spaw2001

Yup. This is true. Universities worth their weight will not let you apply for another MBA if you already have a MBA (that's like going through T-38s twice...not fair). After looking through the thread, a few more points on the on-going BS vs. good degree debate. I firmly fall into the get a valuable degree now camp. I am actually quite passionate and albeit self-proclaimed, well-versed on the subject. For the record, I have a MBA/MS from the Kelley School of Business at Indiana (Full Time Rankings: US News and World Report #23/Business Week #15). So, it is considered top tier but carries less prestige than the big names. It is a well-respected school in the business world and is a national brand that gets people employed throughout the country. I went through their Kelley Direct program which is a hybrid of online and several in-residencies. I am not trying to stage a defense and justify my choosing to pay now for a brick and mortar school. This was a careful decision after a lot of consideration, research, and discussion with folks in the private sector. So, just sharing my thoughts. I can honestly conclude that the notion that a MBA degree will be obsolete in 6-9 years when you get out is crap. For example, people say, if you can't get a top-20 MBA while you are in the military (which most of us can't due to flying commitments), then don't get one at all because it will be worthless. So....just get the check the box degree and go get a real MBA later. This logic is ill-founded for a variety of reasons. 1. When our pilot commitment is done at age 33-35, we don't know where we will be in life. The chances of dropping everything to go pursue a top-5 MBA and its $150k+ price tag are diminished. 2. Prestigious MBAs and the companies that they feed have an "unwritten" age bias. While they will accept a few folks in their mid-thirties, once again, chances are greatly diminished (i.e. you better be from Kenya and have saved >50 baby seals). The sweet spot for acceptance into MBA programs is late 20s. Companies have a bias because a 36 year old with a family is less likely willing to get used/abused as a low-level associate at goldman sachs. Obviosuly, this isn't gospel and there are exceptions but this is the general trend. 3. People assume that there are no other available degrees for folks that already hold a MBA but would like to give a post-military career transition/credential boost. There are fantastic fellowships (i.e Stanford http://www.gsb.stanford.edu/sloan/sponsors and MIT http://mitsloan.mit.edu/fellows/advantages/) that only take a year and are for mid-career professionals. We would be incredibly competitive and bring a unique perspective to something like this. These do carry a hefty price tag though. 4. There is a weird assumption that there are few intangible benefits to getting a MBA now. This is also incorrect. Before starting at Kelley, I had no real business knowledge or interest. Now, my curiosity for everything business is insatiable. My MBA has turned into a launching pad for seeking more knowledge and being literate in the current business buzz. Sure, if you get the MBA ticket and don't continue your education, some elements might become obsolete. But, isn't this true for any field or degree? In my opinion, the head start on knowledge that I have gotten is worth way more than waiting 5 more years until my pilot training commitment is up and then going to get a degree. 5. People assume that there is no network associated with an online degree from a reputable school. I admit, I was skeptical as well. This was the most surprising element for me while getting my MBA. At the time, Kelley was the top-ranked MBA offering an online degree. (Now, depending on which rankings you look at Kenan-Flager and Kelley share the market with a slight edge to UNC because its school is overall more prestigious than IU...Duke also has a continental MBA but has in-residencies every 8 weeks so not really a player). Anyway, the quality of the students in my class was astounding at Kelley. I thought I had a pretty good record, but I was the dumbass in my initial project group. Remember, these people fall into similar categories as us. They are top professionals unable to break away from their career to get a MBA. Therefore, they chose to go the part-time route and sought out the most prestigious options. This leads to an incredible network and one that I keep in contact/consult with often. I am actually working on a side venture with a fellow Alum. I get it....Going to Harvard and tapping into that network in a full-time program is powerful. Remember though, these people sacrifice 2 years of income, and incur tons of debt to get this opportunity. With the rising tuition prices and the ever-increasing capabilities of online technology/robustness in MBA program online delivery, distance programs are becoming a viable substitute. Based on feedback from colleagues, the majority of companies (there are a few that have a prestige bias: Investment Banking/Wall Street Consulting) don't really care how you get your MBA as long is it has some level of branded-prestige and is AACSB accredited. Sure, a top-5 MBA will give you a boost, but at the end of the day it is about the complete-person and the unique experience brought to the table. 6. The Air Force has skewed the cost structure of getting an education. Many think the going rate of getting a good education is $250/ credit hour. That is the going rate for a "for profit" school that has figured out how to get military members to go with them. The reality is, in order to get a degree of repute, it is going to cost "out of pocket" money or the use of the GI Bill. For reference, IU cost 60K for my dual degree and was cash-flowed and supplemented by the GI BIll. I still have about 18 months left on my GI Bill. At the end of the day, I believe that if we are going to do the work, might as well make it meaningful and something we can leverage in the future. That is my rant for now on the subject....

