AlexLM12
-
Posts
49 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Gallery
Blogs
Downloads
Wiki
Posts posted by AlexLM12
-
-
1 hour ago, nolifepilot said:
I feel like next week is the week!! 🤞🏻At least I hope so haha. Anyone heard anything more on their end or is our current guidance still "mid-January?"
I tend to think so. If I'm not mistaken, the official PDSM released on Jan 20th of last year, with CCs notifying selects the week prior/the second week of Jan. So yeah, if it follows from the past, it'll be next week
-
1
-
-
The way I see it, we are exactly 2 weeks away from being able to say "any day now"
-
4
-
-
14 hours ago, Elijah said:
For what it’s worth, I also heard the rumor about the 40 slots within my wing before I saw it on this forum. Let’s hope the rumor about more slots was actually true haha.
Just created an account here because the suspense is killing me. It’s my second year applying. I have a PPL, 99 AFOQT Pilot, and 92 PCSM.
I always wondered why it takes so long for the results to release after the board meets? Assignments? MFS scheduling?
MFS occurs after notification of selection, so not that, and if the board selects in November, I can only imagine the delay has to do with the holidays, and with the process of assigning people to different training classes, since we are all sort of sliding in to the normal pipeline of people flowing from the commissioning sources. That is assuming training bases and dates come with board selection notifications, which I'm not sure of. Does anyone know how long active duty selects tend to wait before heading to training? I know there won't be the standard "casual" status for us, and I'm hoping we won't just stay in our current AFSCs for a whole year or more.
-
20 minutes ago, Dash1isoptional said:
I went through MFS when I initially joined. You go to Wright-Pat. and its basically a more in depth physical. You'll be there for a week and if everything's fine you'll be cleared to fly. I read in other forums that you'll be scheduled for MFS quickly after the official results go public.
Luckily I'm already at Wright-Pat, but this is different than the flight physical I already did that took an entire day? It seems like that's something they should do before they make pilot selections, but I did not know that, so thank you for the info!
-
1
-
-
For those applying to this board that got cleared for IFC I (pilot), we have to do Medical Flight Screening (MFS) as the final stage. I was given a medical extension so I just got cleared, and I have not done this yet. Has anyone else done the MFS yet or know how this process goes?
-
On 6/6/2022 at 3:36 PM, nsplayr said:
From what I understand the F-15 EX Eagle II is replacing, in part, the single-seat F-15 C/D models, not the F-15E Strike Eagle, i.e. the one with the WSOs onboard. Boeing apparently offered that as a possibility back in 2020, but I haven't seen any movement on that actually happening; perhaps someone in the Strike Eagle community can speak to that more intelligently.
It should not make a big difference one way or the other. Either the Strike Eagle will continue on unchanged, get replaced with a two-seat EX, or by the single-seat F-35, meaning slightly less CSO seats in the Air Force, or who knows. It doesn't really impact you as a individual unless you're actively a WSO in that community already.
And most importantly, don't put the cart before the horse...there are plenty of platforms with CSOs/WSOs/etc. and if you're trying to board for CSO, I would get excited about the possibilities of any/all of them. I might recommend shooting for the U-28 or the AC-130J just based on my experience but YMMV 🇺🇸
Good luck!
Yeah, I don't even think the F-15E would be my first choice as a CSO anyway, that would be B-1 or AC-130, but I've heard F-15Es tend to drop more than those two airframes and I would want any WSO spot on those or the BUFF over RC-135/AWACS/EC-130
-
12 hours ago, 08Dawg said:
Not to bust your bubble, OP, but the only place I’ve heard it called Strike Eagle II is your post. All the official literature calls it the “Eagle II”. That in and of itself is telling as to what Big AF intends to do with this platform, if it even survives.
Yes, I think the title of the program does indicate their intent for the platform. I only titled it as such because it is essentially a newly updated Strike Eagle, still with 2-seats, and was wondering if a Strike Eagle II would ever exist. I think it might but only if the F-15 C/D capability gets fully replaced first or if the current Strike Eagle begins to fail in some sense. I'm outside the field so I don't have any insight beyond what's publicly discussed.
