Aviation Continuation Pay (ACP - The Bonus)

[Danny Noonin]

If I go reserve with 16 years TAFMS, do you really think it will take 15-25 more years reserve time to accrue 4 more years of TAFMS? Honest question, because I'm trying to gather some data myself regarding this point. I'm currently working on the assumption that, as a MAF flyer, it will take me 8-10 years of AFRC flying/deployments to accrue the remaining 4 years of AD time I would need to start pulling an AD retirement. That's assuming no possibility of sanctuary, and no AD recall.

Dudes DO NOT think that you can get out of active duty to be a part timer and still get an active duty retirement. I know it is theoretically possible and I know it has happened in the past. But I'm telling you that it is a serious long shot any more. There are actually checks in the system to try and prevent that from happening now.

[SocialD]

Shitty internet, fucked up my edit.

Are you talking Reserves or ANG? It seems like there are quite a few guys doing this. Helps that some of them are at squadrons with an alert mission. Some dudes volunteered at the Guard Bureau to make this happen. I'm fairly certain i'll never get a 20 yr AD retirement...just wondering.

[Danny Noonin]

Are you talking about the Reserves or ANG? What are the checks? It seems like there are quite a few guys doing this right now. It helps that their squadron has an alert mission. One or two volunteered for tours at the Guard Bureau (while still flying) to make it happen. I'm fairly certain I'll never get a full AD retirement anyway...just wondering what you mean.

EDIT: I agree that I wouldn't get out expecting it to be a done deal, some have just had great timing.

Tours at the guard bureau and alert are different animals I think. Can't speak to that. I'm talking about being on active duty paid for man days (MPA) which is where the majority of ARC guys build up active duty time. To get put on MPA there is a CMAS approval process done by the active duty and one of the things they look at is sanctuary (being above 18 years of active duty credit). They won't approve for anyone inside sanctuary for the most part unless you sign a sanctuary waiver...and I've seen them not even offer that waiver. They don't want you to get an active duty retirement! I say again, they don't want you to get an active duty retirement. It neutralizes one of the advantages of having an ARC (cost). And it's active duty's money

Look at it this way: a retirement is an enormous bill. What is the world going to look like in 8-10 years? Will the MAF be so busy that the ARC is activated all the time? More specifically, will they be so busy that they need to activate the specific ARC dudes who are really close to costing a fortune or can they get by with just the other ARC guys?

Can it happen? Yes. In theory. But as the budget slims down I would bet serious money against it. Obviously there are exceptions.

I'm saying all this because I hear idiots (I'm talking about you RTB) talking about getting out at 16-18 years all the time acting as though they'll still get an active retirement as a part timer no problem, but it will just take a few extra years. After all, they've heard about is from their cousin's uncle's brother's friend who saw ferris bueller pass out at a 31 flavors last night. What few right now seem to understand is that the calculus has fundamentally and drastically changed in only the last two years on this as OCO money dried up and budget frugality became real. Retirements are expensive.

Edited July 3, 2013 by Danny Noonin

[ak47]

After all, they've heard about is from their cousin's uncle's brother's friend who saw ferris bueller pass out at a 31 flavors last night. What few right now seem to understand is that the calculus has fundamentally and drastically changed in only the last two years on this as OCO money dried up and budget frugality became real. Retirements are expensive.

I appreciate you clearing this up, because for a lot of us who grew up in he MAF world in the last decade, it's difficult to put this into perspective because of the load that the ARC has been pulling. As a young C-5 guy who only spent 2.5 years doing that, I was with one AFRC guy on the day he earned his AD retirement and knew another in the same squadron that got his. It didn't seem all that unreasonable to do the same, but the future probably isn't guys spending the better part of 10 years on AD orders.

[Cap-10]

Noonin speaks the truth.

If getting out at the 16.9 year point, your better option would be to hope for an AGR position. They are normally 4 year tours.

As you can imagine, AGRs are coveted and there is always talks of them being converted to ART positions.

Good luck!

Cheers,

Cap-10

[Danny Noonin]

They are normally 4 year tours.

As you can imagine, AGRs are coveted and there is always talks of them being converted to ART positions.

