Leaderboard

So I've gotta give credit to FLY6584 for giving me the idea, and I can completely understand how he wasn't able to read his question during the SECAF visit…they only had 5 during ours. I was tired of bitching about the VSP eligibility and decided to ask the SECAF myself while she came to visit our deployed location. Here was my question: "Madam Secretary, thank you for taking my question regarding the FY14 Force Management Programs. On behalf of the 2,500 pilots in the 2005-2008 year groups who were identified for the RIF and voluntary programs, my question is on our VSP eligiblity. There are 415, or 16%, currently identified as a coverage in the Air Force, and many have sought to exhaust "voluntary" measures available, vice waiting for the "involuntary" boards. Many pilots have already been denied for VSP due to their Pilot Training service commitments, while others have been processing at AFPC since last month. It has been expressed that the waiver authority for our Pilot Training commitment resides with you, Madam Secretary, so we would like to know if you are expecting to waive these commitments for eligible volunteers? And, if we won't be waived, will this group still be expected to meet involuntary boards without being afforded the option of voluntary measures?" Her answer: "I assume you are referencing the overages for the mobility pilots, because fighter pilots are currently undermanned. We just took a pause to relook at these programs, and you should be seeing some movement on the applications for those in overages soon"……..so, she didn't really answer the question specifically. Final question: "To reference the first question, if someone is denied a voluntary program, are they expected to meet an involuntary board?" Her response: "I would assume not. If they are eligible to volunteer, I don't know why we wouldn't let them and then send them to the boards. Am I correct? Let me ask my leaders (looks at the Generals in the front row). We'll have to confer with the personnel center and get back to you." I'm not sure what answer I was expecting to hear, but I definitely got the 'Politician Special', vague and brief. I'm one of the lucky ones that still has my VSP application in the system (submitted at 0050CST), so I'm hanging on to hope. From the feel of the forum, I would definitely reapply if you have already been denied. If you want out that bad, what do you have to lose? Other info of note: Use voluntary measures prior to involuntary boards Only 11,000-12,000 voluntary apps submitted (my guess is mostly pilots) Looking to cut 16,700 from AD in FY15 2x Involuntary boards, 13-15 months apart. If you meet the 1st board, you won't meet the 2nd unless from disciplinary actions Specifics: 11M, 2005, ADSC through June 2017

While the regulations permit you to be more restrictive, it's not mandatory. Not every rule needs an additional base or group supplement.

Yes. The Air Force and I rarely see eye-to-eye and it was time to part ways amicably with all the benefits (although 37% vice 50% hurts a little). That's a fancy way of saying the family is ready to settle down in one spot. The job market is pretty good outside for me right now so that helped the decision a lot. It is a little bitter sweet to make rank and then just retire but it is the right time for me to get out.

I have too much time on my hands, which generally means I have some other important thing I could be doing that I don't really want to do. Having said that, I would have written that article slightly differently. Public Affairs would be a difficult career field for me...here is what I read when I clicked on that link (I'm sorry I did that): Over the next 269 days, every Airman across the entire Air Force will be forced to redo work they have already done based on a law we’ve known about for over 1,600 days. We were a little busy working our way through all the shit the Military Commissions Act of 2009 was doing to our operations in Guantanamo Bay to get to this until now. These redundant actions will allow the Air Force to validate that an audit means that these records are “fully auditable”. It is unclear what it will mean if this audit does not prove this theory, but considering this category of money amounts to $5.4 billion, the Air Force is hoping it does. Senior leaders in charge want everyone to know that being not “audit compliant” does not mean there is a problem, it means that we “lack the required documentation for our spending” to know if there is a problem. There is a difference, it’s important that you know that. The goal of making everyone do things again is to be sure that we have this documentation and that we can audit these expenditures if NDAA 2016 makes us. The Air Force, at this time, does not intend to actually conduct this audit, only to ensure it is auditable. There is a difference, it’s important that you know that. Do not bring any documentation prior to being notified just because you think it is a convenient time for you to do so. The special super-duper scanner at the finance offices will not function correctly if you do not provide the paperwork at the time and choosing of the Air Force. Airmen will have 30 days once notified via email; hopefully, this will be enough to overload the system enough separate times to create errors across the entire data set that can be later used as an explanation should the audit prove the data is not “fully auditable”. However, the official story will be to avoid “unnecessary duplication of effort”. The Air Force also plans to implement a “Strategic Delay” somewhere in the middle of this process to assess the auditability of the audit. Once the process is completed, this documentation will be stored for longer than the current practice of 6 years in order to meet requirements, however, this will not prevent the need to re-audit and members will need to re-accomplish this task should a future NDAA require an an actual audit, not just an audit to prove auditability. From the highest level, the Air Force needs every Airmen to know: Your finance-related documentation is your responsibility, not just the finance office’s. Even if you turn in all the required documentation, check your pay to ensure it is correct, and notify them if your personal situation changes, you may still be required to re-accomplish tasks to ensure that what you have provided is still in your possession. If you have lost your marriage certificate or any other financial documentation, do not expect finance to have it, go through official state channels to obtain another one, and whatever you do, do not attempt to recreate any documents in crayon. The Air Force plans to audit everything. Did you save the receipt for that pencil? Units will have until next year to ensure that they have receipts for every process, procedure and transaction that spends Air Force money. Any accounts valued at less that $5.4 billion will be handled directly by AFPC. Bendy

