Leaderboard

You and I may understand that but how do you think the general public views it? Do you really think they'll trust pilotless planes when they see so many accidents with driverless cars? The flying public don't think logically like you and I. Case and point...everything is flowing smoothly, beautiful day, no delays. We push early, get right on the runway and take off way early. I see we're going to be 30 minutes early...and we're going into LA. I know gate space is a premium and i've been burned by this before. So I decide to slow up and get closer to an on time arrival. We land, roll right into the recently opened gate, and people are happy with our on time arrival. New jet, new day...I see we're going to be 30 minutes early, however I decide to keep the speed up because I forget about the mess that is LAX. We land early and the gate is still occupied. So we sit on the ramp for 30 minutes, shut down an engine (maybe both) to save gas. Meanwhile in the back, the passengers are absolutely losing their freaking minds! They inform the FAs that "there are open gates right there!!!" Finally our gate opens, and we roll into the gate ON TIME. You wouldn't believe the mean mugs and the anger in their faces! Smile and wave boys...time to get to the hotel before we miss happy hour!

Agree with this sentiment. Why should it be assumed that the AF can't compete financially with airline salaries? Given the relatively small percentage of mil personnel that are pilots, it would seem that even huge bonuses should constitute a relatively small percentage of DOD $. Take a look at some of the unique medical bonuses and then ask yourself why the AF/DOD/Congress refuses to entertain the idea that its pilot force is as worthy of receiving competitive compensation. Sent from my iPad using Baseops Network Forums

Yes it is possible, I am a living breathing example of this...here's how it happened (WARNING, not to be used as a template of what you should do). I was a prior enlisted crew chief that was hired in house by my heavy unit. While in T-6s I performed towards the top of my class. My T-6 flight commander made everyone fill out a track select dream sheet (yes, even me thought I knew I was headed for T-1s). Being the punk smart-ass LT that I was, I racked T-38, UH-1, T-44 then T-1 in that order. Five minutes after handing in the dream sheet I was called into the Flight Commanders office to redo it. After some back and forth discussion, my Flt CC picked up the phone to the NGB to see what he could make happen. The day of track select I was called to the DOs office and put on a 3-way (sts) phone call with my home heavy unit and the NGB. It was decided that I could track T-38s, with the understanding that I go back to my heavy unit and if I struggled and washed out of T-38s, I was done. So that night, everyone was surprised when a T-38 came up on the screen instead of the T-1. (Don't worry, it was an NGB funded slot, I did not take it away from an AD stud). Fast forward a few months into T-38s...I was the red-headed step child of the class, but towards the top in performance. After being approached by several IP and my Flt CC telling me I should fly fighters, I made a difficult phone call back to my sponsor unit asking for their blessing. They said go forth and look for a fighter unit up until my Altus dates, at which point I'd be committed to heavies. I interviewed to 2 units the weekend after assignment night and was officially hired by my #1 choice the weekend prior to graduation. During IFF/B-Course , I found out that big blue was looking to get rid of our jets (and other units as well), which eventually happened after flying the jet for 1.5 yrs. Being an inexperienced fighter dude (in a then dying airframe) during sequestration, it was difficult finding a unit to hire me and send me to another B-course. Staring down the barrel of RPA class dates, I pulled the trigger and was hired back by the heavy unit that sent me to UPT. The end. BL. Bust your ass, luck and timing (my Flt CCs, IPs, and home unit were awesome and extremely supportive), don't go behind your sponsoring units back (I didn't call a fighter unit until I received a blessing), and have a good attitude and my thankful and happy wherever you end up.

So, the old rule.

I hope this isn't a repost. Please enjoy this offering of humor from The Duffleblog https://www.duffelblog.com/2017/02/fighter-pilot-shortage-results-in-recruitment-of-average-looking-uncool-people/?utm_campaign=coschedule&utm_source=facebook_page&utm_medium=Duffel+Blog&utm_content=Air+Force+to+allow+average+looking%2C+uncool+people+to+become+fighter+pilots

Unfortunately no age waivers

I just spoke with my recruiter. He said that I was ranked 3/31 in Officer interviews with everything marked all the way to the right and the addition of 8 bullet points. Hopefully this can push me over!

Fixed it for you.