Obviously they can't punitively assign a 365 to you and yes those come from higher up. In general, however, if a unit has to slap a tour on to someone (i.e. a CAOC gig or insert other shitty deal), your name will be passed up over someone they are taking care of. I misspoke when I said 365 because those are assigned from above as mentioned earlier in this thread.

Yup, 7 day opt out protects the member from PCS'ing within 2 years of a DOS because PCS's incur a 2 yr commitment. Say, you have one year left on your commitment and they non-vol you to Minot, you can 7 day opt out and stay at your current base until separation. Yet, often Wings that have a ton of non-vols to shit bases will track your 2 years to separation date so they can drop an assignment on you before the 7 day opt out becomes an option. Also, in rare instances, the AF could force you to move if you are within 2 years, but they cannot force you to extend your ADSC. Finally, someone who 7 day opts out is ripe for a 365 because the cards are shown. The best way to avoid all this is to try and time your PCSs such that your commitment expires at the end of a normal length tour.

Yup....Its true, you'll never be home..But, for living arrangements, if you are single downtown tacoma aint bad. If u want to brave traffic and do the drive, check out seattle...most everyone would want to live there but a vocal minority actually live there and try to convince everyone else the drive is worth it...I lived i tacoma for my entire tour and was perfectly happy there. If u are married you will prolly live in puyallup, dupont or lacey...good luck...plane is sweet but the lifestyle will probably make you volunteer for a UAV after a few years

Why is it that everyone has to spin everything? You could literally make a case that a turd should not be cut because it motivates and "creates" jobs...People on here are starting to sound like nancy pelosi making the important case for every government program.. At the end of the day, something and some program has to be cut...We already have a mass-marketed demo team and they are called the Thunderbirds (love em or hate em). We all know that a band is cheaper to maintain than a demo team especially considering any demo team other than the t-birds is redundant...Spin spin spin

Too soon?

Cut everyone else's programs, but don't touch my favorite ones regardless of how frivolous they are!

Yup, that's confirmed. I called about the same question less than a year ago, and certificates are not recognized on your surf or DQHB as of now. He said there was some talk about them eventually getting recognized, but not yet.

From my perspective, I think you need to decide very carefully if you want to be a pilot for at least 10 years. It is extremely easy to sign that 10-yr commitment, go to pilot training, take pictures of yourself in the mirror with your fighter mask on (not that I did....), drink with the bros, etc...When the newness wears off, and perhaps you don't get the exact plane you wanted initially, the question is, will you be happy?? Furthermore, as your friends are getting out of the military (after a few year commitment and starting to make money, getting prestigious degrees, etc...will you wish you were on the other side? What I have found, people that love flying overall are satisfied with being an air force pilot. People (like myself) who were more enamored by the "Top Gun" image aspect of flying, seem to be disappointed. Don't get me wrong, I am proud to have served my country (and that is priceless). After all, when many people have been shoveling shit in louisiana, us military aviators have been downrange helping the fight in Afghanistan, Iraq, and all over the world...cool stuff for sure. I will wear my OEF hat with pride one day, haha. Yet, from the pure job satisfaction side, if you don't love to fly, then all the queep and bureaucratic garbage will wear on you quite quickly. Also, I was a C-17 pilot and volunteered for UAVs, and I can say that I actually enjoy this job much more for a variety of reasons...One man's trash is another's treasure, I guess. Bottomline, when assessing what you want to do, toss out the outside perceptions, and images associated with a job, and decide if you will actually enjoy the task. As an example, I am kind of a big picture guy that likes to innovate, and I am bored to tears with following checklists and operating an aircraft with set parameters/specific regulations. It feels very, "monkey see, monkey do" to me. Outside the box (sts) thinking is frowned upon in aviation. But, this is all a personality thing...You just have to decide. One thing that is great about the guard/reserve is that it allows you to live 2 lives..You can serve/fly and also have an outside job...pretty good deal if you aren't 100% sure on what you want to do...good luck!

