Fuzz
-
Posts
1,641 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
14
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Gallery
Blogs
Downloads
Wiki
Posts posted by Fuzz
-
-
On 9/13/2018 at 6:34 AM, ThreeHoler said:
Unless it just changed, it is training RIPs signed before 1 Nov 18.
We've had several people turn down IPUG already and sorry no one is rolling the dice that AFPC will honor a Facebook post when it comes to what the 1 November timeline actually entails.
-
My understanding is that the new NDAA mostly handed over the rules to the DoD versus them being in Federal code. So yes there is no law now requiring up or out but the my understanding is that the DoD has to draft new guidance and they could choose to keep it.
-
Looks like we are on to "UPT Next 2.0", anyone seen the results of 1.0?
https://www.afwerxchallenge.com/ptnv2challenge/
-
On 8/22/2018 at 1:12 AM, Tonka said:
This caught the bosses eye...
The CSAF gets to pick his team, he has the entire 500K+ active, civ., AFRC and Guard personnel of the greatest of AF on the planet at his disposal. I believe the CSAF has exactly who he wants working for him, if he doesn't then that rests solely with him.
-
10 hours ago, dream big said:
Or..let’s do it the old way. Hand your receipts and paper voucher to finance and you’re paid 3 days later.
Finance can't pay a voucher when 99% of the work is done for them in DTS within a week or let alone get it correct. What makes you think they'll be able to take it start to finish correctly in 3 days?
-
We were logging sorties and currency as well as FCIFs, testing and Form 8s in GTIMS. Actually made processing sorties a lot easier and quicker.
-
3 hours ago, dream big said:
Yepp, kind of like the MAF AFMAN vol 1, two interim changes in 1 month and still haven’t gotten it right with utter confusion across the squadrons. But still, better than nothing.
I literally have no idea what I need for currency between the Published Vol 1, the released admendments, the cluster that is ARMS in both the AF wide change and the fact that ARMs doesn’t reflect our new Vol 1 plus all our logging sheets for sorties are now outdated.
-
11 hours ago, Jaded said:
"They told me on Facebook that I wouldn't have an ADSC!"
Sad that it’s mostly come to that, watching SQ/CC ask on a facebook page why they are finding official news from a Facebook page instead of official channels is entertaining.
Also that info came from my commander in response to a direct question.
-
1
-
1
-
-
Updates we received said this only applies to those returning from a different airframe/staff. This does not (for now) apply to long term DNIF, overdue checkrides, Q3s etc requals.
-
They keep missing the boat with all this after the UPT commitment is up, by that point it’s too late. Also like previously mentioned other AFSCs don’t have to wait until the end of their commitment to receive professional pay, so this will likely backfire once again.
-
2
-
-
13 hours ago, matmacwc said:
You worked on getting people to work at their home job while deployed, you sir, are the devil.
Word from the unit is that person was completely compartmentalized from the squadron when he was working that job but he did have to make regular trips to Shaw due to IT issues.
-
What is happening? I feel like there are deleted posts I missed.
-
5 hours ago, pcola said:
Well I specifically read it as an in-unit course (ie formal course that is conducted in-unit). I’d be very surprised if AFPC tags every CC directed requal for ADSC. I know my requal (which is currently under way, in-unit, CC directed) is not gonna get me an ADSC.
And it sucks but isn’t surprising I guess that the C-17 sends folks back to Altus for requal. That’ll definitely get you an ADSC.
We requal a decent amount of people in-unit, just depends on their background and slots available at Altus. Typically airdrop is our most common in house requal.
-
4 hours ago, Breckey said:
So as I see it in the excerpt IPUG or WIC will not incur the ADSC since they are not initial or requal. Also what about differences training (ie TH-1 to a UH-1) it's an initial qual course at the FTU but isn't per the MDSV2?
WIC falls in rule 16 but no mention of IPUG from what I can see.
-
8 minutes ago, pcola said:
I’d think this only applies to formal requal courses. Should be able to do CC directed requal for that case, which shouldn’t incur the ADSC as there’s no paper trail with AFPCExcept for note 2 which talks about in-house requals also incurring an ADSC.
-
It actually shows your commander is completely ignorant on what actually happened with that board and that's disappointing. However, not surprised given how terrible of a job HAF did in communicating what was actually happening with that board, regardless he's still a tool. Hope he doesnt feel that way when AFPC shifts the promotion rates like they do every year to ensure we promote enough people to fill the demand.
-
1
-
-
PDSM dropped on MyPers, if the AMC facebook page comments are any indication it's lacking in details or any type of specific protections.
-
It’s a pretty big leap from a handful WG/CCs to 4 Star MAJCOM/CC.
-
They have yet to drop the PSDM. It "stuck in staffing" but should be out shortly.
-
Not mentioned*:
- You are committed to 20 years commissioned service.
- Still eligible for "flying" 365s
-Still eligible for "flying" staff positions (i.e. MAJCOM Stan/Eval etc).
-Should still be eligible for the ACP Bonus.
*sourced from multiple Facebook pages
-
Well I hope those SEAD assets don't have to go very far to get to their targets.
-
1
-
-
-
2 hours ago, Gazmo said:
This all sounds great and you could bet your ass if we were allowed to run the show in the AOR like you portray, we'd be all over it, but in the grand scheme of things, we've been Kingpin/CAOC's puppet for the last almost two decades because some dude sitting in a building with 3 foot thick concrete walls and no windows thinks he knows how to run shit better than we do. The last time I did WTF I wanted was when I heard a pair of Vipers 10 min from bingo over the Med during OUP waiting for a French controller in a NATO AWACS to approve our transit to their area. By the time the controller got back to us with an approval, we had already .85'd it over there, got them on the boom and they were off to their targets shortly there after. Of course then there's the issue with what freq is everyone on? This is not the info that we need to be searching for in the jet. That info isn't going to be handed to us by the planners who are dealing with 40 sorties a day so it all goes back up to the top. Why do we need to be on the "right freq"? We're not allowed to run the show and do whatever we want when the AOR is run like an ARTCC. So we sit there and orbit and wait for our ARCT like we are expected to because ultimately, as mundane as that seems, that's the responsibility we've been given. Hey, we get paid the same either way. Maybe in a real conflict, things would be different.
Well considering you have apparently no interest in coming prepared to a real conflict based on yours and other’s statements on here, I would expect you to continue to be a puppet because the people do come prepared aren’t going to have the time to wait for you to get back in the vault to get smart on stuff you should know as a military aviator.
We fight the same mentality in the C-17 world. “I don’t have RWR so why do I care about SAM threats? I can’t do anything about them.” It’s a false assumption and a willful lack of critical thinking.
-
4
-
1
-
-
16 hours ago, Danger41 said:
I’m interested to hear about the exercise where the MAF dudes did that bad. My main MAF interactions have been out at WSINT and they’ve done well. The others have been on rotators in and out of theater and they let me put up a hammock so I love them.
That’s because you were probably dealing with WUGs or selected airdrop crews. MG17 we made a conscious effort to not stack the deck and send crews 4 deep on IP/EPs. Only time we picked crews for the most part were when regs drove crew qual positions (formation or package lead qual’d etc). Turns out when you send our line ACs on the road TDY/deployed for 200+ days minimum every year there’s not a lot of chances for them to hone those other skill sets and then GOs act shocked when they go tumbleweed and blow right through a a TACSAM WEZ.
-
2
-
1
-
2
-
Finance Problems
in General Discussion
Posted
Last I checked cabs can't be considered when doing the constructed travel cost. It's how C-17 squadrons manage to pay us $200 less when we drive because they don't factor in the $100 one way taxi from Lawton to Altus.