BCan

Poor wording. My POV was from big AF. Better wording: Why would the AF want to figure out how they involuntarily recall retired folk when they could start by simply closing the doors. If 1000 retired dudes wanted these jobs....sure that would work. The fact is, the AF is going to be lucky to get 10 volunteers ...and they know it...and that's the reason you got zero info on your phone investigation. Smoke and mirrors...

I agree this is setting the stage for something larger. Reminds me of when the demo teams got cnx'd - what followed was grounding entire squadrons. I don't see why you'd want to bring back retired dudes...I think the end game is a stop-loss. It would be difficult to set a policy of who got recalled out of the retired crowd. It be far easier to just close the door. Just my .02

I'm a bit confused how you go straight to retired dudes when you can start to tag those who are at the end of UPT commitments and dudes who haven't applied to retire, and dudes who have retirement orders but haven't gotten out of the burning building yet.

It will only improve the bottom line for a small time period. Then the airlines will start cutting ticket prices to capture market share - standard. So the real benefit is reduced airfare/shipping costs. How much extra is an airline ticket with two pilots up front? Honest question...my rough math is about 30ish dollars a ticket...for salary. I too usually choose the cheapest airfare, but this is one situation I'd pony up the extra cash. The larger question is economic. You've got to have people with jobs (or govt provided income - whole other discussion) to by airline tickets, cars, etc. If we do get to AI/automation as being discussed, it's going to be the political / societal issue of our lifetime IMO. Just read an article that Elon Musk foresees humanless factories...will not even require factory floor lighting. We think income inequality is an issue now... I've also heard little discussion on the bandwidth & infrastructure required. I've heard zero discussion on vulnerabilities associated. I'd think technologically advanced countries would certainly be interested in how the entire aviation system is controlled from ground / space assets. I think most would agree that using our current UASs as a yardstick for what is feesable for airline travel is a rather poor comparison. I'll reference the 6-9 emails I get yearly requesting my participation in class A UAS mishaps.

http://edition.cnn.com/2016/08/10/us/us-air-force-pilot-shortage/ http://video.foxnews.com/v/5079490464001/air-force-facing-massive-fighter-pilot-shortage/?#sp=show-clips http://www.airforcetimes.com/story/military/2016/07/18/air-force-leaders-plan-incentives-fix-fighter-pilot-shortage/87245740/ https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/checkpoint/wp/2016/08/10/the-air-force-fighter-pilot-shortage-is-already-a-crisis-and-it-could-soon-get-even-worse/ http://www.wnd.com/2016/08/crisis-usaf-warns-of-fighter-pilot-shortage/

Dude...think this through very carefully. you are entering into a 10yr commitment - essentially giving the AF the power to do as they please with you for 12 years. So, if "just the thought of going to reapers" gives you pause...you might be on to something by second guessing your decision. What were you doing 12 years ago? Secondly, you think you are entering your dream job - but think this through logically. Why the 10 year commitment? Why does the AF offer a pilot bonus of up to 225K...and why are the majority of pilots not taking it? Why would we be talking about stop-loss? i'm not saying you should / shouldn't proceed to active duty. What I would say, is if flying is all you seek - then you are bat-shit crazy for not looking at the guard/reserve. Disclaimer - I've been active duty my entire career. If, however, you abuse yourself nightly to a candle lit scroll of the airmanship creed ...then maybe you are the next General Changer and will love active duty. good luck!

Am I the only one who sees "stop-loss" as blowing up the the AFs face? First off, stop-loss isn't a tool used to fix personnel mismanagement. If we are in a declared war with damn near every squadron deployed...ok, I get it in that situation. Second, if the AF attempts to give guys/gals the heisman after a 11-12 year commitment, or prevents their retirement - then I see all out rebellion, to include a class-action lawsuit. Third, is it even legal? Anyone smart on how this would work (I.e. What is your IRR commitment after the UPT ADSC?). Has this ever been used in the past in this situation?

https://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/natsec/R40121.pdf I'd say a good set of lawyers could pick-apart this law when utilized to retain CONUS based UAS operators...but then again...I'm not a lawyer. The link is an interesting read on how the stop-loss program unfolded since DS1.