I'm sure it never occurred to her... But maybe she was left out and ostracized by the "boys club" because she's a whiny annoyance and just plain unpleasant to be around. This crap is ridiculous, as mentioned by others, there are plenty of awesome females who make it in the "boys club" Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

yes tnkr, I guess sarcasm can be tough to judge on the internet based on the number of "down votes" I get every time I post on here. This is a good place to vent, and a valuable resource to share rumors/lessons learned/and "heres what my vMPF says today." Thanks CHS17 for your funny memes, they make me laugh before I make the long walk to my GCS every night. Those of you who have been able to stay in a cockpit, I salute you. Please keep those of us who went through UPT only to be banished to a life of watching video feeds in your prayers.

Mission: Know your troops. Accomplish the mission. Trust Sq/CCs to run the squadrons - it's okay if they do things slightly different then you would. They (should) have a better pulse for the squadron than you. Train like we fight. Our culture is so safety minded these days that it seems safety is more of a focus than max performing our leadership, training and aircraft capabilities. Encourage dudes to push it up in the jet (within the aircraft limits and regulations) and take time off work to truly live and enjoy life. Don't just talk about work, work, work. This will show your troops you're a real person, and not just a robot. Accomplish a full review of local regulations/addendums to AFIs and rescind those that aren't necessary. They usually make the mission more restrictive and/or create additional and unnecessary work. Simplicity to the max extent possible (see line above) in every facet would alleviate a lot of the hand-cuffing, Admin: Don't auto-populate leadership in squadrons based solely on pedigree. Pick the right person, not the right pedigree- this can go in the Mission section too. Don't be afraid to fire people that suck at their jobs. Stop making dudes get grad degrees when it's not a requirement to make O-4 Stop making dudes accomplish PME-correspondence to go in-res at all levels (i.e. practice bleeding). Rack and stack dudes based on (primary) job performance, leadership, and additional duties-in that order (i.e. not a masters, PME-correspondence, Volunteer of the Yr, etc.). Put your top dudes in the jobs that will make the OG the most combat ready (i.e. don't make them your execs), then strat them accordingly (#1, 2, 3). Don't pick dudes for upgrades because their about to pin on Major/Lt Col, etc... --- this is more at the squadron level, but the principle can be applied at the OG level too. Don't pick quarterly/annual award winners because "it's their turn." Pick based truly on merit!

I was an IP in the '135, and I used to teach this as my little "bag of tricks" thing. At that time, not a lot of attention was paid to the Dutch roll tendencies of the jet, because the Series Yaw Damper (SYD) was very dependable. Dependable, but not perfect. I had this happen (Dutch roll exacerbated by a malfunctioning SYD) over middle-of-nowhere Canada in the middle of the night when I was a youngish AC, and it scared the bejeezus out of me. No matter what I did, it kept getting worse--up to 40 degrees of bank either way at its worst. Fortunately, we had a graybeard IP on the jet with us who came up to the jumpseat. He talked me through the recovery technique, and all was well. It's a counterintuitive manual control recovery, and had he not been there I can't help but assume the worst might have happened to us. When I became an IP, I made sure I told everyone the story, then walked them through the recovery. I hope the community puts emphasis on this for the lifespan of the airplane. Sounds like they will.

Good luck, and thanks for your service! Although it does make me sad to see the AF meat grinder push people to make decisions like this.

Come on... cut me some slack. For the record when I joined I never planned on wanting to get out early. I totally 100% bought into the blue. I'm not sure I'd call myself a kool-aid drinker, but I was damn near close to it. Never in my wildest dreams did I imagine I'd want out of the organization I fought so hard to get into and admired for so many years. For me, the biggest disappointment.... is this organization not being what I thought it was when I joined. In the end we'll all be fine and most of us will go on to have successful careers in civilian aviation, but that's not what I grew up dreaming about. I never wanted to tell my grandson about my third leg into LAX flying my Delta jet... I always wanted to tell him about this awesome organization I got the chance to serve and help make this world a better place. I have had the chance to do some really great things over the past 7 years and wouldn't trade them for the world, but unfortunately for me the bad FAR outweighs the good.

I hear you. Cutting Ripits is on my long list. Hang in there.

Copy. See you at McConnell in sept 15 Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Handing out and you choosing to get on of your own free will are two different things. I was never issued Rip-its on any of my deployments. I was, however, given the option to make a decision like an adult and decide for myself if this was something I wanted to ingest. This is no different than Bloomberg banning large sodas in NY. Idiotic. Just for the record, Pitbull blueberry-pomegranate energy drinks were 10x better than Rip-its; if you could find them.

If you entered the military in Texas (on your DD214), you may also be eligible for the Hazlewood Act. 150 hours of state tuition that can be transferred to spouse or children.

As it was explained to me many years ago: 1) Never use the rudder. You're inputs are never as quick or accurate as the rudder assist system and you'll only make the Dutch roll worse. 2) make sharp aileron inputs in the opposite direction of the roll as soon as you start to see/feel it. Put it in and take it right out, like high school sweethearts. 3) slow down. Dutch roll occurs by having more lift from one swept wing than the other. Slow down to reduce that lift difference. 4) land as soon as possible. DR is nothing to sneeze at. But I guess we've already figured that out. To the crew. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

We like to fly with you, but some of the time, you suck.

This is why I love this forum WxMan

How low-threat does war have to be before sugary drinks become the potential risk to airmen? Maybe bronze stars are in order for everyone who braved the hazardous fluid intake (sts).

She's a political appointee from a military-gutting liberal, I don't expect her to be able to vis recce every plane in the fleet, but she should at least know how to quickly dispose of 25k people

A town hall meetings with the SECAF and a two-star general isn't all it's cracked up to be. The SECAF and the 20 AF/CC came to Malmstrom in Feb in the wake of the cheating scandal. They held an all call and force modernization was mentioned as one of the future AF challenges. One of our pilots asked a question regarding the modernization of our 40+ year old helicopter. Exact response is as follows: SECAF: I'm sorry what do you fly? Pilot: The UH-1N Huey SECAF: I'm sorry, I'm not familiar with that aircraft. (Proceeds to talk about CRH) 20 AF/CC: Don't ask questions with acronyms that people don't know. (Then proceeds to talk about a previous question) This was while on a road trip to AFGSC missile bases where there are only two types of MDS's; ICBMs and Huey's. She instantly lost credibility with every pilot in the room.

Simple answer, make Col Doctor so and so deploy and work the same schedule that we all do. 12 on 12 off for the whole deployment, no opportunity to leave the alert facility while "on" and tell him he can't use anything other than good food and good sleep to maintain the alert (ie zero caffeine and no Ambien) and he has to ride along on every flight on his shift. I bet he'd be a zombie by the end of a four month trip.

I would let my wife use my GI Bill if I absolutely thought I wouldn't want to get a legit graduate degree in the future. There is also MyCAA which is a lot like TA for spouses. The crazy thing is, it is was easier for my wife to use MyCAA than it was for me to get approved for TA. Here is the MyCAA fact sheet in case you haven't heard about it... https://www.militaryonesource.mil/12038/Project%20Documents/MilitaryHOMEFRONT/MyCAA/FactSheet.pdf I personally wouldn't plan on giving my children my GI Bill unless if they were close to graduating high school. I do not trust that it will be around in 20 years. I especially do not believe that there is any chance that the GI Bill will be as great in 20 years as it is now. Have a separate college fund for the kids that you control 100%.

Sometimes leadership means simply having the courage not to change everything for the sake of change.

