Prozac Posted May 26, 2015 Share Posted May 26, 2015 (edited) I would hope Big Blue would have some serious explaining to do in Congress if they implemented stop loss now. It is a program meant for use in extreme national emergencies. It was not intended as a tool to cover for this organization's complete ineptitude when it comes to managing personnel. While it may technically be legal, you'd better believe I'd be on the phone with my representatives raising holy hell if I found out I was being Stop Loss'd. Edited May 26, 2015 by Prozac Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jaded Posted May 26, 2015 Share Posted May 26, 2015 Anybody have the stop loss statute handy? I'd like to see if it states reasons that stop loss may be implemented. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mp5g Posted May 26, 2015 Share Posted May 26, 2015 Title 10, United States Code, Section 12305(a) http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/USCODE-2011-title10/pdf/USCODE-2011-title10-subtitleE-partII-chap1209-sec12305.pdf Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BCan Posted May 26, 2015 Share Posted May 26, 2015 (edited) Fight in court...based on what, exactly? Last time I checked, stop loss was completely legal. Just ask all the poor bastards in the Army who were stop lossed to serve another tour in Afghanistan and/or Iraq. https://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/natsec/R40121.pdf I'd say a good set of lawyers could pick-apart this law when utilized to retain CONUS based UAS operators...but then again...I'm not a lawyer. The link is an interesting read on how the stop-loss program unfolded since DS1. Edited May 26, 2015 by BCan Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bergman Posted May 27, 2015 Share Posted May 27, 2015 While it may technically be legal, you'd better believe I'd be on the phone with my representatives raising holy hell if I found out I was being Stop Loss'd. Wait, isn't that akin to treason?? 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nineline Posted May 27, 2015 Share Posted May 27, 2015 Wait, isn't that akin to treason?? Yes, but only if you're a stop lossed A-10 pilot. -9- Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HU&W Posted May 27, 2015 Share Posted May 27, 2015 Yes, but only if you're a stop lossed A-10 pilot. -9- Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Why would they stop loss A-10 pilots? I thought we didn't need those anymore. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BFM this Posted May 27, 2015 Share Posted May 27, 2015 I read the new "RPA talking points" the other day and all I saw was 30 "traditional" pilots being extended 1 year. I'm assuming that meant extend from return to manned flying, but I'll try and get them to post tomorrow. It was the cliff notes of "we have a problem"... "its big"... "here's what we're doing in the short term to fix this, but its not a long term solution"... words words words, sounds right, words words, but we don't believe it, word words, stop the paper before we have to talk about what we won't sacrifice (F-35, all desired future war capabilities... let's stop loss instead)There were several initiatives outlined in those "RPA talking points" that had me scratching my head. If you noticed, it also said they were exploring the idea of UPT direct… Again. Learning is hard. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Karl Hungus Posted May 27, 2015 Share Posted May 27, 2015 Learning is hard. Leading is hard. Hence, we have managers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sim Posted May 28, 2015 Share Posted May 28, 2015 I'm actually dreading checking my email tomorrow morning. ###### my life. ing eh! I just got out of that shit-hole. While leaving, they promised that they will recall dudes that left if something comes up. Is there any more info? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
guineapigfury Posted May 28, 2015 Share Posted May 28, 2015 Fucking eh! I just got out of that shit-hole. While leaving, they promised that they will recall dudes that left if something comes up. Is there any more info? Nothing yet. I think if i'm going to get stop-lossed, then I deserve the courtesy of there being a declared war. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bender Posted May 28, 2015 Share Posted May 28, 2015 (edited) Nothing yet. I think if i'm going to get stop-lossed, then I deserve the courtesy of there being a declared war.That's cute; maybe if things worked they way they should. The "must move" suck is in full effect, I believe stop loss is not here, yet. We're forced into sending our good guys to RPAs, but they "spare" the "stratified" guys/gals for the other assignments. Who's going to fix this? We've sent top people, well AFPC has, but we spared our leaders at all opportunity. Who's going to fix this? Me? I volunteered to go to this shit at a point in my career where this should be fun (mostly). [i'm a major now, believe that shit?] I'll take it on, but as a DO or SQ/CC, you aren't doing anything beyond mitigation here with the authority I've seen to date. Whose is going to fix this? If I try, will I just end up fired? I've seen #1/150 go to RPAs without a notice or a complaint... I've seen a guy get "protected" because we happened to send him to the wing... I've seen us take a "as #1/731" and give them a bomber... #1/731...young captain too...if that person shouldn't lead our UAV core, who should? Me? I'll do my best. The deck is stack against us...by us. Weird, Bendy Edited May 28, 2015 by Bender 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scoobs Posted May 28, 2015 Share Posted May 28, 2015 Are the guys who signed up for this happier than the guys coming from manned cockpits? 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lloyd christmas Posted May 28, 2015 Share Posted May 28, 2015 Are the guys who signed up for this happier than the guys coming from manned cockpits? Quiet Scoobs. 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
12xu2a3x3 Posted May 28, 2015 Share Posted May 28, 2015 it also said they were exploring the idea of UPT direct… Again. ing awesome. my timing is impeciable Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
