Aviation Continuation Pay (ACP - The Bonus)

[Gazmo]

[Gazmo]

Technical difficulties posting. Let's try this again...

I'm not so sure what's so crazy about some of these tanker TDY's. Although I can say I've been to some really spectacular TDY locations, I can't say that our fuel was not a necessity. I've spent over week in Souda Bay with hops to Lajes in between. I've lived in Spain for two months when we were shwacking Lybia in 2011. We were one of the first of many crews to bring a tanker into Moron for that operation and yes, you bet your ass that in between 10-12 hour missions, I toured the countryside of southern Spain and sat on many of nude beaches sipping ice cold sangria and Cruz Campo. I even got to walk through the Rock of Gibralter. You can also bet your ass I may have brought back three dozen bottles of Spanish wine and maybe even a few dirt cheap bottles of Cuban rum we can't get in the US. I've spent many of days broken in Hawaii on the way to Guam to support PACOM deployment while I swam in a salt water pool and drank Mai Tai's at the Outrigger Reef in Waikiki. I've spent many weeks here and there in northwestern Germany supporting NATO training and you can bet your ass I took back as much dirt cheap German Reisling while I made $100 a day in per diem. I can go on and on, but you know what? Those are the times I'll never forget and what makes me think, "Wow. We actually get paid really well to do this shit!". Like I said before; at the end of the day, someone needed a flying gas station nearby and we were there doing the mission while noone else in this world wasn't. There was a day when AMC didn't give a shit when we landed with 35k+ lbs of fuel on locals. Now we land

Sent from my SM-G900V using Tapatalk

[Duck]

And for every time Gazmo and I had a cool trip like those, we had about 600-900 hours sucking it up in the desert. So in my opinion, Big Blue definitely gets the better end of the deal out of its aircrew, even when taking into account some of the sweeter deals out there.

[guineapigfury]

I hit the 10 year mark in a few months.  I'd gladly spend the next 10 years deployed flying the exact same sortie every day if it got me out of MQ-9s.  Can't wait to turn this bonus down!

[BADFNZ]

11 hours ago, TnkrToad said:

 

I suspect this all comes back to force management, which is the focus of this thread.

As I recall, around the '07 timeframe, the tanker community was flooded with pilots. Why? Lotsa pilots were getting produced, but the communities which really needed them (11F & 11S spring to mind--I'm sure others were hurting, too) simply could not absorb them.  The KC-135 community--and I assume C-130 & C-17 communities, too--got the overflow, because it's a whole lot easier to get someone through Altus/Little Rock, so they can serve a copilot, than it is to train up a Viper or Talon driver. I distinctly remember we had about 100 pilots for 15 jets, with a 7,000 hr flying hour program at EGUN. Do the math, and that only equates to 140 hrs in the seat, per pilot, per year. Not exactly a formula for success, when one wants to get and keep people competent as aviators. At one point at EGUN, there was a policy that two copilots would fly on each sortie, so that they could build up enough "other" time (even though time in the jumpseat is useless), so they would have the chance to eventually upgrade to AC & later IP. In that timeframe, we also started to deploy crews (but not jets) downrange, so crews could get more flying hours--on AMC tails, which didn't count against EGUN flying hours. EGUN was a sweet deal deployment-wise, because of the lunacy of having USAFE, not AMC, own those tails (and I'm sure the same was true of PACAF-owned tankers). 

Yes, there were some pretty sweet TDYs in EUCOM, because--shockingly--most places in EUCOM are more fun to visit than bases in CENTCOM. If a tanker's going to go TDY, it's typically going to go to a base with a lot of ramp space and a long runway, which tends to mean it's going to be near a reasonably large city, which typically means plenty to see and do. EGUN was sweet TDY-wise, because--you guessed it--USAFE, not AMC, owned the tails. Again, I'm sure the same held true for PACAF tanker units. 

