Jump to content

Promotion and PRF Information


Guest e3racing

Recommended Posts

What if even as a Commander of a non-flying unit, you could fly attached? Easy solution.

 

 

So we as an AF need to find that balance. It starts with making Command attractive again.

 

Sent from my iPhone using Baseops Network Forums

I'd buy that. It's essentially what our OSS/CCs typically get; it's also what on occasion, from what I have heard, can help keep them sane.

 

And also true. The few people these days I hear desiring command are egomaniacs who see it as a stepping stone, with no regard for the responsibility of commanding the AF's core unit. Sts.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Duck said:

What if even as a Commander of a non-flying unit, you could fly attached? Easy solution

Not all bases have flying wings.  So I guess the space guys command non-flying squadrons, too?

Of note, from the stats:  pilots and mission support both make up ~30% of ipz population but made up ~31% of selectees.  Other operators (e.g. 12Xs) and non-rated ops (e.g. Space and cyber) were selected at lower rates than their proportion of population.  Pretty soon you'll end up with pilots commanding space squadrons.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Weezer said:

Do this, and you'll quickly run out of flying positions to put rated Lt Cols in.  You'll be putting flyers as commanders of non-flying units and in non-rated staff positions.

I'm not against that, necessarily, but I don't think that's what's going to motivate your rated CGOs.

Easy fix, let these guys promote and fly the line and mentor younger guys... without a "staff position" for them.  That's a AF bullshit way of thinking.  Not everyone is meant to be or is right for command.  Even more guys who could command, simply don't want to.  The AF doesn't handle these rated officers the right way.  Management thinks everyone should be want to be vectored for command.  If they don't, they are pushed out and/or passed over.  

What's the logic of that? Let these guys stay in and do the job that the AF has invested millions in.  Who cares if we don't have some office job for them? They probably don't want some bullshit office job.  Let them stay in and promote easily to O-5.  If that becomes the standard, more dudes will stay in.  Most of us would love to fly the line and avoid bullshit office jobs.

And please don't tell me this isn't "fair" for the shoes who don't have the opportunity to be a technician and promote.  If that triggers them, they should have thought about that before becoming shoe clerks.  They don't offer the AF a valuable skillset. Pilots do.

The AF is going to have to change their thinking regarding promotion for pilots, amongst other things, if they want to a damn thing about the pilot crisis.  They need to throw out the traditional rules and guidelines. The system is broken and retarded.

Edited by flyusaf83
  • Upvote 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 hours ago, hatedont said:

Your points maybe the exact reason why the promotion numbers for pilots are dropping. Why?

We think we are above the rest of the Air Force. Some of our guys have treated people like utter crap at the Pentagon, creating a negative perception of some communities. When you piss off the wrong people long and hard enough, they will eventually start to push back. 

I'm guilty of it myself. Returned from a deployment and the MDG/CC was behind the automatic entrance doors at the clinic having her butt kissed. I didn't see her initially, just 5 to 6 E's and O's but I was in a rush. So I proceeded to head through the second set of doors and she said hi to me like you need to acknowledge my superior rank and presence. I said hi back and kept walking. I was trying to get my inprocessing checklist signed off and this was my second time in the clinic because ITR didn't give me a return checklist.  I was rushing so I can take leave the next day. After you return from a deployment you are in a different mindset and just want to get away from the base altogether. But the MDG/CC wants to be acknowledged. Got it. There is nothing that says I have to issue a greeting indoors to an O-6.  The OG/CC doesn't expect you to kiss his ass every time he is in the squadron. Damn, the ops world is different.

Guess what? When she retires and I retire in 3 years, I will still walk by her ass in civilian clothes and not say a word. 

 

uh wut?

But Did You Die.jpeg

  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites



You're smoking crack if you think that chiefs aren't part of the problem. I've never met a more entitled group for no reason in my life. A large majority of these guys shouldn't have made it past TSgt and now all they do is yell at everyone and complain. Why do we need chiefs? There are a few exceptions to that but I would say it's rare. Chiefs are by and large pieces of crap. But they are the first to tell you "I'm a DV!" Fvck you dude. Get out of my way and have a wonderful AF day. If you don't have the backing of the chief then the chief needs to be fired and put in his place. It's not his job to not back you.


