Oo7kerpow
-
Posts
17 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Gallery
Blogs
Downloads
Wiki
Posts posted by Oo7kerpow
-
-
Instead of handing out school slots from the board, they'll hand out 365's!! Congratulations on making major above the zone...here's a 365!
-
On 5/21/2018 at 10:13 PM, BADFNZ said:
I heard the recently canned 317 AW/CC made crews create a quad chart for any non-TACC off-station mission to brief to him?
I don't know the guy but in all fairness this briefing (minus the requirement for said quad-chart, which is popular with the Army) has been required since I was at Dyess back in 2009, and maybe before that. Except it used to be to the AG/CC before there was a wing commander...I remember briefing my mission to the then-AG/CC and getting questions like "Where are you planning on eating with your crew" and "Who is driving the rental car." Cosmic mission related questions, I know.
-
On 4/6/2017 at 5:42 PM, HossHarris said:
You can 3-day opt a 365 like you always could.
You can no longer set a DOS if you get a 179 to get out of the 179. Did you notice that almost all the 365s have been split into 2x 179s. Weird coincidence I'm sure.
(If you already have a DOS set before notification of a 179 you should be good. Of course if you have a DOS in the next 6 months you shouldn't be getting a 179 ....)
Randomly perusing these forums and came across this one. As I am separating 30 Mar 18, I thought I'd shed some light since some of this information is inaccurate. If you are purely separating (not retiring) you can absolutely establish a DOS to avoid a 179. 3-day and 7-day options are for assignments and 365s because they are handled through the assignment process. The separations reg, AFI 36-3207, says absolutely zero about reasons preventing you from separating as it relates to deployment. I'm not even sure the word is in the reg. If you are able to separate given any of the reasons in the reg, you can do it.
In October of 17 I was tasked with a deployment May 18-Dec 18. My UPT commitment ends in March 18. The next day after receiving the tasking, I submitted a separation package in vMPF for Mar 30, 2 days before my AEF window opens. AFPC said it didnt matter and than I could've picked any date before the end of the deployment and I agreed with them, but I'm superstitious and left it that way. My boss knew it was coming because I briefed him of this possibility months ago (because I was also supposed to PCS in the spring and theoretically protected by a DAV code starting in Nov 17). The deployment functional dude wasnt happy, but I showed my boss and the wing/cc the regs and put "completion of active duty service commitment" as my reason for separating and it went right on through. There is nothing in 36-3207 that prevents you from doing this.
Retirements on the other hand, are different. The reg changed a few years ago and now if you can complete your -179 deployment within your ADSC (plus 30 days) you are required to go. However, people get confused about 365, the chart simply says if you are not eligible to 3 or 7 day opt then you have to go on the 365. If you are eligible to 3/7 opt, you can still do that (36-2110). They did also add notes about Stop Loss to the sections discussing retirement and deployments, however.
-
1
-
-
I think afpc is smarter than we think. Personally I think these games are more representative of manipulation than incompetence. Although probably both
-
Liquid, I'm curious what your thoughts are on a cultural shift towards more decisions being removed from lower leadership and being made higher up. I'm not sure if technology has created this or if something else, but subjective decisions have disappeared at the lower level. I would argue this is one of the causes of not only "box checking" but performance reports that need distinguishing factors to be able to tell officers apart.
For example, it is extremely hard to express on paper that officer A is just better in the office and in the jet than officer B because no one can be less than stellar on an opr. When it comes to rack and stacks, if the sq/cc has not personally observed this excellence, there is no room for flt/CCs to go to bat for said officer. Half the time flt/CCs are blatantly told how to strat and what job to push to match sq/cc rack and stack based on said box checking criteria. Sq/CCs have even less ability to justify said awesomeness unless backed up with awards when discussing things like SOS, oprs, and prfs at the grp/wing level. There is no box for above average pilot/nav-it's either instructor or flt cc and that's it. If you rock yor pt score, get your aad, and don't kill anyone in the plane, you'll go to SOS and be promoted, regardless if you are hardly in the office, can't land to save your life or always need a "seeing eye" crew member to ensure youre safe in the jet.
As a flight commander, it's hard to go to the sq/cc and justify xx strat u less its supported by said box checking spreadsheets, regardless of role as supervisor. Isn't that why we have flt commanders? On the same token, a sq/cc should be able to do the same for an individual at the grp level.
If we we were allowed to actually say a persons real performance on a report rather than saying everyone is awesome, maybe we wouldn't need things like aad and SOS to separate the chaff. And if rehabilitation existed in the Air Force, we wouldn't worry about being honest about a persons feedback.