If folks in AMC were taking the keys to the jet and going on boondoggles such as you described, that was a bit shady. I imagine there was a legit rationale for those training sorties--not the least of which was getting folks trained on Block 40, which required an overseas sortie--even if the crews took a bit too much license with the opportunities they were given. The tanker squadrons, awash with copilots and young ACs, had to (1) get their crews adequate numbers of hours--which might not have been accomplished if they simply filled user requests, and (2) give their crews some variety of experience--flying in the Pacific (remote/island destinations, tropical weather, dealing with customs, etc.) is way different from theater AR missions flown from the Deid. I'm sure those who went on these boondoggles ended up being much more well-rounded aviators than those who had 2,000+ total hours at the end of their first assignments, but who had done nothing other than fly locals when home and theater AR sorties one-to-a-full stop from desert locations. 

Thailand and Guam, while one can have great fun at both locations, are also hosts to exercises and real-world operations. Just because one can have a good time at a particular location doesn't mean nothing worthwhile is happening there. I'm sure China and North Korea would be very happy if we avoided "good deal" locations like PGUA, VTUN and elsewhere, in order to avoid the appearance of having a good time. 

TT

So in EUCOM/PACOM, good deal TDYs just came with the territory.  In AMC, they were "shady".  GTFO.

If you have a glutton of flying hours, not enough days in the year to kill them, and are overmanned with co-pilots, what's the harm in taking the keys to the jet over the weekend and shooting some pro at Travis/Beale then enjoying Wine Country after you land?  I'm not a tanker dude so I have no dog in this fight, but I see no problem with this and don't think it's "shady" at all. 

[TnkrToad]

12 minutes ago, BADFNZ said:

So in EUCOM/PACOM, good deal TDYs just came with the territory.  In AMC, they were "shady".  GTFO.

If you have a glutton of flying hours, not enough days in the year to kill them, and are overmanned with co-pilots, what's the harm in taking the keys to the jet over the weekend and shooting some pro at Travis/Beale then enjoying Wine Country after you land?  I'm not a tanker dude so I have no dog in this fight, but I see no problem with this and don't think it's "shady" at all. 

Dude, chill.

       I took Right Seat Driver at his word when he said, "We had guys in the -135 go to the DO and validate a two week off-station sorties to knock out 'training.'" The way he wrote it indicated there was something less than legitimate about the rationale for those missions and the way they were executed. You apparently didn't bother to read my entire sentence, even though you quoted it. I wrote: "If folks in AMC were taking the keys to the jet and going on boondoggles such as you described, that was a bit shady." You completely missed the whole rest of the paragraph, where I (1) figured there was a more valid purpose for the missions Right Seat Driver described than simply taking the jet for an extended joy ride, and (2) even if they had gotten a good deal, it wasn't necessarily a bad thing, since they likely got good training from it. It's also funny that you mentioned there was a glut (not glutton) of copilots at the time, which might have justified long off-station missions, since I was the one who brought it up. 

       It seems you also missed the part when I highlighted "the lunacy of having USAFE, not AMC, own those tails." I personally think the current command construct for tankers in Europe is ridiculous; AMC should own the tankers in Europe, not USAFE. One of the bennies of this would be that tanker crews stateside would occasionally get to do something other than deploy to the desert, European-based crews might contribute more equitably to CENTCOM operations, and--probably most importantly--the pain would be spread more evenly than it currently is. But that would have required a bit more reading comprehension on your part.

If you're gonna critique folks, at least bother to read what they wrote first. 

Getting back to the topic of the thread, the KC-135 take rate is currently 32.1%--worse than C-130J, C-17, C-5 and mobility test communities. The only heavy communities with lower rates are KC-10 and C-130E/H, which are only marginally worse, at 30% and 31.3%, respectively. Based on these stats, I'd guess tanker crews aren't going on a whole lot of boondoggles these days. If they are, they sure aren't helping retention all that much.

TT

[Runr6730]

8 hours ago, TnkrToad said:

Dude, chill.

