Aviation Continuation Pay (ACP - The Bonus)

[Guest]

Let's "get over" Benghazi too while we're at it too.

[Motofalcon]

Dude, we get it - you hate the President, and you are throwing major bait for us to jump on your bandwagon and blame him for every problem under the sun. Nobody is taking it; we are focused on slightly more specific Air Force problems.

Just STFU already. 

[Guest]

I am not trolling this board. I have a dog in this fight. I've been developing electronic communications for military systems for 30 years, I have kids that are currently AD. I just want what's right. The leftist agenda IS NOT right... If you don't agree, then we will just have to disagree. Have fun at your gay rights parade.  

[ViperStud]

BAMF, put down the scotch and sleep it off.  I've been there, bro - stop posting until tomorrow and while you're at it, don't text any ex-girlfriends either...

[Guest]

8 minutes ago, Motofalcon said:

Dude, we get it - you hate the President, and you are throwing major bait for us to jump on your bandwagon and blame him for every problem under the sun. Nobody is taking it; we are focused on slightly more specific Air Force problems.

Just STFU already. 

Got it, fully understood, thanks for setting my compass straight.... 

[HU&W]

12 hours ago, General Chang said:

Your leadership will fall over themselves to give you the choice assignments you want, all the way to Colonel.

21 hours ago, 2niner said:

If you could go back and tell your younger self "Don't join!" would your younger self have listened? Would you regret it 10 years down the road having not joined?

I would absolutely tell myself to join.  I was one of those people that needed a springboard to get from adultolescence into a professional adult life.  I've made great friends, had incredible adventures/experiences, built a very healthy financial future, and developed a strong resume.  That said, there's been quite a bit of suck, and there have been a few times I've regretted the decision to make it a career instead of transitioning to the guard.  For me, the worst part about active duty is that I don't get to determine my own future, and I have to leave many of those decisions to people who only know me by my strat/push line, my quals, or my timing.

2 hours ago, Duck said:

Can you believe we are talking about stop-loss when these assclowns just cut 25K TWO FREAKING YEARS AGO. 

Put another way; two years ago we took three years of cuts in one year, and people are surprised when the math doesn't work.

[SnapLock]

So, first of all I'm not going to bash Obama but I do think that his leadership, policies and direction given to the DOD have helped to create more suck for us.  His appointees are the ones running the DOD and the AF.  Think about it.  Also, many say that the AF has become a social experiment.  At least some of that has come from the White House.

Concerning QOL.  I remember driving to work early every morning as a Lt.  I hated the early days but remember being so glad that I was in the AF and didn't go to the airlines like some of my friends.  I also remember always thinking that I would do 20 and had no interest in ever going to the airlines.  Now I have no desire to do 20 and am frantically combing over my airline apps.  I've asked myself why things have changed.  It's different for everyone but it really boils down to leadership, the queep and the broken promotion system for me.  The AF has been a HUGE benefit for me.  I wouldn't change a thing about my decision making.  I would not change a thing if I could do it all over again, but I've realized that this isn't worth sticking around for.  

One of the biggest things that gets me is that I work 12-16 hour days while it seems like a lot of the rest of the base works 0730-1630.  They also usually get to break away for lunch and are allotted time for PT.  I don't get either.  My days are ALWAYS crazy busy and when I have to deal with one of these 0730-1630 workers I ALWAYS get pissed off.  It's usually because they will only do what I need Thursdays between 10 and 11.  Or, I have to make an appointment to see them a week in advance.  Or, THEY decide when they will do the training that I need and the next training that they are conducting is 3 weeks out and in the middle of the day so my squadron has to take me off the schedule for the day.  I could go on, and I think we all could, but the thing that sends me through the roof is seeing their work ethic and working conditions.  Their building and offices are usually new or newer.  Meanwhile, I go back to a shit hole squadron and check the mouse traps to see if we caught the mice that have been running around.  Meanwhile the shoe clerks are sitting in nice new leather office chairs and have book cases made of rich mahogany.  While, I'm trying to get something done with this person they notice that I'm missing a signature or some other small thing and tell me that they can't do a thing for me until I go run around to get that done.  This whole time they seem to be doing virtually nothing and sitting in their chair playing on their iPhone for most of the day.  You all have seen this too, right?  It's obvious that their work load is minimal compared to the aircrew out there and their offices completely close down for training, while we come in on the weekend to get that stuff done or do it after flying at 2000.  Why in the hell can't we assign some of these people back into the flying squadrons to take some of the load off of aircrew?  The whole manning in tight everywhere argument is a numbers game in my opinion.  It's B.S.  A lot of the rest of the AF needs to come spend a week in a flying squadron to see how long our days are and our workload and I think people will understand.  

