Promotion and PRF Information

[Herk Driver]

Working in both the Wing and OG front office for several PRF periods I never once saw a Commander ask for or review an FEF.

I have, which is why I am asking. I am wondering how pervasive it is, or if this was an anomaly.

[Trogdor]

I will throw one more log on the fire for what type of squadron leadership is out there. I had a commander that stated at a CC call, “its all well and good to be both a good aviator and a good officer, but if you had to pick one you should strive to be a good officer.”

Everyone knew his stance on “box checking.” So, for all the young Lt’s in the crowd…good officer = AAD, SOS, etc.

[WeatherManC130]

Has anyone seen SR's reviewing FEFs (942's) during the PRF writing/review?

I asked this question when I was at GRACC about 2 years ago and the answer was no. This blew my mind. I was told it wasn't if you Q3d but when. The sad thing is that new copilots in the squadron don't even know what an FEF is. At least UPT/U-2/89th still ask for a copy for your 942. I guess it is perfectly acceptable to be a crappy pilot but all your boxes checked and make rank.

WxMan

[Liquid]

I will throw one more log on the fire for what type of squadron leadership is out there. I had a commander that stated at a CC call, “its all well and good to be both a good aviator and a good officer, but if you had to pick one you should strive to be a good officer.”

Everyone knew his stance on “box checking.” So, for all the young Lt’s in the crowd…good officer = AAD, SOS, etc.

Why would you have to choose one? If you can't do both you probably aren't a very good aviator either. Good AF aviators are good officers. Not all good officers are aviators. It is rare to have a bad officer be a good aviator that you want in your force. And I'm not talking about careerist officers. I mean good leaders who understand the mission, the environment, the guidance, know about risk acceptance, know about warfighting and critical thinking and know how to take care of, mentor and lead their subordinates, and set and enforce high standards. And be very good in the aircraft. Sounds hard to do it all because it is. Good aviators that are bad officers don't belong in the military.

[brickhistory]

Good aviators that are bad officers don't belong in the military.

Wonderful, even motivational cheerleading. But it doesn't, and hasn't, fixed the problem. On this site alone, how many threads with how many anecdotes about p1ss-poor leadership and/or senior officers commanding who weren't good aviators? And that's just this site. Multiply it by how many p1ssed, non-led folks who have seen the beast and decided "fcuk that" while Col or even Gen Skippy goes about his or her merry, Kool-Aid chugging way? Billion here, a billion there, and pretty soon you are talking about real money...(famous quote from Congress).

[Rusty Pipes]

Why would you have to choose one? If you can't do both you probably aren't a very good aviator either. Good AF aviators are good officers. Not all good officers are aviators. It is rare to have a bad officer be a good aviator that you want in your force. And I'm not talking about careerist officers. I mean good leaders who understand the mission, the environment, the guidance, know about risk acceptance, know about warfighting and critical thinking and know how to take care of, mentor and lead their subordinates, and set and enforce high standards. And be very good in the aircraft. Sounds hard to do it all because it is. Good aviators that are bad officers don't belong in the military.

I think you missed his point. His Commander (and the majority I have had share this stance) implied or straight out stated that the box checking that everyone keeps referring to is what makes you a good officer... or more along the lines that you cannot be a good officer unless you check these boxes (and now unless you check them as quickly as possible). I've heard the same speech from multiple Commanders about "if you had to choose one, you should be a good officer"... not sure if that came from the same speech by a speaker in Polifka or something, but to a crew force that has been inundated with this constant barrage (AAD, PME in Cor, etc) for the past 10+ years it directly translates to "box checking is more important than being good at your job". That may or may not be the message that is intended, but I can promise you that is the message that is being received loud and clear by your crew force from those in leadership positions in most cases.

[ATIS]

I know back in 2003 when I showed up at my Sq the first question my Sq CC asked me as part of my inprocessing "meet the commander" checklist was if my Masters was done and if I had SOS done in correspondence (he didn't have a copy of my surf in front of him)... so this isn't a recent thing, we have a whole generation of folks who don't know any different.

NAF ATSUGI 1996:

Check-in sheet shows a block to check off: Skipper and XO, I caught both of them late on my first afternoon. Skipper sits me down with the XO and .....

"Welcome to the squadron, you must have had good grades to get to Japan, so lets cut to the chase:

A) Learn your jet and learn the mission, fall behind or don't cut it we send you back to the states

B) Take care of your troopers

C) Don't get in "too much" trouble

D) Don't let your pilot fly you into the back of the boat

Questions...nope...OK, lets go to the club and meet everyone else"

Things have changed.

