Aviation Continuation Pay (ACP - The Bonus)

[TnkrToad]

GC (can’t bring myself to call you general, given that from your posts I figure you’re at best an O-5) . . . To bring us back from the thread derail (aren’t we supposed to be taking ACP/ARP?), here are numbers questions (you purport to be a numbers guy—take the emotion out of it, blah, blah, blah) that you have thus far failed to answer:

- Given the numbers of pilots the Majors are projected to hire over the next several years, the small number of mil pilots available to meet that demand, and the shrinking number of civilian pilots that’ll be willing to shell out the cash needed just to get the required ATP for a regional job . . . how are your predictions of record retention numerically supportable?

- How in any way does your discussion of there being a “glut” of 16-18 yrs of service officers (’95-’97 commissioning groups) square with the fact that these same year groups all part of the “pilot bathtub”—read under-production—of pilots in the late 90s? Do you have any numbers to support your claim of a glut?

- Specifically, why are there more 11Fs than 11Ms with 18 years commissioned service right now, if there’s such a glut of 11Ms?

- How were the 11H and 11S communities—which were manned at 76% or less (10%+ worse off than the 11F community) about 1.5 years ago—able to magically fix themselves so quickly?

- If the above two communities have gotten healthy all of a sudden, why is Big Blue not using them as models for rebuilding the 11F force?

- Given the glut of rated bodies on AD, what are the projected numbers of pilots that would seek to Palace Chase . . . and as asked before why are they not being encouraged to do so?

- Will 40% and below ARP take rates (such as were seen in the late 90s—last big hiring spree) be sustainable when we see them again in the next few years?

If you can provide rational, numerically supportable arguments for any of the above, you might have some credibility. Otherwise, I’d recommend that those on this forum dismiss you as a propagandist that is unfortunately feeding at best incomplete info to senior leaders who are thus making misguided personnel decisions that are degrading our force.

[Rusty Pipes]

Rusty, you complain so much about the C-17 tempo, but then I offer the Grand Forks suggestion to moderate your family life, and you complain about that. You can't seem to believe anyone would enjoy UAVs, when many people appreciate the change of pace. You're not happy about the $0 bonus, but if you were included, I suspect you would complain about your bonus not being as much as a fighter pilot. If you were to get the fighter bonus, you would complain that you shouldn't have to sign a 9 year contract in which the Air Force has the upper hand.

I'll concede some of the points on this forum about "service" only going so far, but Rusty, you seem to be so jaded that you are 100% in it for yourself, and that is very, very toxic.

First off... -852 lame points for "liking" your own post!

Your Grand Forks suggestion has to be one of your stupidest suggestions to date and shows that you have zero clue as to how a pilot thinks. You take a guy who probably wanted to be a pilot since he was 5 yrs old, worked his ass off through high school to pay for flying lessons to get his PPL (that would be private pilots license for you A1 number crunchers), spent a year of his life working his ass off in UPT with the hopes of selecting the aircraft that he wants to fly (signing a 10 yr ADSC to fly it), spends anywhere from 200-300 days a year on the road because geniuses like you can tell him his Squadron is overmanned with pilots and even cuts those manning numbers... and when the guys tell you that the theory vs the reality of your numbers is wrong... "Well you could just move to Grand Forks and fly a remote control airplane instead!" Then you are actually clueless enough to say that 1) these guys think this is a good deal and 2) there are people in this or any community that are lining up to take your offer... and should be grateful with hat in hand for your fantastic opportunity.

My complaint about the bonus is that the attitude of number crunching non-pilot ass hats in San Antonio and DC is that if we throw money at the problem it will go away and you base this thought on irrelevant "historical data" without for even a second looking more than one assignment cycle into the future or looking at external factors. This mindset in the corporate world would get all of you fired on a daily basis... including the GOs!

As far as me being 100% about myself and being jaded? Tell me something... How is the view from the cheap seats??? You come on here and manage to dodge every question about stats that come your way from anywhere other than your soda straw A1 fabricated numbers about Squadrons and manning... you glorify the insane "advancement by box checking" process (one that you are clearly a product of) while ignoring the 99% of those on here saying that there is no actual leadership in leadership positions and tell anyone who disagrees with your ideas that they should do us all a favor and just quit... you look at the VSP disaster from a few years ago and the conclusion you draw is that the AF should have just come out and admitted they screwed up, but completely ignore the fact and reality that the overwhelming majority of all who applied for VSP were pilots!