Example: at a certain amc base, your package not only has to impress your own sq/cc but every squadron cc in the group and then again at the wing to make it to SOS. If you already don't at least have a ba+, you're not going to make it. If you have a passing but lower pt score, you have a reduced chance of making it. I understand wanting to send the best officers, but when you remove that subjectivity from a sq/cc, all that is left is box checking. It's a double whammy.
I don't think most people have an issue with the aad. They have an issue with it being possible to be a floater, getting paid $80k a year to do just enough work to not get in trouble, check all the boxes, and get promoted over their buddies who are shouldering the load. You can argue that these individuals eventually get filtered out, but it doesn't help the guys they stepped on first.
-
I cringe every time I hear a Moose call sign.
-
1
-
-
A fresh new J guy 'should' be able to.. but Afghanistan is very different than CONUS. High elevations/max gross weights/defensive systems are not taught in unison so task saturation and maturity (especially for GW considerations) are not there yet. A few rides in those conditions and its natural again, but those few rides are still educational over there.
This. As a brand new AC in the sandbox right now, I can attest to this. My first flight out here was surprising to me-way different than what we train for back home. Airmanship isn't truly tested until you are removed from your safe cookie cutter conus training environment and you are faced with a situation like this:
One controller (atc) wants you to go left for traffic, but you don't wanna go left because there's a thunderstorm there. Another controller (c2) wants you to go right because there is a roz in front of you because some a-10s are blowing shit up, but you don't wanna go right because there's a ######ing mountain there. You can't climb because you don't have the performance yet. Your copilot and nav are telling you different things based on the controller they are talking to. Your eng is worried about the number four tit gauge which decided to stop working, and your load is worried about the bright flashing light off of your left wing which is probably just a pickup truck but could be something more. Obviously several options available, but typically not something you encounter back home and if you don't have your head on a swivel, you could easily decide to do something that could bend metal and kill people.
I'm sure every aircraft has similar stories. I've seen the wreckage, and carried passengers on the plane in question. Ill reserve judgement, because I know everyone has been put in a situation where after they landed, they heaved a sigh of relief because whatever they ######ed up didn't result in the worst case scenario.
-
I'm getting really tired of landing at places in Afghanistan with a broken plane on one end of the runway
-
Good start. Next the genius who came up with the failed policy that directly resulted in countless wasted hours should be publicly reprimanded as a general warning.
Too late. Opr bullet and promotion already awarded.
-
Don't forget it's at an angle up-so the horizontal component is less then what the strap is rated at. So for a 10000 pound strap, you might only get 2/3 of that
Edited to show that it might have already been covered at 60%
-
It's all 8th grade level stuff; everyone called it Slackademics for a reason ...
Except for the dreaded weather test
-
How can the Air Force justify doing this for money? What happened to all those critically manned afscs(non aircrew) that would be perfect places to send these individuals?
-
This case made me sick. As someone who has felt the wrath of the military justice system before, I can see plenty of reasons why this case never would have flown in a civilian court.
I hate the argument "she has no reason to lie." Bullshit. We're all human, and we all lie. Why is it assumed that the man committed a crime? It's the same logic used in reverse. You could argue that he had no reason or motive to do this. Neither are good arguments.
As to being convicted by a jury of your peers. What makes you think that the court of law is an entirely fair process? Why do lawyers fight to get certain evidence removed, so as to not influence the jury? Because it would be devastating to their case, not whether it is relevant to the guilt or innocence of their client.
Who does the jag work for? Who does the adc work for? Who does the military judge work for? The government. If you don't think the odds are stacked against the accused, you're wrong.
How many commanders know jack squat about the law and blindly accept the word of the jag(the ones prosecuting you)?
The Air Force as an institution had plenty of reason the go all out here. Anyone remember the c17 pilot court martialled for an off dz drop? The Air Force didn't think he would be convicted. They did it to send a message. And to appease everyone screaming for blood.
Put yourself in his shoes. Would you still think the same thing if the genders were reversed? I doubt it.
-
Reflective belts anyone?
-
1
-
Promotion and PRF Information
in General Discussion
Posted
I’ve separated already but I’m watching this just to see if I got promoted anyway-I suspect I’m an easy kill remove for this one especially if mine was one of the 200 SRs have to “prove again.”
“Hey SR justify why we should promote this guy”
“Well he’s separated so....”
Normally as long as the board is >90 days from separation date they can’t remove your name just for separating, but this one is so different I wouldn’t put into past them. Although the OSD can do anything so I guess we will see.