Thats funny Rusty! I am waiting for the school that awards a full degree based on SOS and Initial qual completion...All you have to pay is the application fee..You can even print the diploma out off of the ADLS transcript page...money!!

Yup...All good points. I think there is a clear divide between whats good for the individual and what looks good to El Air Force. Senior leaders simply want to report to Congress that 96.9% of Majors have a masters. Check out our educated and thoughtful officer corps! But, please don't read the fine print because the majority of our rated force, and future AF leaders get them from for-profit schools. I feel good though, because we are all making the collective whole look good. Perhaps a year at the prestigious Air University will make it all worth it! If you think about it, the selection rate to in-res IDE is about that of an ivy league university for officers. I love how the Air Force sells shit sandwiches and somehow manages to simultaneously make us feel grateful.

Please bestow thou omniscient view upon us...In the mean time, im going to get a beer

Some good points for sure, but I don't think the AF consciously says, "Let's not qualify/train our folks too much because then they'll leave." It probably all comes down to costs...And then, that is a whole different topic because we all know TA is a waste for officers, but it looks cheap on paper..Only 250 per credit hour. It would be tough for the AF to justify paying the 150K per officer for an ivy league MBA. Also, I think it is difficult to really say who would "Stay and leave" based on the good deals and education investment the Air Force decides to give to an individual. I have met people across the spectrum from "fast burner" to shitbag decide to stay in or get out...It is a very personal matter. I for one, would stay in if they offered to send me to get a Harvard MBA/MPA and then go teach at USAFA as a stepping stone to future leadership positions (this is similar to a viable Army career route). Other people may dismiss such an opportunity because they want to stay in the cockpit. But no, instead, they force virtually all pilots to stay in flying billets until the 10-yr commitment is up, treating senior CGOs and junior FGOs as simple stick actuators. Then, they get around to sending 20% to Maxwell or, if you are lucky Joint school (which is still a bullshit military education). The rest then get the privilege of doing ACSC in correspondence. Wow...what an amazing confidence and leadership building program (all from the comfort of your computer)! I am not trying to sound aloof, but I am just tired of the Air Force throwing money around with all these ridiculous half-assed programs that look good on paper but provide little real, actual value to the member.

Ha..thanks for the english lesson Herk.."me fail english, thats unpossible..." And yes, I agree with Brabus that the Air Force would have a difficult time telling people how to best spend their money...But there seems to be unwritten examples of this anyway: 1. Masters degree basically required for IDE consideration 1st look 2. AD folks applying to pilot training boards essentially require a private pilots license

Yeah, don't get me wrong, I am a big proponent of educated officers. I have ranted and raved in other threads about the f'd up AF education process. The check the box system the Air Force has now and the limited opportunity for ops folks to get a prestigious degree is insanely short-sighted. A lot of my peers are getting out of the Army at this point (I was a cross-commissioner) and cruising into Harvard, U of Chicago, Dartmouth etc...Further, the Army has programs very early in careers to send folks back to get masters degrees at good schools. Also, teaching at West Point is considered a good career move unlike teaching at USAFA for AF pilots. So, while our peers are out getting great degrees, the Air Force flying community is stuck getting online degrees and wondering if TUI is going to keep their accredidation. Yes, I know that one could argue that pilots don't necessarily need prestigious degrees, but do infantry officers need these degrees? No..but the other services seem to have a better grasp that educating their officers and building more credentialed individuals is an investment into the profession and ensuring military officership is considered elite...The Air Force tends to boil everything down to technical necessity...This is bullshit because educating people (outside of AFIT and Maxwell) expands people's horizons and builds more thoughtful, perspective-rich decision-makers. Now, off that soap box....there is a fundamental problem with the "pay to play" promotion process. Essentially, it fosters an environment where people knock out a degree out of necessity rather than for the actual interest in knowledge. Further, how do we measure this? So, I chose to use my GI Bill and TA to get a MBA at a reputable school. I did it for me and future options, but does that mean the Air Force should favor me more than someone that got a check the box? What I say, and I actually briefed this at SOS, is we should eliminate the "requirement" to get a masters before Major promotion. Eliminate TA altogether for O's. During the Capt years, people are assessed based on technical skills and leadership potential alone. When the most talented folks are selected for IDE in residence, then the Air Force should have a much broader selection of schools outside of the military education structure. These should include top-tier civilian schools. This serves 3 main purposes. First, it is a carrot to keep people in. Second, it broadens horizons for military leaders. Third, it reduces wasteful education spending (i.e. TA on for profits) and replaces it with real, worthwhile education.