It's clear to me that if leadership really cared about retaining the most highly trained members of the AF that have had millions of dollars invested into them then things would not be this way.  Instead we worry about making the AF look and feel like a civilian office environment for the non-aircrew.  I'm not advocating making everyone else's lives worse, but what I am saying is there are resources out there that could be used to take some of the load off of aircrew and make their quality of life better.  But what do I know?  Maybe it's right to let people walk away who have $10 million in training and 10 years of experience invested into them.  Yeah, take care of the people who's tech school was 6 weeks long.  That's how it should be...   

[FlyinGrunt]

SOF truth: Humans over hardware.

FHP: AFSOC is doing FAR better than most in the CAF/MAF, but I still have most copilots telling me they fly between 1-2 times A MONTH.  And that's after not getting to fly an actual airplane at all at LRAFB.

Chang, et al: our proficiency level is terrifying.  I'm with Brabus - the "real" IPs, WOs, etc are struggling as much as they can, but there's only so many hours in a day, after HAF and Congress-mandated programs and training.  Your chief villain is the lack of support manning, bc the comparative advantage is massive in terms of man hours.  I am an AFSOC pilot, and therefore I can do anyone and everyone's jobs (please note the satire, folks) - but my time is spent more productively flying and instructing.  Any Fortune 500 company knows this.

If you're claiming to fight for us, time to man the F up and speak truth to power.  Tell the Congresscritters how useless their latest mandated training, or tell HAF that having 6 separate mandated training syllabi for SAPR is only trivializing the gravity of the issue and wasting precious combat training time.

I will speak some heresy: most additional duties are best done - by us.  DOT, DOV, DOK - duh.  Most are better when we are in charge, albeit with non-aviator SMEs helping.  Do you think some finance troop knows what gear to buy for the next deployment? (this is huge in AFSOC.)  I've motivated dudes in office drudgery by reminding them that 80% of what we do . . . is for us.  It's not a piece of paper, it's a mission, a person, a career, an asset that we have to develop for the future.

That having been said, give me more people, more FHP, and more jets.  We can fix a lot, but only if They That Are So High stop telling Congress that all is well.

P.S.  Yeah, I just drank a bunch of whiskey

[FlyinGrunt]

Also, Snaplock: most who know me know that were I the WG/CC, the support squadrons' duty day would look a lot different.  I'm of the Robin Olds school: "If I can send a man to fly combat 24 hours a day, he can get paid 24 hours a day!"

1.  I would eliminate all internal training between 0730-1630.  ("closed for training")

2.  I would mandate at least min manning during all squadron functions.  Hell, I might forbid squadron functions 0730-1630.

3.  While this might be negotiable, I would mandate some manning from about 0300-2300, with full manning during duty hours.  MX dudes are working as long as we are, and they have a right to be supported too.  And so do I after flying during a night week.

4.  Good cop: in AFSOC, this isn't an issue, but I would force-feed the interfly to the support types and ops types alike.  Get these folks seeing what they're supporting, and morale goes up - every time.  I've seen it time and time again, across AFSCs - show them, and tell them, about what you do and how their help makes your life easier, and you get the results you want.

5.  Bad cop: don't like the increased duty hours?  I seriously don't care.  Chang, I'm taking a page from your playbook: I can train a new CP in an AFSOC C-130 in an average of 2 years.  I can train a new 3-level finance troop in 2 weeks.  Guess who I care more about retaining?  Especially since you A1 types continue to insist that supplying an endless stream of 3 levels and 25 hour copilots replaces the combat tested Pro Sups, IPs, WOs and others we're hemorrhaging . . . 

[sqwatch]

Reading through this thread, and posts like the one above, is quite disconcerting. I am a civ pilot select headed for OTS sometime in the future and this thread certainly has opened my eyes to some of the problems the AF is facing right now. Just the thought of going to Reapers after UPT makes me nauseous. Some questions if you'll indulge me: Knowing what you know now, being in for 5, 10, 20 years, if you could go back and tell your younger self "Don't join!" would your younger self have listened? Would you regret it 10 years down the road having not joined?

I suppose it says something about my overall commitment to join that an online forum would cause me to re-think my future career as a military pilot. You all make valid points, but there have to be some redeeming qualities to being an AF pilot.

