What's wrong with the Air Force?

[MechGov]

I bitch as much as the next guy, but what would be a good thing for leadership to do to show they “care”? Not trolling, I’d love to hear some actual suggestions other than (my standard  game plan) just complaining. 
I bring this up because someone asked me this yesterday as I was holding court and bitching about this and I didn’t have an answer.

I’ve been amazed at how much hiring back support staff has mattered: current ops & UDM contractors, enlisted personnelists, and our OG actually trying to work some human performance initiatives aimed primarily at aircrew. That last one moved the needle a little bit for me.

Maybe if wings could keep finance/MPF/med open until 1630, or have some after hours CDC options for the shift work guys, that might help too. Me personally, I wish we had some actual big blue tech support just it doesn’t take 20 damn minutes to open my email each time. What about a non-flying position to work DTS issues?

I’d say block training of annual/biannual GT requirements would be huge, but that’s another topic altogether. Sure would be nice to block out 2 weeks and knock everything out instead of scheduling a couple dozen courses individually.

The AF has decided it’s unable or unwilling to buy our commitment commensurate with the airlines. Fine. But a focused use of our time would address a lot of our gripes? If I didn’t have to waste so much of my time taking care of queep, maybe I could focus on my job aviating, and do so in a reasonable time.

[nunya]

5 minutes ago, MechGov said:

Sure would be nice to block out 2 weeks

If it takes two weeks to knock out the training they think is important, I think we've found a place to start.

[MechGov]

If it takes two weeks to knock out the training they think is important, I think we've found a place to start.

I’m giving the benefit of the doubt for SERE, water survival, CATM, CBRN, etc

[Royal]

The vector we've been on for the last two decades is a function of skin in the game or lack there of. Flag officers have the veneer of authority without any culpability. Goldfein had a tremendous opportunity to right the ship when he first took his post. He could have outlined his expectations to the all of us and said non-compliance will be addressed ruthlessly. After his first 3 months in office, he should've made unannounced visits to the 3 largest wings of AMC, ACC, and AETC respectively. Once it became obvious to him that the intent he issued was not being taken seriously, he should have fired the OG, WG/CC, and NAF/CC of each base. I have a sneaking suspicion when he came back for his next visit, things would look different at most wings. From there we could find creative ways to implement the optimum way to handle or completely jettison non-essential "training."

It's nauseating to watch these Flags act like all of this is rocket surgery. The timidity that management exhibits when forced to make even the most benign decision is embarrassing...I don't have a lot of answers for how to fix our problems, but I know for sure that traipsing around in your Gulfstream just to tell your CGOs that your hands are tied is not what will stanch this gushing arterial wound.

 

Edited August 18, 2019 by Royal
Grammars

[dream big]

On 8/17/2019 at 4:11 PM, uhhello said:

Have they?  I know they renamed a bunch to AFMANs.  Nobody has been able to give me a straight answer as to what that changes.

It’s easier to change / update an AFMAN than an AFI.  

[Clark Griswold]

Would a "Golden Apples & Known Follow On" program / assignment encourage retention?  Thinking mostly of pilots (aircrew generally) but could be applied to other career fields (not sure exactly what but this is not necessarily exclusively for the rated community).

Reading this thread and seeing that there has been some elimination of queep, shoe clerkism, bullshit, etc... not much but some and that is apparently all the Bobs are going to get rid of, could they win over the masses (or at least enough of them to mitigate the talent arterial bleeding) with assignments/programs to stay for a bite of a Golden Apple and the inevitable payback?

Ex:  3 year flying assignment of choice (jet, location, both, something cool, etc..) followed by a known follow on assignment of equal length that meets the needs of the AF first but also is acceptable to the member (ex:  UPT, RPA, Staff, etc...).  All of this covered with a decent retention bonus also.  

If the follow on assignment can not be honored, the member would have the option to reject the re-assignment and either 7 day opt, Palace Chase/Front or accept the new follow-on, potentially with a new, larger bonus if the AF really needs this assignment filled, sts.  This would pressure the AF to keep its word to and give the member certainty.  Likely the initial bonus would be smaller but what the military can not match in the civilian world in monetary terms (by policy choice) it could offer in unique and personally rewarding work.

Revival of the ACE program, Aggressors, more Special Flying Assignments, Light Attack, etc...

Say there would 200 aircraft in these programs, coming in at about 500 hours each FY, averaging out at $5k per hour that's $500 million.  Not chump change but if you retain about 145 pilots per FY you offered it as people came in and went out of the program, you break even.  That's figuring an average pilot at the end of his/her ADSC cost $3.5 million to train (conservative estimate as some cost $8+ mil).  Even when you figure in the support cost per tail, WAG that at $1 mil per FY, you only need about another 60 pilots to sign up per FY.  