I don't see how the AF is going to get away with this...you guys need to band together and fight this shit in the court / public domain (if it is true). It is one thing to stop-loss in-order to fight a ground war...it is another to use it as a tool to correct your shitty personnel system, to add additional commitments to guys/gals who have already served lengthy commitments. And what war are they implementing this for? Congress hasn't declared war? If this logic holds up, then we can just get rid of any bonus's, ADSCs, just use stop-loss? I'd round up the bros, get a lawyer(s), talk to JQP...and FENCE-IN...

Tell them you'd like to switch over to the T-38 for other reasons? Job as red air, bomber base IP, etc down the road. Then, get the ADSC removed after you PCS. Just a thought.

For future bros ref...good stuff here regarding 3/7 day opt....sorry I didn't find it earlier.

Hoss, read'em. to include the note that the chart is just for reference...WTF? It is disheartening that I'm forced to make decisions based on how I interpret AFIs that other people should be SMEs. I'm guessing the assignment/retirement AFI writers must sit right next to the ROE writers. FML.

Hacker, I'm in the opposite boat...I'm 99% sure I don't want to take another assignment...unless hookers and blow are included. However, some are telling me I cannot apply for retirement outside of 1-year, some are telling me I can be PCS'd immediately following a 365...with 18 months left till retirement. Lot's of people involved in the assignment and retirement process and most of them do not understand how the two interact.

Learjetter, you touched on another topic I'm getting conflicting info...when/how I apply for retirement. I understand, typically it is 1-year. However, if I have orders dropped for a conus assignment, 2-year ADSC right?, then I can turn down the assignment?, apply for retirement?, even if outside of 1-year? It was my impression, that once I'm inside of 2-years, I have options to get out of a conus / oconus assignment based on those assignements ADSCs. My gameplan was to take a 365, return home inside of 2-years, then decline any assignment. Now that I'm working with AFPC to line up the 365, I'm not getting any confirmation that this plan is solid. I have heard rumors that a 365 gets you a 24-month deferment from assignments once you return...but I haven't seen that in writing anywhere either. Thanks again.

Thanks guys. By my math it would cost me about 220 dollars per month to forgo the last year. I just want to understand what I'm losing...sounds like it might not be a ridiculous amount vs. what I have lined up for a follow-on career and/or avoiding another move on the kids. Thanks Again.

Trying to decipher DoD regs regarding Time-in-Grade (Lt Col) and retirement. Lets say I have 20 years, been an 05 for two years, and I put in paperwork to retire. Lt Col TIG requires 3 years to retire as a Lt Col...what does that mean? I understand that I can't wear a retired Lt Col hat to the BX but does it drastically effect benefits? Or...can I not even apply to retire until I hit 3-years TIG? As I read it, under the high-3 retirement, they average out your highest 36 months of service...so if you have 1-year of 04 pay and 2-years of 05 pay...thats the average, right? Not quite as much money as getting 3-years TIG...but better than never having been payed as an O5? So the BL question: I want to retire before hitting 3-years TIG as a LtCol...is it possible and what is the damage? Any help is appreciated!

I think we've been played...and played well. I'm thinking Gravedigger is a crusty ole' fighter pilot who is getting a kick out of this shit. I mean, no way a dude quits pilot training because of his or his old ladies QoL requirements, becomes a satellite officer, then gets on a website called "flying squadron forums by baseops.net", then calls out those who finish an entire flying stint "a bunch of ing whiners". I've met some some characters in my time, but no one with the brass balls and/or total lack of SA to make themselves look so completely ridiculous. So here's to you GDigger...you got us good.