Sent from my iPhone using Baseops Network Forums

Exactly. Unfortunately, Chiefs are a byproduct of the us vs them mentality. If Chiefs actually answered to Pilots and not some snot nosed support officer trying to be the next FGO/Yr we may be able to start the refocusing. I had a Mx Chief work for me back in the day and he was the best dirty uniform, wrench turning, war story telling, advice giver I could have asked for. Since we were on the same "team" it worked out great. A hell of a lot of our Chiefs (and O-5s/6s) have forgotten what team they play for.

My Dad was a Marine Fighter Pilot Commander and actually fired 2 SgtMajs who weren't adequately taking care of his Marines. We need to do more of this in the AF.


Sent from my iPhone using Baseops Network Forums
  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, ClearedHot said:

Yeah but was he a SpecOps Fighter Pilot?

Years back an Enlisted Navy SEAL got commissioned and ended up flying Hornets.

Bet he had some stories.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, flyusaf83 said:

And please don't tell me this isn't "fair" for the shoes who don't have the opportunity to be a technician and promote.  If that triggers them, they should have thought about that before becoming shoe clerks.  They don't offer the AF a valuable skillset. Pilots do.

More should have the chance to go to pilot/nav/abm training and pass, or not, based on aptitude in the actual job.  Regardless of whether or not you want rated officers in charge of more fields (universal management badge has its downsides), the AF needs to make more rated officers.  That means more schoolhouses and relaxed medical standards for entrance physicals.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

CE guy here...good discussion. Here is my perspective:
- The arguments that flyers deal with too much queep and flyers should lead mission support squadrons are mutually exclusive. The majority of the queep in a CE squadron is personnel, finance, environmental,  or contracting related. Much of the queep is driven at the HAF, DoD, or federal government level. Putting a flyer in charge of a CE squadron isn't going to eliminate queep. The queep problem originates with the fact that our government has become the most useless, grid-locked bureaucracy in modern history. So, you have to choose one argument or the other. Putting a flyer in a support squadron is going to increase the queep they deal with exponentially.
- Many times the queep starts with a pilot. I've pulled teams off of apron repair to fix potholes in the wing headquarters parking lot. I've also had heavy equipment operators turn snow over with a shovel before a DV visit so you can only see "clean snow." No shit. That stuff wasn't an engineer's idea, and it is embarrassing and humbling to go ask trained people to do those things while making it "your own" (i.e. Not diming out wing leadership)
- The Air Force chose long ago to invest in cool jets and not facilities. Probably a wise decision given our budget. But, I only get about 50% of the funds I need to maintain the base in a fair condition. One third of our squadrons are often deployed, and there isn't the manpower to execute 100% of those funds even if we got them.
- Flyers don't understand what their support squadrons provide in terms of readiness because squadrons don't deploy with the wings they support. For CE Airmen, readiness means that our Airmen need to be able to repair a cratered runway, setup emergency airfield lighting, setup aircraft arresting systems, and provide drinking water among a host of other tasks. When most people think of CE, they think of Bubba plunging their toilet. Bubba is very important, but he is a very small piece of the pie. When we deploy, we need flyers dropping bombs, not figuring how to get water from A to B.
- Where engineers often fail is telling the operational community where we can't support. Sometimes we let work slip into the black hole, which is unsat.

So, this diatribe probably fits better in what's wrong with the AF, but the takeaway is that I don't think moving flyers into support squadrons is a cure all in terms of fixing support functions and rated promotion rates, and it certainly isn't as easy as some would think. If people are leaving because of all the non-flying stuff they have to do, moving someone into a support squadron seems like the worst thing you could do. I don't know what the right answer is to the pilot crisis, but I hope you guys figure it out. The nation needs you guys, and I'm proud to support you.