Secondary benefits include reduced pressure on SUPT to graduate substandard students, reduced pressure on training fleet, reestablishing esprit de corps, not screwing over your guys, etc...

Light a candle and crack a beer, if leadership really wants to fix retention, they have to do something different. 

[FLEA]

5 hours ago, Clark Griswold said:

Would a "Golden Apples & Known Follow On" program / assignment encourage retention?  Thinking mostly of pilots (aircrew generally) but could be applied to other career fields (not sure exactly what but this is not necessarily exclusively for the rated community).

Reading this thread and seeing that there has been some elimination of queep, shoe clerkism, bullshit, etc... not much but some and that is apparently all the Bobs are going to get rid of, could they win over the masses (or at least enough of them to mitigate the talent arterial bleeding) with assignments/programs to stay for a bite of a Golden Apple and the inevitable payback?

Ex:  3 year flying assignment of choice (jet, location, both, something cool, etc..) followed by a known follow on assignment of equal length that meets the needs of the AF first but also is acceptable to the member (ex:  UPT, RPA, Staff, etc...).  All of this covered with a decent retention bonus also.  

If the follow on assignment can not be honored, the member would have the option to reject the re-assignment and either 7 day opt, Palace Chase/Front or accept the new follow-on, potentially with a new, larger bonus if the AF really needs this assignment filled, sts.  This would pressure the AF to keep its word to and give the member certainty.  Likely the initial bonus would be smaller but what the military can not match in the civilian world in monetary terms (by policy choice) it could offer in unique and personally rewarding work.

Revival of the ACE program, Aggressors, more Special Flying Assignments, Light Attack, etc...

Say there would 200 aircraft in these programs, coming in at about 500 hours each FY, averaging out at $5k per hour that's $500 million.  Not chump change but if you retain about 145 pilots per FY you offered it as people came in and went out of the program, you break even.  That's figuring an average pilot at the end of his/her ADSC cost $3.5 million to train (conservative estimate as some cost $8+ mil).  Even when you figure in the support cost per tail, WAG that at $1 mil per FY, you only need about another 60 pilots to sign up per FY.  

Secondary benefits include reduced pressure on SUPT to graduate substandard students, reduced pressure on training fleet, reestablishing esprit de corps, not screwing over your guys, etc...

Light a candle and crack a beer, if leadership really wants to fix retention, they have to do something different. 

I'm a big fan of ACE because it reinforces that AF pilots should be good "pilots" not good "MWS Pilots" . Airmanship is a skillet and is transferable in many avenues. 

[brabus]

There was no assignment or string of assignments offered that could have kept me in (they tried). Of course there are some that will be motivated by that, but in general the bullshit outweighs any good deal assignment...and then you add that to what joe said above. Yeah no thanks AD.

[pcola]

Guys it’s not that difficult really. Simple economics in the end. The pay has to be commensurate with the job. Either more pay or less work. Until they do that, people are going to keep migrating towards opportunities where the pay is commensurate.
And relying on patriotism won’t work either when most of us view the last 20 years as a total waste of blood and treasure.


Sent from my iPhone using Baseops Network mobile app

[HossHarris]

4 hours ago, brabus said:

There was no assignment or string of assignments offered that could have kept me in (they tried). Of course there are some that will be motivated by that, but in general the bullshit outweighs any good deal assignment...and then you add that to what joe said above. Yeah no thanks AD.

They would have had to get to you MUCH earlier. Waaaay before getting close to the end of your ADSC for any “good deals” to have any effect.

basically, they’d have to make the AF great again from the start. Good luck. 

[SocialD]

3 hours ago, pcola said:

Guys it’s not that difficult really. Simple economics in the end. The pay has to be commensurate with the job. Either more pay or less work. Until they do that, people are going to keep migrating towards opportunities where the pay is commensurate.

Right...it's nearly impossible to compete when guys figure out they can get out and make significantly more whilst working significantly less.  Even Guard squadrons, minus maybe the ones that are in BFE, are even struggling keep their full time jobs filled.

Edited August 19, 2019 by SocialD

[Clark Griswold]

15 hours ago, FLEA said:

I'm a big fan of ACE because it reinforces that AF pilots should be good "pilots" not good "MWS Pilots" . Airmanship is a skillet and is transferable in many avenues. 

Concur

A light jet (or t-prop) that's inexpensive, light footprint and can fulfill the range of flight training (acro, spin, close formation, instruments) and keep the CT beans manageable is feasible.  DART 450 would likely fit the bill.