I apologize if this is too much of a digression for this thread's topic. I was just reading through so I thought I'd post it here.

 

You gotta make that call for you homie. Despite my lamenting, there is NOTHING in the world like launching your death vessel into a combat sortie and feeling the thump of a magical space guided weapon fall off your jet after getting a nine line from some badass snake-eater down in the sh1t, then watching with amphetamine-induced glee the explosion light the ground below and wash out your nvgs. It's made all my taboo rendezvous with BQZip's mom feel so mundane. I hate to admit it, but the experience is so amazing that I would sit through a thousand more SARC briefings while a finance airman repeatedly clicks deny on my travel voucher all while simultaneously seeing how many red points I can rack up on the cyber awareness challenge just to watch an air burst weapon fall off my jet and explode on our enemies one more time. Unfortunately, I am a realist and unlike uncle ricco, I have to let go- accepting the fact that my best days are probably behind me.

Would I do it all again if I could repeat the same career path? Fvck yes for the reasons described above. Would I join with the possibility of being stuck in droids after a ten year commitment? Nope.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[JQuintana]

Soooo... Any further words on increasing the bonus to 35K a year?

[ThreeHoler]

Soooo... Any further words on increasing the bonus to 35K a year?

Requires congressional approval. AF is lobbying for it.

[brickhistory]

Been on the road for the last week and enjoying the entertainment on this thread, largely via Chang's bait and all the bites he is getting.  Like watching a fishing show where every cast = a strike followed by a dramatic fight to the catch and release.

My opinion is that Chang is a FGO on staff and is enjoying his ability to wind up the AF's "one percent" population.  (I know the math isn't right, but for the purposes of this post, just go with it).  So he gets his cheap shots in, gets so much attention that he self-actualizes and needs a tissue to clean up with, and, not coincidentally, takes a few ideas back to his overlords that this thread generates.  As well as serving as a non-attributable arena for some trial balloons - "Hey, how will the plebes react if we stop-loss?  Will they go tell Congress or can we get away with it?"  "15-19 year ADCS for UPT?  Would they preach against it to newbs?"

If Big Blue goes stop-loss under the current geo-political situation, i.e., no bigger war or major U.S.-based terror attack like 9/11, the screaming to Congress and the multiple class-action lawsuits that AF will have to answer will approach the ridiculous.

Congressman X: "So, CSAF, you have the fewest aircraft in your inventory since pre-WWII, yet you are hundreds of pilots short to fly them.  Why?  How come the Army and Navy don't have this problem (assuming this is true, I don't know for a fact)?  And since we, Congress, haven't declared that we are in a national emergency/voted for such, why are invoking the law we gave you to keep pilots involuntarily?  Didn't you just force out a whole bunch recently?

Lawsuit A:  In that the President hasn't invoked a national emergency and that a stop-loss of any duration or magnitude constitutes a penalty for only a certain group, the AF has caused severe injury and hardship due to its own negligence and stupidity.  Or some such legal argument...

In A1's terrific solution - make the problem go away until someone else has to deal with it - have they thought through the 2nd and 3rd order effects of stop-loss and indentured servitude-like ADSCs?

- As noted, how effective at doing anything other than flying would a stop-loss pilot be?  During Madeline Albright's war, I.e., Kosovo, I can assure you my GAS factor was low.  Something for the mission and I still ran at the bell.  Want some other queep?  Sorry, not my problem.  And in order to just avoid the dishonorable discharge hoop, the work I will perform will be so sub-standard that you will spend so much time having to re-do it, you can't imagine the ass pain you are about to endure.

- So you give a naïve kid who wants to fly a 15-19 year ADSC which he signs because, well, he's naïve.  Is he now guaranteed to make at least O-4?  Or will you have to ask Congress to modify the laws regarding promotions?

- What happens when naïve kid gets cynical and doesn't get promoted?  Currently, separation law trumps ADSC regs.

- What about the budget effects of this sudden pool of guaranteed O-4s?  Only so many FGOs can be on the books.  Cut the promotions for non-pilots?  Ok, what happens when you run out of MX guys, Cyber guys, etc, etc, etc.  Stick a pilot in that billet?  How effective will that be?  And wouldn't that COA be an own goal since you took your pilot-slave out of the air arena - flying/staff/other directly related jobs - so now you lost both the non-rated expertise in that area  plus a pilot out of flying?

- This could be just the ticket to get the Warrant Officer/Enlisted pilot track underway.  Cuts officer money, avoids the FGO limit. Win/win for the AIr Staff.