[joe1234]

I think a major problem is that we equate the "good officer" piece with checking boxes instead of, you know, actually leading people. See, because pilots don't usually have that many people to lead, we look at exec jobs, awards packages, AAD completion, PME, and in the case of the forum, the ability to fly an aircraft, in lieu of "can I put this person in charge of other human beings".

I've seen plenty of flight commanders come and go that were fucking awful leaders get sent straight to the head of the pack because they checked the right "in lieu of actual leadership" boxes. The types that really don't give a shit about their people and are just doing the Flt/CC gig to pad their PRF. Some of them turn out to be good leaders, some of them turn out to be absolutely awful, but by the time they get there, it's already too late. You've given out your school slots and have decided who your future leaders are going to be with a very minuscule and flawed data set.

The idea of reviewing FEF's for a promotion board would only exacerbate this problem. But, then again, there's nothing else to fall back on except "commitment and enthusiasm for the Air Force" indicators such as what boxes you check and how early. This leads to terrible quality control. Also, I honestly think the dubious and inconsistent quality of the leaders is a causal factor as to why we sometimes get sent to the cheap seats when it comes to joint operations. It seems like there is far more confidence in an Army, Navy, or USMC O-5 leading something (anything) than an Air Force O-5. At least, that's the impression I get. Sure would be an interesting straw poll.

[Rusty Pipes]

I honestly think the dubious and inconsistent quality of the leaders is a causal factor as to why we sometimes get sent to the cheap seats when it comes to joint operations. It seems like there is far more confidence in an Army, Navy, or USMC O-5 leading something (anything) than an Air Force O-5. At least, that's the impression I get. Sure would be an interesting straw poll.

I was drinking my 7th third beer at the MUFF one night with a Navy and Marine O-6 who were both Wing CC equivalents at home, but deployed to the CAOC (both flyers, both great dudes) who were "venting" to me about the young AF guys they had working for them. It completely blew them away that these guys were on a "combat" deployment and they were working on PME and AADs... neither of them could even comprehend it. They were asking me about it in the hopes of calling BS on these guys who as young Capts and Lts told them they needed to get their AADs and SOS done in cor or they wouldn't get promoted and that being deployed was the easiest time for them to do it... not only that, doing it while deployed was highly encouraged by their Commanders. When I confirmed what their guys told them and that it was what was being pushed by Commanders the response from the Marine O-6 was, "No offense, but shit like that is why nobody takes you guys too seriously from the other services. If one of my Marine Capt pilots working for me was taking Masters classes over here I'd kick his ass because that's not why he is here!"

[slackline]

I have a sincere question. What happens when you're just a run of the mill, average pilot? From reading these posts it would seem to be inferred that you're all a bunch of golden hands! I am an average pilot. I can do everything in my mission set safely. Are there people that do it worse? Yep. Are there people that do it better? You bet. I know my mission, and I'm very good in the 3-1 dept because that's something in my control, but is the fact that I'm not Chuck Yeager a disqualifying factor in me being a good leader?

I'm honestly curious because a young pup reading these posts might just think, "well, that's it, I'll never do anything important because I'm not the best out there." I fly a crew aircraft. I fly in some pretty gnarly situations, and I'll be the first to admit that I was just not as blessed as some in the "hands" department. I'm a great instructor, and I'm always safe. I've been lucky enough to get lucky in some of the worst situations.

I have always busted my arse working hard, and been trusted by my crews and leadership. AAD's are something I've always avoided like the plague, I had to do SOS on a waiver because of deployments, TDY's etc not permitting me to go before, and I've done ACSC in correspondence because I was basically told "or else". Rescue continues, in my very biased opinion, to be one area where we've had excellent leadership the majority of the time. My current assignment has pulled me away from USAF Rescue for the last three years, so maybe that's changed, but I doubt it.

Long winded way to say that IMO, being the best pilot isn't the only important thing. I acknowledge that most of you aren't saying it is, but I just want to clear that up for young guys. You should never stop trying to be better, but realize that, like I always tell my 10 yr old son, there's always someone better. Being a great "real" officer is more important than being a great pilot. I think a lot of you are saying it, but I'll just spell it out. Being a great officer in the Air Force doesn't always mean you'll be the best pilot, but it does mean you'll never stop trying. And, just to be clear, in today's climate being a great officer doesn't mean you'll get promoted. I think it'll be rare that the truly great ones get passed over, but it happens, and that's what you have to be prepared for. Sometimes being a great officer means pissing off your boss, and that has ramifications.