       I took Right Seat Driver at his word when he said, "We had guys in the -135 go to the DO and validate a two week off-station sorties to knock out 'training.'" The way he wrote it indicated there was something less than legitimate about the rationale for those missions and the way they were executed. You apparently didn't bother to read my entire sentence, even though you quoted it. I wrote: "If folks in AMC were taking the keys to the jet and going on boondoggles such as you described, that was a bit shady." You completely missed the whole rest of the paragraph, where I (1) figured there was a more valid purpose for the missions Right Seat Driver described than simply taking the jet for an extended joy ride, and (2) even if they had gotten a good deal, it wasn't necessarily a bad thing, since they likely got good training from it. It's also funny that you mentioned there was a glut (not glutton) of copilots at the time, which might have justified long off-station missions, since I was the one who brought it up. 

       It seems you also missed the part when I highlighted "the lunacy of having USAFE, not AMC, own those tails." I personally think the current command construct for tankers in Europe is ridiculous; AMC should own the tankers in Europe, not USAFE. One of the bennies of this would be that tanker crews stateside would occasionally get to do something other than deploy to the desert, European-based crews might contribute more equitably to CENTCOM operations, and--probably most importantly--the pain would be spread more evenly than it currently is. But that would have required a bit more reading comprehension on your part.

If you're gonna critique folks, at least bother to read what they wrote first. 

Getting back to the topic of the thread, the KC-135 take rate is currently 32.1%--worse than C-130J, C-17, C-5 and mobility test communities. The only heavy communities with lower rates are KC-10 and C-130E/H, which are only marginally worse, at 30% and 31.3%, respectively. Based on these stats, I'd guess tanker crews aren't going on a whole lot of boondoggles these days. If they are, they sure aren't helping retention all that much.

TT

Your statement about EGUN not sharing equitably is dated by at least 4 years. EUCOM tanker crews are getting tasked at rates equal to or greater than their AMC counterparts, and they aren't good deals. Up until recently, 21 hour augmented duty day sorties to beautiful Africa were a daily occurrence.  Hell, we're even being augmented by the ANG/AFRC and AD to fill the lines.  Are there good deals?  Yes, but they are fewer and further between. 

[Azimuth]

11 minutes ago, Runr6730 said:

Your statement about EGUN not sharing equitably is dated by at least 4 years. EUCOM tanker crews are getting tasked at rates equal to or greater than their AMC counterparts, and they aren't good deals. Up until recently, 21 hour augmented duty day sorties to beautiful Africa were a daily occurrence.  Hell, we're even being augmented by the ANG/AFRC and AD to fill the lines.  Are there good deals?  Yes, but they are fewer and further between. 

You strategically left out the per diem made in Istres France as well.  And I'll fly 21 hour augmented duty day sorties if you told me I never had to do STRATCOM stuff again.  You know what a AMC good deal is?  Go to McGuire and sit Alpha for a week.  Trust men, I've spent three of my last five assignments in AMC.  I got better "good deal" teaching at the FTU in Altus.  Grass isn't always greener.

[Danger41]

On 3/10/2016 at 8:47 AM, di1630 said:

My Quals-I landed on the carrier first try when I played top gun on the 8 bit NES in 1987.

That is the most unbelievable thing I've ever read.  Almost like saying you made it through Captain Skyhawk without hitting a mountain on those fast levels.

[BashiChuni]

9 hours ago, Danger41 said:

That is the most unbelievable thing I've ever read.  Almost like saying you made it through Captain Skyhawk without hitting a mountain on those fast levels.

i never landed on the top gun carrier but i DID make it thru the fast Captain Skyhawk mountain level, rescued the scientist, and destroyed the alien space station eye

[TnkrToad]

15 minutes ago, Runr6730 said:

Your statement about EGUN not sharing equitably is dated by at least 4 years. EUCOM tanker crews are getting tasked at rates equal to or greater than their AMC counterparts, and they aren't good deals. Up until recently, 21 hour augmented duty day sorties to beautiful Africa were a daily occurrence.  Hell, we're even being augmented by the ANG/AFRC and AD to fill the lines.  Are there good deals?  Yes, but they are fewer and further between. 

