Jump to content
189Herk

Goldfein advocating FAA 1500 hour rule change???

Recommended Posts

ViperStud    229
4 hours ago, F16Deuce said:

Looking at external factors beyond control as opposed to issues internal to the Air Force and how we lead and manage our people is a poor approach.

Couldn't have said it better and this is why I think "asshat" is still a valid moniker. I've yet to see the 6-9 contractors hired in my corner of the fighter world (granted, ANG) and we're starting to really hemmorhage dudes. If the 1500-hr rule is pursued full-bore without other meaningful changes being put in place, it feels a lot like trying to address the problem by ignoring the root causes. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
gearpig    1,553
7 hours ago, F16Deuce said:

Valid points.  The issue I have with it is that it doesn't address the root cause of why pilots are getting out.  One thing I heard a different GO say was that we don't have a retention problem, we have a leadership problem, which I actually agree with (meaning people leaving in large numbers is symptomatic, rather than the problem itself).  Looking at external factors beyond control as opposed to issues internal to the Air Force and how we lead and manage our people is a poor approach.

Right. I don't get it. How does Goldfein expect to be taken seriously? If I were the FAA at a meeting with a military general, I'd be interested as to why he expects me to fix his problem. His reasons for having a problem with the 1500 hour rule have absolutely nothing to do with the basis for why the rule was created. If he's going to attempt to rally the airline execs against the FAA by saying everyone can have more pilots, the airlines are going to say, "That's great, Fingers, but we're still going to want your pilots over sub-1500hr pilots, and we see that you're trying to keep them from us."

Edited by gearpig
  • Upvote 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Karl Hungus    296
7 hours ago, BeerMan said:

I agree with you. I think understanding this is critical to solving the problem long term. Most of the things that impact my professional life can be solved somewhere between the flight commander and wing commander level. 

You think the leadership problem is between the O-3 and O-6 level?  Really?

AFPAK Hands.  Worthless 365s/179s to shitholes to do busy work.  Silly additional duties.  A broken, archaic promotion system.  Flight pay that hasn't changed since the early 1990s.  A bonus that hasn't changed since 1999.  Rampant micromanagement of squadrons/groups/wings by the NAF/MAJCOM.  Have those very solvable issues been fixed yet?  No?  How many of those things are solvable at the O-3 to O-6 level?  Yeah, I didn't think management was serious about fixing things either- easier to just send your top "leader" (LOL) to whine to the FAA.  

 

  • Upvote 6

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
TnkrToad    179

Observations:

- Nothing we've discussed in this thread involves Goldfein in any way restricting AF pilots' ability to get out at the ends of their respective commitments and pursue employment with the airlines. The only restriction is on those with commercial licenses (250 hrs min) who previously could have served as airline first officers

-- His recommendation would, however, ultimately expand competition for those jobs--a free-market principle which many on this forum typically espouse

- I have yet to hear how life has improved for civilians with less than 1,500 hrs since the FAA rule was enacted. While QOL prior to the ruling might have been a horror show, how is life any better now for those who are trying to build their hours, without the regional airline option available to them?

-- As amply discussed on this forum, life is good for those who are already airline pilots (ALPA = the white-collar version of the Pipefitters' Union), and the prospects are pretty darn good for those with essentially a free ticket to the union (prior-mil pilots). Since I've heard no evidence yet to the contrary, I presume that QOL/safety issues have gotten worse for civ pilots who're now having a harder time getting past the higher barrier to entry

-- BTW, nobody forced anyone to take those crap regional jobs in the pre-1500 hr rule days

Don't get me wrong; I'm the son of a retired airline pilot and a current AD AF pilot. I really like the position of advantage I'm currently in--thanks, FAA/ALPA/rapidly-retiring Baby Boom generation! I just find much of the discussion on this thread to be a bit disingenuous.

