Jump to content
Baseops Forums

Jetpilot

Registered User
  • Content Count

    33
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

18 Good

About Jetpilot

  • Rank
    SNAP

Recent Profile Visitors

470 profile views
  1. Isn't this entire problem a result of our systemic "can't say no" leadership culture? A commander receives a certain "bill" for assignments and he only has X amount of pilots from which to choose. Priority will be given to the top flyers in the squad, both to protect their careers and to ensure the health of that individual community. Then, in order not to look bad, gives the UPT assignments to those who are left, qualifications be damned. This problem is only further complicated by the pilot shortage, which gives the commander even fewer options of who to send to a particular assignment resulting in a greater possibility of someone being given an assignment to which they are unqualified. IDK, but maybe the cancellation of auto-waivers might just shed some reality on the system. If SQ/CCs won't say "no" then this will certainly produce the same effect. It would be nice to fix something before it breaks, but hey, we fly to failure in this org.
  2. 12%!! I have not been at a regular ops unit for some time now, so maybe someone else can chime in, but is this statistic translating into squadrons with only 1st or 2nd assignment captains and then the CC/DO? Are other MAJCOM A1s also limiting staff assignments similar to what ACC did? So...crisis mode??
  3. I am starting to lose track how many times I have now seen officers who have only been stratified at the CGO level i.e. their O-5 PRFs were written when they were senior captains, surpass above average performing FGOs. This is the most frustrating part of the whole promotion process. FGO and CGO have totally different levels of expectations. This is what makes me believe the only real thing the board looks at is the bottomline strat and where it came from. They could not care less about an officer's upbringing. It also makes me extremely cynical about the new promotion system. Why would it be any different if there are only two lines. Certainly since strats and DPs still exist on the PRF, what will drive senior raters to more closely examine an officer's record? Its emblematic of our culture where 15 second news clips suffice for being "well informed". My solution would be to scrap the PRF system altogether. Let the full record speak for itself.
  4. Spoiler alert...it will sound the same as someone who makes it IPZ except the bottom line will have a #1 strat from either a WG/CC or above. Pathways to achieve this feat are 1. be a wing exec 2. be an aide/exec for a flag officer (preferably as a captain) 3. work a staff gig for a flag officer (again preferably as a captain). Better yet, make sure you check the box on just one flying assignment to ensure you have enough time to do one of the above and then PCS to a fellowship program to ensure your O-5 PRF is written as a CGO. This way the board can see how fantastic of a CGO you are without muddying the waters with FGO performance.
  5. Do we know what what percentage of pilots the USAF intends to promote using this system? I fear next year's promotion board is going to be a bloodbath in terms of pilot promotions to O-5 given we are unveiling two brand new, mostly untested, systems; split categories and two line PRFs.
  6. Does anyone know how to access "As Met" records on Talent Marketplace? I tried PRDA, but there were no longer folder icons from which to choose.
  7. It's not about your record, it's about your bottom line strat and DP. Nothing else matters.
  8. For those who are at school or have been at school - just heard that official guidance states all PRFs are required to be re-written. Memo with details coming out soon.
  9. A pointless measure. All this does is validate what we already know. PRF's are an inaccurate means of identifying real leadership potential. This measure simply promotes the self-licking ice cream cone that is our USAF promotion system. You can literally do F*@#& all for 12 years, take an exec/aide gig working for a general and end up on top of the pack. Side note: Word on the street said mock boards that were conducted using an officer's record without a PRF yielded drastically different results than mock boards conducted using 2 line/9 line PRFs respectively. Hmmm...
  10. Since most people like to reference the proverbial "made-man", I can attest that the opposite is also true. I.e. I have seen cases where someone with DG's from every level (USAFA/ROTC, UPT, SOS), #1 strat's at the sqd/grp/wg level, high-level awards, selected 1st look for school to a highly competitive fellowship program loses out, on BTZ promotion board to O-5, to a pretty decent "average" officer sans all the glitzy stuff mentioned above because the average guy was an exec for a GO just before the promotion board. These examples highlight that the "made-man" theory is less about DGs/strats/awards than it is about who you know and when you knew them. Bottom line: I believe a lot of our frustrations can be traced to a mismanaged meritocracy. However, I have a hard time believing it could be less subjective in the civilian sector.
  11. Absolutely agree we need to break our operators from support in terms of determining promotion. It’s ridiculous to expect a finance/contracting officer to understand the nuances of growing up in ops and vice versa. With regard to 2 line prfs, the usaf already has a hard time getting it right when it comes to understanding an officer’s pedigree in 9 lines. With only 2 lines, we might as well only promote wing execs, aide de camps and the like.
  12. I was able to get it working by resetting google Chrome and using the owa address. This past summer it was the owa address that died on me and that is why I started using the other URL (cp.mail.us.af.mil), which I saw someone post about earlier last year. Thanks all for the help. Cheers!
  13. Thanks. no luck with that either.
  14. Question for computer savvy folks out there: Every time I try to access webmail via https://cp.mail.us.af.mil I keep receiving the following error "cp.mail.us.af.mil’s server IP address could not be found. DNS_PROBE_FINISHED_NXDOMAIN" This link was working fine up until a couple of days ago. I am using a Mac with OS Sierra 10.12.6. Any help would be much appreciated.
×
×
  • Create New...