 

7 minutes ago, Azimuth said:

You strategically left out the per diem made in Istres France as well.  And I'll fly 21 hour augmented duty day sorties if you told me I never had to do STRATCOM stuff again.  You know what a AMC good deal is?  Go to McGuire and sit Alpha for a week.  Trust men, I've spent three of my last five assignments in AMC.  I got better "good deal" teaching at the FTU in Altus.  Grass isn't always greener.

Copy all on both your points; EGUN crews are plenty busy--perhaps at a rate greater than AMC crews. This would illustrate my point, though: if AMC owned the crews at EGUN as well as those stateside, I'd say it would be more likely the pain--writ large, in terms of TDY/deployment rates and locations--would be equitably distributed. Sounds like EUCOM and AMC are at least attempting to share the load, hence ARC & AD crews augmenting, but the coord isn't working all that great if the workload is still unfair. If you're going to operate a tanker off-station anyway (Istres, perhaps), an AMC crew/jet can do that mission just as easily as an EGUN one.  Here's to hoping the two commands can work and play well together, and maximize quality of life for crews stateside and overseas. 

In an attempt to keep this thread on topic, the high opstempo and crappy deals would do much to explain how/why the ACP take rate is so low thus far. Desert rotations, homeland defense alerts and a-word hiring aren't likely to substantially change in the near future. I don't suspect take rates will substantially change, either.

TT

 

[Chicken]

Just out of curiosity... what drives a bonus for certain AFSCs anyways?  Why are there a lot of critical skills not offered a bonus?

[Guardian]

What skills are you referring to?

[slackline]

1 hour ago, Guardian said:

What skills are you referring to?

Bowstaff skills, nun chuck skills, you know, skills that impress the girls...

[Guardian]

Dude....teach me.

Do you think you could throw a football over.....say...... That mountain?

[Chicken]

2 hours ago, Guardian said:

What skills are you referring to?

So I have an AGR spot lined up... however I went on mypers today and it talked about continuation.. outlined about 30 AFSCs that are considered "critical skills" .. so now im wondering if my palace chase package is ed now?

[Guardian]

Oh. Sorry man. Do you have the super secret palace chase desk at afpc number to call and ask?

[Sprkt69]

41 minutes ago, Chicken said:

So I have an AGR spot lined up... however I went on mypers today and it talked about continuation.. outlined about 30 AFSCs that are considered "critical skills" .. so now im wondering if my palace chase package is ed now?

Doesn't matter what your Wing or AFPC says, it's all about what SECAF Palace Chase signs off on.

[di1630]

My Quals-I landed on the carrier first try when I played top gun on the 8 bit NES in 1987.

That is the most unbelievable thing I've ever read.  Almost like saying you made it through Captain Skyhawk without hitting a mountain on those fast levels.

I shit you not...reason #69 I consider myself "worlds greatest pilot".

[Herkasaurus]

On March 15, 2016 at 9:26 PM, Guardian said:

Oh. Sorry man. Do you have the super secret palace chase desk at afpc number to call and ask?

It's called the trunk line for some dumb ass reason. It's 2 SNCO's that work cases and can tell you the status without having to check CMS or whatever the system is called. I used it a year ago when I dropped my PC papers. They put my application on the next round that went to the SECAF's monthly meeting where the O-6 looks at the apps to make a final decision. They only did it cause my requested separation date minus days of terminal leave had already passed with no answer in sight. 

[Right Seat Driver]

On 3/14/2016 at 10:07 AM, TnkrToad said:

Dude, chill.

       I took Right Seat Driver at his word when he said, "We had guys in the -135 go to the DO and validate a two week off-station sorties to knock out 'training.'" The way he wrote it indicated there was something less than legitimate about the rationale for those missions and the way they were executed. You apparently didn't bother to read my entire sentence, even though you quoted it. I wrote: "If folks in AMC were taking the keys to the jet and going on boondoggles such as you described, that was a bit shady." You completely missed the whole rest of the paragraph, where I (1) figured there was a more valid purpose for the missions Right Seat Driver described than simply taking the jet for an extended joy ride, and (2) even if they had gotten a good deal, it wasn't necessarily a bad thing, since they likely got good training from it. It's also funny that you mentioned there was a glut (not glutton) of copilots at the time, which might have justified long off-station missions, since I was the one who brought it up. 