[HU&W]

6 hours ago, sqwatch said:

there is NOTHING in the world like launching your death vessel into a combat sortie and feeling the thump of a magical space guided weapon fall off your jet after getting a nine line from some badass snake-eater down in the sh1t, then watching with amphetamine-induced glee the explosion light the ground below

[...]

Would I join with the possibility of being stuck in droids after a ten year commitment

Note: Paragraph 1 is also the best part about RPA's

[SurelySerious]

Note: Paragraph 1 is also the best part about RPA's

Is there an artificial feel of the thump when the weapons release in the GCS now? THAT was the block 50 upgrade we were waiting years for?!

[HU&W]

1 hour ago, SurelySerious said:

Is there an artificial feel of the thump when the weapons release in the GCS now? THAT was the block 50 upgrade we were waiting years for?!

How long have you been at Holloman?  They installed the rumble packs in the seats nearly a year ago.  The don't work all that great, but at least setting 6 is fun.

[Homestar]

17 hours ago, SnapLock said:

Wall of text

I get that squadrons are undermanned, but you could stay at work till 8pm everyday and there would still be OPRs to review tomorrow.

Unless you're part of some sweet union that hooks you up with overtime pay, do your overtime on your missions and let the queep get done when it gets done.

 

[Ram]

We should just reduce our pilot rest requirements to free up a couple more hours per day for queep. That'll fix it.

[Motofalcon]

35 minutes ago, Ram said:

We should just reduce our pilot rest requirements to free up a couple more hours per day for queep. That'll fix it.

You jest, but I have heard more than one person from AFPC talk about reducing the 2MDS vol 1 hours requirement to be "experienced", that way the experienced/inexperienced ratio numbers look better...

So it may not be a huge stretch to change pilot rest requirements when home station on training sorties (i.e. Not deployed). If stop loss is on the table, I'm sure other crazy ideas are as well. 

Edited May 22, 2016 by Motofalcon

[BCan]

Am I the only one who sees "stop-loss" as blowing up the the AFs face?

First off, stop-loss isn't a tool used to fix personnel mismanagement.  If we are in a declared war with damn near every squadron deployed...ok, I get it in that situation.

Second, if the AF attempts to give guys/gals the heisman after a 11-12 year commitment, or prevents their retirement - then I see all out rebellion, to include a class-action lawsuit.  

Third, is it even legal?  Anyone smart on how this would work (I.e. What is your IRR commitment after the UPT ADSC?).  Has this ever been used in the past in this situation?

 

 

[2niner]

Thanks to everyone who took the time to respond to my post, I've read all your responses. Glad to hear some more tempered opinions about what the job entails. And good to know that even with all the suck, you still come out of the experience with a net positive.

I will comment on something SnapLock said though concerning QOL:

On 5/21/2016 at 10:36 PM, SnapLock said:

 

One of the biggest things that gets me is that I work 12-16 hour days while it seems like a lot of the rest of the base works 0730-1630.  They also usually get to break away for lunch and are allotted time for PT.  I don't get either.  My days are ALWAYS crazy busy and when I have to deal with one of these 0730-1630 workers I ALWAYS get pissed off.  It's usually because they will only do what I need Thursdays between 10 and 11.  Or, I have to make an appointment to see them a week in advance.  Or, THEY decide when they will do the training that I need and the next training that they are conducting is 3 weeks out and in the middle of the day so my squadron has to take me off the schedule for the day.  I could go on, and I think we all could, but the thing that sends me through the roof is seeing their work ethic and working conditions. 

 

 

I can certainly see how 16 hour days of running around base doing essentially nothing but queep would get old really fast. I was also amazed that you don't get allotted time for PT. The physical fitness of the pilot corps -- people who are responsible for the lives of aircrew and those on the ground -- seems more important than, you know, someone who sits in a cubicle all day. But I guess you can always get a workout in after your exhausting 16 hour day.

 

[BCan]

1 hour ago, 2niner said:

Thanks to everyone who took the time to respond to my post, I've read all your responses. Glad to hear some more tempered opinions about what the job entails. And good to know that even with all the suck, you still come out of the experience with a net positive.

I will comment on something SnapLock said though concerning QOL:

I can certainly see how 16 hour days of running around base doing essentially nothing but queep would get old really fast. I was also amazed that you don't get allotted time for PT. The physical fitness of the pilot corps -- people who are responsible for the lives of aircrew and those on the ground -- seems more important than, you know, someone who sits in a cubicle all day. But I guess you can always get a workout in after your exhausting 16 hour day.