TT

 

  • Upvote 3
  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
BeerMan    199
2 hours ago, gearpig said:

Right. I don't get it. How does Goldfein expect to be taken seriously? If I were the FAA at a meeting with a military general, I'd be interested as to why he expects me to fix his problem. His reasons for having a problem with the 1500 hour rule have absolutely nothing to do with the basis for why the rule was created. If he's going to attempt to rally the airline execs against the FAA by saying everyone can have more pilots, the airlines are going to say, "That's great, Fingers, but we're still going to want your pilots over sub-1500hr pilots, and we see that you're trying to keep them from us."

Stop focusing specifically on the 1500 hour rule for a second. Try looking at the problem from a 10-year lens. 

Everyone on this board has been screaming for the last 5 years that Air Force leadership, Congress, and America in general has not been paying attention to the looming pilot shortage. The 11Ms have been screaming "do something, don't just focus on 11Fs!" The Guard and Reserves are saying the same thing. They are losing their experienced pilots as well. Everyone agrees that if the Air Force does not do something then we're all F'd. Boot color, Friday shirts, rolled up sleeves, and contractors are not going to solve what is becoming a national problem, and will be a national crisis in 5-10 years. You could eliminate every pilot filled 179/365 tomorrow and you still wouldn't save enough pilots to put even a tiny dent in the approximately 1500-3000 pilots a year that the guys on this board have said are going to be hired in the next decade. We shit on one another all the time about the Air Force not having a long term plan that works with Congress and the commercial sector, and now some of us are angry because the Air Force is trying to have a conversation about a national problem?

Personally, I'll take having to compete with a regional guy at an airline over having all of the experience sucked out of the Air Force. Fingers is just being honest about the problem, and is having a conversation with the people who can help. Having a conversation is a good thing! Do you see that perspective? 

And to be clear: I agree with a lot of the comments guys have made about attacking the problem instead of the symptoms. Stupid 179s/365s still need to be abolished, I like the positive uniform changes, in active duty fighter squadrons I have personally seen contractors tackle queep jobs, constant deployments to "temporary" (ahem permanent) locations with and without pilot swaps need to be adjusted, and there are still many other changes that need to be addressed and/or implemented. 

  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Duck    852

Granted changing changing the 1500 hour rule may increase the potential applicants eventually. However, for a vast majority of Pilots in the Air Force who feel like the Leadership has broken faith with them, it only further alienates that group more.


Sent from my iPhone using Baseops Network Forums

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
BeerMan    199
3 hours ago, Karl Hungus said:

You think the leadership problem is between the O-3 and O-6 level?  Really?

AFPAK Hands.  Worthless 365s/179s to shitholes to do busy work.  Silly additional duties.  A broken, archaic promotion system.  Flight pay that hasn't changed since the early 1990s.  A bonus that hasn't changed since 1999.  Rampant micromanagement of squadrons/groups/wings by the NAF/MAJCOM.  Have those very solvable issues been fixed yet?  No?  How many of those things are solvable at the O-3 to O-6 level?  Yeah, I didn't think management was serious about fixing things either- easier to just send your top "leader" (LOL) to whine to the FAA.  

 

KH I agree with a lot of what you have identified as problems. I still don't really understand what some NAFs do that couldn't be handled at the Wing or MAJCOM level, but I've never worked in a NAF.  COCOMs largely control 179/365s and unit AOR deployments. Usually if the COCOM wants it, he/she usually gets it. What I was trying to convey with my leadership comment is that the daily issues that I see and interact with in the CAF are issues that can be solved by a flight commander or ADO who is empowered by his/her DO and SQ/CC to make decisions and run the squadron as they see fit. I see that same concept in OGs and not as often but sometimes MXGs who have WG/CCs who empower their folks to run their groups as they see fit, and accept some risk.

A few examples I've seen or experienced:

-DOs who send Lts and Captains off station for good training and god forbid to actually have some fun.

-SQ/CCs who said to the ADOs, "don't go to the monthly base recycling program meeting, its dumb. If you get any flak let me know and I'll handle it." There were multiple other instances and examples but this was just one.

-SQ/CCs and OGs who have lobbied to adjust/deny 179/365s because they are dumb, and WG/CCs who have supported them. Note, they didn't always win.

-AOR OG/CCs and WG/CCs who literally told the mustache and uniform police to knock it off.

