Jump to content
Baseops Forums

Jetpilot

Registered User
  • Content Count

    38
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

21 Excellent

About Jetpilot

  • Rank
    SNAP

Recent Profile Visitors

597 profile views
  1. The 2% GDP argument is ridiculous. There are many more quantifiable factors that go into NATO member contributions than just GDP. Troop commitments, equipment expenditure as a percent of GDP, exercise performance etc. There are also many non quantifiable factors such as basing rights, political influence, strategic location etc. CSIS did a study on this exact topic. I also think we tend to forget that NATO (our idea) was only agreed upon because the US was going to fit the majority of the security bill. This allowed Europe to rebuild their economies from ruins and also allowed us to have the biggest bargaining chip in terms of influence/off shore balancing power etc. This is what we originally and still want. While we must always look to continually improve institutions, souring relations with Germany only hurts history's most successful and consequential alliance. Without a unified NATO good luck countering Chinese influence in Europe/Africa.
  2. First person to get “chiefed” for inappropriate mask wear in 3, 2, 1...
  3. You misunderstand. This statement was in response to why China and Russia are continuing with their economies...they use authoritarian tactics. The western world obviously does not do this hence why we need to follow a different approach. This does not take away from the fact that our response is not sufficient. Stay safe and wash your hands.
  4. Russia is using webcams to ensure people stay home and China isolated/cleaned/and imprisoned those who violated confinement. (authoritarian tactics) Our response is not enough. There will be no economy if everyone is sick regardless of who dies or not. We need to do it all and now in order to get the economy going as fast as possible. Laser focused confinement, mass testing/cleaning. I don't think people will come out of their house until they feel some sort of sense of security. Ignoring it all and let it play out does not lessen the fear.
  5. Agree that draconian lockdowns are not effective unless there are other mitigating strategies i.e. mass testing, constant sanitizing of public spaces, and diffusion of information on who is infected and who is not. I look to South Korea, Singapore, and Taiwan who all came out strong early and used a multitude of strategies. Second point, the last time I checked, the media is not in control of the White House, Congress, and/or Military. I understand there seems to be some hysteria playing out, but looking at transmission data and number of hospital beds, we are in for a shit storm if we decide to just ride it out. What would the economy look like when 2/3 of a given business' workforce is out sick despite their age. Also, what if this virus effects large chunks of those who maintain water and power grids? Putting the world on hold for a month will tank the economy, but so will letting upwards of 1 million people die with many more being too sick to work. (https://www.imperial.ac.uk/media/imperial-college/medicine/sph/ide/gida-fellowships/Imperial-College-COVID19-NPI-modelling-16-03-2020.pdf). It also is hard to quantify all of the second and third order deaths that will result from a lack of hospital space. We need a flexible, targeted approach to tackle this. We should also be shifting towards a national unified effort that calls on all applicable businesses to tweak their production lines and being producing vital products (respirators, masks, hospital beds etc.) It needs to be an all hands on deck with a coordinated strategy originating from the top. Anything less and we will fail to instill the confidence the average American citizen needs to continue their pre-COVID19 lives. However, currently we have anything but this level of coordination and effort. Individual states will take matters into their own hands, which will ultimately conflict with another state's plan leading a continued reduction of efficiency.
  6. 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.
  7. 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??
  8. 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.
  9. 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.
  10. 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.
  11. 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.
  12. It's not about your record, it's about your bottom line strat and DP. Nothing else matters.
  13. 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.
  14. 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...
×
×
  • Create New...