.2% overall (76/1219)... APZ with a P was 3.7% (44/1176), w/ a DP 91.4% (32/35). Without a DP, it's a steep climb for APZ promotion... Chuck
  6. My guess is the last thing they need going into a long weekend is to set folks up to celebrate or drown themselves in Jack-Daniels-flavored sorrow for four straight unaccountable days. That’s how OPREPs get generated... So Monday at the latest, one way or the other. Chuck
  7. When I was a part of C-17 standup in AK we had to deal with this too. I’d ask him who the AF level CS manager is and where they work... Elevation around obstruction is an avenue of approach. Then let me know. I might know a guy... Chuck
  8. To paraphrase the greatest of all cargo pilots, “Who’s gonna fly em, kid?” Another of the multitude of reasons this one’s got issues - pilots - but they’re not insurmountable. This concept could be manned if the AF loosened its grip on “all pilots must be officers” with the officer career progression that goes along with it. But we’ve refused to change that, entertain warrants or enlisted pilots (a program that’ll be quietly killed) in force. Contract pilots are a possibility, along the lines of the Red Air contract. That idea has merit. I’m sure there’s dudes who would fly 208s delivering spare parts to the spoke outbases. If they aren’t all flying for the airlines already. Chuck
  9. Because they don’t. Frankly stated, this is what’s happened when fighter pilots of above average intelligence got free reign on ACC staff to explore new ideas about force presentation - they quickly got in over their heads and scoffed what the actual experts told them, coming up with “forward thinking” ideas that already exist, aren’t tactically or fiscally feasible, or have already been disproven. In this case - all three. Chuck
  10. That a C-5 person of any rank is tied to JFE definitely belongs in this thread. All MAF is not equal, nor representative... just like the CAF. Chuck
  11. Great example of how draft NDAA language (pre-markup, void of concurrence of the services) can get leaked and grow a narrative of its own. WTF does that mean? It means they’re drafting the next budget and someone slipped this in. That’s it. While not discounting the need, this isn’t a done deal. In fact, the official AF position as sent back to Congress surprisingly differs in many ways from the fanboy cherry-picking of information in the article. This one has to bake some more... Chuck
  12. Generally BPZ w/DP select rates hover between 25-33%. Have DGs? Been a DO (for BPZ to LtCol)? WIC? School in-res? SAASS? Been an Exec/ADC for a three star or higher? OTY Award wins at Wing or AF level? Does your PRF have a strat in the bottom line? Is it signed by a GO? — chances trend higher with those markers. (FWIW I recently saw the PRF of the CJCS’s Exec for BPZ to Col... had a DP from the Chairman and didn’t get picked up early - so it’s not ALL about recent performance or who signed your report - the record has to be there and consistent - but it helps) If not, then have a realistic expectation for your DP and we will see you IPZ. Chuck
  13. Tons of maneuver room, but I don’t think this is going to end well. Delays, cutbacks, more delays, goldplate until its unaffordable — Tried and true Pentagon tactics. We missed the window to get this thing made. The LAA might show up in AFSOC but that’ll be the extent. This thing is still on the books for one reason: John McCain. Big blue woulda killed it long ago if it coulda. It has nothing to do with mission, and everything to do with money and politics. And cuts are coming — when we start moving money around to dry out and repair Offutt, and/or once the decision is made to “warm status” Tyndall - ala Homestead... even faster if we have to cut flying hours to pay for border wall construction. All options are on the table at this point. It’s going to be a bumpy year. Not sure LAA has much altitude or airspeed left. Chuck
  14. TTX for this is going on now at Randolph. Expect table slap at Fall Corona if it all goes well. The Army’s figured it out, can’t be that hard. Also two line PRFs. #execLove Chuck
  15. Youre going to have to explain what you mean by “direct effects.” If I take an 29 ship of C-17s loaded with a brigade from the 82d, wrap them in a gorilla package of SEAD/Strike/CAS/ISR, and send them north of the DMZ to seize an airfield, that has “direct effects” on the enemy. They teach that at the WIC... Or do you mean “weapons effects” when you say “direct effects”? If so, I’d say that limiting the WIC education to the employment of guns/bombs/missiles/radars is a Blue-4 level of understanding of the employment of airpower. The WIC is not about that (beyond Core One/Two academics...) it’s way more. Your post is littered with double speak and lack of understanding of not only what the Weapons School teaches and produces but of the operational-level employment of American airpower. But it takes time and experience to comprehend how much one doesn’t know, especially about other MWS’s, employment, tactics, etc. and I’m far from an authority... Just trying to give you a view of what the WIC sees - take it or leave it. It’s already been said - the WIC isn’t all about weapons employment. If the name is all that matters to you, I don’t really know what to tell you and you certainly don’t want to hear it from me. Chuck
×
×
  • Create New...