  • Upvote 14
Link to comment
Share on other sites

What needs to define a "technical track", if getting passed over for O-5 and continued indefinitely isn't it?

If the ACIP went up to 10k a month...I think we might find some valid competition with the airlines.

How does the Air Force compete with an organization that will pay you twice as much for less than half the work, while dropping out 95% of the shitty parts?

How are rated promotion rates and retention even connected?

If you were punching as an O-4, who would change their mind based on a promotion to O-5?

Bendy


Sent from my iPhone using Baseops Network Forums

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I get the impression that "being good in the jet" is just an assumption. You should just do that, and the difference is how much more you can handle. How much time does that really command?

I'm sure it's based on airframe...how much time does that take for an F-22? An A-10? What about a C-130J?

How "good" is good enough? Is there a limit? If I just let a guy have time to do nothing but, would s/he excel? Or would they just go home to the wife/hooker? I find it hard to believe people aren't "good in the jet" based off anything other than their personal lack of give a fvck.

Commanding a support squadron is pure, 100%, unadulterated queep. It's exactly like commanding a flying squadron without the flying. How many CE commanders are out patching holes? How many CONS commanders are writing contracts? None. Zero.

It is also not even remotely required to understand what your people do to lead them. It certainly helps, but a good leader with half a brain can listen to the right people and sail the ship in the right direction.

Things might be a lot better around this part of the woods if Bossman didn't think he fvcking knew better than the people actually doing the work, but believe people when they said things need to be done differently without concern that it was going to make him look bad to his boss.

This can of worms is literally so messed, all one can do about it is laugh. The only ones not laughing are trying to straighten their shit due to non-promotion, or 1/2 BTZ school selects riding the wave of "it's all good in the hood". I can guarantee you a IPZ O-5 select is under no illusion of the disaster that abounds.

Bendy

Sent from my iPhone using Baseops Network Forums

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why would I want any pilot to be put in charge of any support function? I told a previous CC he sucked ass dealing with the E's. His valid excuse was never being around enlisted. This is a dumb ass concept to think you can do better at another officers job just because you are a pilot. Get over yourselves.

People who think they can do any officers job in the AF and be 100% effective is WRONG. I never needed a SNCO to tell me what to do as an officer. As a prior, I know what an enlisted airman needs. It's hard to lead someone if you never walked a mile in their shoes.

I'm that guy that told the shirt no you are not taking "A1C Need for Speed" driving privileges away on base because he got a ticket off base. Then he got another ticket on base for a stop sign or something. The kid was about to deploy and I told the shirt that's a dumb ass punishment. I went old school on the A1C and needless to say, the problem was resolved. I don't need a SNCO telling me how to handle the enlisted. If you need a seeing eye dog as an officer, you shouldn't be a CC or put in charge of E's period. 

Some of you think airmen should spend a day in ops. Airmen should never have to spend a day learning about ops or supporting it. They selected the jobs they have for a reason. I give 2 craps about how you fuel your plane. I chose intel as my enlisted job to be indoors so I don't have to be on a hot ass aircraft parking spot pumping fuel. My focus should be on our adversaries, not how to launch an F-22. Don't piss in my Cheerios and I won't piss in your Wheaties.

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

51 minutes ago, hatedont said:

Why would I want any pilot to be put in charge of any support function? I told a previous CC he sucked ass dealing with the E's. His valid excuse was never being around enlisted. This is a dumb ass concept to think you can do better at another officers job just because you are a pilot. Get over yourselves.

People who think they can do any officers job in the AF and be 100% effective is WRONG. I never needed a SNCO to tell me what to do as an officer. As a prior, I know what an enlisted airman needs. It's hard to lead someone if you never walked a mile in their shoes.

I'm that guy that told the shirt no you are not taking "A1C Need for Speed" driving privileges away on base because he got a ticket off base. Then he got another ticket on base for a stop sign or something. The kid was about to deploy and I told the shirt that's a dumb ass punishment. I went old school on the A1C and needless to say, the problem was resolved. I don't need a SNCO telling me how to handle the enlisted. If you need a seeing eye dog as an officer, you shouldn't be a CC or put in charge of E's period. 