New AFRC policy is for 3 year AGR tours, not 4. And a very large number of AGR billets will convert to ART on 1 Oct 14. Everyone thought that push died when Stenner left but turns out he got it into the 15 POM before he retired.

[Cap-10]

New AFRC policy is for 3 year AGR tours, not 4. And a very large number of AGR billets will convert to ART on 1 Oct 14. Everyone thought that push died when Stenner left but turns out he got it into the 15 POM before he retired.

Had not heard about the 3 year tour change.

We were told that only 2 of our 7 AGR spots were transitioning, but in the mean time, the AGRs would be a 1.5'ish years as a sort of stop gap until the ART start date.

Cheers,

Cap-10

Edit: I type goodly.

Edited July 4, 2013 by Cap-10

[RTB]

I'm saying all this because I hear idiots (I'm talking about you RTB) talking about getting out at 16-18 years ...

Noted Danny, noted. Remember, I know where you work!

But valid none the less. Thanks to your...advice...I just crossed the 20 years TAFMS date still flying. The grass looked greener but I gotta say, life looks way better now.

[HossHarris]

life looks way better now.

Well maybe not RIGHT now.... Eh?

/inside joke

//ha!

[RTB]

Valid

Well maybe not RIGHT now.... Eh?

/inside joke

//ha!

So true...

[11F]

For what it's worth, I spoke with a tax professional yesterday. In my situation (married w/ 4 kids), the half up front option to 20YAS would cost me ~$10,000 more in taxes over 9 years (making the huge assumption that the tax code doesn't change) as opposed to the $25,000 per year.

[Jughead]

For what it's worth, I spoke with a tax professional yesterday. In my situation (married w/ 4 kids), the half up front option to 20YAS would cost me ~$10,000 more in taxes over 9 years (making the huge assumption that the tax code doesn't change) as opposed to the $25,000 per year.

Now go talk to a finance professional to see what $112.5K (less taxes) can be expected to earn over those same 9 years.... Hint: it's more.

Big assumption here, of course, is that you invest the money instead of a hookers-and-blow extravaganza....

[Smokin]

Big assumption here, of course, is that you invest the money instead of a hookers-and-blow extravaganza....

Wait... you're saying hookers and blow is not an investment?

[TnkrToad]

Tanker,

Good, reasoned thought. Only a couple of probs:

1. The AF doesn't have the option to guess when a hiring boom might take place wrt spending taxpayer $ on the bonus.

2. Even with staff overages, the Wings are still fully manned (and then some) with -11Ms. There's not enough room for them all; if you look at the UMDs and especially the TDY charts, there is clearly a large overage. And I'm talking trends for the UMDs and TDYs, not just one year. Heck, C-17 pilots, I bet your SF brothers would love your TDY rates! More words . . .

GC apparently isn't coming back to this discussion, so pointless to respond to him personally, but gotta make some observations about what he's saying:

- He says essentially that Big Blue must be reactive (can't predict the future, so at best can only react to the recent past--i.e., current manning & prior years' ACP take rates)

- Large numbers of retiring Baby Boomers from the workforce in this and for the next many years has been foreseeable for, I don't know, about the last 65 years or so . . . and BTW, they're going to vacate jobs across the economy, not just the commercial airline industry

- Funny thing is that 11Fs eligible for the bonus this year ('01/'02ish year groups) are in fact "healthy" according to the "red line" requirements vs. "blue line" inventory. Big Blue is pretty well screwed for later year groups, but that would imply that they're figuring this FY's bonus on predictions of future 11F manning . . . weird

- It's also funny that when the mid-90s (read "pilot bathtub") year groups, which were undermanned from the outset, came up for bonus eligibility they were offered none of the same special ACP options we're seeing now. Again, A1's logic is at best horribly inconsistent

- GC cited record ACP take rates (historical data) to validate his points, but ignores the most relevant data points--ACP take rates in the late-90s. If he's playing "hear no evil/see no evil" with hard data, and as I assume works in A1M or somewhere in that vicinity, then one must assume that our senior leaders are equally as clueless or intentionally ignorant as GC appears to be . . . which is scary

- Mr. Market can and does react to supply/demand imbalances way faster than Big Blue, which should be a concern for everyone. A low FY13 ARP take rate due to Big Blue's dithering (but explained away by the program's late release, not market forces, pilot frustration with Big Blue, etc.) will likely be followed by a roughly-equivalent program in FY14 which could prove disastrous.

