Aviation Continuation Pay (ACP - The Bonus)

[SocialD]

Ya man, I'm going to have to cut my IPUG debrief short...gotta go get my tow-motor training/license.  LOL.  

[tac airlifter]

6 hours ago, Sua Sponte said:

Are you in a CRW/CRG? If you're going to austere locations, isn't that what they're for?

I am not.  There’s a whole different Air Force out there.  

20 minutes ago, SocialD said:

Ya man, I'm going to have to cut my IPUG debrief short...gotta go get my tow-motor training/license.  LOL.  

It’s motherhood just like tanking is for you: enabling movement to target.  What if your yo-yo plan was landing on a blacked out dirt strip to drive your own fuel truck to FARP, and the better you do it the quicker you return to a TIC?  Not so silly anymore.  
 

that’s an extreme example, although valid.  Mostly it’s to move luggage pallets quicker!

[SocialD]

23 minutes ago, tac airlifter said:

What if your yo-yo plan was landing on a blacked out dirt strip to drive your own fuel truck to FARP, and the better you do it the quicker you return to a TIC?  Not so silly anymore.  

 

Ya, I was being a bit flippant in my comment. But it's a bit silly in my scenario due to the vacuum cleaner of an underslung intake on the jet.  That FARP better plan on a few engine swaps.  I've changed a few engines back in my enlisted days, it might be a tough gig in a FARP. 😂 

 

But seriously, in this scenario, are we just leaving fuel trucks in the middle of nowhere with noone around?  Maybe we are...but I'm not sure I'd trust the fuel. 

 

 

23 minutes ago, tac airlifter said:

that’s an extreme example, although valid.  Mostly it’s to move luggage pallets quicker!

 

If we're not at a FARP scenario anymore, who is building those pallets that you need to move quicker?  Why not have an additional troop there to move stuff.  Is the next step to have you land, go build up the pallets yourselves, then go?  Seems more prudent to build up our CRG type units than to keep piling duties onto one person.  I get the ACE idea, but at some point, it gets a bit crazy to expect good outcomes if you continue to pile up the duties. 

[QAZqaz]

11 hours ago, Swizzle said:

A.dditional/A.lternate -- C.ombat -- E.xperience, eh?

Future downrange hypothetical story...So...this one deployment I was a forklift driver, next a copilot, another a bus driver, and latest 'rote my own IPR/Personelist/Finance/CE/secretary/Comm-troop/Aircraft CC...what could go wrong besides all those passwords/login deadlines/currencies on an epic collision course culminating in ____insert your fate here (i.e. futility testing more with less, repeatedly)___

LOL. 

It is funny that a 100k/yr bonus was recommended and they actually chose to go the opposite direction w/ worse terms (that said this report came out after the 2021 ACP was decided, however the Rand study did not). I just want to hear one person who has been in these conversations explain why they chose to ignore recommendations. If I was a betting man, the status-quo will continue with the 2022 ACP. In 2023 once they realize that a mistake was made, they will up it to the past 35k/yr to get a marginally higher take rate and call it a success. 

[hindsight2020]

46 minutes ago, QAZqaz said:

LOL. 

It is funny that a 100k/yr bonus was recommended and they actually chose to go the opposite direction w/ worse terms (that said this report came out after the 2021 ACP was decided, however the Rand study did not). I just want to hear one person who has been in these conversations explain why they chose to ignore recommendations. If I was a betting man, the status-quo will continue with the 2022 ACP. In 2023 once they realize that a mistake was made, they will up it to the past 35k/yr to get a marginally higher take rate and call it a success. 

It's not lack of awareness, it's straight up (however sclerotic) game theory application. They have a reductionist view of airline hiring cycles since oh say, the end of the vietnam war (and definitively post deregulation). They will always short-call airline hiring predictions. That's why things like the FY21 AvB offerings are allowed to manifest in spite of real world a-word hiring intel they are privy to, especially in the age of the internet.

I forget I'm one of the old crusty guys on here now, so I catch myself repeating the spiel, but I'll do it anyways: They'll always play run-the-clock offense, even when they're behind. It's not a bug to them, it's a feature. This is because even though in a game with no ADSC such decisions would get them sacked out of office, that's not the game we're playing here. You AD critters should know that better than anyone.

At the pilot occupational level, they staff and manage this place like a regional airline. So, treat your ADSC contract like you work for the best paid regional airline, and a lot of this lamenting is self-limiting. If you pursue an extension of your one-sided contract, do so with eyes wide open. And to be clear, there are reasons why it's ok to be a "regional lifer" (ask me how I know). No right or wrong answer, only the right or wrong answer for each individual and /or dependent family.

Happy New Year.

[ThreeHoler]

Just wait until the advanced training ADSC comes back within the year. They fixed the glitch.