Just a suggestion. MC12 guys should talk to U28 guys. We do have an FTU now but a lot of these challenges you mention in your community were addressed years ago. There should be a cross talk and just because it's ACC vs AFSOC doesn't mean that there isn't some common ground. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Don't be afraid to say "no" when asked from above to do more with less. Doing more with less is a slippery slope in a time of dwindling resources. Don't be afraid to say "yes" when asked from below for support to fix a broken process. It'll empower your people to want to solve problems rather than begrudgingly live with them. Cut the fat that wastes everyone's time...including and especially your own. Budgets matter, but it's not our money. Time is ours. It's our most valuable possession. Don't waste it.

Tell the guys in the MAF that the fastest way to poison the crew force is to show any sign of "Leadership by Q-3" that many OGs seemed to have embraced as of late.

That's pure BS. These managerial clowns just don't get it. Go to Gen Welsh's facebook page and ask him directly and let him know what happened at the town hall. Others have already been speaking up on his facebook page. And if you don't want your name out there, just create a separate account.

FYI The vertical order of images is widely believed to be a significant representation of importance. This idea is so pervasive that it has entered into common parlance with the phrase "low man on the totem pole". This phrase is indicative of the most common belief of ordering importance, that the higher figures on the pole are more important or prestigious. A counterargument frequently heard is that figures are arranged in a "reverse hierarchy" style, with the most important representations being on the bottom, and the least important being on top. There have never been any restrictions on vertical order; many poles have significant figures on the top, others on the bottom, and some in the middle. Other poles have no vertical arrangement at all, consisting of a lone figure atop an undecorated column. Sometimes a very exclusive or prestigious family crest is placed on the bottom. There it supports the remainder of the crests above. Placing a figure on the bottom increases its prominence as a feature of the pole, as trees are thicker towards the base, increasing the bottom figure's size. Placement on the bottom also brings that figure closer to the people, increasing their interaction with that crest. Haida doorways are often seen embedded in the bottoms of house-frontal poles. These were kept deliberately small. To enter, guests and members of the house would need to bow in respect to the supporting crest of the pole. Conversely, the tops of Haida poles often feature a family's moiety-crest. Haidas come from one of two moieties and identify primarily as the descendants of an eagle or a raven-associated family. This 'primary' crest could be said to be more important as the first level of family identity and societal structure, or less important as one of the most common and least exclusive crests. Given the complexity and meaning of symbolism in Haida totem poles, which figure is most important could be considered arbitrary. The importance of each crest is in the observer's informedness and connection to the meanings of each figure. Asserting that one figure, story, or history is more important than another because of its placement on a pole may reflect the observer's own cultural perceptions of hierarchy than the actual significance of the figures.

1. Figure out the congressionally mandated reason your base/wing exists and do that extremely well. Everything else is secondary (even if you work support). 2. Provide direction and then trust the people and decentralize as many of the day-to-day decisions as possible. Encourage your subordinates to do the same for "their" people. 3. Know your people. Remember, everyone down to the lowest ranked Airman has a story and try to learn some of those stories. Mentor them in chasing their dreams and solving their problems for their own good and the good of the AF. 4. See below... Edited to add: Don't be the "good idea fairy." It's a proven path to failure. Every good idea will have negative consequences to somebody and often for almost everybody. Accept that and willfully choose the bads along with the goods. These decisions will have more impact on the culture of your organization than almost anything else.

I agree Rusty. We need more action, less talk. More leaders, fewer managers. We have toxic, self serving and underperforming commanders at many levels and they should be removed. Many old bosses, me included, are no longer commanders and can only influence decision makers from the staff. It is not so much about fear of rocking the boat as no authority to make change. Commanders need to be held accountable for their unit's climate, morale and performance. Commanders must also hold staffs accountable for how well they support. Senior commanders must be held responsible for their subordinate commander performance. I don't know the details, but it looks like USAFE just did this. CSAF has the ultimate authority and responsibility to make the common sense changes we need. The best way to notify CSAF and MAJCOM commanders of bad leaders, those who are abusive, self-serving and immoral is through the IG process. It is not perfect but it is more effective than complaining on a message board.

Nothing I have said trivializes any of our service, including my own. I'm quite proud of it, actually. My concern is the prevention of losses in the next major conflict. Since we don't have the tempering process of intense combat to keep us focused, we will need bold, forceful leadership to cut through the bullshit that has filled the vacuum during 10+ years of a low-intensity conflict and keep us focused on fighting and winning the next war. Right now we are failing at that, miserably. If you can't see the bullshit that I speak of, perhaps it is you that is wearing the rose-colored glasses.