Is it possible? Yes. Will it provide more options in the future? No. And I don't think you have a solid grasp of the -38/T-1 thing. I definitely wouldn't say that one track is "better" than the other. Just focuses on a different skill-set. I understand why a heavy unit would want you to go to T-1s (they risk losing you to a fighter unit at the end of -38s) but I recommend to our guys to go -38s if they can for the sole reason that formation in that setting is the most fun you can have with your pants on and you'll never get to do it again once you're out of UPT.

So, the latest NDAA said the Air Force would have to prove the non-monetary methods they tried to retain pilots before they congress would increase the bonus beyond $35K a year. Any chance CSAF is playing the long game and using the 1500 hour rule proposal as evidence he's tried? "Look, I attempted to lower the amount of hours civilian pilots need to fly for the airlines, but it didn't work, I'm going to need $50k/year to retain fighter pilots."

Pcloa, thanks for the interesting post. To avoid upsetting ihtfp's delicate sensibilities about what should go where in an Internet forum, I'll decline replying. But if you'd like to continue on PM I'm game, cheers.

I really don't want to further derail this otherwise constructive thread, so I'll attempt to offer a few concise points to clarify your confusion on my position (I can see why there is confusion based upon my hasty/incomplete argument in the earlier post.) However, I'm not going to attempt to convince you that I'm right or you're wrong. If anyone would like to further discuss the merits of our military objectives pertaining to VEOs, we can start a new thread or take it offline. With that said, for clarity, what I said in my earlier post was "If the DOD wants to get serious about remaining ready for the future threats posed by the "4+1" it needs to seriously reconsider its objectives as related to dealing with VEOs." I added the bold parts to highlight what was apparently too subtle of a distinction. Yes, I do not believe that "defeat," in a traditional military sense, of the ideology that fuels VEOs is possible given our current pol/strat limitations. Our current NMS clearly states that our objective is to "Disrupt, Degrade, and Defeat VEOs." This aim of "defeat" is what, IMHO, needs to be reconsidered. After reading several of the COIN classics (Galula, Nagl...) and a great newer perspective by Emile Simpson (War From the Ground Up), I became convinced that attempting to defeat the VEO threat requires dismantling and replacing the ideology that supports them. This is not in the US's best interest, for reasons which I believe are beginning to manifest in our USAF (see previous post.) Another great book is Out of the Mountains by David Kilcullen. This read convinced me that this IW fight against non-state actors is the most likely fight of the future. Some of the threats will be from current or new VEOs, while others may be proxy battles with organizations placed, instigated, or supported by nation-state opponents (the 4). Regardless, we need to continue to be able to deter, deny, and defeat state adversaries, while being able to economically wage war against these current or pop-up non-state actors. Expending the vast amount of resources that we do in seeking the holy grail of making these +1 threats "go away" is a losing strategy. So yes, we need to admit that we cannot (and should not) attempt to achieve the defeat of VEOs. Given enough freedom to act, budget, and will, do I think that the US mil could defeat ISIS or AQI or any other single entity? Yes - but that is irrelevant because another similar threat is certain to rise from the ashes. I think a strategy of containment is more feasible. Think whack-a-mole, but where our main effort is weighted towards slowing the rate of mole pop-ups and rapidly thumping it back into its hole, vs chasing it into its hole to root it out and exterminate it. Slowing the rate of mole pop-ups is a job for the D, I and E. The M can Disrupt and Degrade...no problem, but Defeating an ideology is a sucker's bet. Shit, I already wrote much more than I intended, and still have a hopelessly incomplete argument, but I think you can at least see my position, even if you don't agree. My apologies for the sidetrack, back to your regular scheduled "the CSAF is out to fuck us" programming... And also, while I'm here (and on topic), I got to hear a 4-star member of the JCS speak this morning, and he shared some of his thoughts on the retention crisis and this upcoming meeting (won't say who it was because of the nature of the non-attribution setting in which he was speaking.) Anyway, I got the distinct impression that this upcoming meeting is also desired by the "airline execs" as well. Apparently they are also concerned about their pilot shortage and want to work with the Service Chiefs to develop a joint solution to a national problem. Not sure if that changes much. For me, I still think the AF's problem is more internal than external. And yes, TankerToad, I get it, airline hiring obviously has a direct impact on AF retention efforts. That is basic economics. However, from anecdotal stories I've heard (tons of them) the dudes that used to stay did so because they enjoyed the AF lifestyle and they loved flying AF iron. It seems to me that the AF is doing its best to piss away that one advantage that we had over the private sector. What, in the current environment, is going to make guys pass up the airline opportunity now that AF morale is low and AL opportunities are high? If morale is key to retaining folks during times of AL hiring surges, how do we improve morale in the environment which is so strained as a result of this draining war?

