Swizzle

Montgomery, O-4: w/ dependent, $183 decrease w/o dep, $156 decrease Cannon AFB, O-4: w/ dep, $63 decrease w/o dep, $90 decrease

Check two other threads...we're already talking about this... Time to lock this down, then "File 13"

The USAF needs pilots so badly; I was seeing MQT, local indoc, and combat cert' trainees getting a slap on the wrist and multiple attempts. Exactly opposite of what you think.

They've proposed using eye scanning/monitoring, like retna trackers, with T-6 partial task trainers to hopefully accelerate an instrument crosscheck. Iterative virtual reality training will probably be extensive in that syllabus, when it gets developed. They will have a T-6 flying portion. **they will probably have near constant oversight from AETC HQ Proposed/goal for new road to wings is 6 months. It's aggressive.

Yes, and it's real. PCS to Texas hill country. Probably a CSD of ~February 18'. Should be pretty neat, but could get intensive real quick or be plauged by setbacks. The program has AETC/CC backing (naturally). A good and smart dude is helping it work.

Mardon Co. had my order in a six month backlog, when i called to get an update they stated it was because of some business difficulties and machines were down. I cancelled the order. I had used them for years...never again.

There is an AETC Det. My guess is they'll PCS studs after they bed down IPs and support equipment within 6 months. It's not the only test bed. The SECAF, CSAF and AETC/CC have publically mentioned this potential COA to fix the production side of the pilot problem (Aka decrease pilot training length). Change of AvB amount to business case analysis (NDAA FY18 mandated), changing pilot QoL through policy easing/protections, and increase of ACIP are meant to slow attrition. The =<1,000 pilot voluntary recall is meant to assist in fixing the absorption problem by keeping IPs in flying squadrons, not on staffs. Previously retired geezers coming back get staff work or schoolhouse flying. Best of luck USAF, you're going to need it. Luck (or lack thereof via previously self-inflicted policies) and timing (economy) are everything...you taught me that...it's still true now. Now bloom where you're planted! What kind of desert rose might we get!?

...perhaps via Post 9/11 benefits...all to more easily fund, grow, and build accredited flying academies nationwide....

It wasn't posted this week. My guess is they'll wait to post it until end of calendar year since the FY17 NDAA AVB is offered until Dec 31st (excluding 1 & 2 yr options).

Watch during an international flight, aka ass-in-seat for more than 7.5 hours or more, movie only

We need the bodies more than the iron, but really both. Growth requires resources, Cannon's existence encourages attrition. The line and mod schedule is sporty and active. NDAA18 appears to fund more iron.

The switch from a GEO-based COCOM(s) to Functional would make interesting, complicated and new C2 relationships...and funding...and training issues

It's projected to be APZers and IPZers. I don't know if and where the APZ cutoff is...perhaps none as there is only 'IPZ' now by the new definition, or maybe they stop at 5 years APZ...who knows. I doubt they've thought of advertising this critical info.

Where do you both see that?

NDAA 2018 passed House of Reps (much like last year) with: SEC. 617. INCREASE IN MAXIMUM. AMOUNT OF AVIATION BONUS FOR 12- MONTH PERIOD OF OBLIGATED. SERVICE. Section 334(c)(1)(B) of title 37, United States Code, is amended by striking “$35,000” and inserting “$50,000”. https://www.congress.gov/bill/115th-congress/house-bill/2810/text/pcs#toc-H9B96A0BBCDD9434EAE44E3AF62ABBA4B Now...what is the Senate going to do?

Easy fix: let guys take the bonus pay when they specify, namely anytime during the contract period, in any amount. Make it like a bank account from DFAS...the servicemember determines when to payout the money; and when it gets taxed. The AF would get a few more takers that way.

Are your dependents on your orders? If yes, then is concurrent or non-concurrent travel authorized? Concurrent could make you eligible for transient BAH. Or are you in the grey, I forget how many days are grey, perhaps 30?

More flexibility could mean more opportunities for balance/corrections in the force (late bloomers)...or over-extending (i.e. delaying decisions or delaying informing members) like a madman could cause falling/failing. Just-in-time IDE...new buzzword? (JITI) Guess it's already taken.... Either way it's retention of information/power and therefore mother blue is holding her cards closer for longer. That can't be a good thing overall for individuals, but that's good for the gander.

The fact that they're considering only core AFSCs as subgroups and not like-RDTM code subgroups harkens to the stupidity of the VSP days when we had too many "pilots"...despite being critically short in certain airframes (AFPC translation = RDTM)...and then masses of KC-10 or other subgroups of "pilots" abandoned ship en mass. Only after approving large portions of certain squadrons did AFPC catch their error and adjust the next Force Shaping programs decisions upon aviators on RDTM codes. History...its important... Oh yeah, nice "business case" and nice doing business with you

There is a process, policy, regulation, AFI and/or etc for everything we do. Knowing when to ignore it is half the battle. The other half is knowing where it exists. ...oh and words have meaning and intention, but words in context is key.

They're (the panel) talking about growing pilots rapidly and it's associated problems, namely lack of safety due to inexperience. They're veiled language is: "...In addition to creating new pathways to becoming a pilot, participants also agreed existing pathways should be improved and expanded to take advantage of available technology and safety research to ensure pilot training and qualification are focused on quality performance measures." Allow me to translate...MAKE NEW PILOTS FAST DAMMIT (small cough, cough, *mumble* crap); and find some of that key-characteristics-shit that'll keep those inexperienced swine safe. Where is that lipstick!!!? Break, break: Notice who had their jacket off? Oh the symbology...guess it's time to get to work boys and girls!

Hopefully it had nothing to do with the "not un-knelt light"...ha...FRED

Strats are individuals' philosophies on a feedback form, so it's been said and observed by lack of USAF guidance...so ask those individuals...or wait until/if the AFI standardizing strats comes out and follow the Bobs' instructions blindy without question - it's just easier that way....rrrriiigght!?

Yep, that's the proposal...as PRFs were only supposed to be discriminators, not the one stop shop. New strats rules are coming/proposed too...expect new AFI and policy guidance.

It keeps the $$ where they (Congress, HHQ, and others who can direct us) want it first...that is all. The stay-elsewhere if normal DTS-brokered hotels are sold out is simply because you have stay somewhere. The appearance of military paying military is no good either...but if you HAVE too After exhausting all options, well okay. And For example, how else are Clovis hotels going to grow be versus a budding AirBnB market?! (Half sarcasm...)