What's wrong with the Air Force?

[Majestik Møøse]

I think in 100 years people will look back in amazement at how concerned we are with tracking skin tone.  Every application wants to know my race and heritage.  WTF?

[SurelySerious]

I think in 100 years people will look back in amazement at how concerned we are with tracking skin tone.  Every application wants to know my race and heritage.  WTF?

Checks.

[TreeA10]

The other phenomena regarding "privilege" is commercials on television.  Usually, there is a person needing or creating a need for a product, this is the person without knowledge of the right thing to do or product to buy.  Then, there is the person with the answer, or the right thing to do, that solves the problem.  Watch and use your magic gender/race decoder ring to separate the smart or knowing from the ignorant or unknowing.  It's not universal but amazingly consistent.

[sky_king]

The other phenomena regarding "privilege" is commercials on television.  Usually, there is a person needing or creating a need for a product, this is the person without knowledge of the right thing to do or product to buy.  Then, there is the person with the answer, or the right thing to do, that solves the problem.  Watch and use your magic gender/race decoder ring to separate the smart or knowing from the ignorant or unknowing.  It's not universal but amazingly consistent.

Usually I see the wife being brilliant and the husband being a bumbling idiot.  Misandry at its best.

[Seriously]

ETA: What's wrong with many leaders across the Air Force is a fundamental lack of understanding of the domains in which we operate. Air, space, and cyber are as unique as land and sea, or sea and air. Yes, they are very much integrated, but they also have very different challenges and threats. There are campaigns being waged in space and cyber every day that have nothing to do with air. We could lose air superiority by losing space or cyber. We could lose space superiority by losing air or cyber. I know that sounds cheesy, but it's true. The mindset that everyone in the Air Force exists to generate sorties is ridiculous. Space wings have mission support groups that enable the space ops groups to do their business. Same with cyber. Space and cyber wings are not mission support to air wings. That mindset needs to change.

What you're describing is why cyber should be it's own service. Why the Air Force insists on controlling this mission is beyond me. It's the same sort of shenanigans the Army pulled with the Army Air Corps. Comm already proved they could "sink a ship" with the Stuxnet virus. I have no doubt they can do much more damage than that.

Cyber stands to gain a lot by shedding the needless overhead and lack of understanding from Big Blue. 

 

 

[tac airlifter]

What you're describing is why cyber should be it's own service. Why the Air Force insists on controlling this mission is beyond me. It's the same sort of shenanigans the Army pulled with the Army Air Corps. Comm already proved they could "sink a ship" with the Stuxnet virus. I have no doubt they can do much more damage than that.

Cyber stands to gain a lot by shedding the needless overhead and lack of understanding from Big Blue. 

 

 

maybe valid, I'm uncertain; we've yet to see our cyber dudes flex their might like the world saw the USAAF flex (CBO, nukes, etc.).  Cyber & space guys keep telling me they have amazing capes justifying an independant service if only I were read in.  Maybe.  I've just had my fill of overt posturing while hiding failures behind layers of over classification; that's an old trick.

An entirely separate issue is the practicality of attempting to create a new service from something not specific to military services.  Meaning: if cyber/space branches off should they morph into a 5th service or new 3 letter agency?  i don't know what structure would fit best, but it might not be military.  

Regardless, they'll be unable to integrate fully or be taken seriously while simultaneously insisting on total information control.  Other tribes have secret capabilities too, but through years of combat discovered we'd be more effective with smartly placed fully read in liaisons sprinkled throughout the interagency.  The JIATF construct has flaws but most times gets the right people cleared to know the right things.  Cyber/space seems totally unable to overcome their classification barriers.

 

 

 

[sky_king]

The Cyber Force should be a military force with no physical fitness requirement, much higher payscale, limited to 1,000 dudes and a 36-2903 equivalent requiring neck beards and fedoras.

[17D_guy]

What you're describing is why cyber should be it's own service....

 

 

No 

maybe valid, I'm uncertain; we've yet to see our cyber dudes flex their might like the world saw the USAAF flex (CBO, nukes, etc.).  Cyber & space guys keep telling me they have amazing capes justifying an independant service if only I were read in.  Maybe.  I've just had my fill of overt posturing while hiding failures behind layers of over classification; that's an old trick...  Cyber/space seems totally unable to overcome their classification barriers.

 

 

 

Yes

The Cyber Force should be a military force with no physical fitness requirement, much higher payscale, limited to 1,000 dudes and a 36-2903 equivalent requiring neck beards and fedoras.

Yes

[guineapigfury]

The Cyber Force should be a military force with no physical fitness requirement, much higher payscale, limited to 1,000 dudes and a 36-2903 equivalent requiring neck beards and fedoras.

What will we call them once they're no longer Airmen?  I suggest Bronies.

[Lawman]

What will we call them once they're no longer Airmen? I suggest Bronies.

I had an S6 that was a Bronie....

No kidding, he asked us to fly his dolls over Afghanistan. We figured they were for his daughters.... The horror....