Yeah, I'll bet traffic in DC is a real bitch and the Metro in the summer gets pretty uncomfortable on your way home to the wife and kids. Let me suggest this to you... for the enlightenment of all of us jaded pilots who only care about themselves, why don't you tell all of us your background? Let us know how well you relate to us and that you share our experiences over the past 11+ years since 9/11. Unless those experiences involve spending 200+ days on the road every year in some shit hole that ends in Stan or in Iraq, endless stories from buds hoping their leave doesn't get cancelled so they can go visit their kids who just moved 1000 miles away with the ex-wife because we are "surging" again, or the feeling of nausea every time the phone rings and the caller ID says "######ing Sq Scheduler" because you know you'll need to explain to your kids why Daddy has to go away again... If you can't relate to that then before you tell someone who has lived that for the past 11+ years they should remember "service before self" maybe you should take a step back and take the opportunity to just STFU!

Guess what Chang... we aren't all warriors no matter what they told you during what sounds like years that you spent sitting in Polifka or at some Commanders Call on a Staff tour! Every last one of us here in this forum is proud to put on a uniform each day to serve our country and is more than willing to strap into the seat and crank the engines at a moments notice... no matter what is waiting to greet us at our destination! We will miss the birthdays, anniversaries, Holidays, baseball games, dance recitals and first steps because that is what we signed up to do. What we don't need is some ass clown who sits in a cubical and runs selective numbers to tell us that, even though he doesn't do it himself, that we should be "grateful" to be doing it and if we don't like it we can just leave. So before you give anyone else the lecture on here about being selfish and jaded, please let us all know how many combat hours you have logged and how many years you sat at the scheduling desk at McChord, McConnell or Shaw during our great period of "overmanned pilots"! Otherwise... go troll somewhere else.

Edited June 30, 2013 by Rusty Pipes

[joe1234]

Rusty, I would caution you against taking on the role of trying to speak for all pilots. As badly as he made the point, we all own that decision in life to miss birthdays or holidays just to keep flying planes. Yes, it could be better managed, but at the end of the day, UAV's are a way out from that dilemma. If you reject this because its your childhood dream to be a pilot and fly military aircraft for like 30 years, then that's the lifestyle you choose, but you know more than anyone what the cost of that is. I think that's the point he was trying to make. Personally, I would take the assignment to GF because my family is more important to me.

And furthermore, we can't blame A1 for shitty management by individual commanders at the WG and SQ levels. If the UMD is short manned or misaligned, then it's an A1 problem. If it is filled and the squadrons are being stretched thin due to to workload, then that's an ops problem.

As far as workable solutions, I think the problem is that we develop officers along strict pipelines, and then set requirements so that one pipeline gets beat on more than others. For example, there are probably some 11F rated staff billets that honest to god need a fighter pilot in it. There's probably a lot more where it's preferred, but not actually needed. The problem here is that some of these staff billets require the tactical knowledge of an 11F, but we've compartmentalized development and training so fucking much that we've painted ourselves in a corner by essentially declaring nobody but a 11F could possibly know or succeed in manning this position. But the reason that's true is because we make that required knowledge exclusive to only 11F's in the first place.

So, in other words, it's a completely self-induced shortage due to a deliberate lack of breadth in the way we develop people to fill these roles. It seems like the answer is to change the 11F staff billets that obviously don't require a fighter pilot and train non-11F's and equip them with the knowledge to fill more of the positions that do require them. If we can't manage to do that, then that's pretty sad.

[C-21.Pilot]

^

And that my friends just about sums the entire debacle up in two posts.

GC - please print Rusty's last post and place it above every urinal you can find, forward it to every GO you know, and let them read it. Invite those involved to the number crunching game to this forum. It sums up a lot of frustration.

Rusty - have to agree with joe. I jumped ship from the C-17 to AETC and won't go back to AMC. There are avenues for folks to jump ship and be home with the family:

1. I have a UPT classmate of mine....C-17 background....who jumped at an ACSC instructor gig. Hates his job, loves his family.

2. I have a SOS classmate of mine who is at GF right now...hates his job, loves his family.

What I would suggest to ANYONE who wants to fly and be home -- take an AETC gig. Sucks being away from the fight. You'll take one 6-month deployment to Tampa (me) or to a -Stan and be home every night otherwise.

I would also pointy out that GC, when talking about reduction of manning, hasn't once claimed that the 11- forces is the primary target....just a particular age/rank/TAFMS group.

