Leaderboard

Dudes, While I sit here and drink my scotch, can't help but think of the bros that are downrange doing the mish'. Here...here. Thanks for the sacrifice. Cheers.

I read this thread twice before starting the Distance Learning 6.0 course, but still didn't fully understand the whole registration and timeline thing until actually experiencing it. The main blackboard page has a picture that looks something exactly like this: I thought it was just a stupid visual of the course and them just trying to make something more complicated than it really was. Turns out, this picture is the syllabus for the entire ACSC program, with the list of all the courses and the types of courses that each one is. Each shape represents it's own "course" that has to be registered for separately through a different website (AUSIS). Plus the courses have to be done in this order, except for the few exceptions when you can double up. Now that I understand this picture, I think it is worth a thousand words. Basically, any of the large colored arrows represents a self-paced "course." Any of the greater than > white arrow thingys, are the "applied courses," which have a specific start and end date. These are the message board classes that involve posts and papers. The problem is that, generally speaking, all of these two-week applied courses are only offered once a month at the beginning of each month. And the biggest kick in the nuts is that you have to register two weeks before the start date in order to enroll. So say, for example, you are deployed and try to register for the Dec 1st class on Nov 16th, too late to meet the 2-week prior requirement. The next class you can register for is the Jan 1st class. So you have six weeks to do the one or two self paced courses, then you just sit on your dick for a while. The eight self-paced courses listed in this picture can take anywhere from a few hours to a day or two if you push it. They are like long CBTs. And the speed of completion depends on your TTPs while attacking them - word search, skimming the readings, screen shots of the online tests in the event you have to take the test again, fast-clicking through the flash media content like regular ADLS courses, etc. Some of the classes are just downloaded readings with short quizzes that you can word search. Some are interactive flash video things with videos, decisions, wargames, "virtual situation rooms," etc. So even if you max performed the self-paced courses in a day each, you still stall out in the overall program because those four applied courses, represented by the white greater than shapes, can only be done once per month. You are allowed to work ahead one self-paced course while you are waiting for the next month to start the applied discussion board course. In summary, I would say it would take a total of about 5-10 full days to do all of the self-paced stuff, but it will take you a minimum of 4 months total to complete the entire course - mainly due to the waiting time for the class start dates of the applied courses. Oh, and second the frustration that you still have to wait a few days for the self-paced courses to be "graded," even if the only tests are through blackboard and are automatically graded on the spot. The previous course has to be graded and marked complete before registering for the next course.

Mark your calendars: The Japan and the ROK are in agreement about something.

So all the improvements seen since 2005 are comm-related. Incidentally, I entered the AF as a comm officer in 2005. Yeah, that makes sense then I guess. Hehe. zb

That's strange...the AFnet migration has happened to me twice inside the span of the last year and all it's ever done is prevent me from checking my email and shared drives on the domains I'm a part of. That is, of course, easily rectified within a 1-2 week timeframe...it takes time, after all, it's the first time we've done this...here. Sometimes I feel like other's desire to improve something than isn't actually broken is the real problem. One man's improvement is another man's irritation. We do this over and over until it's barely recognizable anymore. That said, I'm sure I'll look back 30 years later and remember the AF it the way my father looked back on his time in the army...Remember the good people, a few of the bad...the rest just is what it was, it was far from perfect, but it didn't really change the outcome all that much. Speaking of a CSAF: While I think it's good to reflect on all changes to see if they had their intended effect, there is very little changeable within a large organization that will bear immediate fruits that are substantive and/or important. I do not doubt that there are senior leaders that struggle to find them everyday. The problem is that those changes set in motion are rarely kept in motion once individuals move on. It's hard enough to champion change when it's your idea, it's much harder when it's another's. As far as what I think has improved? Not much. It's different, sure...but improved, not really. I don't particularly think it needs to either. If anything, I'd let the O-4 and O-5's that haven't had the pleasure have some of my deployments. Let's just revamp all of it...I'll write up a BBP...there, now it's time to PCS. You got the stick now, Bobby. *right in the trash can, too much work* This thread is not my favorite (although the fat kid falling through the long jump pit did make me smile), Bendy

And....not a single fuck was given....

You must work for Liquid. Everything about the space ops business has improved under Gen Shelton and Gen Welsh. From the simple stuff like getting rid of flight suits and leather jackets, to the career field management (3-year tours and cutting ties with missiles), scrapping the ridiculous medical standards and paperwork and leaving it up to you and the mission commander to determine if you can pull ops, huge changes to IQT/MQT, and all of that while bringing on a lot of new systems and capabilities and during budget struggles. From my corner of the world, the last 3 years have been constant improvement. Hopefully the rest of you will be able to say the same in a few years.

Agreed! I've been in over 12 years and only switched to DTS in late 2011. Not once did I ever have a problem with my orders/tickets/reservations, until I started using DTS. I carried a travel voucher on the trip and logged shit as I went. When I got home, I just dropped it off at finance and was always paid pretty fast. Since I've started using DTS, more often than not something is fucked up. Hell, a few weeks ago I ended up with no airline ticket there or home (ended up non-revving out since i had no time to contact SATO), and my rental car had 3 different reservations. My authorization wasn't approved until a week after my TDY (I created it about 1.5 weeks prior). When we had the Debit card, I got so accustom to not having funds loaded that I just left my per diem on my card so I knew I could always get tickets/ hotels. There is a special place in hell for whoever thought up DTS (right beside the creator of JMPS)!

Except back in the day the vouchers didn't get f'd up -- you turned them in at containers that were located at convenient places around base, and the pros whose job it was to process them did...and they didn't get kicked back to fix the tiniest nitnoid crap like they seem to do more recently. I can say that for about 7 or 8 years in the mid-late 90s, I never had to go to finance and have a voucher unscrewed.

The huge pay raises of the late 90s-early 2000s -- mandated by Congress -- were nice.

For me, the Air Force improves everyday...because that's one day closer to separation.

Eat it yourself. Every thread about what sucks/improved in the AF quickly derails into bitching about uniforms, pt tests, boots, master's degrees, and other bullshit. Those topics must be very important for everyone, since you all bitch about it so often. If leaders are reading this thread they're most likely saying "Holy shit... our officers are a bunch of whiners who act like children. Our (supposed) warriors, when asked what's improved, can only come up with uniforms, boots, and pt tests, because that's all they care about. Damn!"

Perhaps the Senators should educate themselves on current egress technology. The seats we have now are pretty damn safe. In my short career I've known of 5 guys who have ejected out of a Goshawk, 4 that have ejected out of Hornets or Super Hornets, and 2 that have ejected out of Harriers. All of them were okay and returned to flight status. Neck safety = limiting the ability for you to move your neck/head. That's not going to work in a fighter cockpit. Everyone who flies with NVGs and/or JHMCS knows the risk and how to mitigate it.