Now I'm not naive enough to believe that every base or wing has a chain of command that works like this, nor that we currently have a system in place that develops these kinds of leaders. Given the fact that we're in this situation, we are obviously getting it wrong in a lot of places, but we're also getting it right in other. The long term solution to that lies more in having leadership at every level (IMHO SQ/GP/WG) that actually LEADS and tackles problems, as opposed to focusing on thinks that are outside of their immediate control. 

Edited by BeerMan
spelling

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
sqwatch    404

I too have been lucky enough to have good leadership that practice what beerman has observed. Most threads on this forum seem to drift closer together then finally meet along the topic of "what's wrong with the Air Force", and when that happens, in my 13 years in the AF, no one has come up with a fix- from crew dogs to leadership.

I will say since my transition to the guard my level of job satisfaction has increased considerably. I can fly as much as I want and there's little pressure to do the things that many people bitch about. There's something to that, and REGAF knows this but it doesn't work in their system- yet.

As for Gen Goldfien, good on him for speaking up in the interests of national defense. I disagree that a 1500 hour change will solve the problem because we are already competitive for the majors at the ten year point, and the concept of working 12 days a month and making 200k plus is something that the AF can not and should not be able to compete with, but I don't get all butt hurt about it and whine like a little bitch because shit isn't going the way I want it to.

Can you imagine the shit storm from ALPA and the congressional hearings that would occur if the government outbid the private sector for labor? That's some ed up shit that most here would call Orwellian yet on the other side of their mouths complain about the pay/work ratio.

I guess I don't understand the vitriol. Don't like the green dot program? Me I either, but pint the finger at civilian leadership who bares the responsibility for this and most other worthless programs. Don't like deployments? They're trying to trim the fat but again, who's really responsible for mandating those deployments to the 'deid? Not flying enough or your equipment is old as shit and broke? Who ed up defense spending (and I'm so bored of hearing it's the f35/Welsh's fault, it's at a higher level than that)?

We have a leadership problem alright, but it goes beyond the CSAF. The Schwartz days are behind us.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Prozac    229
1 hour ago, TnkrToad said:

Observations:

- Nothing we've discussed in this thread involves Goldfein in any way restricting AF pilots' ability to get out at the ends of their respective commitments and pursue employment with the airlines. The only restriction is on those with commercial licenses (250 hrs min) who previously could have served as airline first officers

-- His recommendation would, however, ultimately expand competition for those jobs--a free-market principle which many on this forum typically espouse

- I have yet to hear how life has improved for civilians with less than 1,500 hrs since the FAA rule was enacted. While QOL prior to the ruling might have been a horror show, how is life any better now for those who are trying to build their hours, without the regional airline option available to them?

-- As amply discussed on this forum, life is good for those who are already airline pilots (ALPA = the white-collar version of the Pipefitters' Union), and the prospects are pretty darn good for those with essentially a free ticket to the union (prior-mil pilots). Since I've heard no evidence yet to the contrary, I presume that QOL/safety issues have gotten worse for civ pilots who're now having a harder time getting past the higher barrier to entry

-- BTW, nobody forced anyone to take those crap regional jobs in the pre-1500 hr rule days

Don't get me wrong; I'm the son of a retired airline pilot and a current AD AF pilot. I really like the position of advantage I'm currently in--thanks, FAA/ALPA/rapidly-retiring Baby Boom generation! I just find much of the discussion on this thread to be a bit disingenuous.

TT

 

So is the next step for the USAF to lobby the FAA to stop the Commercial Pilot or CFI equivalency programs?  That would certainly serve to place another barrier up to try and stem the tide.  Should Goldfein lobby individual airlines to stop adding .3 to military resumes?  Should he lobby them to stop accepting military time altogether?  There are real debates to be had about the 1500 hour rule and its effects on the aviation industry.  Solving the USAF's pilot shortage should not be the driver of that discussion.  Goldfein is out of his lane.  He should concentrate on the myriad of issues that he CAN effect WITHOUT help from the FAA or airline industry. 

