Jump to content

Promotion and PRF Information


Guest e3racing

Recommended Posts

di1630, have you ever been a group/wing exec? Have you attended one of the military's "worthless" schools?

No, married to one so I've seen the work, but being a glorified secretary was never my goal when joining the AF.

I've attended a few worthless USAF schools but not ACSC in res as I presume you are inferring. All my knowledge of the happenings are from friends and colleagues who have.

I'm not sure why my attitude seems the exception but I could think of nothing worse than spending a year of my life at Maxwell. The only good thing I've heard is its a year long vacation from the CAF and it's easy.

But I don't hate the CAF so I'm fine sticking around. I fly my lines, do my work and go home to my kids while the careerists slug it out with extra work and politics for the same paycheck. While they take on an extra meaningless project to impress the boss, I have a jack and coke in the bar.

Someday their hard work might pay off with a sweet Pentagon staff tour or being a generals aide. Good for them if that's what they want.

Climbing the big blue ladder by being an exec and doing school was never a dream of mine. Getting paid to fly jets and have a family was. And I'm succeeding.

Cheers

  • Upvote 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The most valuable experience I took away from my 2.5 years as a squadron and group exec was how to look after the people I supervise to help them succeed, which is something I wish I had gotten from my Flight Commanders when I was younger. I had the opportunity to go straight into a Flight Commander position immediately following my exec tours and took every opportunity to mentor my young Lts, NCOs, and Airmen, push them for opportunities to excel, and ensure their OPRs/EPRs/award packages were the best they could possibly be.

This, IMO, is where the value is in being an exec. Not the strats.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Except people can and should learn that exact lesson (take care of your people, find opportunities for them, mentor them, put effort into their OPRs, etc.) without having to be an exec. In my experience, I've worked with a good amount of dudes who clearly did learn that lesson and did well as flt/cc's, ADOs, etc. who never did an exec job. If an exec job is the only way in community X to gain those skills/learn those lessons, then that community is epically failing. I'm glad you took something positive out of your experience (and a very important lesson in my opinion), I really am, but its a shame you spent 2.5 yrs as an exec and got the same lesson you should have received well prior to exec-dom.

You're not the exception di1630, lots of dudes think that way, myself included. I don't shit on guys for wanting to go to school, be an aide, etc. Great if that's for them, even better if a good bro decides to walk that path...hopefully it results in a good dude being a CC. But, it's not for all of us, and choosing to not walk that path should in the same manner not be looked down upon by the school-types, etc.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I didn't read his post to say he thought anyone doing the "leadership" route were auto-douches, just that it's not for him and he shouldn't be looked at like he has a dick sticking out of his cranium for professing said stance. Maybe I missed some other post earlier, but if not, I think you're putting a lot of words in his mouth. Bottom line, there are a lot of great leaders who did school/staff, and came back to the jet with a decent amount of tactical ability given their position at the time; as you said, there are several who are great leaders and good in the jet as well. However, it shouldn't be a shock that the path they walked is not desirable for a lot of dudes, including A LOT of dudes who are not "off the path" because of a lack of capability to do so, but by choice alone.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Except people can and should learn that exact lesson (take care of your people, find opportunities for them, mentor them, put effort into their OPRs, etc.) without having to be an exec. In my experience, I've worked with a good amount of dudes who clearly did learn that lesson and did well as flt/cc's, ADOs, etc. who never did an exec job. If an exec job is the only way in community X to gain those skills/learn those lessons, then that community is epically failing. I'm glad you took something positive out of your experience (and a very important lesson in my opinion), I really am, but its a shame you spent 2.5 yrs as an exec and got the same lesson you should have received well prior to exec-dom.

You're not the exception di1630, lots of dudes think that way, myself included. I don't shit on guys for wanting to go to school, be an aide, etc. Great if that's for them, even better if a good bro decides to walk that path...hopefully it results in a good dude being a CC. But, it's not for all of us, and choosing to not walk that path should in the same manner not be looked down upon by the school-types, etc.

Checks

Edited by DirkDiggler
Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's not shocking that guys don't want that path. At all. It's shocking when a guy who's never done exec/school/staff claims to know with certainty that all are "worthless," meaningless," etc. How the ###### does he know?! In what other facet of military life is it acceptable to heed the advice of someone who hasn't been there, done that? Does a B-courser/wingman get to say with certainly that WIC is a worthless waste of time? Does a KC-135 boom get to compare the capabilities of the B-2 versus a B-52 just because he's refueled them? No. We roll our eyes at those people and tell them to shut the ###### up.

That's what I think is lame. Those things don't seem appealing to you? Cool, don't do them. But don't turn around and A) act like you know about them, and B) that your chosen path is so far superior/righteous to someone else's.