-
Non-rated Capt here, attempting to go CSO at the next rated board, but do any CSOs in the business have any intel on how the Strike Eagle II replacing the F-15 C/Ds will affect the CSO career field? They will all be two-seaters/WSO capable I've read, but not sure if the AF will use WSOs in the air superiority mission. I imagine they still will for the current Strike Eagles getting replaced by Eagle IIs, but not sure. I've not been able to find any info on that, and I've been super curious.
-
Browsing on my Air Force computer so I just let it happen
-
Impropable attempt at thread resurrection:
A lot of info here has been great, but must be dated by now.
What is the ABM field looking like now with JSTARS allegedly on borrowed time, with us being out of Afghanistan/less deployments, and the increase in recent threats from near-peers like Russia and China? Are ABMs still getting a lot of action and flight time with newer technologies/space and RPA capes in existence?
Am almost a Capt and am going to apply for ABM on the next rated board.
-
On 10/13/2021 at 2:23 AM, Tiger said:
Honestly that’s not unlike my situation. The military flight docs (and later some shoe-clerk O-6 at the pentagon) kept telling me my condition was “progressive”. Complete BS because every published medical article on the condition says the exact opposite. It was almost like they just started making stuff up to support their reasoning.
Yeah, that checks. I think it changes primarily based on manning requirements. If there are more applicants than positions anyway, why continually examine the medical literature to determine if some conditions can now be waiverable? It's easier for them to just deny and move onto someone who doesn't have the condition. It's not fair, but that's how the system functions. Eventually it catches up, and I'd imagine shortages might drive changes in waiver allocations. Yes, flight standards don't follow the most up-to-date medical science. One such example is that the Air Force medical guides, up until this summer (I believe the Navy still does), considered PPI-REE as a subset of a condition known as EoE, even though medical literature has for several years gotten away from that distinction. Does it matter? I'm not sure, but it demonstrates your point
-
On 9/12/2021 at 4:02 PM, 08Dawg said:
As someone who was similarly disqualified from an AF FC1 but who has held an FAA Class 1 since 2016, no, nobody in the AF cares. It makes no sense, it is frustrating as hell, but IMO the AF is looking for every reason to tell you no, whereas the FAA seems to only care if you meet the standard or not. My buddy was also permanently DQ’d by Wright Patt for a condition that they contradicted themselves on in the paperwork (no joke, they said it is not a rapid onset condition but we’re worried about sudden loss of eyesight), while a civilian ophthalmologist said he would absolutely not suffer a sudden loss of sight and should be qualified. Welcome to dealing with AF medical…
I’m honestly a bit jaded, if that’s not obvious, but it’s the Air Force’s loss. They created this mess and keep turning away otherwise highly qualified people who would gladly give them another decade of service on the cockpit. I’m going to take my talents (and my FAA Class 1) and fly for somebody else. If I were in your shoes, I’d look at doing the same. The regionals are throwing six figure bonuses at people…the regionals! It’s a pilot’s market out there right now. Go find your opportunity!
Perfectly said!
It's not worth dwelling on, even though I've always found that difficult personally, just because I've never been able to grasp the logic. I am getting excited about the flying opportunities once I get out though, and hope you are too. Even the civilian world offers more exciting stuff than you will ever have the time to pursue.
-
1
-
-
On 8/24/2021 at 4:15 PM, yervis said:
Simple solution, but would have to come from someone with authority to make it happen. Two steps:
1. Cut the red-tape that currently surrounds pilot applicants. For instance, going through MEPS, just to go to the FC1 later on that is more stringent, but more professional/thorough/makes less mistakes than MEPS? Cut out MEPS.
2. Create an office (or whatever it would be called) that is a single point for the Air Force that has the authority and single objective to help out pilot applicants having issues and get them squared away with wherever their issue is hung up at.
If the AF wants to claim they have a retention shortage, one solution is with helping applicants who are so dedicated they’ve put their lives on pause + spent thousands on personal physicians to try to prove they’re fit for the AF. These dedicated applicants would then go on into the AF knowing they were genuinely helped out and not stepped on by some illogical bureaucracy, which in the long run, may add one piece to their personal decision to stay in longer.