This is actually a good thing, in my opinion. 250/credit hr or whatever they pay, simply reinforces behavior to get a cheap, worthless, for profit degree. $250*30 credits for a masters=$7,500. What quality degree costs only $7500? None is the answer. I got my masters from a state school and it still costed $1000 per credit hr. It will be interesting to see if they will mandate degrees if there is no financial support from the gov. It's kinda jacked up that people essentially have to pay for promotion.

I just have a difficult time buying the direct correlation between serving more than 20 yrs and being a douchebag/"the man." I've said it before, but it is very easy to make sweeping generalizations on this forum. A general theme or assumption I read a lot here is if you get passed over, then you are some kind of cult hero. This tragic figure fought the man and won a moral victory sacrificing promotion to be with the people. Then, we have the 0-6 that played every move perfectly...stepping on as many toes up the ziggurat of success. Then, after 20 years, this person stays in and gets to make decisions such as how many reflective belts we wear and how can we make PT uniforms as uncomfortable as possible. In reality, I find quite a mix in the "real world." There are plenty of really awesome high ranking dudes and some jackasses as well. Then, for the passed over people, there are some really good dudes that get screwed. The more common story, however, is they failed to do something that the Air Force specifically outlines is required for promotion (whether it is bullshit or not). This doesn't make them bad people, but they simply didn't take care of business. Then, of course, you have some wastes of space that deservedly don't get promoted. These seem to be fairly rare, however. As I said in the other post, I think there are a variety of factors that keep people in and out of the force. While anecdotal, I find most Lt Cols that aren't going to make 0-6 typically stick around a couple past 20 and choose to stay or go based on assignments and whether good deals present themselves. While I am not for getting rid of the pension because I think there should be a unique, good deal for the high quality people that choose to serve their country long-term, I do think that the 401K plan will naturally force shape the service to where retirement becomes less of an all or nothing deal. As a result, there will be a more gradual winnowing effect of its members. People that stick around, get deservedly rewarded more, but people will also have the option to leave early with some compensation. Further, it does inherently force people to be more responsible with personal finances as mentioned in my last post. This is a valuable life lesson that under the current system, we don't really have to learn

Rainman, I am just trying to track what you are saying because I am not in the civilian world? In your opinion, do you think most people that don't have a retirement is a result of self-induced retirement saving/planning procrastination or is it because companies are literally F'ing them out of retirement? I am pretty read-up in the financial planning/finance area and my perception is the majority of folks tend to overspend/drive up debt relying on a company or government organization to bail them out in the end. Essentially, folks spend a lifetime paying banks interest. Further, while most military members seem to behave fairly well with regards to consumer debt (except for airmen with the AAFES star card haha), many have this proclivity to buy a house with a white picket fence every time they PCS, accounting for zero risk and essentially "renting" the property with 0 down, 30 year loans. The common argument is why rent when you can buy with a lower payment?? This seems logical in a vacuum but does not account for risk and being stuck with a house at PCS time either because the market didn't appreciate, or they are upside down in their 0 down loan. The only thing that saves them is signing up to be an absentee landlords with leveraged houses scattered across the country. I bring this up because I feel like people make certain decisions, but then get all high and mighty when an organization doesn't flop out the supple benefits teet. At the end of the day, military members making 60-80K have no business being in 300K homes and then renting it out and buying another one at another PCS location. I bring this up essentially to say that saving for retirement is not quite as difficult as many make it out to be. But, this requires foresight and a shift in the consumption/"have to own a home" culture many Americans (military included) have. At 9% interest saving 850 bucks a month (roughly 15% for a Capt) into an index fund, an individual will have $1.5+ million at age 56 (if the person starts at 26). See Dave Ramsey's calculator: (http://www.daveramsey.com/articles/article/articleID/investing%2Dcalculator/category/lifeandmoney%5Finvesting/) This is a conservative rate considering the market has been closer to 10% since its inception. Further, this assumes no raise throughout your life. Pretty realistic numbers if you ask me! Common naysayer arguments: Oh but 850 is a lot of money per month! My response: May seem that way but total up all house mx, realtor fees, interest, etc.. and most will be surprised with what you come up with. Trust me: I have a rental property in a good real estate market, and it is still expensive..Many tend to just focus on appreciation and seem to discount all the trickling-in/recurring costs associated with a home. What about inflation? My response: No investment is safe from this. What if the stock market crashes? My response: Well, what if the government arbitrarily decides to stop your pension (i.e. Pritchard, AL (http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2011/02/20/sunday/main20034120.shtml)? What if all your real estate investments go under water and you can't rent them? What if all the gold people buy up in this hyper-fad crashes in half when the slight bit of confidence is restored in the stock market? No investment is 100% safe. Look, like I said before, military folks sacrifice and deserve some compensation plan, but I think many people make reckless decisions based on some expected savior pension plan and then make risky decisions. I am included in this. Hell, I LEASED a 45K BMW as a 2LT! I am just saying, perhaps, we need to tighten our belts a bit so we are not so reliant on gov offerings.