** I suspect that many non-ops guys are possibly on the bubble.

I personally feel that A1 will meet the numbers they are looking for. If they don't meet their mission, those, like GC, will still get promoted and pushed up the chain without a glimmer of insight.

Edited June 30, 2013 by C-21.Pilot

[GoAround]

Rusty et al, please heed the words of those before and stop feeding his fire. Wang Chang is prob a nav or cyber Maj who has read his own press clippings. He's prob an IDE select sitting at the MAJCOM or below level. It's easy for someone like him with a short man complex to sit atop his staff perch and chuck spears. I would love to have it out with this dbag over a beer at Applebee's (which is where he hunts for cougars).

[Rusty Pipes]

Rusty, I would caution you against taking on the role of trying to speak for all pilots. As badly as he made the point, we all own that decision in life to miss birthdays or holidays just to keep flying planes. Yes, it could be better managed, but at the end of the day, UAV's are a way out from that dilemma. If you reject this because its your childhood dream to be a pilot and fly military aircraft for like 30 years, then that's the lifestyle you choose, but you know more than anyone what the cost of that is. I think that's the point he was trying to make. Personally, I would take the assignment to GF because my family is more important to me.

And furthermore, we can't blame A1 for shitty management by individual commanders at the WG and SQ levels. If the UMD is short manned or misaligned, then it's an A1 problem. If it is filled and the squadrons are being stretched thin due to to workload, then that's an ops problem.

I'm not saying that there aren't some folks who wouldn't mind going to GF to take a UAV... having 2-3 IP/EP types 7 day opt to find that guy isn't the best way to do that though. You also can't tell a guy who finally made it to NASCAR that you'll offer him a remote control toy car and then tell him he is lucky to have it. That is just a fundamental misunderstanding of the thought process of your typical pilot and it isn't a solution to the real problem.

I am not saying that the UMD is short manned or misaligned... I'm saying it is short manned or misaligned for what units are being tasked for. If a Sq is manned at 100%, but that gives them the capability to have 10 crews on the road at a time and they are constantly tasked to have 13-15 crews on the road then telling us that we are manned at 100% doesn't mean shit! Add to that the taskings that these units don't get credit for such as alerts, etc and we get into the mess we are in now. The frustration comes from someone using numbers that are in reality fictional and then lecturing those who are living the reality about how they should just shut up and color or get out because we'll be better off without you. Especially when that lecture is coming from someone who not only isn't currently living it themselves, but has never lived it. I can read 1,000 books about the Coliseum in Rome and fighting the lions... but it doesn't make me a Gladiator.

[ThreeHoler]

To add to what Rusty is saying: the largest KC-10 squadron on AD is the deployed squadron. How does the manning work on that...

[theat6bisasham]

Boldface applies - eject

this is a retarded snake eating it's own tail...bail out nav, bail out already, the pilot has long since left you siting there without a ######ing stick...

[slackline]

Rusty et al, please heed the words of those before and stop feeding his fire. Wang Chang is prob a nav or cyber Maj who has read his own press clippings. He's prob an IDE select sitting at the MAJCOM or below level. It's easy for someone like him with a short man complex to sit atop his staff perch and chuck spears. I would love to have it out with this dbag over a beer at Applebee's (which is where he hunts for cougars).

Guys, attack the arguments he makes, not this person everyone is inventing. He makes some very good points, but then fails to back up some other hard to believe points. You don't impress anyone by picking some Internet fight. Just saying...

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD

[deskjockey]

Slack...people are just saying that this dude is just trolling. He's the one who went off book and exposed himself as a troll. Calling names like "pilot pussies" really isn't the way to have a discussion (especially with a bunch of pilots). It also exposed him as someone who is clearly pretending to be someone he's not. He mentions some generals' names and uses first person so everyone assumes he's on the inside. He goes with it...he mentions statistics without giving any...and finally, he uses a screen name with the word General in it. Either he's the worst leader the AF has or he's not who he implies he is. Either way, not worthy of engagement. I can't believe you guys are trating him any different than any other troll.

I'm with the others, ignore the dude and he'll go away.

[slackline]

Slack...people are just saying that this dude is just trolling. He's the one who went off book and exposed himself as a troll. Calling names like "pilot pussies" really isn't the way to have a discussion (especially with a bunch of pilots). It also exposed him as someone who is clearly pretending to be someone he's not. He mentions some generals' names and uses first person so everyone assumes he's on the inside. He goes with it...he mentions statistics without giving any...and finally, he uses a screen name with the word General in it. Either he's the worst leader the AF has or he's not who he implies he is. Either way, not worthy of engagement. I can't believe you guys are trating him any different than any other troll.