- If it is true that C-17 dudes (for instance) at the unit level are getting crushed, yet all the metrics that GC and those of his ilk indicate that they have enviably low TDY rates, and no effort is made to reconcile those opposing realities, then Air Force policy will remain unchanged, 11Ms will grow more bitter and getting out will all the more viable

-- What happens when in FY14:

--- The ARP remains unchanged from FY13, leaving little additional incentive for 11Ms/11Ss/11Hs/11Rs to stay in . . . and again doesn't even publish it until halfway or more through the FY, by which time too much damage has already been done

--- The commercial airline industry quickly ramps up its hiring (no more furloughees, improving economy, etc.), incentivizing folks to depart Big Blue . . . while all manner of other commercial and government entities are competing for the same bodies--the Air Force bureaucracy works at its standard pace . . . Nero (Big Blue) fiddles while Rome (the pilot community) burns

--- Continuation of sequestration-driven cuts further erode QOL in the Air Force . . . I've seen no indication that members of Congress are going to start cooperating together in the near future

--- Promotion boards get pushed even later or promo rates get reduced to fix the "glut" of FGOs . . . since Big Blue doesn't dictate different promo rates based off of AFSC, prized 11Fs/others from short-manned pilot communities get schwacked at the same rate as personnelists/mx officers/etc.--which further convinces those "on the fence" that the future in Big Blue ain't as bright as it once seemed

I'll give you a hint, from one who experienced going through SUPT, and then was in an 11M flying squadron in the late 90s:

- In the flight room there's at least as much discussion about who's hiring/how to write app's (if not more so) than there is about flying . . . which not only encourages/enables lower current year ACP take rates, but plants the seed for future retention problems by raising a bunch of youngsters who are all too aware of the future ahead of them on the outside

- Problem is, those coming eligible for the bonus in the next few years have a heckuva lot more flying experience than the early-90s year group dudes did when they were making the decision whether/not to punch . . . thus making them that much more valuable

- Ever read "Tipping Point" by Malcolm Gladwell? Big Blue's taking a huge risk that it'll be able to stem the tide of 11Xs departing before the exodus takes on a "mind of its own", with 11M squadrons turning into giant airline lead-in programs

I hope Big Blue isn't counting on another 9/11, another increase in airline pilot retirement age (anyone want a 69 yr old pilot on your next United flight?), or some other anomaly to slow/stop the bleeding.

I don't want any of my above "doom and gloom" predictions to come true . . . but GC's comments, lack of inspiration or a viable plan from senior leaders, everything I know and have seen about large bureaucracies and well-known facts about the economy/Boomer retirements/sequestration are major causes for concern. Yet again, I hope that someone on this board who is in fact a senior leader (or has valid insight from one) will either A) explain why my logic is wrong, or B) if I'm right tell me what if anything Big Blue plans to do about it.

[disgruntledemployee]

^^^

A. No need, see below.

B. Nothing. Big Blue believes in only the bonus, as we have all heard in this forum. And stop loss, they believe in that too. So they don't need to manage it better, just slam the exit door whenever needed.

Out

[Rusty Pipes]

Yet again, I hope that someone on this board who is in fact a senior leader (or has valid insight from one) will either A) explain why my logic is wrong, or B) if I'm right tell me what if anything Big Blue plans to do about it.

I'm most certainly not a senior leader and most of those in senior leadership positions (3-4 Stars) that I have heard speak in the last few years tend to acknowledge the questions about Airlines hiring, AADs, pointless deployments (Ummm... CAOC anyone?), but as far as their plans go they always seem to dodge the questions. So my prediction is they will handle it in true Big Blue fashion by just ignore the problem until they have to react to it... which will be WAAAAAY too late for them to do anything about it.

[matmacwc]

I don't really think stop loss is a good idea, but if you were a four button in DC, and stop loss would fix your problem, most people would do it.

[Jaded]

I don't understand how stop loss would actually be implemented. What do you do, stop loss all pilots until their O5 look and then kick out a bunch of majors? It seems like stop loss only works as a temporary measure while you create a long term fix. What's the long term fix in this case? 15 year ADSCs?

