A self-licking ice cream cone convinced the only way to learn leadership is the USAF school of group think.

I think the failure starts with SOS. Largely regarded by most as a joke or a nice break to practice your golf swing and drink. With the push to go to all these joint/sister-service schools we never give future leaders any solid Air Force centric PME before shuttling them between Joint PMEs/Staffs, civilian internships etc. The Army has career courses that they send thier captians (usually 4-5 months) and the PMEs are branch specific not some mile wide-inch deep overview of the AF.

 

 

 

Edited December 20, 20159 yr by Fuzz

You mean FLEX and ADWAR is how we plan and execute an air war?

Board results delayed again, another 15 days to "early to mid February"

On December 19, 2015 at 8:43 PM, Fuzz said:

I think the failure starts with SOS. Largely regarded by most as a joke or a nice break to practice your golf swing and drink. With the push to go to all these joint/sister-service schools we never give future leaders any solid Air Force centric PME before shuttling them between Joint PMEs/Staffs, civilian internships etc. The Army has career courses that they send thier captians (usually 4-5 months) and the PMEs are branch specific not some mile wide-inch deep overview of the AF.

 

 

 

The Army also has the advantage of time. It does not take two years to make platoon leader. Whereas, that's about what it takes to make a 1 each rated air power practitioner in the AF.

9 hours ago, bennynova said:

Board results delayed again, another 15 days to "early to mid February"

Are you talking about the Colonel or Major results? Major is still end of January to early February.  If you are talking about Major they slid everything to the left in the doc, because they are sneaky like that.  

Edited for clarity. 

Edited December 30, 20159 yr by SnapLock

We're almost to the point of having to do double PRFs since we won't have the results for 2015 before 2016's are due.  It's almost like they do this shit on purpose; clusterfuck as performance art.

Don't the 2005 Majors exhaust their list in March-April?  Gonna be a short wait for some if the 2006 list publishes in Feb.

We're almost to the point of having to do double PRFs since we won't have the results for 2015 before 2016's are due.  It's almost like they do this shit on purpose; clusterfuck as performance art.

Don't forget the jazz hands.

15 hours ago, SnapLock said:

Are you talking about the Colonel or Major results? Major is still end of January to early February.  If you are talking about Major they slid everything to the left in the doc, because they are sneaky like that.  

Edited for clarity. 

You are correct. 

  I missed the slide to the left

 

thanks

On December 30, 2015 at 9:18 PM, Dupe said:

The Army also has the advantage of time. It does not take two years to make platoon leader. Whereas, that's about what it takes to make a 1 each rated air power practitioner in the AF.

 

Agreed and I'm not advocating for a 4-5 month course (especially being an AMC guy). My point is though other services take their early officer PME seriously or at least devote time to it more than a 2 week course jammed into a 5 week course. 

My ideal look at PME would be 2-3 weeks of generic officer PME with all officers together and then another 2-3 weeks where people separate into their specific career areas (rated, MX, services, etc) and focus on of job specific PME and development.

Do people actually learn stuff at PME like ACSC or AWC? SOS was an 8 week vacation from the CAF - I expected ACSC to just be a 12 month vacation with nebulous benefits.

Do people actually learn stuff at PME like ACSC or AWC? SOS was an 8 week vacation from the CAF - I expected ACSC to just be a 12 month vacation with nebulous benefits.

Somewhat of a derail:

A bit of both. While the part-time banker's hours were a great sabbatical and chance to be with the family, there was a significant amount of material to read.

On the surface, they advertise that they want you to "think strategically, and solve the complex problems of the air force". And a lot of the international relations/military theory courses do teach you a huge amount that engineering type minds wouldn't necessarily be exposed to.

Realistically, they are bound by JPME curriculum and handcuffed by the AETC formal course mentality, grading rubrics and "approved" solutions.

Then, there are the near daily parade of stars wanting to give advice to an audience of Majors. Pros and cons abound...

Definitely learned a lot...Definitely wouldn't consider it the "Harvard of the South"

15 hours ago, Jaded said:

Do people actually learn stuff at PME like ACSC or AWC? SOS was an 8 week vacation from the CAF - I expected ACSC to just be a 12 month vacation with nebulous benefits.

Anytime I can talk to another AFSC in I learn a lot more about the AF than my Cyber stuff.  It's helped me execute my mission better because I now know how it impacts the other parts of the base/mission.  Even better if it's in a relaxed/low-threat environment.

Should we consider talking with someone from another AFSC "PME"? I don't discount the value in those interactions, but doesn't that speak to ACSC's lack of effectiveness from an academic point of view if that's the best thing you get out of the course?

So far, no one at ACSC can explain to me exactly what I'm supposed to get out of it beyond a general sense that eduction helps build problem solvers.  We have the most educated force in history and we're losing wars, so I'm not sure education = problem solving.  I won't thread derail anymore than simply saying that ACSC is not worth a year of my time off the line while ops units are short on experienced pilots and the nation is losing wars.  

 

I wonder why Air University doesn't do an end-of-career PME survey to figure out what our PME needs to be.  I would think if you asked every retiring O-5 and above about their PME experience throughout their career, what they needed versus what PME taught them, etc., AU would get a lot of useful feedback. 

I wonder why Air University doesn't do an end-of-career PME survey to figure out what our PME needs to be.  I would think if you asked every retiring O-5 and above about their PME experience throughout their career, what they needed versus what PME taught them, etc., AU would get a lot of useful feedback. 

Most of AU probably isn't interested in improving.

Won't change anything.  What do we know?  Besides, nobody ever actually puts any of that stuff to use, we just shoot from the hip.

Out

I wonder why Air University doesn't do an end-of-career PME survey to figure out what our PME needs to be.  I would think if you asked every retiring O-5 and above about their PME experience throughout their career, what they needed versus what PME taught them, etc., AU would get a lot of useful feedback. 

Most of AU probably isn't interested in improving.

Probably true but take a close look at some of the things taking place at AU through "transformation." Many of the top positions have lowered ranks as the top guy. Many of the top "academics" have been moved to different positions and the Spaatz Center was just eliminated from what I understand. Maybe this is all much ado about nothing, but it looks like Gen Kwast is making some decisions that are going to impact the future there, one way or another.

On Friday, January 1, 2016 at 9:26 PM, tac airlifter said:

We have the most educated force in history and we're losing wars

Sad...and true.

On January 4, 2016 at 8:28 PM, ATIS said:

Sad...and true.

 

I argue that we're being directed to go fight unwinnable wars.

 

We're losing the very best that we can.

46 minutes ago, Dupe said:

 

I argue that we're being directed to go fight unwinnable wars.

 

We're losing the very best that we can.

What do you mean by "unwinnable?"

and we certainly aren't doing our best.  How could you even say that?  Are we hitting every target we could?  Are we streamlining the laborious target approval process?  Are we capitalizing on every TST?  Regardless of the viability of our strategic objectives, we simply aren't doing our best to accomplish them.  If we were doing our best we wouldn't be forcing experienced line operators into school and staff while leaving the units executing missions short handed.   

I think he means: we're using a $138 million jet to drop a $1 million bomb on a  $20 tent killing a couple warriors for Jihad at a time but scattering all the rest of the cockroaches and creating ten more Twitter Jihadis in the process.

4 hours ago, tac airlifter said:

Regardless of the viability of our strategic objectives, we simply aren't doing our best to accomplish them.  

Therein lies the problem: if the policy aims are not attainable or reasonable, then no level of effort will secure the ends.  Forcing some of those experienced operators into school and staff may actually be the remedy for the ills of the AF.  People with firsthand experience working to influence strategy...seems valid.