I'm with the others, ignore the dude and he'll go away.

I totally agree that he's saying some stuff that just doesn't add up. I'm just saying don't engage him on that level. Is he demonstrating horrible leadership? Yep, but this is the Internet, take that with a grain of salt. A lot is left open to interpretation here, and people don't always come across they mean to. I'm not defending him, just saying don't engage on the personal crap.

You have to admit that even with some of the garbage he's throwing up, he's also giving a couple nuggets of solid info even if it's hard to hear. Take it for what it's worth.

[Fuzz]

Wings are assigned people based on UMD AFSCs. If a Wing pulls up a guy without a slot, they must be attached to the Wing, but they are still flying with the squadron. As a result, the squadron is still getting full use of the pilot in the aircraft. Hence, there is no overage (and most Wings have way more -11Ms than UMD billets). Again, manning is not an issue- your C-17 squadrons have more than enough pilots to do the mission you should be doing.

Champ beat me to it, but Chang... you have absolutely no sense of reality whatsoever! If you think for a second that any Squadron is getting even half use out of any pilot working at the Group or Wing then may I suggest you take a trip to any C-17 Base and have a 10 minute conversation with the young LT scheduler and ask them how often the Gp or Wing Exec flies... or anyone not in the Sq that is on loan or attached for that matter.

This right here, the answer is maybe 1-2 times a month (and that's for locals), talk about actual missions probably 0, maybe 1. There are IPs and WOs that I have never seen on the board for a mission since I have been at my squadron, and these are the dudes I would jump at a chance to fly with because of their knowledge and experience.

Most squadrons have a few civilians for continuity and to overcome the few instances when attached personnel can't pull their weight on a particular week.

A Few? Try one (squadron secretary) but then they got furloughed.

[busdriver]

Attached dudes not flying is primarily a leadership issue. That and a too much queep issue.

[stract]

as an attached flyer, I make sure that I make myself available to fly, and I'm proactive about letting scheduling know this. I see other attached folks who just kind of disappear, don't pop into the SQ occasionally to remind folks they're still around, and they're the ones who fly once a quarter and then feel bitter about it. If you don't make yourself available and bug scheduling on occasion to get on a line, it's your own fault.

[GoAround]

Guys, attack the arguments he makes, not this person everyone is inventing. He makes some very good points, but then fails to back up some other hard to believe points. You don't impress anyone by picking some Internet fight. Just saying...

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD

Sorry I don't impress you...my feelings are hurt. Go ahead and waste your time by arguing back with a guy who has demonstrated, after several posts, that he just wants to stir the pot. I admit, he started strong after a couple posts, but then showed his true colors with double-speak and borderline kindergarten replies. He has lost all cred in my book. Just sayin bro...

[Recut]

First off... -852 lame points for "liking" your own post!

<<>>

Otherwise... go troll somewhere else.

"2" Nice post, man. Couldn't agree more and couldn't have said it better.

[Recut]

^

I say this because Rusty sticks to his guns. IMHO, the AF needs people to do this more. No more "Sir, Yes Sir" Robots. This discussion has become about pilots bitching about bonus $ and not respecting big blue. F that notion. On a broader scope, there's much more involved. I think Billy Mitchell would agree in that sense.

To add: I don't understand when someone starts posting and claiming that they are (at the pentagon, sr leaders, whatever the case) the discussion turns into kissing some ass. WTFO. Even on the internet, in an anonymous environment people are willing to bow down to the "leader". Uggh

Edited July 1, 2013 by Recut

[TnkrToad]

So, in other words, it's a completely self-induced shortage due to a deliberate lack of breadth in the way we develop people to fill these roles. It seems like the answer is to change the 11F staff billets that obviously don't require a fighter pilot and train non-11F's and equip them with the knowledge to fill more of the positions that do require them. If we can't manage to do that, then that's pretty sad.