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
NKAWTG    32

The ATP requirement to fly for 30k a year for a regional is a legitimate problem for industry.  While it puts separating military pilots at the front of que for the majors, it breaks the entry level pipeline on the civilian side.  Entry level wages need to go way up to provide a ROI for the years spent slumming as a CFI, or the 100k + needed to get the flight time.  Legitimate problem, but where does the Air Force have a dog in this fight?  Big Blue has it's own pipeline, thousands of people wanting entry level positions, and job security independent of the economy at large.  Not to say you have job security, because hiring and firing are bureaucratic decisions, not rational ones.

As much "effort" as the military puts into retention, the single overriding factor is the economy.  If you can get equivalent or better compensation/QoL out the military, then you leave.  If we can't, then we stay.  Doubling a bonus won't move the needle nearly as much as 9/11 or the great recession.  

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
skibum    54

I love how all us capitalists suddenly become socialists when we talk about our industry.

  • Upvote 3
  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
ViperMan    129
7 hours ago, BeerMan said:

Everyone on this board has been screaming for the last 5 years that Air Force leadership, Congress, and America in general has not been paying attention to the looming pilot shortage. The 11Ms have been screaming "do something, don't just focus on 11Fs!" The Guard and Reserves are saying the same thing. They are losing their experienced pilots as well. Everyone agrees that if the Air Force does not do something then we're all F'd. Boot color, Friday shirts, rolled up sleeves, and contractors are not going to solve what is becoming a national problem, and will be a national crisis in 5-10 years. You could eliminate every pilot filled 179/365 tomorrow and you still wouldn't save enough pilots to put even a tiny dent in the approximately 1500-3000 pilots a year that the guys on this board have said are going to be hired in the next decade. We shit on one another all the time about the Air Force not having a long term plan that works with Congress and the commercial sector, and now some of us are angry because the Air Force is trying to have a conversation about a national problem?

Personally, I'll take having to compete with a regional guy at an airline over having all of the experience sucked out of the Air Force. Fingers is just being honest about the problem, and is having a conversation with the people who can help. Having a conversation is a good thing! Do you see that perspective? 

And to be clear: I agree with a lot of the comments guys have made about attacking the problem instead of the symptoms. Stupid 179s/365s still need to be abolished, I like the positive uniform changes, in active duty fighter squadrons I have personally seen contractors tackle queep jobs, constant deployments to "temporary" (ahem permanent) locations with and without pilot swaps need to be adjusted, and there are still many other changes that need to be addressed and/or implemented. 

I fully agree with you on this, and call me a cynic, but when I get a memo telling me I can roll up my sleeves, I delete it as fast as I do the ones reminding me that we're putting new cover sheets on our TPS reports - it just doesn't matter to me in the big scheme - I'll roll them up/down, wear whatever color boots you want, etc. That said, the AF wouldn't need to worry what the airlines did if their focus was on QOL. It is the only way the AF will compete with the airlines and it = (Fun / work) x Compensation. The Air Force, arguably, has a lot of control over two of these factors (Fun and compensation), so when people see our focus turned outward on issues that are yet to affect us, it's equivalent to worrying about a non-factor. So ultimately, I don't consider arguments that state the AF can't compete with industry - the AF is part of the only entity on the planet that can print money, so yes, they can compete - they just don't want to set that precedent.

What else it suggests to me is that longer UPT commitments are not in the works, the AF was told 'no', or is anticipating being told 'no'.

7 hours ago, BeerMan said:

Stop focusing specifically on the 1500 hour rule for a second. Try looking at the problem from a 10-year lens. 

[...]

Personally, I'll take having to compete with a regional guy at an airline over having all of the experience sucked out of the Air Force. Fingers is just being honest about the problem, and is having a conversation with the people who can help. Having a conversation is a good thing! Do you see that perspective? 

And to be clear: I agree with a lot of the comments guys have made about attacking the problem instead of the symptoms. Stupid 179s/365s still need to be abolished, I like the positive uniform changes, in active duty fighter squadrons I have personally seen contractors tackle queep jobs, constant deployments to "temporary" (ahem permanent) locations with and without pilot swaps need to be adjusted, and there are still many other changes that need to be addressed and/or implemented. 