I actually think your solution would be appropriate. I'm not sure if the medical screening happens after contracting and selection for bait-and-switch purposes or if its a budgetary thing, but I'd argue that your method would still save money simply by helping out pilot applicants and ensuring motivated officers are are qualified and then retained. I've known a lot of fellow flight DQ'd officers who just do their 4 years as an LT (where you mostly learn and get trained) and separate right when they make captain and can actually put their skills and knowledge to use, to pursue aviation on the civilian side. The AF just spent $42K on my training for a career that won't persist past another 10 months if I go that route, and I won't use any of what I was just trained on in that timespan. All that is on top of the $20K+ in 2018 that I similarly haven't used.
Point is, the AF wastes money on the officers it DQ's anyway by investing in them just to have them leave if they never come to terms with the flight docs decision. Seems like they could use that in a different way, and ensure that people in non-rated positions are those that actually want to do them.
-
1
-
-
On 8/23/2021 at 7:33 PM, Tiger said:
Quick discussion for the Air Force guys here.
A few years back, shortly before I commissioned in the AF, I was selected for UPT but shortly thereafter medically disqualified at Wright Patterson AFB for all flying duty (Pilot, nav, RPA, ABM) based on a very rare but also extremely minor corneal imperfection, Thygeson's Keratitis (small spots on the surface of my eye). I still met the vision minimums but unfortunately the flight surgeons would not consider me for a waiver, and their justification was that this condition was "debilitating","extremely painful", and "progressive". I remember the day I was disqualified, they were adamant that I would never be able to get any kind of flight physical above an FC3, military or civilian. Later on, I saw a few private ophthalmology specialists (one of them an AF reserves flight doc) that concurred with the diagnosis but did not agree with the Air Force's claim that it could cause extreme pain and told me that it was in no way a progressive condition. These doctors both provided written statements for me to send to the docs at Wright Patterson, but predictably the Air Force still wouldn't budge and I was out of luck. Not surprisingly, I never did experience any of the symptoms that were used as justification to disqualify me.
Fast forward to today. I'm getting ready to take a biannual check-ride this week, so I go to an FAA flight doc to renew my third class medical. I do the standard tests (vision, urine, etc) with the nurses and then go into the exam room to wait for the doc. He comes in, goes over my test results, examines me, and then says that I qualify for not only an FC3 but also an FC1 and that he'd be happy to issue one to me if I'm interested in flying for a career. Long story short, I walked out of his office today with the medical certificate the Air Force told me I would never be eligible for. On top of that, I didn't require a single waiver.
So, I'm curious as to what you gents think about the situation. Does an FAA FC1 translate to military flying duty whatsoever? I'm not sure if and how the standards differ, but I don't understand how in the eyes of the FAA I'm medically qualified to captain a 737 for Southwest airlines, but according to the Air Force I'm apparently too disabled to fly even remote control aircraft, let alone C-130's. It almost as if the Air Force can't see the forest through the trees, because they keep complaining about a pilot shortage but keep turning away perfectly qualified applicants.
Same situation here.
I currently have an FAA Class 1, but have never been able to secure even an Air Force Class 3. Unfortunately one won't help secure the other in my opinion. It is frustrating that, for example, the FAA trusts you (medically) to fly a large plane with hundreds of men, women, and children onboard, but the Air Force won't trust you to fly a plane with a single crewmember, or in my case, won't trust me to even sit in the back of an AWACS, watch a screen, and talk on the radio.
The FAA also gives you a chance to get qual'd with "demonstrated ability" tests to prove you can operate and fly properly despite medical conditions that DQ you, but sadly, the Air Force gives no such chance.
Flight standards exist for a reason, though the Air Force flight standards seem restrictive to the point of irrationality at times. In my experience its because they are flight doctors, and may not have the depth of experience in certain disqualifying issues related to specialties like gastroenterology, ophthalmology, orthopedics, etc. This is probably why a lot of civilian doctors will claim there aren't any aeromedical concerns but flight docs disagree. Just my experience with a GI problem, but @stuckindaytonmight have a better perspective on it overall.