I hope that made sense. Long day, it's hot, and I actually got to fly. Time for bed.

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD

[Rusty Pipes]

I have a sincere question. What happens when you're just a run of the mill, average pilot? From reading these posts it would seem to be inferred that you're all a bunch of golden hands! I am an average pilot. I can do everything in my mission set safely. Are there people that do it worse? Yep. Are there people that do it better? You bet. I know my mission, and I'm very good in the 3-1 dept because that's something in my control, but is the fact that I'm not Chuck Yeager a disqualifying factor in me being a good leader?

I'm honestly curious because a young pup reading these posts might just think, "well, that's it, I'll never do anything important because I'm not the best out there." I fly a crew aircraft. I fly in some pretty gnarly situations, and I'll be the first to admit that I was just not as blessed as some in the "hands" department. I'm a great instructor, and I'm always safe. I've been lucky enough to get lucky in some of the worst situations.

I don't think it is a matter of being the best pilot, it matters what you are focusing on. If you don't know your Ops Limits or weather mins on a flight on the deployment and when you land you spend your free time working on your AAD then it is a problem. The bigger problem is if your supervisors are saying that if you had to pick which one to work on then you should work on your AAD. Are Commanders coming straight out and saying this... doubtful. Is that the message they are sending on a daily basis... absolutely!

Getting the point yet, Liquid? I'm certainly not saying that you did this... I'll take your word that you did the opposite which is great. It is the message that is getting to the young pups... intentional or not; it is coming from their bosses and from the looks of the past 42 pages of this thread it certainly isn't MWS specific.

[AnimalMother]

is that tracked in some sort of metric, and if so, are leaders held accountable in any way? Not being cynical, just wondering...

That data, to me, is more valuable that 20 unit climate assessments. While the cause does not fall squarely on the shoulder of the "losing" CC, if I was a higher up, I would certainly wonder WTF was going on in a squadron that was losing that many people.

Can't tell you if/how that data is being tracked, but apparently, leadership response was along the lines of "well, we'll just plan for slightly higher attrition." This type of thing doesn't seem to really get their attention. Only when the #1 or #2 dude in the wing drops paper do they seem to make an effort to convince them to stay. I think they see it as an insult to the invitation to the cult of the anointed.

[BuddhaSixFour]

I have a sincere question. What happens when you're just a run of the mill, average pilot? From reading these posts it would seem to be inferred that you're all a bunch of golden hands! I am an average pilot. I can do everything in my mission set safely. Are there people that do it worse? Yep. Are there people that do it better? You bet. I know my mission, and I'm very good in the 3-1 dept because that's something in my control, but is the fact that I'm not Chuck Yeager a disqualifying factor in me being a good leader?

I had a long debate about this once with a school select friend who has mediocre hands. I came into it arguing you need good piloting skills to lead in the ops world. He, obviously, felt you didn't. I think we settled in the right place...

I don't think you need stellar hands. You do need competent hands with stellar judgement, experience, and knowledge. Without those, how is a leader/commander supposed to make decisions regarding flying? How are they going to judge risk versus reward? How are they going to identify and set standards of performance or develop reasonable squadron flying policies? If you can do those things well, along with the other thousand things leadership entails, your hands just need to be good enough to not undermine your credibility.

When I had a commander fail to meet that criteria, I didn't directly care that he was a bad stick. I did care that he made bad decisions and created meaningless restrictions based on his own fears, shortcomings, and misunderstandings of the aircraft.

[guineapigfury]

Looking at PRFs is probably a good idea, but do enough guys have Q2s and Q3s for this to be a useful discriminator? I've been in 7 years and I know about 6 guys with Q3s. Half of those were good to excellent pilots (including one patchwearer). My other concern here is that there is no similar event to a checkride with which to evaluate MSG types.

[Vetter]

I've seen a General drop a JDAM on friendly coords (thankfully, they were fully retrograded). Nothing happened.

A Wing Commander dropped a BDU on a Maverick pass on a check ride. He got a downgrade.

I have numerous other examples. Bottom line, we shouldn't expect too much out of our senior leaders tactically because they are too busy leading. Gone are the days of Sr leaders having street cred (some do, most don't). So, I'd venture to say after one makes O-6, hands don't matter. So why should hands matter for the chosen ones making it to the coveted Sr leader level?