Big Blue's already been through this drill, and has recategorized as many 11F billets (to 11G, 16G, etc.) as it thought it reasonably could, yet there still aren't enough 11Fs to go around--and BTW, they ain't enough 11S or 11H types either . . . leading to 11Ms filling all manner of billets in ACC, AFSOC, COCOM staffs, etc . . . not to mention MC-12 flying billets, that 11Fs should be filling. Problem is that the "Red Line"--the number of 11Ms Big Blue figures it needs by year group (need lots of Lts & Capts, fewer Majs, even fewer Lt Cols, etc.) doesn't take into account all the added requirements foisted on us. Combine the fact that Big Blue's Wing and below manning models suck (pilots fill Wing/Group/Sq staff jobs that could/should be filled by civilians if funding were provided to do so) with a system that fails to account for the "in lieu of" requirements that 11Ms are filling . . . and 11M units get their nuts crushed while all the charts in the Pentagon show that 11Ms are "overmanned."

The refusal to recognize this reality and account for it in Air Force manning models results in all manner of misguided decisions, with this year's ARP just being the latest example. Make the best decisions you can, knowing that the crappy policies will continue until HAF/A1 gets a clue.

[slackline]

Sorry I don't impress you...my feelings are hurt. Go ahead and waste your time by arguing back with a guy who has demonstrated, after several posts, that he just wants to stir the pot. I admit, he started strong after a couple posts, but then showed his true colors with double-speak and borderline kindergarten replies. He has lost all cred in my book. Just sayin bro...

Relax there, Turbo. No one is trying to hurt feelings. If you don't think that people are learning from the back and forth between GC and Rusty et al, then you're sorely mistaken. It's good information that they're both putting out there. At times each of them crosses some imaginary line in an attempt to squash the other one, and all I'm saying is keep it on the level.

^

I say this because Rusty sticks to his guns. IMHO, the AF needs people to do this more. No more "Sir, Yes Sir" Robots. This discussion has become about pilots bitching about bonus $ and not respecting big blue. F that notion. On a broader scope, there's much more involved. I think Billy Mitchell would agree in that sense.

To add: I don't understand when someone starts posting and claiming that they are (at the pentagon, sr leaders, whatever the case) the discussion turns into kissing some ass. WTFO. Even on the internet, in an anonymous environment people are willing to bow down to the "leader". Uggh

It's good he sticks to his guns, but when people go full retard and attack the person that they've created in their minds it gets silly. Nobody is defending GC. In fact if you go back and reference most of the posts people calling for civility are saying that there is actually some pretty good info he's putting out there in between the garbage he can't seem to refrain from saying.

I'll never understand internet posturing... Nobody thinks anyones any tougher for having done it, so why bother. Okay, I'm done trying to be a voice of reason. Let heated rhetoric ruin the valid points that each side is making. Who cares? It's like those far right wing conservatives. Nobody can hear the valid arguments they're making sometimes because they lace everything with venom. Zero credibility instantly.

EDIT for grammar

Edited July 1, 2013 by slackline

[F16Deuce]

. . . not to mention MC-12 flying billets, that 11Fs should be filling.

Ughh...

[Ram]

Ughh...

Agreed. But maybe that's better for another thread.

[GoAround]

Relax there, Turbo. No one is trying to hurt feelings. If you don't think that people are learning from the back and forth between GC and Rusty et al, then you're sorely mistaken. It's good information that they're both putting out there. At times each of them crosses some imaginary line in an attempt to squash the other one, and all I'm saying is keep it on the level.

It's good he sticks to his guns, but when people go full retard and attack the person that they've created in their minds it gets silly. Nobody is defending GC. In fact if you go back and reference most of the posts people calling for civility are saying that there is actually some pretty good info he's putting out there in between the garbage he can't seem to refrain from saying.

I'll never understand internet posturing... Nobody thinks anyones any tougher for having done it, so why bother. Okay, I'm done trying to be a voice of reason. Let heated rhetoric ruin the valid points that each side is making. Who cares? It's like those far right wing conservatives. Nobody can hear the valid arguments their making sometimes because they lace everything with venom. Zero credibility instantly.

You're right, I'm sorry. I will do better next time.

[TnkrToad]

Ughh...

Agreed. But maybe that's better for another thread.

Not really--the point is this: Flying and staff billets coded as 11G (T-6, Pueblo, USAFA, MC-12 flying billets; all manner of staff billets; ALO billets--jobs that can be filled by pilots from any community ) should be proportionally filled by pilots from all the various communities. Due to shortages, Big Blue has wisely elected to disproportionately man these billets with 11Ms (or not fill them at all), in order man ops flying squadrons. This makes sense--good on the A1 types that are doing the best they can to man billets with the best-qualified folks available for those billets. Check with your bros in the aforementioned billets--T-6 sq's, MC-12s, dudes at Pueblo & USAFA, etc., and ask how many 11Fs (or 11Ss/11Hs) they have in their squadrons. I think you'll find crazy lots of 11Ms, with the other communities few and far between or totally absent.