Just because the Air Force is a little "ableist" with your condition, not every employer/AME will be. There are a lot of cool civil flying jobs that still run missions that serve your community. EMS transport, aerial firefighting, etc. That's what I'm looking into because it's the next best thing to military service.
-
I have been diagnosed with a medical condition that is disqualifying for ALL initial, untrained (which I am) FCs, and is not waiverable. However, it is not a permanent condition, medically (it can be controlled), though the Air Force might view it as such, given that it is in my history and could resurface in the future if I do the wrong things...namely, eat the wrong foods for a long time.
My question is, does anyone know if an "X" in the MSD or a "NO" in Waiver Guide means a PERMANENT disqualification/non-waiverable status? Or, does it just mean non-waiverable so long as the condition exists? Is there some way to determine if the Air Force medical standards system views a particular issue as permanent or not? "Controlled" vs "Persistent/Severe?"
Thank you to anyone that can help!
-
4 hours ago, stuckindayton said:
Phoria standards are different for IFC I than for ABM applicants because ABM's do not have scanning duties. That refers to clearing the aircraft of other aircraft or objects whether in the air or ground. There is a phoria standard for ABM applicants, but it is more lenient than IFC I. PM me if you want more specific information. I'm assuming your IFC I was not done at Wright-Patt.
Thank you, I sent you a PM
-
17 hours ago, IMUA said:
So the short answer is it is a very convoluted and opinionated process. I know this because was DQ’d and separated.
The Medical Standards Directory (MSD) is the quick view version of what conditions are eligible for what class of physical. However, it’s a very guarded product that exists in the medical world with the older versions occasionally popping up on google.
Between the MSD and AFI48-123, the opinion (and language) of the doctor submitting the waiver paperwork will make or break your waiver package or separation package.
In my experience if you can get a waiver for the class you need you can apply again for a job with that flight class of physical. i.e. if you can work a class3 physical with said waiver for your condition yes you are medically qualified and can apply again.
CAUTION: many of the conditions that DQ you from flying class physicals also DQ you from serving all together. In the MSD there is a column that identifies what conditions are or aren’t fit for retention. So just because you have a waiver for condition X it does not mean you are home free. If you run into the wrong doctor they could in their opinion say you don’t meet retention standards according to the MSD and could end up being separated. Retention cases trump flying class physicals qualifications. My condition did not meet retetion standards so when I asked my PCM and team to start a waiver I was straight up told no, it’d be unecessary work for a waiver for nothing as you still would not meet retention standards even if you meet FCI standards.
I'm sorry to hear that, but I really appreciate you passing along that info. I will look into the MSD, and the fact that I can apply again gives me hope for a different rated position. I am currently a non-rated officer, so I meet retention standards, but not sure if I can pass a FC yet. The opinion/language piece could certainly be frustrating. I hope all is going well for you in whatever you are doing now
-
Hello,
I was disqualified during my Class I Flight Screening after selection, and I'm currently applying for a Class III now to try and be an ABM. I understand that some conditions are permanently disqualifying from rated positions, but I have no idea if mine is (esophoria). Any idea where I can find out if I can even apply again? I've tried calling AFPC/AETC, and the base that performed the physical, but I haven't gotten much apart from the issue that DQ'd me the first time. If anyone has any info, thank you!
-
3 hours ago, UFTapplicant said:
AFPC told me the nomination PSDM will drop in late Feb and the next board will be in Sept.
11 hours ago, Rated2014 said:The PSDM for the next board should drop around June with all of the dates and new reqs. That tracks another Sept-Oct deadline for apps. They did take a lot of ABMs this year, so the need seems to be there! Good luck
Thank you both!
-
Congrats to everyone that got selected! I basically just heard about this program, so too late to apply to this board. Does anyone know when the next board is? I heard September but I haven't seen that anywhere in MyPers or elsewhere. I'm trying for ABM, afoqt score is 99. Thanks for the help!
2023 Active Duty Flying Training Board
in Pilot Selection Process
Posted