Some of you think airmen should spend a day in ops. Airmen should never have to spend a day learning about ops or supporting it. They selected the jobs they have for a reason. I give 2 craps about how you fuel your plane. I chose intel to be indoors so I don't have to be on a hot ass aircraft parking spot pumping fuel.  My focus should be on our adversaries. Don't piss in my Cheerios and I won't piss in your Wheaties.

I'm throwing the bullshit flag; first, because your points are contradictory, and secondly because they're incoherent.  If you think pilots aren't good leaders because they aren't around enlisted people, you should be 100% for putting them there.  It's not going to get any better unless you expose them to it sts earlier on so they can figure it out.

And this has already been mentioned, but what specially qualified a finance officer to lead his section?  A 4 week tech school? No, being put in charge of the people and finding a good SNCO to mentor him, which takes time.  Which is, again, why we probably ought to put fliers in that position sts as well if we expect them to ever grow in the same manner.

 

Lastly, people in support functions should absofuckinglutely be exposed to what it is they support and where it fits sts in the big picture.  Half the problems we have getting comm to respond, for example, might be resolved more quickly if they understood what a screeching halt our squadron grinds to when our mission planning system is tits up.  Well, that and the base comm to have the appropriate authorities etc, but I digress.  It is the same concept as this: when a young flier makes a stupid decision in the grand scheme of an LFE because he was only thinking about his jet and not the whole strike package, we debrief him on it and then teach the larger group the lesson learned so hopefully the other LTs don't make the same mistake. 

  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

CE guy here...good discussion. Here is my perspective:

- The arguments that flyers deal with too much queep and flyers should lead mission support squadrons are mutually exclusive. The majority of the queep in a CE squadron is personnel, finance, environmental,  or contracting related. Much of the queep is driven at the HAF, DoD, or federal government level. Putting a flyer in charge of a CE squadron isn't going to eliminate queep. The queep problem originates with the fact that our government has become the most useless, grid-locked bureaucracy in modern history. So, you have to choose one argument or the other. Putting a flyer in a support squadron is going to increase the queep they deal with exponentially.

- Many times the queep starts with a pilot. I've pulled teams off of apron repair to fix potholes in the wing headquarters parking lot. I've also had heavy equipment operators turn snow over with a shovel before a DV visit so you can only see "clean snow." No shit. That stuff wasn't an engineer's idea, and it is embarrassing and humbling to go ask trained people to do those things while making it "your own" (i.e. Not diming out wing leadership)

- The Air Force chose long ago to invest in cool jets and not facilities. Probably a wise decision given our budget. But, I only get about 50% of the funds I need to maintain the base in a fair condition. One third of our squadrons are often deployed, and there isn't the manpower to execute 100% of those funds even if we got them.

- Flyers don't understand what their support squadrons provide in terms of readiness because squadrons don't deploy with the wings they support. For CE Airmen, readiness means that our Airmen need to be able to repair a cratered runway, setup emergency airfield lighting, setup aircraft arresting systems, and provide drinking water among a host of other tasks. When most people think of CE, they think of Bubba plunging their toilet. Bubba is very important, but he is a very small piece of the pie. When we deploy, we need flyers dropping bombs, not figuring how to get water from A to B.

- Where engineers often fail is telling the operational community where we can't support. Sometimes we let work slip into the black hole, which is unsat.

So, this diatribe probably fits better in what's wrong with the AF, but the takeaway is that I don't think moving flyers into support squadrons is a cure all in terms of fixing support functions and rated promotion rates, and it certainly isn't as easy as some would think. If people are leaving because of all the non-flying stuff they have to do, moving someone into a support squadron seems like the worst thing you could do. I don't know what the right answer is to the pilot crisis, but I hope you guys figure it out. The nation needs you guys, and I'm proud to support you.