Edited July 10, 2013 by Vetter

[Danny Noonin]

Good discussion all around

Explain to me the you can't polish a turd comment with regard to bad deals. Isn't that something leaders are supposed to do? If a commander can't change your "bullshit" aircraft assignment (RPAs, FAIP), your undesirable base location (Creech, Cannon), the fiscal crisis (no money to train), your ops tempo (supporting unpopular and "not real" wars) or the lack of needed guidance from HAF, what is this commander supposed to do? Whine and bitch with them in the bar or just quit? Or motivate them to get the mission done with hard work, long hours, lousy conditions and no appreciation from peers? An important part of leadership is getting your people to buy into the mission (even unpopular ones), overcome the obstacles, give more than they thought they could give, take care of their families and somehow enjoy it enough to do it all again tomorrow. This requires what you call polishing a turd and what you say no one respects...Many times I've been given a f*ing turd and had to polish the shit out of it.

I respect what you're saying and agree with it for the most part. I think were into semantics. What you call polishing a turd is what I call having a positive attitude and making the best of things. As in bitching vs whining, i see those as different things. A turd is still a turd and can't be shined into granite. When CCs at any level try to sell to some young pup that that 179 with three weeks notice than means he'll miss the birth of his first kid is really a great deal because he'll be able to get X kind of stink on his resume, that's polishing a turd to me. It's not a good deal and everyone knows it. It might be a great professional experience for a guy in the end, but it's a fucking turd. I've seen that crap. That kid didn't give a shit about his résumé at that point and that CC was full of crap. Other obvious example: a CC with 3,000 hours telling some poor kid who dreamed of flying his whole life and had his wings for just a year that he'll never fly a manned airplane again (TAMI) and what an awesome deal that really was. Any bullshit pep talk in cases like that are disingenuous at best and take away all credibility for that cc. Sometimes you have to call a spade a spade instead of being a spin meister. Dudes respect honesty out of their leaders. Don't you? Spin is rarely totally honest and everyone can see through that crap.

That does not mean that CCs can't lead by positive attitude and point out the opportunities and the unconsidered bright sides of bad deals. But that doesn't make them stop being a bad deal to a guy who just got the news. Being unhappy about a deal does not necessarily make one toxic and doesn't mean that guy won't bloom and excel where he's planted and/or eventually love what he originally thought was a turd.

Am I making sense? Positive attitude but no bullshit. That's what dudes need.

[BFM this]

Polishing a turd: Leadership

Piss on my back and tell me it's raining: Not leadership.

[ViperStud]

Dudes we do not want FEFs part of the rack and stack process. I've been chief of Stan/Eval in two squadrons and I can tell you there is some blood in FEFs and it might surprise you who has it. There are above average pilots with Q2/3s in their records and total limfacs with Q1 no hits all day every day. I've had CCs want to fly dudes with specific FEs to either get them exposure or to set a dude up for success.

I am what I consider a very big picture and objective FE but there are a lot of others with agendas. A past CC flew with his golden boy and have him an EQ on an average ride, but who is going to question it? Be careful what you wish for. I'd rather have leadership be able to assess their pilots based on day-to-day observations rather than check rides a previous bases that may have had an agenda behind them. Check rides are just a snapshot anyway, not aleays a valid overall assessment of a pilot's skill.

[General Chang]

Just an observation and a couple of questions...

It seems like there are about 15-20 guys on this thread that are really fed up with the Air Force personnel system and want to do something about it. That is admirable.

As pointed out, there's nothing you can currently do from your position, except point out the flaws to your leadership and maybe post some thoughts in this (or similar) forums. Again, admirable as long as it's not whining.

Therefore, if you really want to change the system, yet you can't from your current position, why not:

1) Aspire to leadership;

2) Do what the current system requires of you to become a Commander; and

3) Do your best to implement your agenda once you are a Squadron Commander or above?

Many excuses are bound to fly from these suggestions. I'm sure the biggest one from folks like Rusty will be, "GC, I've served with Squadron, Group, and Wing Commanders, and trust me, they have no ability to make changes." Or some of you may quote Tony Carr (great dude) and say, "GC, if Tony couldn't implement change and left, what shot do I have?" Well, I'll come back at you with some of the logic several of you have used against Liquid. Your Commanders in the past, to include Tony, hit a wall with their specific leadership. When you are in Command someday, who's to say that you won't have the exact leadership above you to hear your voice and implement change? You say to Liquid that times were different when he came up in the AF. True. But Commanders might be different in the future from what they are right now. Same logic.