 

[matmacwc]

On 8/17/2019 at 8:03 PM, Majestik Møøse said:

IDGAF if Maj Gen Wills “cares” about anything or not. He’s got a job to do, and it’s extremely disappointing that he doesn’t grasp the concept of increased retention pay being cheaper than the expense of replacing experienced guys. He also thinks he can’t afford to compete with the airlines, which is a foolish take on the problem. The truth is that he’s spending billions to train the airlines pilots for them.

He cares, he also bleeds blue so what do you expect?  I knew him at DLF, straight shooter but definitely the party line.

[hindsight2020]

On 8/19/2019 at 2:51 AM, joe1234 said:

I mean, that's all well and good, but why take a flimsy deal that the AF will probably renege on, when I can just be a full-time guard dude or reservist, and have ironclad protections so that big blue can't eventually fuck me over? Because they definitely will at some point. But as an ARC member, I still have the freedom to drift from job to job as I please, yet not be on the hook for active duty fuckery.

Yeah, I resemble that remark. I have a few marked regrets in this life; having decoded the AD/ARC chasm as a civilian, before I ever agreed to set foot at OTS, is definitively not one of them. A relative outlier outcome compared to most military aspirants, and certainly one of the one or two times in my life I've been #foresight2020. 

An AD OG once uttered in the middle of a hot swamp-ass bread van in the middle of July at DLF, when confronted with pilot talk about retention, and me being the only ARC patch wearer in the van: "Thing is guys, we already have a technician track...it's called the Guard/Reserves". Took me a while to process, as the AD dudes initial reaction was to quietly snicker and roll their eyes, but the dude was right, and I was proof of it. Not what the AD cats wanted to hear, and certainly a bit of a Pontius Pilatus derelict stance on the part of said OG, but not an inaccurate statement in the least. To each their own. Nothing will change. Recession's coming. Run the clock offense wins again, from Big Blue's perspective. We all gotta make lemonade, and we all have our personal/family drivers. AD martyrdom doesn't have a high ROI from where I sit, but I don't discourage those who wish to pursue that avenue.

 

[Royal]

14 hours ago, Clark Griswold said:

Concur

A light jet (or t-prop) that's inexpensive, light footprint and can fulfill the range of flight training (acro, spin, close formation, instruments) and keep the CT beans manageable is feasible.  DART 450 would likely fit the bill.

 

Clark, it's a great idea in theory, but we have zero money for it. AFRC completely ran out of funding with almost two months left in the fiscal year...This trend will continue in perpetuity until one day we're bankrupt 1 month into a new fiscal year. The entire future of the USAF and its personnel has been mortgaged to a multi-decade unending conflict,  the B-21, KC-46, and F-35. Management bought into the sales pitch from the contractors that all we need to win any future battle is just a few goldplated wonder machines, and future generations are footing the bill.

[Negatory]

Well I don’t think you can argue we need new airplanes for the medium/long term timescale if we expect to maintain parity with the likes of China.

It’s just that our acquisition process is bogus and ends up costing way more time and money than we are led to believe.

Also doesn’t help that we are constantly deployed to CENTCOM and other AORs and have very little to show after 20 years of effort.

[Guest nsplayr]

On 8/19/2019 at 3:51 AM, brabus said:

There was no assignment or string of assignments offered that could have kept me in (they tried). Of course there are some that will be motivated by that, but in general the bullshit outweighs any good deal assignment...and then you add that to what joe said above. Yeah no thanks AD.

I found myself the specific next assignment that would have kept me in for 4+ more years of AD, and was still told, "No, FU, PCS to Cannon." Oh well, see ya guys then I guess 🤷‍♂️

Been in the Guard almost 5 years now with a good shot to be on orders as long as I want, as well as the option to just DSG and fly the line occasionally if shit goes sideways. The grass is definitely greener. Go Guard!

[Guest nsplayr]

23 hours ago, Clark Griswold said:

Concur

A light jet (or t-prop) that's inexpensive, light footprint and can fulfill the range of flight training (acro, spin, close formation, instruments) and keep the CT beans manageable is feasible.  DART 450 would likely fit the bill.

 

So like...a T-6? Why would you buy some unproven aircraft with a Ukrainian engine rather than the aircraft damn near every pilot left in the AF already trained on?

[SurelySerious]

4 minutes ago, nsplayr said:

So like...a T-6? Why would you buy some unproven aircraft with a Ukrainian engine rather than the aircraft damn near every pilot left in the AF already trained on?

Where else would Clark throw down his inane knowledge of random aircraft if he went with that simple of an idea?