Quibbling. Take a shot. (You made your points.....but still.....take a shot)

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Baseops Network Forums

  • Downvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Frog, the argument wasn't that having flyers command some support function would reduce queep for that person; it's the flyer in such a position would add needed perspective to what they're actually supporting. Quick personal example - two weeks to go to PCS with no orders, TMO/training couldn't do anything without them, etc. Guess who still punched out at 1630 every day even though the flight CC said they were behind?  That's right - the FSS. The same dudes that think we show up just to fly and work a 4 hour day. Leaving at 1630 with work piled up is a no-go in ops; it should be the same in the MSG. 

Flyers leading some of those functions as majors (the same rank of their current CCs) would lend some perspective and give those dudes valuable leadership experience before being a flying CC. Many MSG people have several command tours; we could eliminate the multiple tours AND get flyers valuable leadership experience. 

Edited by ViperStud
  • Upvote 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Bender said:

I get the impression that "being good in the jet" is just an assumption. You should just do that, and the difference is how much more you can handle. How much time does that really command?

I'm sure it's based on airframe...how much time does that take for an F-22? An A-10? What about a C-130J?

How "good" is good enough? Is there a limit? If I just let a guy have time to do nothing but, would s/he excel? Or would they just go home to the wife/hooker? I find it hard to believe people aren't "good in the jet" based off anything other than their personal lack of give a fvck.

 

In my experience certain people have different learning curves, no matter how equal the snowflakes want to make us.  If you fly your MF ass off for the first 4-6 years in your given MWS and pick things up fairly quickly, your probably set for life given 5-7 flights a month and time to attend squadron academics and self study.  I have seen 40 year olds that couldn't start the jet correctly, so giving a frag does mean something.  I also think there are a lot of people who think they are "good in the jet" and they are dismal failures, I am not one of them, I am good. (or was, story for a future post) 

On a side note, CE does some good stuff, but I have to harken back to a world famous Flying Fiends Show of Colors tradition of statements in a "What if" format.  

"What if"  support did.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why would I want any pilot to be put in charge of any support function? I told a previous CC he sucked ass dealing with the E's. His valid excuse was never being around enlisted. This is a dumb ass concept to think you can do better at another officers job just because you are a pilot. Get over yourselves.
People who think they can do any officers job in the AF and be 100% effective is WRONG. I never needed a SNCO to tell me what to do as an officer. As a prior, I know what an enlisted airman needs. It's hard to lead someone if you never walked a mile in their shoes.
I'm that guy that told the shirt no you are not taking "A1C Need for Speed" driving privileges away on base because he got a ticket off base. Then he got another ticket on base for a stop sign or something. The kid was about to deploy and I told the shirt that's a dumb ass punishment. I went old school on the A1C and needless to say, the problem was resolved. I don't need a SNCO telling me how to handle the enlisted. If you need a seeing eye dog as an officer, you shouldn't be a CC or put in charge of E's period. 
Some of you think airmen should spend a day in ops. Airmen should never have to spend a day learning about ops or supporting it. They selected the jobs they have for a reason. I give 2 craps about how you fuel your plane. I chose intel to be indoors so I don't have to be on a hot ass aircraft parking spot pumping fuel.  My focus should be on our adversaries. Don't piss in my Cheerios and I won't piss in your Wheaties.

Every time you post I read it in a yelling voice and for a guy whose name is "hatedont" (what does that even mean anyway) you sure do have a lot of emo teenager angst.

I haven't read anywhere in this thread that pilots are "better" or can do the job better than the non-rated officers across the base. I do think the AF has a lot of bloat and the Support side of the house doesn't really do a hell of a lot to support me or the actual no $hit mission. (Although I enjoyed Pacific Indian Asian Heritage month, wait, no I didn't because I was too busy flying)

I actually think most of our pilots make $hitty Commanders and not for lack of trying. We really don't do a good job developing them like other services do. By the time a Soldier is a Battalion Commander, how many other Commands have they had where they are actually leading people (Officers/Enlisted)? Probably a minimum of two, one being as a Lt and once more as a Captain.