Young officers (especially Captains; Rusty, you're old, it's probably too late for you, my friend), if you feel so strongly that you have a better way, why not do what today's system requires of you in order to become a Commander and have a shot at change. Who knows- you may be hitting your head against a wall when you're a CC. Then again, you may have the perfect leadership team above you to make a difference in your subordinates' lives. I guarantee you, if you're still in the Air Force around the 17 year point, and some doofus is your Squadron Commander, and he has amazing leadership above him that is open to instituting change, you're going to wish you'd done your AAD and PME back when you were a Captain, however distasteful, in order to be in his position and make a difference.

Young guys reading this thread- I know you're out there lurking in the shadows- everything Rusty, Champ, Animal, Vetter, Liquid, etc are saying about be the best you can be at your primary job above all else is absolutely correct. Don't even bother trying if you're not putting the mission first (alongside your family). But don't close doors later in your career to buck the system now; close those doors in a decade or so, when you're bucking the system as a Squadron/Group/Wing Commander, standing up unequivocally for what you think is best for the mission and your Airmen.

Thoughts?

[FUSEPLUG]

Polishing a turd: Leadership

Piss on my back and tell me it's raining: Not leadership. TACC.

FIFY

[Liquid]

Good discussion all around

I respect what you're saying and agree with it for the most part. I think were into semantics. What you call polishing a turd is what I call having a positive attitude and making the best of things. As in bitching vs whining, i see those as different things. A turd is still a turd and can't be shined into granite. When CCs at any level try to sell to some young pup that that 179 with three weeks notice than means he'll miss the birth of his first kid is really a great deal because he'll be able to get X kind of stink on his resume, that's polishing a turd to me. It's not a good deal and everyone knows it. It might be a great professional experience for a guy in the end, but it's a ######ing turd. I've seen that crap. That kid didn't give a shit about his résumé at that point and that CC was full of crap. Other obvious example: a CC with 3,000 hours telling some poor kid who dreamed of flying his whole life and had his wings for just a year that he'll never fly a manned airplane again (TAMI) and what an awesome deal that really was. Any bullshit pep talk in cases like that are disingenuous at best and take away all credibility for that cc. Sometimes you have to call a spade a spade instead of being a spin meister. Dudes respect honesty out of their leaders. Don't you? Spin is rarely totally honest and everyone can see through that crap.

That does not mean that CCs can't lead by positive attitude and point out the opportunities and the unconsidered bright sides of bad deals. But that doesn't make them stop being a bad deal to a guy who just got the news. Being unhappy about a deal does not necessarily make one toxic and doesn't mean that guy won't bloom and excel where he's planted and/or eventually love what he originally thought was a turd.

Am I making sense? Positive attitude but no bullshit. That's what dudes need.

You are spot on Noonin. Thanks for the perspective.

[brickhistory]

Therefore, if you really want to change the system, yet you can't from your current position, why not:

1) Aspire to leadership;

2) Do what the current system requires of you to become a Commander; and

3) Do your best to implement your agenda once you are a Squadron Commander or above?

By God, if only someone, somewhere had thought of this before. Say since 1947...

It's thinking like this that is gonna take this great nation all the way to California one day.

edited to add: The system is like it is because the system, i.e., those running it want it that way. It worked for them, why shouldn't that be the measure of success? Otherwise, you invalidate their achievement.

And, again, this is not a new phenomena. Look at the b1tches from the Vietnam era. Look at it from the 1980s.

Edited July 10, 2013 by brickhistory

[busdriver]

Look at the b1tches from the Vietnam era. Look at it from the 1980s.

It can work, look what happened when a non-patch got command of the F-4 WIC and changed the foundation of the way the AF trains. If CR Anderegg is to be believed the AF method of building blocks and crawl-walk-run came from post Vietnam bitches. It can happen, but you can't forget where you came from, and you have to put the mission first. I don't like where the AF promotion system is at right now, but I guess I'm an optimist and I think that it can still be fixed.

I don't think anyone can argue that advanced education is a good thing, so let's get rid of the box-checking AAD and make a new category that acknowledges all kinds of advanced education (TPS, WIC, AFIT, Various real degree programs, etc). Diversity is good right? So let's reward diversity of advanced education.

[disgruntledemployee]

Just an observation and a couple of questions...

It seems like there are about 15-20 guys on this thread that are really fed up with the Air Force personnel system and want to do something about it. That is admirable.

As pointed out, there's nothing you can currently do from your position, except point out the flaws to your leadership and maybe post some thoughts in this (or similar) forums. Again, admirable as long as it's not whining.