I don't think that this board's current attention on the 1500 hour rule is about that so specifically - rather it is general irritation with the latest in a series of misfires when it comes to addressing the problems the USAF says it has. The 1500 hour rule has not, in any way, contributed to the current exodus in the USAF - thus when this board reacts to it with 'really?' - it is a valid response. There is always a push and a pull when deciding on whether or not to leave the AF for other opportunities. Right now, the 'pull' factor has increased, but this was easily foreseen years ago, and is resultant from the long-looming retirement hiatus - not from the recent implementation of the 1500 hour rule. Once the regional airlines are empty, then we can talk about what the impact of that decision has had on the regional airlines as well as on military pilot retention, but as it stands now, the airlines can hire as many regional pilots as they can cram through training.

What people here are focused on are the issues that "push" individuals out of service. Many people on this board have looked at this problem with the long view in mind and I've seen many such considerations that do address these issues in serious ways, but yet, we don't see movement on them or even acknowledgement that they're factors. Things such as:

  • Basing decisions (Holloman, Cannon, Creech, Shaw, etc)
  • 365s/179s (which exist specifically to skirt the USAFs own rules...)
  • Up or out
  • "Mandatory" not-mandatory education
  • Ill-timed moves/PCSs
  • TAMI/drones
  • Opaque/unclear/questionable promotion rules
  • The list goes on

Ask me 10 years ago if I was considering going to the airlines, and I would have laughed at you. Give me more control over the factors listed above, and I'll laugh at the airlines...for at least another few years, which is all the AF wants anyway. So, yes, I sort of see that perspective, and I would give it more credence if it was backed up by actions taken 10 years ago to

  • Increase the bonus
  • Eliminate up or out
  • Be more transparent with career opportunities/progression

Or actions taken 4-6 years ago to not

  • Force-shape fighter pilots...yeah...or other 11Xs...

BL: seems to me that it is just something convenient to point at - just like the previous reasoning given which was "pilots just want to fly more..." when sequestration was all the rage.

4 hours ago, NKAWTG said:

The ATP requirement to fly for 30k a year for a regional is a legitimate problem for industry.  While it puts separating military pilots at the front of que for the majors, it breaks the entry level pipeline on the civilian side.  Entry level wages need to go way up to provide a ROI for the years spent slumming as a CFI, or the 100k + needed to get the flight time.  Legitimate problem, but where does the Air Force have a dog in this fight?  Big Blue has it's own pipeline, thousands of people wanting entry level positions, and job security independent of the economy at large.  Not to say you have job security, because hiring and firing are bureaucratic decisions, not rational ones.

As much "effort" as the military puts into retention, the single overriding factor is the economy.  If you can get equivalent or better compensation/QoL out the military, then you leave.  If we can't, then we stay.  Doubling a bonus won't move the needle nearly as much as 9/11 or the great recession.  

That, to me, sounds like American, Delta, United, and Southwest's problem - not the USAFs.

  • Upvote 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Lstcause257    6

Why the hell does this matter? For all we know he was tasked to work with the FAA to come up with a solution (something that has been discussed for a while). As a result a part of the equation to help the national pilot shortage (both military and civilian) is to lower the time.

What's wrong if they lower the hours for FOs, a lot of the issues mentioned are completely in the control of the airlines. (Showing without rest, pay, training)



I was crossing oceans with just over 1K hours with a brand new FP. So according to some posts here we should have been a death trap waiting to happen.

If you are an AF pilot and you believe this is doing you an injustice the problem probably isn't flights hours...


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

  • Upvote 1
  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Prozac    229
47 minutes ago, Lstcause257 said:

Why the hell does this matter? For all we know he was tasked to work with the FAA to come up with a solution (something that has been discussed for a while). As a result a part of the equation to help the national pilot shortage (both military and civilian) is to lower the time.

What's wrong if they lower the hours for FOs, a lot of the issues mentioned are completely in the control of the airlines. (Showing without rest, pay, training)



I was crossing oceans with just over 1K hours with a brand new FP. So according to some posts here we should have been a death trap waiting to happen.

If you are an AF pilot and you believe this is doing you an injustice the problem probably isn't flights hours...