The bottom line is it doesn't make sense to pay a dude $100k a year to be an O-4 Sq/CC just so they can stand up in the Wing staff meeting and say "nothing to report, Sir!"

We need to develop better and more experienced Commanders and that starts at the O-1 level. Maybe then we wouldn't have as many of these dip$hit O-5/6/7s who end up getting plastered on JQP or who singlehandedly drive down retention in their Squadron.




Sent from my iPhone using Baseops Network Forums
  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm starting to see arguments for a separate service, the "Air Force" and the "We support the Air Force".  You could call it the SWAF, or SAF.  And inside the "Air Force" we could have the MAF, CAF and.......oh wait we have that already.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, hatedont said:

Airmen should never have to spend a day learning about ops or supporting it.

I chose intel to be indoors

So, what would you say intel does, other than being the supported unit for CE HVAC?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Life ain't fair.  Any arguments based on "fairness" are invalid.

It's the Air Force.  Walk into any organization (that's not the AF) and you will find people in charge at every level who have an intimate understanding of what the organization's primary function, mission, and purpose are.  (Does the CEO of Ford understand cars?)  Pilots see parts of all the support, decision makes, and execution functions of the USAF simply by the merit of their job.  Pilots can and should lead the Air Force at all levels.

Competition selects quality.  Simply by going through the selection process of pilot training, higher quality raw material is selected.  Ever hear about the guy that washed out of finance tech school and used UPT as his backup?  Not a knock on personal value, but not everyone has what it takes to do certain jobs.  That doesn't mean that all pilots are good leaders or even good people.  It simply means that pilots come from a pool that is stress-inoculated, studious, and highly adaptable.  Those are known qualities that can contribute to the growth of a good leader.  But that person has to be properly mentored.  Properly taught humility.  Properly taught how to lead by example.  Properly given the chance to failure in an environment where mistakes can be made and learned from.  (for another post, but this is exactly why the service academies exist)

A generation ago, they understood the value of doing difficult things for the positive impact it a makes on one's character.  A smart man once pointed out that suffering produces perseverance; perseverance, character; and character, hope.  Instead of a society pursuing character and hope, we now live in an instant-gratification-every-thought-and-emotion-I-have-deserves-an-audience-and-it's-your-fault-my-life-is-so-unfair society.  The Air Force is simply reflecting that.  Promoting self-servers and a lack of mission focus are just a couple symptoms of that fact.

I argue that the collapse in the Air Force is due to moral decay.  You can't swing a dead cat these days without hitting an O-6 convicted of sexual harassment or conduct unbecoming.  With moral fiber like that, is there any doubt why the AF is failing?

No amount of promotion process fixes can correct a lack of moral conscience.  Until individuals start holding themselves to a higher standard, learning what sacrificial servant leadership is about, and learning how to pursue character, we will continue to see the fallout of moral collapse.

FF

 

Edited by FourFans130
  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

OK, mea culpa 1: I drank a lotta beer today, so this thread is getting TL;DR.

1.  Promote by AFSC ain't hard.  Let's say you have a YG of 2000 officers.  You need 1200 pilots.  Promote them.  You need 600 CSOs of various kinds.  Promote them.  You need 200 MX officers.  Etc etc.  Split the boards and don't suck.

2.  As a former RA, yes, with 2-6 weeks of training, I could do the comptroller's job withe sufficient motivation.  Anyone with experience in that area should understand that the motivation is inherent bc jail.

3.  I don't give 2 fvcks about the cost for any support AFSC's costs to retrain.  Run them all out, if that's what it takes; I sincerely believe I can find and inspire a rated officer to learn the job and kick @ss, given sufficient resources.

4.  As said before, with no pilots, there is no spear, just a shaft.  The kind presently given to our 4th point of contact, repeatedly.

5.  The world needs ditch-diggers too - aka the entire MSG.  But if I have to choose, I'll choose the OG and MXG every time and outsource the rest.

  • Upvote 2
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...