bsTHUD
-
Posts
7 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Gallery
Blogs
Downloads
Wiki
Everything posted by bsTHUD
-
This is along the lines of what I'm curious about. Us applicants never got eyes on anything other than the Boards selection criteria. Completely understand if Sq/Gp/Wg want to retain their members therefore use a different criteria than the Board but kinda backwards if you ask me. If Sq/Gp/Wg are only pushing packages with a certain score threshold, then why even submit a full package with accomplishments, accolades, letter of rec, etc to them. Wouldn't they just ask for aptitude scores instead? If the Board is looking to select those with the "whole-person" concept (which the AF embodied in most areas anyways), why limit the applicants being pushed to the Board solely based off of one area (scores). Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
-
I'm confused on that topic though because the Gp pushes out guidance IAW the Board suspense (never got eyes on anything from the Wg down to the Gp) and down to the Sq but I've never seen anything where the RPA community has its own criteria. That doesn't make sense how we would be held/scored to a different standard than the board would. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
-
Bringing it to everyone's attention: ensure your Sq, Gp, and Wg are tracking the boards selection criteria. You can find their criteria if you go on the AF Portal, type in UFT, then hit the first link that brings up the PSDM, scroll down where people are asking questions and read through to find the % breakdown. I believe it's 40% leadership, 30% potential, and 30% aptitude/PCSM scores as they state they are looking for the "whole-person concept." I just found this out the hard way from my Gp stating "he has good stuff but his scores were lower than his competitors." This implied that the Gp doesn't rack and stack, they simply push packages up to the Wg but still put them in some sort of competitive order. This is coming from a guy who has a 93 pilot and 84 pcsm, recently was an LNO and forward deployed from that gig, numerous international and diplomatic ties, first-ever ACE coordination, with 1,000+ flying hours in the RPA community and plenty of combat experience PLUS a 3-star letter of rec and I was still put 3/3 at the Gp. That being said, i am pushing a screenshot of the Board's selection criteria breakdown up to the Wg to ensure they are tracking the % breakdown and not racking/stacking solely off of PCSM like the Gp stated, "the Wg will rack and stack based on PCSM scores like previous years" (incorrect - the % breakdown was the same in last years board as well). If i am not good enough, so be it, it was a miracle to get my package together in 2 months from start to finish anyways. But if i dont get selected solely based on PCSM score, it's my own fault for not taking it into my own hands. Do your due diligence! Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
-
My first FC1-related appt was lab work back in April, a few days ago i got the approved FC1 with "pending MFS" like you mentioned. I don't know all so now im questioning if that means i have to go back to Wright Pat? Anyone know? As for the blank box like Parsons mentioned, i can see it being additional space to write things but i opted not to based on last years 215 where the blank box was actually where we put our name like box 19 states. Seems like a clerical error and i dont want to portray to AFPC that i didnt have enough room to fit everything so i found extra space to include a bit more. Apples to apples i guess. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
-
Completely feel this. Wasn't sure what narrative statements held the most weight on the 215 specifically. It was tough cutting fat on statements i felt were strong. Relied heavily on my personal letter and letter of rec to capture other things that weren't captured on the 215. I also left block 19 blank. Like you said, it seemed as if it shouldn't be there. Last years 215 i saw from previous applicants had a number 19. Remarks but no box to write in. But my 215 was due to the squadron yesterday so it's in gods hands now. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
-
There is hope, I'm currently deployed and just finished my FC1 last week. All in about a months timeline from when i started reaching out to folks to the day i was seen by the Flight Doc. I don't write this to brag by any means, i write this to say networking is key. I started with my home station med group who defended my deployed units med group when they initially denied seeing me for my FC1 stating "we aren't entitled to conduct your FC1, your home station is." I began scrambling with the unknown suspense for apps due to the Sq (have since found out it sounds like late June for me) reaching out to my home med group to see if they could pull some strings while I'm out here. A technician back home happened to know a technician out here, a buddy of mine went through ROTC with a current f-22 flyer and had me reach out to the f-22 flight doc, and both of those things got the ball rolling allowing me to get my lab work and vision done prior to my Flight Doc visit. Now granted, i am waiver-less and health has always been pretty solid so the med group here didn't necessarily feel anything would be dragged out/tied back to them but my recommendation: start with your home station med group, ask leadership at work, reach out to friends in other units/career fields/bases to see who they know. Someone always knows someone and all you need is one person to pull a string and boom you're getting your FC1 completed just before the buzzer sounds. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
-
I'll be retaking the AFOQT and TBAS as well. I have 22/23 Apr and 6/7 May options and would love some study material! Thanks for that Wing timeline as well, a buddy of mine got picked up on the FY25 board and his board suspense was Oct and his suspense to the Sq was early June so I'm surprised with our board suspense being Aug, the Sq suspense isn't sooner??