Porkchop, I 69% agree with you here. You are right on about less incentive to stay for a career but, I think the people that stick around that are worth a shit aren't really sticking around for the retirement pay. They are sticking around for career advancement or good opportunities (i.e. foreign exchanges, embassy tours, random cool assignments). After all, how many folks on the fast track do you meet that punch right at 20? Actually, even a lot of donezo Lt Cols I run into stick around a few years beyond 20. If it is for the meager extra couple percentages of retirement per yr, that seems ridiculous to me considering they could make much more in the civilian sector. At the end of the day, I think people stay or go for a variety of reasons and not just retirement pay. In 2010, I made over 6 figures in the mobility world being gone all the time. Not worth the money though. Similarly, the average length of an investment bankers' tenure at a wall street bank after their MBA is 1 year. Why when the pay is so great? It is because job satisfaction, perceived development opportunities, and relevance have been consistent top reasons for people sticking around at their job beyond pay. I am in the same boat. I will be eligible to and plan on punching at the 12.5 point, and it is not contingent on what kind of retirement system is in place. I have my own damn retirement system in place. I am not sure why so many folks live or die by what the government may or may not do. As you say, you have maximized your experiences and used the military programs to get educated. As I have mentioned in previous posts, too many officers (pilots especially) don't follow this model. Instead, they sit around watching government benefits or waiting for the next sortie/racking up hours to be ready when Pan-Am hires again. Of course, I am not saying the government should leave service members high and dry so please spare me the "I got shot at and do so much more than civilians" argument. But, I think we are starting to sound like a bunch of entitlement driven, union-backed civil servants. Read Ralph Waldo Emerson's self-reliance please. It fired me up and reminded me that the government doesn't owe me jack shit so my goal is to prepare myself so I don't have to crawl to them for benefits either.

Am I the only Air Force pilot just not 100% impressed with the Robin Old's style? It is a niche leadership style that worked for a certain type of person in a particular era. As I mentioned in the previous post, I agree with his tenacity and am obviously not a fan of the complete slide to political correctness today. But, Olds' style was much like a Patton. Olds and Patton are great battlefield commanders. But, imagine if Eisenhower and Omar Bradley weren't present to keep aggressive leadership style such as Patton's in check. Similarly, I think an Olds style leadership simply caps out at a point. Disregard for politics in total favor for mission and bros is simply an ideal that doesn't exist in the real world. Personally, I prefer Gen Welsh, Colin Powell, Petraeus type that seem to strike an excellent balance between politics, morale, and mission. Unfortuantely, this style is few and far between so we tend to herald back to the days of Gen Olds and set an unrealistic benchmark

While I agree with it personally, I think the cliche Robin Olds argument is like trying to make a moral case against abortion to an atheist. Robin Olds lived in a much different era and the argument falls on deaf ears. While most pilots would argue those were better days, the reality of today: there is a 99.9% chance people will return from a mission in any aircraft (fighter, UAV (ha), heavy) in one piece. SOOO, as many have said before, we get to fight a long-term war with a peace time standards environment. I am done trying to change the Air Force. It is a huge bureaucratic mess...basically a social security system with wings. I say take it or leave it...serve your time and get out, or stay in and deal with the exponentially increasing bullshit. Do we really think a post on af.com is going to change their behavior in any way. Hell, I applied for VSP, and after all that upheaval up and down the chain after the results...what changed? I am still in the Air Force...I think our only vote is with the good old feet and I plan on using them in a few years.