       It seems you also missed the part when I highlighted "the lunacy of having USAFE, not AMC, own those tails." I personally think the current command construct for tankers in Europe is ridiculous; AMC should own the tankers in Europe, not USAFE. One of the bennies of this would be that tanker crews stateside would occasionally get to do something other than deploy to the desert, European-based crews might contribute more equitably to CENTCOM operations, and--probably most importantly--the pain would be spread more evenly than it currently is. But that would have required a bit more reading comprehension on your part.

If you're gonna critique folks, at least bother to read what they wrote first. 

Getting back to the topic of the thread, the KC-135 take rate is currently 32.1%--worse than C-130J, C-17, C-5 and mobility test communities. The only heavy communities with lower rates are KC-10 and C-130E/H, which are only marginally worse, at 30% and 31.3%, respectively. Based on these stats, I'd guess tanker crews aren't going on a whole lot of boondoggles these days. If they are, they sure aren't helping retention all that much.

TT

Well, that escalated quickly.  Just getting back from being TDY and seeing two extra pages to this thread discussing tanker TDYs.  The "training" piece of my post wasn't implying dudes were doing shady shit.  Going on a Block 40 OST and want to drop into Travis for an off-station trainer?  Sure, go ahead.  Working east coast business efforts and bringing back lobster from Pease?  Go right ahead.  Dudes were not walking into the DO office looking to fly into their hometown to bang their ex-girlfriend from high school.

This was a time when dudes were still going downrange before they enforced the DAV code policy (2006-2011ish).  It was the only way dudes were going to get more experience other than flying the Malak at OTBH.

[TnkrToad]

Interesting--the latest update to the ACP take rate also includes take rates for the 18Xers' bonus. I'll get to that in a sec, but first a few highlights from the 11X community. From 8 Feb to 15 Mar, here were the following changes:

Overall 11x: 16 more takers, for a 37.6% FY16 take rate thus far

- Bomber: 1 more taker; 26.9% -- lowest of all communities--surprising, since they've historically had a pretty healthy take rate

- C2ISR: 2 more; 48.8%

- Fighter: 5 more; 29.7%

- Mobility: 4 more; 36.4%

- Rescue: 1 more; 71.4% -- highest of all communities (not surprising--they've always had a high take rate)

- SOF: 2 more; 38.5%

- Unmanned (11U): 1 more; 55.2%

18x take rate: 14.3% (2/14) thus far

- Exactly 1 (out of 1) RQ-170 pilot and 1 SOF RPA pilot (out of 6) have taken the droid bonus

- None of the seven 18A Pred or Reaper drivers have taken the bonus thus far

- Three total RPA bonus takers thus far (between 11U, 18A, 18S); I'm curious to see how GC and company plans to build any degree of long-term experience/continuity in the RPA world

Bottom line: the take rate continues to be underwhelming. Over three quarters of this year's eligibles were the true-blue types who signed up for the bonus early last year. The slow trickle of takers this FY further indicates Big Blue has some retention issues (shocker, I know).

TT

 

[Jaded]

I'm hearing that there is serious talk of bringing back the ART bonus this year as well, which could further incentivize people to get out. Additionally, around the squadron there are serious fears about stop-loss which are driving people to get out ASAP when they might have stuck around a year or two more as they explored outside options.

[Runr6730]

If you have an ADSC that extends beyond your pilot training commitment, does that affect when you are offered the bonus?

[pawnman]

9 hours ago, TnkrToad said:

Interesting--the latest update to the ACP take rate also includes take rates for the 18Xers' bonus. I'll get to that in a sec, but first a few highlights from the 11X community. From 8 Feb to 15 Mar, here were the following changes:

Overall 11x: 16 more takers, for a 37.6% FY16 take rate thus far

- Bomber: 1 more taker; 26.9% -- lowest of all communities--surprising, since they've historically had a pretty healthy take rate

 

Two words: Global Strike.