Why is it that you never see a "school/staff" path guy criticize the "career flyer" guys, but that every page here is littered with the career flyer guys condemning the school/staff guys and reminding them, constantly and with an eerie hint of insecurity, that they care about flying and their family and that they're succeeding?

Believe it or not, the school/staff guys top priorities are oftentimes flying and family too. They're just also willing to take other career avenues along the way, and without the need for constant reaffirmations to anonymous peers on the internet.

What staff or IDE have you done (if eligible)? Have you been an exec at any level?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

But don't turn around and A) act like you know about them, and B) that your chosen path is so far superior/righteous to someone else's.

Agreed - it's a two way street.

Why is it that you never see a "school/staff" path guy criticize the "career flyer" guys

I've seen it several times, just luckily haven't been the poor bastards directly under that "school/staff" guy's command. Like I said, everyone should chill the fuck out and thank the dude who is willing to walk the career path to leadership, as well as thank the dude who says it's not for him and stays on board in some manner to continue the tactical advancement of our Air Force from a flying standpoint. The problem is the latter are more commonly shit on/shoved aside than those who check the appropriate career advancement containers the AF deems more important. You can absolutely do both, the problem is not many people do both; I am grateful there are good dudes who can do both, just wish there were a lot more of them.

Edited by brabus
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here's the dilemma: I want to chose when and how I leave the Air Force. In order to do that, in today's Air Force, I have to make O-5 or I run the risk of not receiving continuation once passed over. To have a better than 50/50 shot at making O-5 I need a DP at my primary board. To get a DP at my primary board I need to be in a position where the Wing Commander believes I deserve one of the few he has to hand out. Showing up and flying the line doesn't get you a DP these days. So I have to take jobs I otherwise wouldn't take during the years between pinning on O-4 and meeting my primary O-5 board. It sucks for a couple years, but hopefully I get promoted and get to stay doing what I wanted to do when I joined (fly).

Have passed over Majors been offered continuation lately?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The problem is the latter are more commonly shit on/shoved aside than those who check the appropriate career advancement containers the AF deems more important.

Serious question: how so?

What do you consider "shoved aside" for an older (O-4/O-5) fighter pilot who is not (by choice or otherwise) on a leadership track?

Edited by Danny Noonin
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Fucking lame...,, But don't broadcast your low SA by assuming that's everyone, and/or babbling about things you've never actually done or been a part of.

Wow....Chill out, take a midol there Nancy.

I'm not bashing ALL the dudes who take the exec>school>staff>whatever the f-else route. Some of them are my good buddies. A lot are complete f-ing d-bags.

What I will bash is the system that seems to think someone who is an exec, goes to school for a year etc. is the best person to lead.

The best leaders I know didn't need that crap to lead.

And finally, you think I need to go to school or be an exec to have any SA about it? Bulllllllsh!t!

I have plenty of experience at all levels, I've seen the game, I know how it works and what it takes to "usually" get ahead in the USAF.

Edited by di1630
Link to comment
Share on other sites

What I will bash is the system that seems to think someone who is an exec, goes to school for a year etc. is the best person to lead.

Dude, I'm the first person to bash anything and everything that is Maxwell AFB. I think it's a low-payback investment for a years worth of time and money (for the AF, not necessarily for the person). But I think you've got it backwards.

The AF picks those that it feels has the most potential to be commanders, etc, and sends them there for development. They don't get to lead because they went there. They get to lead because they were high-enough quality to get picked up in the first place. IDE, SDE, etc. are the results of that, not the other way around.

Execs are a slightly different animal (drastically different in some cases) because of the ways those are chosen. OG/wing exec decision process may be affected by deployment cycles, PCS cycles, other jobs/needs within a wing, etc....i.e. timing. But it still is seen by many as a developmental job intended to show a guy a bit about how the world works outside of a squadron. Some are more developmental than others. I'm sure some are quite secretarial as someone said and a million examples of bottom feeders being execs. But that's the general intent.

It's a perfectly fair argument to say that we pick guys too early for the leadership track. But IDE is when it is. It's only a couple of years before command anyway. So we have to make a cut somewhere. This is where the AF does it. I don't necessarily like it, but I don't really have a better idea either when taking into account the big picture.