Therefore, if you really want to change the system, yet you can't from your current position, why not:

1) Aspire to leadership;

2) Do what the current system requires of you to become a Commander; and

3) Do your best to implement your agenda once you are a Squadron Commander or above?

Many excuses are bound to fly from these suggestions. I'm sure the biggest one from folks like Rusty will be, "GC, I've served with Squadron, Group, and Wing Commanders, and trust me, they have no ability to make changes." Or some of you may quote Tony Carr (great dude) and say, "GC, if Tony couldn't implement change and left, what shot do I have?" Well, I'll come back at you with some of the logic several of you have used against Liquid. Your Commanders in the past, to include Tony, hit a wall with their specific leadership. When you are in Command someday, who's to say that you won't have the exact leadership above you to hear your voice and implement change? You say to Liquid that times were different when he came up in the AF. True. But Commanders might be different in the future from what they are right now. Same logic.

Young officers (especially Captains; Rusty, you're old, it's probably too late for you, my friend), if you feel so strongly that you have a better way, why not do what today's system requires of you in order to become a Commander and have a shot at change. Who knows- you may be hitting your head against a wall when you're a CC. Then again, you may have the perfect leadership team above you to make a difference in your subordinates' lives. I guarantee you, if you're still in the Air Force around the 17 year point, and some doofus is your Squadron Commander, and he has amazing leadership above him that is open to instituting change, you're going to wish you'd done your AAD and PME back when you were a Captain, however distasteful, in order to be in his position and make a difference.

Young guys reading this thread- I know you're out there lurking in the shadows- everything Rusty, Champ, Animal, Vetter, Liquid, etc are saying about be the best you can be at your primary job above all else is absolutely correct. Don't even bother trying if you're not putting the mission first (alongside your family). But don't close doors later in your career to buck the system now; close those doors in a decade or so, when you're bucking the system as a Squadron/Group/Wing Commander, standing up unequivocally for what you think is best for the mission and your Airmen.

Thoughts?

The Sq/CC battlefield is littered with tons of balls smashed flat by hammers. I use the analogy because I've seen over and over again what happens to Sq/CCs that fight the good fight. I've shared many a beer while discussing the frustrations.

Maybe you guys were blessed with bosses that let you run your units and stayed out of your business. Maybe you had CCs above you that didn't micromanage everything. Maybe you were able to truely promote your best people regardless of checked boxes, you know, got them to SOS, DPs, School slots, awards, etc. Or maybe you had to make some of your people sign up for SOS so that the CCs above you would listen to you that Bob was the best and needed to go next.

Before I go, I share a small story of one of those "amazing" leaders about the Sq level. Over beer one day, he talked about a promotion board he sat on. He was talking about scoring, the process, etc. He said that he would give extra to guys that checked the PME box the soonest. I rebutted that the system gamers know this and play that to their advantage. Just because someone signed up for PME and got it done ASAP doesn't make them a better leader. He didn't agree. Amazing leadership.

Out

[Liquid]

At the Corona last fall, the MAJCOM CCs and CSAF talked about what we value as an AF and what we should value at promotion boards. I helped chop on the input below that was sent to CSAF and HAF A1 from our MAJCOM CC. He sent this in Oct:

"What we value in every officer for promotion (in priority order)

Capt to Major

1. Job performance (AC, IP, EP, WIC, AMU OIC, FLT CC, etc)

2. Leading Airmen both in garrison and deployed

3. Combat deployments, deployed mission commander

4. SOS

5. Additional duties: exec, safety, training, current ops & scheduling, plans, etc. This provides us insight into which officers can master their primary skill set and also handle increased responsibility.

6. Optional: Masters Degree

Major to Lt Col

1. Job performance

2. Leading Airmen both in garrison and deployed

3. Combat deployment mission commander

4. Joint job - GCC, OSD, JS, Inter-agency

5. HQs job- HAF, MAJCOM

6. IDE either in-residence or correspondence

7. Masters degree

Lt Col to Col

1. Job performance

2. Squadron commander

3. Leading Airmen both in-garrison and deployed mission commander

4. Joint job - GCC, OSD, JS, Inter-agency

5. HQs job- HAF, MAJCOM

6. SDE either in-residence or correspondence

7. Masters degree"

Not sure what the response was or if there was one. I've heard the CSAF and A1 are working on the vector and new promotion board guidance. Hopefully this guidance will include masking AAD at O-4 board, MLR and prohibit using it for DP consideration.