FlyLow

Thread revival: Anybody aware of a current weblink to access GTIMS? Specifically, my C-130H training schedule. The "GTIMS web reports" functionality might work if I knew the correct URL for Little Rock. I've hit a dead end spelunking on the MAF GTIMS download site. I'm using VMWare Horizon Client on my MacBook Pro. Regular GTIMS keeps crashing the virtual desktop. TIA.

Anybody have perspective on who to talk to first when considering a PC request? ISR, ARC recruiter, current commander, prospective unit(s), other? Any unique considerations that anybody has run into? Thanks!

I recommend pushing flight hours *earlier* in training, not later, by contracting a commercial-instrument rating for pilot selectees in a single-engine airplane *prior* to UPT. The vision: - Air Force generates a syllabus for civilian flight schools. - Instead of casual status, students fan out across the country to go get flight time prior to UPT. - Students earn 250+ hours in a single engine airplane a <$200/hr. - Students build air sense, learn to communicate on the radios, learn how to learn to fly, etc... - All students start UPT having completed a commercial-instrument and complete a short baseline academic syllabus to account for variance in civilian flight schools. - Air Force spends less time (money) teaching the basics and more time (money) on teaching "military" flying (formation, energy mgmt, etc). - Air Force avoids having to teach "air sense" at $600/hr in the T-6, much less $1,500/hr in the T-1, $3,200/hr in the T-38, or say... $8,200/hr in the F-16. - Hell... I had students come to me in the schoolhouse that couldn't enter a VFR traffic pattern, make a CTAF call, or recite their cloud clearances. I shouldn't be teaching this stuff in an aircraft that costs more than $200/hr to fly. IMO, this knowledge is the price of entry, not even worth reviewing in the FTU. Yet... here we are.

Quick question. I'm in the process of a PCS. We originally planned to check in on 1 Jan. Our BAH goes down $60/mo from CY17 to CY18. If I check in on 31 Dec instead, I get the CY17 rate due to being grandfathered, right?

My T-6 flight at Vance (mid-'09 class) had 33 studs. "Super flight" at the time. (Dunno if they still do that.) Out of those 33; three guys got T-38s. Out of those three, one got a fighter.

Tucson is a great town. We really enjoyed our time there.

False. Army is having some of the same aviator retention problems that the USAF is having.

I've found "Thank you for your support" works well.

I know, right? [emoji23] The Sq/CC can be Chalk-2. But FL should be a tech track guy. Just like Army aviation.

Fix the USAF: 1) Dramatically cut staffs. Group staff all the way to HAF staff. Force manpower back to the squadron. Mandate a "no larger than" size (with some minimal flexibility) based upon the number of subordinate units. Weak leaders have big staffs. 2) On OPRs/PRFs, eliminate staff experience as an indicator of success and replace it with squadron experience. Good staff officers *do not* necessarily make good commanders. Use the USMC aviation model of pushing people you don't want in your squadron, to the Group/Wing staff. Keep all your most credible people at the squadron level and make sure the machine rewards them for their competency. 3) +1 on the technical track. Make tech track guys your tactical experts and upgrade them early to IP/EP/WIC. Command track guys should seek the advice of their tech experts and stay out of their way in combat. 4) +1 on base consolidation. More facilities mean more staffs, more ancillary duties, more shoe clerks, and move moves. All of which dilute the quality of our force. 5) +1 on separate rated promotion boards. I should not have to compete for promotion with a guy who requires no technical expertise to do his job. I think it's pretty easy to see why he has time for volunteer bullets and I don't. 6) Work out a fair way to have all OPRs close out at the same time. Stratify everybody. Eliminate thin slicing. Strat against all those with whom you complete for promotion (i.e. #5/15 of my 2005 officers). Edit: I <3 spelling.

Okay, I see your point. But take a look at the WO model in the Army. If you're a commissioned officer and decide to revert to warrant, you don't get to revert to W4... W2 (maybe). So maybe if you're on the leadership track and decide to switch, there needs to be a credibility-building period. I guess you either have a qual or don't (IP), so a guy reverting to the tech track as an O-4/O-5 and no IP qual still has an uphill battle.

No. If you fail at the command track I don't want you coming back to me as a disappointed (now permanent) O-4 with no flying time because you *were* on the command track. Choose your fate: Tech or Command. Bloom where you're planted, or GTFO.