Sent from my iPhone using Baseops Network mobile app

[ImNotARobot]

At the pilot occupational level, they staff and manage this place like a regional airline. So, treat your ADSC contract like you work for the best paid regional airline, and a lot of this lamenting is self-limiting. If you pursue an extension of your one-sided contract, do so with eyes wide open. And to be clear, there are reasons why it's ok to be a "regional lifer" (ask me how I know). No right or wrong answer, only the right or wrong answer for each individual and /or dependent family.
Happy New Year.

“treat your ADSC contract like you work for the best paid regional airline, and a lot of this lamenting is self-limiting. If you pursue an extension of your one-sided contract, do so with eyes wide open.”

What a prolific analogy. Excellent work.

[pawnman]

34 minutes ago, ThreeHoler said:

Just wait until the advanced training ADSC comes back within the year. They fixed the glitch.


Sent from my iPhone using Baseops Network mobile app

Just wait until people decline ADSCs for instructor upgrade or requal.

That'll REALLY help the manning. 

[hindsight2020]

24 minutes ago, pawnman said:

Just wait until people decline ADSCs for instructor upgrade or requal.

That'll REALLY help the manning. 

 

Yeah, given how people in my prior community would dodge the IP stink like their life depended on it (mostly out of a desire to retain the ability get out of the MWS with AFPC, for duty station dearth reasons), I don't see how it would be in the staffing's interest to open a door and allow folks to legally opt out of an upgrade via ADSC declination. Much better to use them and lose them in situ for whatever balance of time they already have, especially given said management class is on the record stating that retention doesn't matter to them anyways.

But, these bonehead careerists never look past their own command/staff tour, so it wouldn't surprise me if they bungled that too just like they bungled the FY21 short call.

[StoleIt]

1 hour ago, ThreeHoler said:

Just wait until the advanced training ADSC comes back within the year. They fixed the glitch.


Sent from my iPhone using Baseops Network mobile app

Wait...Seriously? Is that really a COA they are pursuing or is this speculation/sarcasm?

I know a lot of different programs are bringing back ADSC's (TPS, WIC, 89th, etc) but that's the first I've heard of upgrades.

[Hunter Rose]

47 minutes ago, StoleIt said:

Wait...Seriously? Is that really a COA they are pursuing or is this speculation/sarcasm?

I know a lot of different programs are bringing back ADSC's (TPS, WIC, 89th, etc) but that's the first I've heard of upgrades.

It's sarcasm.

Although big Air Force did try this, what, 5-6 years ago? It lasted all of a week I think. Once the reg was published, pilots adamantly refused to accept ADSC for upgrade. Once Big AF realized the pilots called their bluff, they relented.

Who knows, though.  The Generals/Colonels who champion keeping pilots have proven time and time again what utterly clueless morons they are, so I guess it wouldn't really surprise me if they tried it again.

Edited January 2, 2022 by Hunter Rose

[Magellan]

4 hours ago, hindsight2020 said:

So, treat your ADSC contract like you work for the best paid regional airline, and a lot of this lamenting is self-limiting. If you pursue an extension of your one-sided contract, do so with eyes wide open. And to be clear, there are reasons why it's ok to be a "regional lifer" (ask me how I know). No right or wrong answer, only the right or wrong answer for each individual and /or dependent family.

So what is life like for a regional airline pilot?  Asking for a friend...

[hindsight2020]

1 hour ago, Magellan said:

So what is life like for a regional airline pilot?  Asking for a friend...

I was being allegorical. I'm a different kind of lifer.

[FourFans]

12 hours ago, SocialD said:

But seriously, in this scenario, are we just leaving fuel trucks in the middle of nowhere with noone around?

...you might be surprised what really happens these days...

[StoleIt]

4 hours ago, Hunter Rose said:

It's sarcasm.

Although big Air Force did try this, what, 5-6 years ago? It lasted all of a week I think. Once the reg was published, pilots adamantly refused to accept ADSC for upgrade. Once Big AF realized the pilots called their bluff, they relented.

Who knows, though.  The Generals/Colonels who champion keeping pilots have proven time and time again what utterly clueless morons they are, so I guess it wouldn't really surprise me if they tried it again.

Copy.

What's scary is it seems like a realistic thing the brass would try.

[brickhistory]

20 hours ago, pawnman said:

Just wait until people decline ADSCs for instructor upgrade or requal.

That'll REALLY help the manning. 

[Bender]

Given they’re doubling down on producing rather than retaining to solve the shortage, I doubt we’ll see any improvements to the bonus. With Afghanistan over, I could also see them adjusting MAF crew ratios again to “help” our manning.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Have you seen the new primary pilot training syllabus? Hard to say we’re “doubling down on producing”. Taking a good stab at halving it…

Should be a good product for the CAF (which maintains their T-38 training), pretty unclear for the MAF…though I’m sure quality will suffice.

Keep an eye on the primary production numbers. The next few year groups are going to benefit from some Cold War style ops tempos!

~Bendy


Sent from my iPad using Baseops Network mobile app

[CaptainMorgan]

Have you seen the new primary pilot training syllabus? Hard to say we’re “doubling down on producing”. Taking a good stab at halving it…

Should be a good product for the CAF (which maintains their T-38 training), pretty unclear for the MAF…though I’m sure quality will suffice.