If youre still eligible next year and pilot is your #1 goal id chase that pilot dream again next year or consoder guard/reserve

All good things.

"Don't go behind your sponsoring units back" - wise words IMHO

FYI getting to a fully autonomous car is a much more difficult problem than a self-flying airplane - basic reason, the driving environment is drastically more complex than the aircraft environment.

@sonofabone don't be discouraged, things are changing in the Air Force with the 11F shortage: https://www.duffelblog.com/2017/02/fighter-pilot-shortage-results-in-recruitment-of-average-looking-uncool-people/

Meet the new rule, same as the old rule. I feel sorry for the guy that gets fired over this misunderstanding. What's that you say? Nobody will be fired for a completely illegal TPS report? Shirley you jest.

DTMO just overruled AF Finance and told them they were ing stupid. New off-base rule: "the member that elected to not use available government quarters will now be reimbursed based on actual expense up to the on base lodging rate." Sent from my iPhone using Baseops Network Forums

So what does your ruthless pursuit of victory look like, and what is the end state or definition of victory? Excerpt from a great essay written in 2007 regarding Al Qaeda [insert VEO]: "The point of imagining the end of the war on terror is not to suggest that it is imminent but to keep the right goals in mind -- so that leaders can adopt the policies most likely to achieve those goals. If they fall prey to the illusion that this is World War III -- and that it can be won like a traditional war -- they risk perpetuating the conflict. Even if Americans were somehow prepared, as in World War II, to mobilize 16 million troops, reinstate the draft, spend 40 percent of GDP on defense, and invade and occupy several major countries, such an effort would likely end up creating more terrorists and fueling the hatred that sustains them. It would unify the United States' enemies, squander its resources, and undermine the values that are a central tool in the struggle. Certainly, the U.S. experience in Iraq suggests the perils of trying to win the war on terror through the application of brute military force." https://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/2007-11-01/can-war-terror-be-won

Could someone define "VEO" for me?

Here's a free piece of advice you should take- NEVER pass up the opportunity to shut the fuck up

For today's Air Force I'd recommend this...

You asked for a reason as to why, in your opinion, people seemed upset. I gave you one. As for my own personal situation, no it does not preclude me from making a living. However, I am not an airline pilot; I'm an engineer and a business owner. I employ aerospace engineers, aircraft maintenance technicians, as well as pilots and flight engineers to fly my aircraft. From the perspective of an employer, yes it appears that an effort is being made to restrict the options of those looking to get out (further down the line) in order to shore up numbers. A spade is a spade, I call it like I see it. Other things may be going on, but it doesn't change perception.

Is a solution that ignores the real problem(s) a viable solution? I'm not sure CSAF gets a pass when he acts like a high-turnover ghetto landlord that makes tenants sign a longer lease or burns down the neighboring complex, but doesn't fix the broken heater, dishwasher, and moldy carpet.

He's in UPT. He wants info on airframes and associated lifestyles. Actual pilots in those airframes have commented with information that could be helpful in the future. Hence the term "valuable information". Unless you know about the lifestyles of every airframe in the Air Force... In which case, by all means. Enlighten us.

I'm not sure what "valuable information" you're referring to. You should reread his comment history. Seriously.

Yeah all you need to remember is the month of your physical last year. Shoot for that month next year, if you don't hit it, don't fret you still have 3 months to get that shit done. I'm not gonna bend over backwards to re-do the PHA schedule so you don't lose flight pay in 3 days. The people who have signed up at the proper time are getting it done. I'm not in the business of ing them to un you. You get the next available slot. It's the same pity I have on people who wait until the last week before their flying eval comes due to try and get it done. Clearly I'm a salty former-scheduler. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk