cmdro
-
Posts
12 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
1
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Gallery
Blogs
Downloads
Wiki
Posts posted by cmdro
-
-
He is telling the truth, if you apply to OTS on a Rated board you have no commitment to the AF. You will know what you have been selected for (Pilot, Nav, ABM, RPA), and can accept or decline with no commitment. I might be wrong (it's been a while since I was in you shoes), but until you go through MEPS on the way to OTS is the first time you sign anything connecting you to the AF. If you have any questions let me know.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
-
Question for the Army flyers who frequent this forum, or those who work with them:
Is the Army aviation community (especially the fixed wing folks) experiencing the same problems with retention now?
I can't speak to retention rates, but they (fixed wing) have the same manning issues we do.
With the airlines hiring, and the prospect of making a whole bunch more than Army W.O. pay (I assume the Army is offering its aviators nothing close to what the USAF is), I'd think the Army would be hemorrhaging fixed wing guys like crazy right now.
Until recently, fixed wing guys had to do a tour or two in rotary first. While a WO3 might have 3k total hours, only 150 of that might be fixed wing time, which does not make them very competitive in airline hiring early on. It seemed like the WOs who were hitting retirement were getting to around 1.5k-2k fixed wing hours in general.
- I get it that most of the Army fleet is rotary wing, but they've got a fair number of fixed wing aircraft, as well. This has to be a topic of discussion among Army aviators
- If the Army is having the same retention problems, I have to wonder if this will have a second/third order effect on the USAF. Army shortfalls have a way of getting "fixed" by in-lieu-of (ILO) Air Force "solutions"
ILO like you talk about has already happened, however, the Army tends to fix manning issues by going GOCO, at least on the fixed wing side of the house.
-
Copy. It's the media's fault that your employer has released names into the public domain in direct contravention of its own rules.
Sure, someone in the AF messed up by releasing the names, but does having the name of the pilot really add any value to the average reader of that article?
"WTF just happen" - Capt Bob M. Smith, USAF
vs
"WTF just happen" - MQ-1 Pilot, Capt, USAF
There is real damage done to those people who were named, even if it was legal, and I argue it added nothing to the value or message of the article.
-
Just an old Capt here at Columbus and if any of you went through CAFB and had a class patch (from any year) that was even remotely "offensive" it's been torn down from the walls/snackbar/etc. Sorry brothers and sorry to see history/tradition go...
So, has anyone looked at CBM on google maps lately?
-
5
-
-
Sounds like a massive storm/tornado went through Sun 'N Fun a few hours ago. Here are some pictures of the destruction from the EAA facebook site.
https://www.facebook.com/album.php?id=192081688622&aid=358039&closeTheater=1
-
Google Chrome works too with OS X 10.6.5.
-
I can't speak for Karl and how he might have known the ranks of those in his class, but any student that goes T-44 and I assume Helos, gets a few training reports before they leave for a new base. Part of one report states your rank, so if you get a lot of T-44/Helo guys in a class it isn't too hard to figure out the general order, especially if those guys are near the top. We also had a student in our class that due to his casual job at the wing was on an email list that received the track/assignment lists ahead of time and those had rank on them as well. And before anyone complains, he was removed from the list before our track and he never shared the lists, but just proves the list isn't as guarded as you might think. And for more token evidence, we had a few guys go T-44 who would have been in the mix for a T-38 spot if they put it first.
-
09-15 - CBM - AD
T-38 - 3
UH-1 - 1
T-44 - 5
T-1 - Everyone else
-
Thought of this thread as soon as I saw the image....
-
brickhistory,
I think since he is age-critical if something did go wrong with him switching to pilot it might keep him out of any rated position.
ggg308,
Personally I would keep the "for sure" position if it is something you can see yourself doing and enjoying. If you weren't age critical I would take the chance, but I can only assume there are going to be a lot of people in situations like yours looking into the switch with the new rules (I have no proof of this, just a guess). But, take my advice with a grain of salt, I'm just an OTS select waiting on my FC1 to be signed off on, there are many people (aka almost everyone) on this board with much more informed advice then me.
Best of luck with whatever you do!
New BAH rates are out.
in General Discussion
Posted · Edited by cmdro
If I am reading the Senate bill correctly, for Mil-to-Mil this is even worse than last year's attempted BAH change (only get BAH for highest ranking member). With this change, a Mil-to-Mil couple with dependents would not even get the highest ranking BAH because the new formula would be:
Member BAH = Max BAH/Number of members in household
For example, lets take two O-4s living in DC with kids, Member 1 would be entitled to BAH w/ dependents, Member 2 w/o dependents.
Member 1 BAH = 3108/2 = $1554
Member 2 BAH = 2673/2 = $1337
Total Mil-to-Mil BAH = 1554 + 1337 = $2891
So, an O-4 married to anyone except another military member living in DC would get a max BAH of $3108, but a Mil-to-Mil couple with dependents would max out at $2891. This is on top of the same couple also taking a ~$30K/yr pay cut from what they would be entitled to under the current rules.