The F-35 needs to go participate in "canx'd flag." Know when to fold 'em

Yeah, I get your point hacker. I was trying to tread lightly with the UPT comment because I know it is a volunteer program. The fundamental problem with long term contracts is they are marathons but the AF treats them like a sprint. In essence, in order to keep sanity for the long term, pilots simply have to balance life with Air Force demands. Unfortunately, the service doesn't see it this way. They see us as stick actuators available for missions and sustained ops for the entire duration of the flying commitment. This may work with shorter ADSCs or in a recruitment force such as the Army. The Air Force, however, is a sustainment force...Right now, they seem to simply rely on the fact that we will just stay in because our commitment takes us roughly to the 12 year point. This is much different than retaining highly trained folks based on job satisfaction and a balanced approach with regards to ops tempo and having a life during the best years of our lives. And yes, I would turn around before hitting Bagram airspace with no TCAS. That place went from awesome to flying into a Western Asia LAX in a few short years

Ok..but in the era of government cuts, doesn't this fall into the category of "cut everything else, but don't cut my program?" I'm not arguing that I would be happy if they eliminate the pension, but it is just another reason not to rely on the government for anything...big ######ing government has never and will never work...why? At the end of the day, it is impossible for the juggernaut of bureaucracy to truly care for the individual. And when they change their mind at the drop of a dime about a program you rely on, then all they have to do is "create jobs" by opening a call center. They will place a low level, hand-out loving government bureaucrat in a cubicle to answer your questions via teleprompter about the new, amazing 401K program. Yes, I know we signed up with expectations that there would be a "guaranteed" pension after 20.. But it was just that, an expectation in the same way we "expect" congress to manage the economy. After all, isn't their original purpose to control the "purse?" I've learned a lot from the last year or so after VSP, fiscal issues, ops tempo, etc...The problem with us is, we have signed a one way contract with the government...after UPT, we owe the Air Force 10 years and in return, they essentially owe us nothing. Yes, they trained us to fly, but, oh yeah, we are doing their work and at their bidding. So, life lesson learned...Never volunteer large amounts of time ( i.e long ADSC) in exchange for future promises..instead, keep an open contract in which you will stay and work your ass off in exchange for recurring fulfilled promises. After all, isn't it ridiculous to assume that we know the state of anything after 20 years? In the corporate world, they owe you nothing and can "in house clean" your ass ala office space at any point..But you can leave anytime as well. Thus, a relationship of trust and mutual support results by definition. Unless there are radical changes to the way business is done, I will fulfill my ten years, but the Air Force has not earned a day more. Just to make sure, I will be watching my ADSC on my surf as closely as my TCAS overhead Bagram.

Right on...I have been on a little bit of a forum rampage over the last week. I was also commenting in the education forum the other day. Here are some observations I have made with us AF flyers and the "pigeon hole'ing" concept I made in my last post. I was an interservice transfer, so my initial officer training was with the Army. The Air Force, by its very nature is much more technically based and there is great emphasis on operating a machine. Yes, it is complex and safety is paramount, but I have noticed that this forces officers into a very narrowly tracked mindset that we need to break free from. Basically, here is the mentality of many pilots: I want to go to pilot training-what plane am I going to fly?-What base?-Why does the Air Force want me to do other things other than fly?-Wait, I have to get a masters degree?-Screw it, I'll just check the box.-Boy, I need to serve 20 to get that pension.-But, this kinda sucks, so maybe I'll get out in 10 years. Hopefully, the airlines are hiring because all I can do is fly. Really?? Countless of my Army buddies are getting out, and getting good jobs and attending top business schools. I didn't know that Infantry or Armor had a good civilian market. They are being hired for and selling themselves as disciplined officers and leaders. Academia and the business world are eating it up, especially after the financial market's ethics issues that unraveled in '08. Why don't we sell ourselves as the same? Even single seat fighter pilots are leading people while operating a complex machine (Flight Lead, Intructors, EPs... And, anyone that flies a heavy and is leading a small team around foreign environments) I am tired of watching people desperately gauging their life and future on whether the airlines open the flood gates. If you love flying, then as I mentioned in my last post, great...go fly and hopefully the airlines work out. There is nothing wrong with that. But, there is also great opportunity for other things. Yet, because we are on active duty with longer commitments, we will have to develop other skills and interests to prepare for a career change...and perhaps not always just "check the box." Attached article from Harvard shows how they recognize the value and unique leadership traits from all the services... Which of These People Is Your Future CEO?1.pdf