Keep an eye on the primary production numbers. The next few year groups are going to benefit from some Cold War style ops tempos!

~Bendy


Sent from my iPad using Baseops Network mobile app

I meant production in numbers, not quality. They’ve slashed the T-1 syllabus, haven’t seen the -38 one.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[DirkDiggler]

16 hours ago, Bender said:

 

Have you seen the new primary pilot training syllabus? Hard to say we’re “doubling down on producing”. Taking a good stab at halving it…

Should be a good product for the CAF (which maintains their T-38 training), pretty unclear for the MAF…though I’m sure quality will suffice.

Keep an eye on the primary production numbers. The next few year groups are going to benefit from some Cold War style ops tempos!

~Bendy


Sent from my iPad using Baseops Network mobile app

 

What are the big changes in the new syllabus (especially for the T-1 MAF/AFSOC tracked guys)?  In the 2.5 years I've been back flying from staff, my community has seemed to win the co-pilot lottery (most of the new guys have been average to above average).  We've also gotten more than the average amount of T-38 guys than I've usually seen.  A couple folks I know on the AETC side of the house have been foretelling this coming wave of drastically less capable pilots coming out of the pipeline but I haven't personally seen it yet.

Edited January 4, 2022 by DirkDiggler
Additional question

[CaptainMorgan]

What are the big changes in the new syllabus (especially for the T-1 MAF/AFSOC tracked guys)?  In the 2.5 years I've been back flying from staff, my community has seemed to win the co-pilot lottery (most of the new guys have been average to above average).  We've also gotten more than the average amount of T-38 guys than I've usually seen.  A couple folks I know on the AETC side of the house have been foretelling this coming wave of drastically less capable pilots coming out of the pipeline but I haven't personally seen it yet.

Don’t have the syllabus in front of me, but IIRC it’s less than 50 hours in the T-1 for the MAF Fundamentals Flight course. That will eventually give way to MAF Fundamentals Sim when they divest the T-1. In both cases, a lot of focus on AR/AD/LL.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[FourFans]

2 hours ago, CaptainMorgan said:

....a lot of focus on AR/AD/LL.

Good.  It's about time we stop hammer home the importance of a perfectly flown VOR-A instead of focusing on the employment end of the stick.  Glad to hear that's happening earlier in the program.  

Students are universal in this: They will meet whatever bar we set.

[CaptainMorgan]

Good.  It's about time we stop hammer home the importance of a perfectly flown VOR-A instead of focusing on the employment end of the stick.  Glad to hear that's happening earlier in the program.  
Students are universal in this: They will meet whatever bar we set.

Yeah LL and AD are so much more pertinent to ACC heavies, C-5s and Tankers.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Swizzle]

28 minutes ago, FourFans130 said:

Good.  It's about time we stop hammer home the importance of a perfectly flown VOR-A instead of focusing on the employment end of the stick.  Glad to hear that's happening earlier in the program.  

Students are universal in this: They will meet whatever bar we set.

In this training climate, it's a swing and a MIF! Regardless of a hit or RBI or goal! 

 

 

 

 

[Smokin]

8 hours ago, DirkDiggler said:

What are the big changes in the new syllabus (especially for the T-1 MAF/AFSOC tracked guys)?  In the 2.5 years I've been back flying from staff, my community has seemed to win the co-pilot lottery (most of the new guys have been average to above average).  We've also gotten more than the average amount of T-38 guys than I've usually seen.  A couple folks I know on the AETC side of the house have been foretelling this coming wave of drastically less capable pilots coming out of the pipeline but I haven't personally seen it yet.

I'm glad it hasn't hit heavies as bad, but I have seen it in fighters.  While most of the young guys seem to be capable mentally and eager to learn, they just haven't had the reps to get the depth of training that guys of my generation had.  Many young pilots are showing up the squadron with literally half the flight hours that I had at the same career point.  The training has simply shifted to the CAF, which just hasn't had the time with the ops tempo that most of us approaching retirement have known for our entire career.  So you end up with CAF IPs (who generally have less experience and specifically less experience teaching the most basic blocking and tackling) filling in where the B-course has left off.  Not a knock on either the students or the IPs, they are just being set up to struggle through it and hopefully not fail.  If you have safety access, go look up the Class A from Shaw a year or two ago and tell me that those guys were not set up and it cost the student his life.

[Standby]

56 minutes ago, Smokin said:

If you have safety access, go look up the Class A from Shaw a year or two ago and tell me that those guys were not set up and it cost the student his life.

Serious question: are there any ejection-capable fighter or trainer aircraft in our inventory that recommend a landing with single MLG unsafe?

If you don’t have safety access, the AIB gives much of what you may need. I realize there are different seats, but one of the most important parts of this mishap (to me) is the failure of the seat. I think far too many people make go/no-go decisions without consideration for seat failure. I have seen people take too much unnecessary risk with a blind assumption that the seat will get them out of a bad spot if things go too far south.