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

You didn't have the paying public onboard when you were doing those crossings. Also the USAF's oceanic training and procedures are a joke.  Something like 30% of GNEs for 5% of crossings comes to mind.  

  • Upvote 3
  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
ViperMan    129
51 minutes ago, Lstcause257 said:

Why the hell does this matter? For all we know he was tasked to work with the FAA to come up with a solution (something that has been discussed for a while). As a result a part of the equation to help the national pilot shortage (both military and civilian) is to lower the time.

What's wrong if they lower the hours for FOs, a lot of the issues mentioned are completely in the control of the airlines. (Showing without rest, pay, training)

I was crossing oceans with just over 1K hours with a brand new FP. So according to some posts here we should have been a death trap waiting to happen.

If you are an AF pilot and you believe this is doing you an injustice the problem probably isn't flights hours...

It matters because if you don't ID the root cause of an issue, you will never solve the problem.

Nothing is wrong if the FAA lowers the hours for an ATP, but that's not the complaint. We (the pilots here) all know that it wasn't a flight-hour issue that caused the Colgan crash, and the subsequent rule-change doesn't really enhance the flying safety of the public.

People's issue is that the USAF is addressing an issue that's not causing its problems.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
flyusaf83    98

The problem is the AF is focused on all of the wrong things in how they are approaching the pilot shortage. Changing the 1.5k hr rule won't move the needle in pilot retention. USAF pilots won't have any problem getting picked up by an airline over the next 15 years.

The reason this pisses me off is that I don't see the AF doing a dang thing to address the reasons for the pilot crisis.  I see more and more queep every single day. I see jets getting older and literally falling apart. I see dudes not seeing their wife and kids for a year to go sit behind a desk in some shithole to do a job an A1C could do. I see the AF thinking they can lure people to stay in by dangling awful jobs like DO or Sq/CC in their faces like it's the best thing ever, if they just take on more bullshit queep to have better OPRs.

I don't see the AF talking about these problems, much less fixing them. Instead, they are talking about stop-loss, longer ADSCs, and this fresh bullshit.  They are just finding more ways to screw pilots over.  Until they change their approach, the exodus will continue. 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
BADFNZ    175
1 hour ago, Lstcause257 said:

Why the hell does this matter? For all we know he was tasked to work with the FAA to come up with a solution (something that has been discussed for a while). As a result a part of the equation to help the national pilot shortage (both military and civilian) is to lower the time.

What's wrong if they lower the hours for FOs, a lot of the issues mentioned are completely in the control of the airlines. (Showing without rest, pay, training)



I was crossing oceans with just over 1K hours with a brand new FP. So according to some posts here we should have been a death trap waiting to happen.

If you are an AF pilot and you believe this is doing you an injustice the problem probably isn't flights hours...


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Because, like any normal human looking for employment, I'd like to increase my chances of being hired post-AF.  If you all of a sudden flood the job market with newly qualified applicants, wouldn't supply and demand dictate that my chances of getting hired would be less?  It's not hard to understand so I'm not sure why you're having trouble with it.  Then again, looking at your negative rep, I'm probably just feeding the troll.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Lstcause257    6
Because, like any normal human looking for employment, I'd like to increase my chances of being hired post-AF.  If you all of a sudden flood the job market with newly qualified applicants, wouldn't supply and demand dictate that my chances of getting hired would be less?  It's not hard to understand so I'm not sure why you're having trouble with it.  Then again, looking at your negative rep, I'm probably just feeding the troll.


Sounds like you are scared of a little competition... if you do a successful 10 year commitment as an AF pilot I personally wouldn't be worried about competition from a 250-1000 hour pilot.


This may be completely out of Fingers lane to talk on this (we don't know if he was given any orders to investigate to find a solution) but he is completely correct in the fact we have a national pilot problem. Regardless if you are a 10 and out guy or a 30 year guy, I would say it is safe to assume that if you are looking for a civilian job between now and 2030 you won't have a problem. That is also assuming you didn't barrel roll a MC-12.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
  • Upvote 2
  • Downvote 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
pawnman    675
22 hours ago, BeerMan said:

I agree with you that there are other issues that need to be addressed immediately. I'm still waiting to see the results from the focus on the squadrons piece he put out a few months ago. I have seen the ACC squadrons hire about 6-9 contractors to works in scheduling, stan eval, mobility, and other support areas. It has had an immediate impact from what I've seen. A lot more pilots being pilots, and a lot more dudes and dudettes in the vault! 