From the article... "The Air Force could not make these waiver delegation determinations earlier because the service needed to have a better idea of who was going to apply, he said. 'You don't know who's applying,' Cox said. 'Before you can go get a delegation of authority, you need to understand what it is that you need to waive, if it's required.'" So, basically, we told everyone they were eligible in Dec, then wasted your fvcking time because we didn't know who would apply and what waivers we would need. And we suck at doing our jobs and managing the force. Did I miss something? How about we research what is needed to voluntarily or involuntarily separate every AFSC that requires a reduction in manning and then release the appropriate information to the masses? HOLY INCOMPETENCE BATMAN!!!

Just as I would never trivialize the sacrifices or challenges our airmen faced in Vietnam or WWII, I would expect our officers to not trivialize the sacrifices and challenges our military has faced since 9/11 in Iraq and Afghanistan. Our Air Force crews have not experienced anywhere near the losses we did in previous wars, but our military has suffered sufficient losses to not be marginalized by reminiscing of better times when fighter pilots felt more appreciated. We shouldn't hope for the times when air to air combat and incredible losses resulting from ground to air fires define our Air Force's worth, contribution and legacy. We should be proud of the asymmetrical advantage we provide our nation as we engage this enemy during this time. And we should be very careful about marginalizing our military's most recent combat experiences to our joint partners. Our Air Force exists today, with significant investment of taxpayer dollars, so we don't have to experience the challenges and losses that we experienced in WWII and Vietnam. It is foolish to wish for "real air combat" and losses to fix our problems and define our worth. My Dad flew Huey gunships during two tours in Vietnam and my grandfather flew B-17s in Europe. There was plenty of admin bullshit and useless bureaucracy then. Robin Olds rebelled against the same. Don't view the past through rose colored glasses and think we are so much worse than we were in the good old days when aircraft were shot down, ground forced needed Beyer air support and morale was high. Especially when it pisses off those who sacrifice, kill and serve.

I agree with you that the AF mission in GWOT is vital and not without risk. I've been on a few sporty ones myself both in Iraq and Afghanistan, but always in the mighty Viper and not in the C model as you assume. Did you see a photo of me in Cosmo or something? Combat loss = directly attributable to the enemy (shot down, crashed while engaging enemy) Number of manned aircraft combat losses in GWOT 2001-2008 = 3 (1 x A-10, 1 x F-16, 1 x MH-53). Not sure how many we've lost '09-present but I'm pretty sure there's a couple more. Source: https://www.airforcemag.com/MagazineArchive/Pages/2009/January%202009/0109world.aspx Number of manned aircraft combat losses in Vietnam 1964-1973 = 2,251 Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aircraft_losses_of_the_Vietnam_War Would you really look a Thud or Jolly Green driver from 'Nam in the eye and tell him your missions during GWOT were "intense"? I wouldn't. Combat, real combat, hardens a fighting force and makes it very focused on just one thing: killing the enemy. We are not, despite your objections to the contrary, engaged in this type of combat, nor are we focused on killing the enemy. The Air Force is focused on SAPR, diversity, inclusion, CBTs, SOS, masters degrees, VSP, BRAC, and sequestration. Seriously, go to www.af.mil and you'll see what we're focused on. It's going to take real vision and leadership to regain our fighting focus. Gen. Welsh may be able to swing the pendulum a bit, but he's one of the few that get it and he's having to fight his own people to get it done. I'm incredibly proud to be in the Air Force. But if we're not careful the next war may catch us with our pants down.

Leave it to a Nav to post a picture with some dude's junk in it.

General Tso, but he does have a certificate from Le Cordon Blue.

I am rechecking my status tomorrow. I have a feeling I was denied for ADSC. IF it was for a PCS I never wanted and was non-vol'd, I want to talk to base legal to double check that, since AFPC auto-checks the voluntary box for you. If i am denied for ADSC due to UPT, I will appeal to the IG, though less sure about that process. My CC was in my office today and neither of us know where the argument stands. Is the UPT question resolved? Are all pilots ineligible for VSP if you have and UPT commitment left?

STUFR

Looking for anyone who may be joining me at Sheppard for ENJJPT this July. I'm not sure our class number...but looks like graduation is slated for Aug 2015.