[Guest nsplayr]

9 hours ago, hindsight2020 said:

...and certainly a bit of a Pontius Pilatus derelict stance on the part of said OG...

 

Pontius Pilatus depicted below:

Edited August 21, 2019 by nsplayr

[hindsight2020]

53 minutes ago, nsplayr said:

Pontius Pilatus depicted below:

 

LOL I always get that. It's not wrong;  your "correction" is a common misconception from the American mouthbreathing collective. Marcus Pontius Pilatus is the full Latin naming convention for said historical figure. Pilate is for those who think historical Jesus spoke 'Murican and had Jim Caviezel for a doppelganger. 

 

[hindsight2020]

1 hour ago, SurelySerious said:

Where else would Clark throw down his inane knowledge of random aircraft if he went with that simple of an idea?

[Clark Griswold]

 

As to a T-6, no doubt there would be cost savings in commonality but the DART would be cheaper to buy and fly, maintain as a fleet of ACE aircraft, not sure about that...

11 hours ago, Royal said:

Clark, it's a great idea in theory, but we have zero money for it. AFRC completely ran out of funding with almost two months left in the fiscal year...This trend will continue in perpetuity until one day we're bankrupt 1 month into a new fiscal year. The entire future of the USAF and its personnel has been mortgaged to a multi-decade unending conflict,  the B-21, KC-46, and F-35. Management bought into the sales pitch from the contractors that all we need to win any future battle is just a few goldplated wonder machines, and future generations are footing the bill.

Agreed, this has negative 6.9% chance of happening but it never hurts to argue for it over BO

No argument also as to how screwed up things have gotten thanks to the Higher, Farther, Faster crowd that Boyd fought at the Puzzle Palace.  Also, I see no end to it with current crop of leaders at the controls now or in the future, no one is going out on a limb to say not every plane has to be the absolute best in category or it's shit, the party line is continuing.

In other threads I've argued for less costly, less sophisticated platforms to be an appropriate part of the overall AF fleet and will continue to do so along with others, only a total idiot or a corrupt narcissist would continue this delusion that we need overkill for 80% of the time we deliver airpower.

Don't mind getting teased/chided for my incessant, cultish advocacy for platforms like the Scorpion or YA-7F, these are platforms we need, can afford and quite frankly, would be the easy A the AF needs to get it's mojo back with Congress and Media.  Every time we dream up some science project that blows up in our faces and we have to go back to Dad for more money is that much more political and real capital we don't have in the future for the other things we will need to just keep the lights on, but hey that's the next guy's problem...

Rant complete.

Edited August 21, 2019 by Clark Griswold

[HuggyU2]

12 hours ago, Royal said:

Clark, it's a great idea in theory, but we have zero money for it. 

Semantics.

It's a function of whether they want to allocate the $$ or not.  But the money is there.

For a number of years, the AF paid for the RQ-4 pilots (which included some Nav/CSO's) to fly the Aero Club Cessna 172s.  Great deal for them... dirt cheap for the AF... benefits were readily quantifiable.  But it was cut.

I remember one of the many attacks on the Beale T-38's.  Around 2005 time frame at Nellis, and F-22 crew chief allowed a gear pin to get sucked into the engine.  The resulting damage to that F-22 engine was more than it cost to fund 3800+ flying hours in the Beale T-38A companion trainer.  Yes... 3800+ hours in the T-38 were cheaper than the F-22 FOD'd motor.  

[Clark Griswold]

Semantics.
It's a function of whether they want to allocate the $$ or not.  But the money is there.
For a number of years, the AF paid for the RQ-4 pilots (which included some Nav/CSO's) to fly the Aero Club Cessna 172s.  Great deal for them... dirt cheap for the AF... benefits were readily quantifiable.  But it was cut.
I remember one of the many attacks on the Beale T-38's.  Around 2005 time frame at Nellis, and F-22 crew chief allowed a gear pin to get sucked into the engine.  The resulting damage to that F-22 engine was more than it cost to fund 3800+ flying hours in the Beale T-38A companion trainer.  Yes... 3800+ hours in the T-38 were cheaper than the F-22 FOD'd motor.  

The yearly flying hour budget for G-Hawk guys to fly the Aero Club Cessnas for the 12th RS was about $90k for the entire squadron for the entire FY.
It was so little money ACC didn’t even know about it until they began the process of creating the 18XX AFSC and started to audit the existing RPA squadrons.
We argued like hell for it but no soup for us or anyone else flying a robot. ACC said it would be too much trouble at OCONUS locations because GA type aircraft are almost exclusive to CONUS US airspace... #totalbullshit


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk