hispeed7721 Posted August 15, 2014 Share Posted August 15, 2014 Isn't vast majority of O-3's planned to be in-res though? Is that not a good discriminator now? That seems to be the intent, for 99% of people to go in-res. But we all know how well it's worked out in the past from intent to execution. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MSCguy Posted August 15, 2014 Share Posted August 15, 2014 In the addendum to the PDE AFI it states that all Capts with the exception of MC and DC will be required to attend in-res. However, senior raters have the ability to block underperforming officers from attending in-res SOS. The way I take that is that in-res will become more of a discriminator. Not going or doing correspondence will mean your senior rater actually blocked you from going in-res. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
17D_guy Posted August 16, 2014 Share Posted August 16, 2014 yes, It really seems like the CMSAF is coming through on a bunch of this stuff. And doing it in a way that will last instead of just issuing a memo or talking about it. AFI's are getting changed, and solid guidance to senior raters. At least that's how I take it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pawnman Posted August 16, 2014 Share Posted August 16, 2014 In the addendum to the PDE AFI it states that all Capts with the exception of MC and DC will be required to attend in-res. However, senior raters have the ability to block underperforming officers from attending in-res SOS. The way I take that is that in-res will become more of a discriminator. Not going or doing correspondence will mean your senior rater actually blocked you from going in-res. Perhaps, but if you are so under-performing your senior rater won't send you to SOS, then you probably don't have much longer in the AF anyway. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Warrior Posted August 16, 2014 Share Posted August 16, 2014 Perhaps, but if you are so under-performing your senior rater won't send you to SOS, then you probably don't have much longer in the AF anyway. Yeah, except for the SR who's going to refuse to send a guy because he has a Q3 in his FEF. It's still a one mistake Air Force. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chuck17 Posted August 16, 2014 Share Posted August 16, 2014 Isn't vast majority of O-3's planned to be in-res though? Is that not a good discriminator now? Think about the next step... IDE/SDE. In-res will now be an even larger discriminator for the next highest grade, IMHO. But for the bump to major, yeah, it's exactly as you describe it - a non-factor really. Chuck Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pawnman Posted August 16, 2014 Share Posted August 16, 2014 Yeah, except for the SR who's going to refuse to send a guy because he has a Q3 in his FEF. It's still a one mistake Air Force. If he's going to refuse to send him to SOS, what do you suppose he's going to put on the PRF? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Warrior Posted August 16, 2014 Share Posted August 16, 2014 If he's going to refuse to send him to SOS, what do you suppose he's going to put on the PRF? It's unlikely that the same guy will still be the SR by the time your PRF is due. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
panchbarnes Posted August 17, 2014 Share Posted August 17, 2014 (edited) Think about the next step... IDE/SDE. In-res will now be an even larger discriminator for the next highest grade, IMHO. But for the bump to major, yeah, it's exactly as you describe it - a non-factor really. Chuck Yes IDE/SDE in-res are going to be huge, but the real question is how will an officer be evaluated for IDE/SDE vector/push? Gen Welsh's intent is to get rid of the box-checking mentality (AAD, SOS in-res) and evaluate/promote junior officers based on performance. Promotion selection process has changed, the mid-level dudes/dudettes need to evaluate officers based on job performance instead of new box-checking criteria (such as volunteer, PT history) or this is a wasted effort. My 2 cents. Edited August 17, 2014 by PanchBarnes Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Slander Posted August 17, 2014 Share Posted August 17, 2014 Promotion selection process has changed, the mid-level dudes/dudettes need to evaluate officers based on job performance instead of new box-checking criteria (such as volunteer, PT history) or this is a wasted effort. I think that's the whole point. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
panchbarnes Posted August 17, 2014 Share Posted August 17, 2014 It goes back to Chuck's earlier comment about nothing has changed. So in-res PME will likely be an even larger discriminator now. Welcome to the new era... Same as the old. Chuck Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MSCguy Posted August 17, 2014 Share Posted August 17, 2014 What really needs to be masked is commissioning source. But we will have squadrons that fly pigs before that happens. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WheelzUp Posted August 17, 2014 Share Posted August 17, 2014 What really needs to be masked is commissioning source. But we will have squadrons that fly pigs before that happens. Huh? Really? Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SurelySerious Posted August 17, 2014 Share Posted August 17, 2014 What really needs to be masked is commissioning source. But we will have squadrons that fly pigs before that happens. You think that really matters to anyone? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Azimuth Posted August 17, 2014 Share Posted August 17, 2014 You think that really matters to anyone? To some it does. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ThreeHoler Posted August 17, 2014 Share Posted August 17, 2014 What really needs to be masked is commissioning source. But we will have squadrons that fly pigs before that happens. I'd have to look at an old OSB but I thought it was masked. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SurelySerious Posted August 17, 2014 Share Posted August 17, 2014 To some it does. Those people probably shouldn't be in charge of people anyway. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chim richalds Posted August 17, 2014 Share Posted August 17, 2014 While we're at it, just close the zoo, it costs too much anyways and is always in trouble in the news. I'm serious, shut the bitch down. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hispeed7721 Posted August 17, 2014 Share Posted August 17, 2014 (edited) While we're at it, just close the zoo, it costs too much anyways and is always in trouble in the news. I'm serious, shut the bitch down. Totally agree. And I'll take it one step further: the only commissioning source should be OTS, fastest and cheapest. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Edited August 17, 2014 by hispeed7721 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HeloDude Posted August 17, 2014 Share Posted August 17, 2014 Totally agree. And I'll take it one step further: the only commissioning source should be OTS, fastest and cheapest. I'm curious to find the cost difference between training an officer via ROTC vs OTS. The quick google search had old data, and usually assumes an ROTC cadet is on scholarship. I would argue that if all cadets were on non-scholarship, that ROTC might be not too far from the cost of OTS. Either way, being able to observe a cadet for 3-5 years before deciding whether or not to commission them, give them a pilot slot, etc is probably a better overall indicator of initial/future performance in the Air Force vs just the application process (where OTS applicants learn what job they will get) and the 12 week course of training/deciding whether or not to commission a cadet (this part might be as good as ROTC?). As for costs, the bigger Dets can train a cadet cheaper than the smaller Dets since the cadre and facilities are present in both, regardless of how many get commissioned. With the recent cuts, has anyone heard of smaller Dets being shut down? But I agree, the service academies are not a good value compared to the alternatives. It's an interesting debate, and probably better on another thread (I'm sure this has been argued in another thread but I'm too lazy to check). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Azimuth Posted August 17, 2014 Share Posted August 17, 2014 Those people probably shouldn't be in charge of people anyway. Agreed, but some of them I know are current Wing Kings. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dupe Posted August 17, 2014 Share Posted August 17, 2014 I haven't seen commissioning source mean anything to anyone above the 2LT level. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WheelzUp Posted August 18, 2014 Share Posted August 18, 2014 I haven't seen commissioning source mean anything to anyone above the 2LT level. Spot on. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DEVIL Posted August 20, 2014 Share Posted August 20, 2014 "BLUF: To set clear expectations and restore Airman's time, the following changes are being implemented emphasizing job performance as the primary consideration when evaluating officers for promotion: A. AADs will not be expected until promotion to colonel for line of the Air Force officers. All data pertaining to AADs will be removed from all promotion-related documents prior to colonel. The promotion-related documents affected are: The Officer Pre-selection Brief (OPB); the Officer Selection Brief (OSB); and the Duty Qualification History Brief (DQHB). B. Method and timing of DE will be removed from all promotion-related documents (OPB, OSB, and DQHB). These documents will only highlight the level of DE, and the status will reflect that it has been "Completed," and for officers selected to attend DE in-residence, it will reflect "Select." The first promotion board to implement the new policy will be the Major's (LAF) Central Selection Board scheduled for Dec. 1." YAHTZEE! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Craft Beer Posted August 20, 2014 Share Posted August 20, 2014 Until it is masked on your SURF, it can still be used as a discriminator by your SR. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now