The problem, as I perceive it--and neither GC nor anyone else has even tried to disprove this--is that HAF/A1M doesn't seem to be taking this into account when making decisions WRT to the ARP. Net result is communities such as the 11Ms getting crushed, with little incentive to stay in due to A1M looking at the wrong metrics. Try on these metrics: ACP take rates for FY '97-'01 (the last big hiring boom) were 35%, 28%, 42%, 32% and 30% (33% avg--half of the "record high" retention GC quoted). BTW, these metrics were for pilots as a whole--which community do you think found it easier to go from a large, multiengine airframe in Big Blue to a large, multiengine airframe in the civil sector? What happens to not only AMC, but also AFSOC, ACC, AETC, COCOMs, etc., when they not only fail to get the 11Fs with 12+ yrs of service they want, but don't get pilots at all . . . because the 11Ms have all jumped ship at their first opportunity. It's not like the ARP as currently structured provides much incentive to stay in . . .

[General Chang]

Not really--the point is this: Flying and staff billets coded as 11G (T-6, Pueblo, USAFA, MC-12 flying billets; all manner of staff billets; ALO billets--jobs that can be filled by pilots from any community ) should be proportionally filled by pilots from all the various communities. Due to shortages, Big Blue has wisely elected to disproportionately man these billets with 11Ms (or not fill them at all), in order man ops flying squadrons. This makes sense--good on the A1 types that are doing the best they can to man billets with the best-qualified folks available for those billets. Check with your bros in the aforementioned billets--T-6 sq's, MC-12s, dudes at Pueblo &amp; USAFA, etc., and ask how many 11Fs (or 11Ss/11Hs) they have in their squadrons. I think you'll find crazy lots of 11Ms, with the other communities few and far between or totally absent.

The problem, as I perceive it--and neither GC nor anyone else has even tried to disprove this--is that HAF/A1M doesn't seem to be taking this into account when making decisions WRT to the ARP. Net result is communities such as the 11Ms getting crushed, with little incentive to stay in due to A1M looking at the wrong metrics. Try on these metrics: ACP take rates for FY '97-'01 (the last big hiring boom) were 35%, 28%, 42%, 32% and 30% (33% avg--half of the &quot;record high&quot; retention GC quoted). BTW, these metrics were for pilots as a whole--which community do you think found it easier to go from a large, multiengine airframe in Big Blue to a large, multiengine airframe in the civil sector? What happens to not only AMC, but also AFSOC, ACC, AETC, COCOMs, etc., when they not only fail to get the 11Fs with 12+ yrs of service they want, but don't get pilots at all . . . because the 11Ms have all jumped ship at their first opportunity. It's not like the ARP as currently structured provides much incentive to stay in . . .

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! These are the types of numbers your senior leaders are looking at to make manning & bonus decisions.

Since I'm offending a great many people (other than Mr. Pipes), I'll make this my last post here. For those of you who feel you are overworked for the money you are paid, I'll throw out an additional suggestion besides RPAs, AETC, and getting out. Many people are intimidated for some reason by volunteering to work staff at the Pentagon. You should consider it. You don't have to worry about flying currencies, the hours for most FGO jobs are 8ish to 4:30 with 1-1.5 hour lunches, you don't ever have to worry about work on the weekends, and there's tons of free museums, sports teams, family life is great...it's the Air Force's best kept secret. Think about it- it's a pretty sweet gig.

Flyers, enjoy those crazy awesome bonuses, keep up the good work. I'm grateful for the awesome opportunities the Air Force has and continues to provide me, and I believe there are more people that not in the Air Force that are grateful for what they've been (and are continued to be) given by Big Blue.

Keep the faith!

[theat6bisasham]

Pentagon? Last time I checked that's staff, and we barely have staff billets for school selects much less anyone else...

And on another note, 11M are filling up the AFGSC staff and STRATCOM which needs way more 11B rep, so it's killing our community when the wrong people are at the top inputing their 2 cents driving decisions that make no sense (watching it happen from the cubicle next-door). It's crazy that the 'bomber' staff is filled with tanker/herc/mobility dudes...i guess AMC staff must be filled with helos dudes and the ACC staff is filled with monkeys.