 

I wonder when this will start for AFGSC.  In my opinion, this and the non-vol 365s to make PowerPoint slides are the two biggest drivers convincing people to leave.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
schokie    57
20 minutes ago, Lstcause257 said:

Regardless if you are a 10 and out guy or a 30 year guy, I would say it is safe to assume that if you are looking for a civilian job between now and 2030 you won't have a problem. That is also assuming you didn't barrel roll a MC-12.

 

Well actually, the guy who infamously barrel rolled - technically aileron rolled- an MC-12 now flies for Fed-Ex.

What's ironic is the CFACC at the time, now current CSAF, went on the warpath briefing all deployed units at the time bragging about how he was going to railroad that guy's career. Now 'that guy' is a retired O-5 flying the line at Fed-Ex, living the good life, and laughing all the way to the bank.

I think the AF is proper fucked. 

Edited by schokie
Format and more detail
  • Upvote 12

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Lstcause257    6
The problem is the AF is focused on all of the wrong things in how they are approaching the pilot shortage. Changing the 1.5k hr rule won't move the needle in pilot retention. USAF pilots won't have any problem getting picked up by an airline over the next 15 years.
The reason this pisses me off is that I don't see the AF doing a dang thing to address the reasons for the pilot crisis.  I see more and more queep every single day. I see jets getting older and literally falling apart. I see dudes not seeing their wife and kids for a year to go sit behind a desk in some shithole to do a job an A1C could do. I see the AF thinking they can lure people to stay in by dangling awful jobs like DO or Sq/CC in their faces like it's the best thing ever, if they just take on more bullshit queep to have better OPRs.
I don't see the AF talking about these problems, much less fixing them. Instead, they are talking about stop-loss, longer ADSCs, and this fresh bullshit.  They are just finding more ways to screw pilots over.  Until they change their approach, the exodus will continue. 

I agree every bit of this. I have watched two deployments get shut off recently because of a lack of need for the individuals down range. Not sure if this trend will continue but it's positive impact to those two units and families. Wish we could see more of that. I'm in it til I am done having fun.

I haven't seen much in fixing the pilot shortage except increasing pilot output. That is not going to solve the problem it's more like giving someone a small blood transfusion while they have arterial bleeding.
From what I have read the NDAA Joe allows for a grand a month in flight pay pretty sure it wouldn't hurt retainability in the critical zones but really we just need to get rid of bullshit.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
BashiChuni    247
48 minutes ago, schokie said:

Well actually, the guy who infamously barrel rolled - technically aileron rolled- an MC-12 now flies for Fed-Ex.

What's ironic is the CFACC at the time, now current CSAF, went on the warpath briefing all deployed units at the time bragging about how he was going to railroad that guy's career. Now 'that guy' is a retired O-5 flying the line at Fed-Ex, living the good life, and laughing all the way to the bank.

I think the AF is proper ed. 

the guy who rolled the mc-12 was an IP i looked up to (and still do to this day) tremendously. when there's a war that goes down that MC-12 IP dude is the guy i'd follow to the gates of hell

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
pawnman    675
45 minutes ago, BashiChuni said:

the guy who rolled the mc-12 was an IP i looked up to (and still do to this day) tremendously. when there's a war that goes down that MC-12 IP dude is the guy i'd follow to the gates of hell

I'm amazed that in an age of prosecuting people like Snowden and Manning, no one asked why there was a cell phone camera on board an aircraft loaded with TS/SCI mission equipment.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
BashiChuni    247
25 minutes ago, pawnman said:

I'm amazed that in an age of prosecuting people like Snowden and Manning, no one asked why there was a cell phone camera on board an aircraft loaded with TS/SCI mission equipment.

i wouldn't even go there

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now


×