[Snooter]

What's the long term fix in this case? 15 year ADSCs?

Psh, at this point it wouldn't surprise me...

[Vprdrvr69]

Sadly, I see a 15 year ADSC in our future. Young guys entering the system would sign away their first born to get a chance to fly USAF jets. Ironically, look at where those guys end up 8, 10, or 15 years down the road. How many guys do we know that hit 20 and hope the USAF lets them stick it out another 10 years. Almost everyone I know past 15 years could pretty much tell you to the day when they hit that terminal leave date. "Leadership" is the ability to keep those young guys motivated so that 15 year ADSCs, stop loss, and 41 pages of ACP bitching is not necessary. Just a thought...

Now back to trying to figure out how to change my screen name to not include the perverted, rape inducing, sexist evil number 69!

[General Chang]

Hmmm...interesting policy suggestion...see, you guys can come up with stuff that reaches the Pentagon!

[Vprdrvr69]

Sadly, I see a 15 year ADSC in our future. Young guys entering the system would sign away their first born to get a chance to fly USAF jets. Ironically, look at where those guys end up 8, 10, or 15 years down the road. How many guys do we know that hit 20 and hope the USAF lets them stick it out another 10 years. Almost everyone I know past 15 years could pretty much tell you to the day when they hit that terminal leave date. "Leadership" is the ability to keep those young guys motivated so that 15 year ADSCs, stop loss, and 41 pages of ACP bitching is not necessary. Just a thought...

Now back to trying to figure out how to change my screen name to not include the perverted, rape inducing, sexist evil number 69!

Hmmm...interesting policy suggestion...see, you guys can come up with stuff that reaches the Pentagon!

Wow! After so many pages and so many posts, your true colors come shining through. You obviously missed the point of the post that referenced what a leader would do. So yes, take the 15 year ADSC to the pentagon and tell them how brilliant it is. Or how you have insider knowledge about how well you know it will work. Let them know that with this brilliant idea the USAF will have guys by the balls AND you won't ever have to spend any money on those pesky ACP bonuses (or whatever the hell you changed the name to). I can see your OPR bullet now, commenting on how many millions you saved the USAF with this pure brilliance. You are well on your way to that first star. Your comments here continue to reach new lows; the stench that emanates from your posts reflects so poorly on the senior leadership you say you represent. You validate the gripes and complaints that dominate these forums. We appreciate the insight though. We really do. I'll take the high ground and keep it civil, but I see the spears inbound.

[ThreeHoler]

Wow! After so many pages and so many posts, your true colors come shining through. You obviously missed the point of the post that referenced what a leader would do. So yes, take the 15 year ADSC to the pentagon and tell them how brilliant it is. Or how you have insider knowledge about how well you know it will work. Let them know that with this brilliant idea the USAF will have guys by the balls AND you won't ever have to spend any money on those pesky ACP bonuses (or whatever the hell you changed the name to). I can see your OPR bullet now, commenting on how many millions you saved the USAF with this pure brilliance. You are well on your way to that first star. Your comments here continue to reach new lows; the stench that emanates from your posts reflects so poorly on the senior leadership you say you represent. You validate the gripes and complaints that dominate these forums. We appreciate the insight though. We really do. I'll take the high ground and keep it civil, but I see the spears inbound.

Sarcasm detector inop in the "OFF" position.

[sputnik]

Sadly, I see a 15 year ADSC in our future. Young guys entering the system would sign away their first born to get a chance to fly USAF jets.

While I probably would have signed a 15 year commitment, I see cadets today who aren't going to UPT. When I ask why, the 10 year commitment gets a lot of comments. It's not huge numbers, but it is surprising (to me anyway). Oddly, many of them have flying experience and enjoy flying, just don't want to be AF pilots.

[11F]

While I probably would have signed a 15 year commitment, I see cadets today who aren't going to UPT. When I ask why, the 10 year commitment gets a lot of comments. It's not huge numbers, but it is surprising (to me anyway). Oddly, many of them have flying experience and enjoy flying, just don't want to be AF pilots.

USAFA Ops AF cadets came through. They said they are having a hard time filling the pilot slots. Schwartz castrated our AF.