Ironically? So you couldn't hack it...puss'd out...and now you call us "a bunch of ing whiners." The irony indeed.

Lighten up Francis. Yes, some people have a skill set that should entitle them to more money. I'm of the opinion that if an airline captain makes 250K / yr...then any combat related pilot job with all the quals/seniority should make at least 500K. Supply and demand, or something...read it in a book once.

Heavy pilots wear american flags in order to comply with Postal Service requirements to carry mail...no?

What are the new rules for crud in our great Air Force?...I'm guessing the Wing/CC isn't going be refereeing under the old verbiage? Wikipedia: Failing to be within the end of the table while making contact with the object ball and the shooter ball is a foul, called Balls (or Lips if female), and the offending player is assessed a life.

Lawman, Some of your points are valid...but some of your points are off the mark. First, let's all agree that OIF/OEF isn't CAS in the classical sense. Sure, when the bullets start flying...it is a fight...and any aircraft with weapons is better than nothing. The majority of the work is TGP NAI scans with some bombs on coords...and mostly bullshit targets. And there ARE PLENTY OF AIRPLANES to fill the ATO. Second, you can't say the A-10 isn't specifically requested....because they are....hundreds of times in a given year on the 1972s. When the remarks read "Request fixed-wing with 30mm, fwd firing, ability to illuminate, TGP..." that is an A-10. As a former Army infantry type, with ALO stink, now old A-10 dude...here is what I think. You build an airplane with a purpose, give the pilots one mission set to focus on...they get good at that mission. Most would agree. The A-10 is hands down the best CAS fixed wing platform on the planet. Period. I'm talking CAS...moving battlefield...FEBA/FLOT/FISL, PAAs, etc. If you asked any AF pilot what platform they would recommend...it would be an A-10. It isn't a result of A-10 pilots having bigger dicks (although I do), being better pilots, etc....it is the result of an airplane designed for the purpose and the pilots being proficient in the mission. If you asked me if I wanted a viper, strike, B1 or Apache in a true CAS fight...it's obviously an Apache...cause you know the mission, you understand the gnd/cc's scheme of Mvr, it is your bread and butter. With that said, let's say we scrap the A-10....if we go toe-to-toe in a CAS fight...how many F-16s, F-15s, F-22s, F-35s do you think are going to be apportioned/allocated to CAS on the ATO? There lies the problem. The AF convinces you they will still be able to provide dedicated CAS in a full-up war...after all, they all supported you over the last decade, right? I ain't belivin it. I doubt Army leadership believes they will see many F-35s dedicated to CAS. Lots of my bros think the AF doesn't care about CAS...not necessarily. I'd say they just care a lot more about strategic shit. Last point: Why there is little talk of the army having organic fixed wing CAS doesn't compute with me. I know some agreement was signed....unsign it. It's been my belief for years that the A-10 would be a better airplane if the army owned it. I was even more convinced after seeing the avionics of a AH-64. I'm all about taking the Air Force out of the equation, have the ground commander own the iron and working directly for the gnd/CC. Maybe then the A-10s could train with the army...because Lawman is right here...we rarely do. This would also end the re-occurring AF debate on dedicated CAS.

2

My guess is it would be 15yrs x 2.5% per year...then subtract 5%. So 32.5%

No...I'm complaining about the fact that half a fighter squadron is in Service Dress on a Monday, the squadron is flying a 10x8, a dude falls off the schedule...and now I have to find a dude who brought his flight suit with him to work so he can perform his J-O-B...be a fighter pilot for the day. Or better yet, how about we create a new game called simulator Monday where everyone can wear a flight suit. I wish I could have been it that room when the CSAF brought this idea up...cause my educated guess is no one had the guts to tell him it was a horrible idea. But hey, everyone will love it cause its honor and tradition? OK...you got me. I only see landscape at the Squadron level...my FOV is narrow. However, sure looks like we lose a lot of talented aviators. Yep. Oh...wait, what?