guineapigfury Posted May 28, 2015 Share Posted May 28, 2015 Are the guys who signed up for this happier than the guys coming from manned cockpits? Slightly, but I suspect most of that is a function of not knowing what they're missing. Based on my conversations with the dudes at my last squadron, I expect most of the 18X Lt's to separate at the end of their 6 years. The prior enlisted and late-rate dudes are a different animal, but they're significantly closer to 20. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scoobs Posted May 29, 2015 Share Posted May 29, 2015 If the AF made it more family friendly by increasing Qol and decreasing hours would people stay? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sky_king Posted May 29, 2015 Share Posted May 29, 2015 http://militaryadvantage.military.com/2015/05/dual-service-couples-could-see-housing-allowances-slashed/ Are you a mil-to-mil couple? You could be losing half of your BAH. No, it's not Obama stealing your cash, it's McCain's idea. As a mil-to-civ guy who gets jealous of two married captains raking in the cash, I think this is a ridiculous idea. It's like the congressmen were sitting around the table saying, "How can we reduce retention even more? Hmmm, how about cutting the salary of much of our force by upwards of $15k a year?" 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
guineapigfury Posted May 29, 2015 Share Posted May 29, 2015 If the AF made it more family friendly by increasing Qol and decreasing hours would people stay? You'd see some improvement in retention, but not much I think. The plan right now is to double output here at Holloman. We're about to cannibalize ops squadrons for dozens of their instructors to increase FTU manning. So ops manning will take a nasty hit the next year, and it's going to be the experienced dudes and dudettes squadrons can least afford to lose, especially en masse. So in the medium term, you'll have ops squadrons flooded with Lt's and not enough IPs to teach them MQT. It is going to be a very rough 2017 for dudes flying the line. To compound the problem, the current bottom of the barrel for 18Xers is terrifying. We had several dudes at my last squadron who I wouldn't trust to tie their own shoes. When we double the number of 18Xers, we're going to see the average quality go down. In the long term, perhaps increased manning will alleviate some issues, but I think we're 4 years out on that, best case. Either way, I don't plan on sticking around to find out. Bottom line: there's a hole in the bucket and the planned repair is to pour twice as much water in. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dvlax40 Posted May 29, 2015 Share Posted May 29, 2015 You'd see some improvement in retention, but not much I think. The plan right now is to double output here at Holloman. We're about to cannibalize ops squadrons for dozens of their instructors to increase FTU manning. So ops manning will take a nasty hit the next year, and it's going to be the experienced dudes and dudettes squadrons can least afford to lose, especially en masse. So in the medium term, you'll have ops squadrons flooded with Lt's and not enough IPs to teach them MQT. It is going to be a very rough 2017 for dudes flying the line. To compound the problem, the current bottom of the barrel for 18Xers is terrifying. We had several dudes at my last squadron who I wouldn't trust to tie their own shoes. When we double the number of 18Xers, we're going to see the average quality go down. In the long term, perhaps increased manning will alleviate some issues, but I think we're 4 years out on that, best case. Either way, I don't plan on sticking around to find out. Bottom line: there's a hole in the bucket and the planned repair is to pour twice as much water in. if the quality is such shit on some of these pilots its about time they revisit the warrant officer solution Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Slander Posted May 29, 2015 Share Posted May 29, 2015 I think this is simple...Put the GCS at places people want to go and you'll get more volunteers. It's be said over and over again, but if you put those bad johnnies at MacDill, Eglin, Luke, McChord, Charleston, Hickham, Hanscom, Patrick, <insert sweet Navy coastal base here>, etc then I bet you'll see more people interested than if it's "wait, so I don't get to fly airplanes anymore AND you're sending me to Cannon? Sweet. I'm out." 7 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dvlax40 Posted May 29, 2015 Share Posted May 29, 2015 I think this is simple...Put the GCS at places people want to go and you'll get more volunteers. It's be said over and over again, but if you put those bad johnnies at MacDill, Eglin, Luke, McChord, Charleston, Hickham, Hanscom, Patrick, <insert sweet Navy coastal base here>, etc then I bet you'll see more people interested than if it's "wait, so I don't get to fly airplanes anymore AND you're sending me to Cannon? Sweet. I'm out." Lol Luke a sweet base? ;) 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Day Man Posted May 29, 2015 Share Posted May 29, 2015 Lol Luke a sweet base? ;) Google "ASU coeds" 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chaff Posted May 29, 2015 Share Posted May 29, 2015 To compound the problem, the current bottom of the barrel for 18Xers is terrifying. You can say the same for bottom of the barrel AMC guys that are flying RPAs too. Every flying community has people who don't belong flying. Any push for numbers is likely to decrease quality. Ask UPT instructors. They are being forced to push guys through that would have washed out not too long ago. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
guineapigfury Posted May 29, 2015 Share Posted May 29, 2015 You can say the same for bottom of the barrel AMC guys that are flying RPAs too. Every flying community has people who don't belong flying. Any push for numbers is likely to decrease quality. Ask UPT instructors. They are being forced to push guys through that would have washed out not too long ago. I know, but this is worse since in most cases we are starting with a lower baseline of talent(18s) and motivation(11s) than you see in UPT. Add to that we've been in push mode for years and we are about to go to double push mode. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now