I'm the worlds biggest proponent that operational squadrons are the heart of the AF. But there is a bigger AF too, and we need to develop people to function in roles outside a squadron too. There is a big world out there that requires people with operational SA to be involved with (i.e. Staff shit). Like it or not, we can't scoff that stuff entirely or the real results will be that squadrons and their capabilities will suffer. Group/Wing Commanders who understand nothing about the outside world are frequently ineffective. A large part of what they do is interact with staffs and the outside world on behalf of their organization. There's way more to it than just personal leadership skills.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Danny - what I mean is seeing dudes who are good officers and pilots, but because they choose (I agree, it is a choice) to not walk the more or less "cookie cutter" path to leadership big AF traditionally desires (school-staff-DO and on), they start getting the shit deals (TDYs, deployments, etc), undesirable assignments, being directly told "do this or get out," etc. A lot of good O-4s get out of AD because their option is do it the big AF way or face a very increased probability of the aforementioned. Or at the O-5 level, good dudes play the game and then get the "have we got a command deal for you!...or go fuck yourself and get out, your call" line, and now the poor bastard who's put in almost 20 years to the AF is faced with a undesirable deal that sucks wholesale for his family or he can decline and get out...great. The AF "raises" officers to all be on a track to WG/CC, COCOM, etc., but doesn't seem to understand that not everyone wants to be on that track. It subsequently doesn't understand what to do with these officers when they try to jump off the track - which I think is a big reason AD is bleeding so much officer and tactical talent into the guard, reserves or worse, completely gone from military service. It's a shame and something that needs some real, hard looks from senior leadership. I do not have a great answer, what do you think? There has to be something real the AF can offer to keep talent on AD who aren't going to be the next WG/CC or higher, but they still offer a great service to the Air Force.

All that said, there are certainly the O-5s that somehow stayed mostly on their desired "non-standard" career track and are doing just fine. But, they're certainly in the minority.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm a tool, I'm a tool, I'm a huge huge huge huge tool

Edit: http://youtu.be/uaPWwyC6CDI

Chill the fuck out.

Because I guarantee you that every one of them has gone to school in residence and

Absolutely false. My precious sq/cc has never had an assignment outside of flying. Dealing in absolutes is a dangerous business from both sides. Edited by SurelySerious
  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm a staff wiener. As Danny alluded to the "staff shit" is important. Having ding dongs here has negative repercussions in the Ops squadrons. You guys want the new hotness? Well if you send a dumb asses to staff, that shit gets fucked up. The Generals who actually make the decisions are informed by Majors and LtCols. I'm actually astonished by how much push me and my Major pears have with respect to requirements and future plans.

It's always one fucked up briefing away from tanking a community for years, the way the POM process works, you're looking at affecting an MDS for the next 3-5 years, and it's extremely difficult and expensive to change thing once the ships have sailed.

  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I do not have a great answer, what do you think?

Fair enough. I get what you're saying and agree...partially.

The problem lies in the big picture. Someone has to do the "undesirable" assignments. It sucks, but it's true. And while I'd rather go to war any day with a bunch of crusty old experienced guys, we have to make room in our squadrons for young pups...every single one we can. Because we are short on 11Fs and the only way we can fix that is to create more. If I create more, I have to be able to absorb them. To absorb them, I need room in a squadron. If we prioritize having all-star teams of experienced guys now, we won't have ANY teams later. It's just a math problem. There has to be a balance.

To say that the solution lies simply in retaining the ones we've got wont work either. What could the AF do to retain them? Give everyone a "great" assignment? Let everyone fly for 20 years? Not fill COCOM taskings for 365s to the Stans because we don't want to hand out bad deals?

I'm telling you, dudes will get out anyway because the reasons people get out often have little to do with a bad deal. It's because they want to move on. It'd because they want to settle down and move less often. Its because their necks and backs fucking hurt and they want to go out on top before they are perma-DNIF. It's because they want more say in their lives. It's a combination of all of the above and more. And--agree or not--right now it's heavily about opportunity. A-words are hiring. Dudes recognize that they can get out now, get a line number, and still contribute to Uncle Sam in the form of 6 sorties a month and a deployment every 3 years in ANG/AFR instead of 8 sorties a month and more frequent deployments on AD. Not a bad trade off--even if you love what you do. Despite all the bitching here and everywhere else, most dudes in the AF still love what they do. But the shine has just worn off a bit. Or a lot.

Mind you, dudes on the fast track still face all of those bad deal things and most of them have spent a year in multi cam somewhere already. So dudes not on the fast track are not alone. Shitty desk job? Check. Moving every year or two between s-word to s-word to DO/CC then on again to s-word, s-word, etc? check. Ripe for 365? Check. Getting little say in your life? Check.

I say all of this as a dude who has made non-standard choices I'm my life. It's worked out well for me, but I've been lucky.

I just think (know) things are pretty damn complicated in the big picture. And what looks on the surface to be easy conceptual answers are not realistic in the bigger scheme of things.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm a staff wiener. As Danny alluded to the "staff shit" is important. Having ding dongs here has negative repercussions in the Ops squadrons. You guys want the new hotness? Well if you send a dumb asses to staff, that shit gets fucked up. The Generals who actually make the decisions are informed by Majors and LtCols. I'm actually astonished by how much push me and my Major pears have with respect to requirements and future plans.

It's always one fucked up briefing away from tanking a community for years, the way the POM process works, you're looking at affecting an MDS for the next 3-5 years, and it's extremely difficult and expensive to change thing once the ships have sailed.