[Clark Griswold]

First time hearing of this bullshit - anyone at Laughlin have more to add?

https://foxtrotalpha.jalopnik.com/air-force-loses-its-mind-grounds-pilots-over-texting-m-1737596640

 

[Boomer6]

First time hearing of this bullshit - anyone at Laughlin have more to add?

https://foxtrotalpha.jalopnik.com/air-force-loses-its-mind-grounds-pilots-over-texting-m-1737596640

 

Check the JQP section.

[Clark Griswold]

Check the JQP section.

Done - read more on this and once again I ask how much further down the road to crazyville can the AF go?

Thanks btw.

Edited October 21, 2015 by Clark Griswold

[17D_guy]

And.. check it again.  Massive bad news update.

[Clark Griswold]

And.. check it again.  Massive bad news update.

Do you mean the latest you and your phone, computer, post, whatever, etc... are open for scrutiny, search, investigation and you are responsible for every communication that can be judged with out cause ?

From JQP:

https://www.jqpublicblog.com/in-message-to-wing-commanders-welsh-declares-zero-privacy-doctrine-for-all-airmen/

This is Orwellian.

Edited October 22, 2015 by Clark Griswold

[stract]

Do you mean the latest you and your phone, computer, post, whatever, etc... are open for scrutiny, search, investigation and you are responsible for every communication that can be judged with out cause ?

From JQP:

https://www.jqpublicblog.com/in-message-to-wing-commanders-welsh-declares-zero-privacy-doctrine-for-all-airmen/

This is Orwellian.

glad there's an entire forum below dedicated to JQP stuff.  Where this article is already posted.

[ThreeHoler]

13 year UPT commitment. Discuss.

[LookieRookie]

13 year UPT commitment. Discuss.

There will still be droves of twenty two year olds signing on the dotted line for the chance to fly the biggest baggest aircraft in the world.

Down the road there will just be 3 more years of anger as these year groups see when they would have formally gotten out.

 

[guineapigfury]

There is always the tank your career on purpose technique.  Passed over twice trumps ADSC remaining.

[Chida]

I signed a SOU in 1998 when I first got to USAFA that read "Should I graduate USAFA, get selected for UPT, and graduate UPT, I understand that I am committed to a 10-year post-UPT ADSC." That was, in effect, a 16 year contract that I signed when I was 18 years old. It was too much, but I signed it anyway because what else was I going to do? They had me over a barrel. 13 years?! That equates to a 19 year contract! That is outrageous especially since it doesn't fix any systemic problems.

For the years 2010-2013, AF was peeing their pants about "record retention!" and in my opinion failed to notice that it was because (in large part) the 10-year ADSC was finally coming home to roost. Thus, AF was kicking people out with wild abandon. But that's what they want. They don't want people to have the freedom to leave. They want to pick and choose who they consider worthy to stay in. So the extended ADSC is not about manning, it's about power: Power to dismiss those they don't want (through RIF, 2x FOS, etc) and power to hold onto those they do want regardless of individuals' desires. This way AFPC doesn't have to plan ahead for anything (except the next RIF or promotion board).

Edited October 23, 2015 by Chida

[Clark Griswold]

glad there's an entire forum below dedicated to JQP stuff.  Where this article is already posted.

Valid quibble.

On the 13 year UPT commitment, seems an odd number but they could make it 15.5 years and they probably could fill the bucket still, aviation runs on dreams.

For the years 2010-2013, AF was peeing their pants about "record retention!" and in my opinion failed to notice that it was because (in large part) the 10-year ADSC was finally coming home to roost. Thus, AF was kicking people out with wild abandon. But that's what they want. They don't want people to have the freedom to leave. They want to pick and choose who they consider worthy to stay in. So the extended ADSC is not about manning, it's about power: Power to dismiss those they don't want (through RIF, 2x FOS, etc) and power to hold onto those they do want regardless of individuals' desires. This way AFPC doesn't have to plan ahead for anything (except the next RIF or promotion board).

Well said.

 

[icohftb]

13 year UPT commitment. Discuss.

is this speculation or based on anything official?

[Warrior]

The whole calculus changes when the retirement system goes to a 401k style with matching.

I wouldn't be thrilled with the longer commitment, but no one would be stuck since they're so close to 20 by the time their UPT commitment is up.

[HU&W]

The whole calculus changes when the retirement system goes to a 401k style with matching.

 

I wouldn't be thrilled with the longer commitment, but no one would be stuck since they're so close to 20 by the time their UPT commitment is up.

 

Agreed.  Cliff vesting is easily the most effective retention tool for mid-level members, both E and O.  That said, what's to stop the bean counters from deciding that 20 years is the magic payback number for the privilege of being a pilot?  Far fetched?  It's really not that much more than 13, and people will still line up.

[Jaded]

From what I've heard, a longer UPT ADSC is the only serious option being considered by HAF to "fix" the pilot retention problem.

 

For the cadets reading this, don't sign a 13 year contract or a 15 year contract. According to this year's retention statistics, > 50% of you will regret it.