 

Dude...think this through very carefully.

you are entering into a 10yr commitment - essentially giving the AF the power to do as they please with you for 12 years.  So, if "just the thought of going to reapers" gives you pause...you might be on to something by second guessing your decision.  What were you doing 12 years ago?

Secondly, you think you are entering your dream job - but think this through logically.  Why the 10 year commitment?  Why does the AF offer a pilot bonus of up to 225K...and why are the majority of pilots not taking it?  Why would we be talking about stop-loss?

i'm not saying you should / shouldn't proceed to active duty.  What I would say, is if flying is all you seek - then you are bat-shit crazy for not looking at the guard/reserve.  Disclaimer - I've been active duty my entire career.

If, however, you abuse yourself nightly to a candle lit scroll of the airmanship creed ...then maybe you are the next General Changer and will love active duty.

good luck!

 

 

[Karl Hungus]

3 hours ago, BCan said:

Am I the only one who sees "stop-loss" as blowing up the the AFs face?

First off, stop-loss isn't a tool used to fix personnel mismanagement.  If we are in a declared war with damn near every squadron deployed...ok, I get it in that situation.

Second, if the AF attempts to give guys/gals the heisman after a 11-12 year commitment, or prevents their retirement - then I see all out rebellion, to include a class-action lawsuit.  

Third, is it even legal?  Anyone smart on how this would work (I.e. What is your IRR commitment after the UPT ADSC?).  Has this ever been used in the past in this situation?

No idea if it's "legal" or not.  However, I can definitely see a Class-Action lawsuit coming forth... even if all it does is get more anti-AF media attention.  If there's anything your senior manager politicians hate the most, it's negative media attention- and JQP/Fox News/The New York Times would/will have a field day with a stop loss.  

I asked a recruiter from a legacy airline what her thoughts were on an AF stop loss.  She said her airline would probably complain to congress about it as well, given how many pilots they're anticipating hiring from the military.  They would like to avoid hiring only civilian/regional pilots, for a multitude of reasons.  I tend to think that airlines lobbying congress would just result in Age 70, though.  

[Fly]

Directly related to the topic: "For years, about 65 percent of the service’s pilots consistently signed up for service beyond their initial 10-year commitment in exchange for a bonus. But in Fiscal 2015, only 55 percent of all pilots and 47 percent of fighter pilots took the bonus. Lt. Col. Robert Butkovich, chief of rated force policy, said the total take rate is expected to drop to about 49 percent by the end of the year."

"Col. Farley Abdeen, chief of the Total Force Aircrew Management Integration Division, called the situation a “crisis” during the interview"

Article:

http://www.airforcemag.com/DRArchive/Pages/2016/May%202016/May%2023%202016/No-Quick-Fix.aspx

[2niner]

15 hours ago, BCan said:

Dude...think this through very carefully.

you are entering into a 10yr commitment - essentially giving the AF the power to do as they please with you for 12 years.  So, if "just the thought of going to reapers" gives you pause...you might be on to something by second guessing your decision.  What were you doing 12 years ago?

Secondly, you think you are entering your dream job - but think this through logically.  Why the 10 year commitment?  Why does the AF offer a pilot bonus of up to 225K...and why are the majority of pilots not taking it?  Why would we be talking about stop-loss?

i'm not saying you should / shouldn't proceed to active duty.  What I would say, is if flying is all you seek - then you are bat-shit crazy for not looking at the guard/reserve.  Disclaimer - I've been active duty my entire career.

If, however, you abuse yourself nightly to a candle lit scroll of the airmanship creed ...then maybe you are the next General Changer and will love active duty.

good luck!

 

 

All good points,12 years ago I might as well been in diapers... Guard/Reserve does sound like the way to go, but I don't have nearly the resume to apply. I was one of those 0 flight hour selects ( I have flown since selection). I applied because I was looking for something exciting/rewarding to do with my life rather than sitting at this cubicle in my office job like I do now. I suppose I was lured into applying for the AF based on claims that you guys enjoyed a higher QOL relative to other service branches, golf course on every base, going straight from sortie to bar etc. etc. Its been great getting a reality check from you guys. But who really knows where the AF is headed in 10 years, the current trend is downward, but I'd think things would have to start improving at some point.

But enough of the woe-is-me sob story from a pilot select. I know a lot of people want to be pilots but never get to for one reason or another. I obviously still have some thinking to do, and I'll be keeping an eye on this thread from the shadows.