Ref AFGSC/A3H

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ref AFGSC/A3H

In AFGSC, not just limited to A3H (if...and I'm assuming here... the H is for helicopters). We had a SPO rep stand up and tell us recently that essentially they were surprised that Link 16 was viewed as an important capability.

Edited by SurelySerious
  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

In AFGSC, not just limited to A3H (if...and I'm assuming here... the H is for helicopters). We had a SPO rep stand up and tell us recently that essentially they were surprised that Link 16 was viewed as an important capability.

And by the time we get it, the rest of the AF will have long since abandoned it for the next thing.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

In medical I have met many Sq CCs that did not do IDE in-res, and a couple guys who did IDE in-res that were non-selected for Sq command. It might have something to do with our IDE process where you have to apply for IDE to go in-res-not via the promotion board picking who they want to send to IDE.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Good points Danny - I understand what you're saying. Maybe the best way is to just accept that those who want the 20 years of flying, more control, etc. are just going to go guard/reserve/out completely regardless of what AD does. But, it still wouldn't hurt to at least loosen the death grip the AF has on the idea that everyone should want to be a WG/CC+ until they are deemed unfit and sent another direction (deservedly or not). For the most part, it is still a potentially very dumb move to show any cards leading to other than "I want to be a WG/CC!" while still on AD, at least until you're at the point you have to show them to move in the direction you want. I think that's a foul, why can't AD just accept someone's desire to do that and let them serve out their full commitment without fear of retribution. If anything it would do a great deal for morale and in turn get better productivity out of people until the very end.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Of all the services, the USAF tends to try and wait as long as possible to pick its senior leaders, and this is a double-edged sword.

Good news: Larger pool of eligibles for senior leadership. Tool-burgers initially thought to be fast-burners can (can, not always will (Foglesong)) be cast aside due to better choices.

Bad news: Everyone is expected to want to be a senior leader, thus leading to our "up-or-out" system. It is extremely difficult or at least unenjoyable to stay in simply to fly the line.

The opposite of the USAF would be the USN, where they place a few select officers on paths for senior leadership incredibly early.

Good news: Many more officers can stay in simply to do what they got in to do without having to act like they want to be an admiral some day.

Bad news: The USN gets stuck with their bad picks as senior leaders due to the small pool. (I mean seriously, have you ever met some of their admirals?!?!)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Of all the services, the USAF tends to try and wait as long as possible to pick its senior leaders

I don't know much about the USN selection process, but I often feel the USAF is too quick to hedge their bets on future leaders. Once guys get knighted as a shiny penny, there seems to be very little that can stop that momentum.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't know much about the USN selection process, but I often feel the USAF is too quick to hedge their bets on future leaders. Once guys get knighted as a shiny penny, there seems to be very little that can stop that momentum.

I feel like the opposite is true as well: its hard to pull above the pack if you weren't the most stellar Lt/young capt.

In AFGSC, not just limited to A3H (if...and I'm assuming here... the H is for helicopters). We had a SPO rep stand up and tell us recently that essentially they were surprised that Link 16 was viewed as an important capability.

Hopefully, you have strong platform reps in your MAJCOM/A3 (I'm assuming this is for a bomber platform). I'm currently in a staff program office job, and I see the ops community that I work for having no collective idea what they want. It's really hard to acquire when I have to guess at requirements.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In medical I have met many Sq CCs that did not do IDE in-res, and a couple guys who did IDE in-res that were non-selected for Sq command. It might have something to do with our IDE process where you have to apply for IDE to go in-res-not via the promotion board picking who they want to send to IDE.

Was going to say the same about Cyber. Sure, there's the cookie cutter path. But 1 of 4 CC's I've had has done that. The rest were's RAS's, led an engagement team in Afghanistan and the other was just wierd. Also, we've got a lot of 2 time CC's for some reason.

I find it interesting the people railing against the exec/school path are those that lack perspective.. the same thing the exec/school path is supposed to teach.

Had a Marine O6 that I worked for and we talked briefly about selection. He was infantry, but said he could have easily been selected for Supply. He said, "You can't just have all your shit-hot Officers in Infantry. We need good ones in all the jobs or the whole thing breaks. I got lucky, that's all."

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thank you. I was beginning to think the only people who post on BODN are idiots who think a guy with experience only at the squadron-level should be the next CSAF, but am relieved to see voices of sanity like Ho are still posting.

Exec, school, command, staff...they're ALL important to round-out our future GOs. Proficiency in the primary job is assumed once senior leaders push you for the "box-checking" opportunities. It's never going to change, because it never should. Thank heavens most of you on this forum aren't in KLPs. I thank my lucky stars.

Go ahead and bash me. Deep down, you know I'm right.

  • Downvote 8
Link to comment
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
×
×
  • Create New...