Chicken Posted April 5, 2015 Share Posted April 5, 2015 Both Arnold & Spaatz served as execs, went to school, did their staff time, and still had time to be effective combat leaders. My favorite color is red. 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WeTheSheeple Posted April 5, 2015 Share Posted April 5, 2015 (edited) Regarding recent O-4 board--higher promo % overall (92), but lower school select % (16). Masking grad school info had the desired result: for the bottom 20% of bubbas with a P, they competed on their official records. Officers from non-ops career fields have 5 distinct advantages in both the competition for DPs and the O-4 board itself: 1) 100% have been Flight Commanders and supervised other people, which is not the case in ops. I expect that the non-selects for O-4 were not cycled through the Mickey Mouse flight command positions (A/B/C Flt vs DOV, DOT, etc) in their ops squadrons; 2) Non-ops have spent their entire careers trying to articulate their value to the broader AF. Everyone has an important role to play, but It is more of a stretch that a FSS 1Lt advances the national interests of the US than the officers in the OG. Every CGOM/CGOQ/CGOY/functional awards package requires them to think about and to justify their operational-to-strategic impact that is assumed away by many operators. 3) Ops bubbas do not get the same credit for deployed experience. Most non-ops folks have deployed to IZ and Afghan, while many (not all) ops frames supported from bases in other countries. Similar to #2 above, ops records--OPRs & citations--often use MDS-specific language and assume that the reader knows both the mission sets as well as the officer's role in that mission. 4) Ops communities have trouble weeding out folks due to ADSCs. Non-ops career fields have more weed-out options due to the shorter ADSC. 5) Competing for O-4 from a staff billet. Smaller pool of officers for strats/DPs, but their Sr Raters will probably be FO/GOs. Grad school, SOS, performance in combat was not masked for the Sr Rater/Wg CC to give out DPs to the top 75% or to fight for folks on the bubble at the MLR. Edited April 5, 2015 by WeTheSheeple 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
17D_guy Posted April 6, 2015 Share Posted April 6, 2015 1) 100% have been Flight Commanders and supervised other people, which is not the case in ops. I expect that the non-selects for O-4 were not cycled through the Mickey Mouse flight command positions (A/B/C Flt vs DOV, DOT, etc) in their ops squadrons; Uh.. ok. 2) Non-ops have spent their entire careers trying to articulate their value to the broader AF. Everyone has an important role to play, but It is more of a stretch that a FSS 1Lt advances the national interests of the US than the officers in the OG. Every CGOM/CGOQ/CGOY/functional awards package requires them to think about and to justify their operational-to-strategic impact that is assumed away by many operators. Begrudging true. 3) Ops bubbas do not get the same credit for deployed experience. Most non-ops folks have deployed to IZ and Afghan, while many (not all) ops frames supported from bases in other countries. Similar to #2 above, ops records--OPRs & citations--often use MDS-specific language and assume that the reader knows both the mission sets as well as the officer's role in that mission. And.... you're an idiot. 4) Ops communities have trouble weeding out folks due to ADSCs. Non-ops career fields have more weed-out options due to the shorter ADSC. See above. 5) Competing for O-4 from a staff billet. Smaller pool of officers for strats/DPs, but their Sr Raters will probably be FO/GOs. What? Never mind, don't answer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zach braff Posted April 6, 2015 Share Posted April 6, 2015 Regarding recent O-4 board--higher promo % overall (92), but lower school select % (16). It was still about the usual 20% school selection - for IPZ Captains. The 16% overall is because there were a sh-t ton more APZ dudes that made major this round that added to the denominator. zb Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WeTheSheeple Posted April 6, 2015 Share Posted April 6, 2015 (edited) 3) Ops bubbas do not get the same credit for deployed experience. Most non-ops folks have deployed to IZ and Afghan, while many (not all) ops frames supported from bases in other countries. Similar to #2 above, ops records--OPRs & citations--often use MDS-specific language and assume that the reader knows both the mission sets as well as the officer's role in that mission. And.... you're an idiot. >>> My bad for the lack of clarity. Ops units do not appropriately document deployed experience in reports, dec citations, etc, which is the primary reason for not getting credit. I have read post-CENTCOM AOR reports that do not mention CENTCOM, anywhere in the AOR, what they did, or what msns they supported. The handful of passed-over-for-O4-ops folks that I know were in this boat. Edited April 6, 2015 by WeTheSheeple Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WeTheSheeple Posted April 6, 2015 Share Posted April 6, 2015 It was still about the usual 20% school selection - for IPZ Captains. The 16% overall is because there were a sh-t ton more APZ dudes that made major this round that added to the denominator. zb Incorrect. Overall, 16.5%. IPZ only, 17.0%. The 73 APZ bubbas didn't move the needle that much. It amounts to more than 100 fewer officers designated as IDE selects from this board compared with the last one. This will increase raw numbers and % of candidates going to school (particularly in the '05-'07 Year Groups), assuming that the number of schools slots remains constant (after the 30% reduction a few years ago). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zach braff Posted April 7, 2015 Share Posted April 7, 2015 (edited) Incorrect. Overall, 16.5%. IPZ only, 17.0%. The 73 APZ bubbas didn't move the needle that much. It amounts to more than 100 fewer officers designated as IDE selects from this board compared with the last one. This will increase raw numbers and % of candidates going to school (particularly in the '05-'07 Year Groups), assuming that the number of schools slots remains constant (after the 30% reduction a few years ago). Well there you have it. I stand corrected… Hope it does mean a better shot for candidates - at least for the ones that want to go to school. ZB Edited April 7, 2015 by zach braff Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Day Man Posted April 7, 2015 Share Posted April 7, 2015 (edited) 3) Ops bubbas do not get the same credit for deployed experience. Most non-ops folks have deployed to IZ and Afghan, while many (not all) ops frames supported from bases in other countries. Relevant, because people get to pick where they're sent/staged from. Edited April 7, 2015 by day man Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ThreeHoler Posted April 7, 2015 Share Posted April 7, 2015 Incorrect. Overall, 16.5%. IPZ only, 17.0%. The 73 APZ bubbas didn't move the needle that much. It amounts to more than 100 fewer officers designated as IDE selects from this board compared with the last one. This will increase raw numbers and % of candidates going to school (particularly in the '05-'07 Year Groups), assuming that the number of schools slots remains constant (after the 30% reduction a few years ago). That is the plan. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
246check Posted April 8, 2015 Share Posted April 8, 2015 And what a That is the plan. And what a damn fine plan that is. I'm an IDE and on-time SDE select and the sooner we get rid of selects and treat everybody as a candidate, the better. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DirkDiggler Posted April 8, 2015 Share Posted April 8, 2015 And what a And what a damn fine plan that is. I'm an IDE and on-time SDE select and the sooner we get rid of selects and treat everybody as a candidate, the better. Checks Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Champ Kind Posted April 10, 2015 Share Posted April 10, 2015 The thing to keep in mind is that there are fewer seats overall. I've heard guys interpreting the shift from 20% to 15% selects as meaning there will be *more* opportunity for candidates to go. ....Realize the shift is being made so that there is *any* opportunity for candidates to go. All they've done is trick-fuck the numbers so that not every single seat at IDE is occupied by a select. As always, it'll be very very competitive to get picked up as a candidate. And now it'll be more competitive to get designated as a select off the board. Source on the total number of seats? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zach braff Posted April 10, 2015 Share Posted April 10, 2015 They cut waaaaaay back on equivalency credit this year as well. You can only get DE credit if you are 1) a DE select on your board and 2) did the program during your DE window. What's up with that? Any ideas or RUMINT? ZB Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brabus Posted April 10, 2015 Share Posted April 10, 2015 (edited) All they've done is trick-###### the numbers so that not every single seat at IDE is occupied by a select. Wasted effort on the trick-fucking; all they have to do is keep chugging along like they are and the bullshit will continue to naturally weed out selects from going to IDE in the form of two big middle fingers combined with a guard/reserve/airline job. Edited April 10, 2015 by brabus Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Muscle2002 Posted April 10, 2015 Share Posted April 10, 2015 They cut waaaaaay back on equivalency credit this year as well. You can only get DE credit if you are 1) a DE select on your board and 2) did the program during your DE window. What's up with that? Any ideas or RUMINT? ZB Basically, it boils down to "Complete", "Select" or nothing are the only things that show on your OSB at a promotion board, thus giving credit is not as important now as it used to be. At least, that was how it was explained during my own experience with gaining credit out of cycle. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
11F Posted May 30, 2015 Share Posted May 30, 2015 The line Lieutenant Colonel board results will be released on 09-June. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DirkDiggler Posted June 10, 2015 Share Posted June 10, 2015 Anyone seen the list/have any info on the stats for this latest LtCol board? Been away from my .mil computer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chicken Posted June 10, 2015 Share Posted June 10, 2015 (edited) Anyone seen the list/have any info on the stats for this latest LtCol board? Been away from my .mil computer. Don't have all the stats.. but overall 72% promotion rate. As far as AFSOC... the "P" had a promotion rate of 28%....just wow. Also know of one WIC (DG) passed over as well. Guess it's not an O5 patch anymore. Edited June 10, 2015 by Chicken Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Homestar Posted June 10, 2015 Share Posted June 10, 2015 (edited) Edit to add: With DP carrying so much weight at this level, Wing Commanders are really the ones promoting people, which is probably a good thing. Edited June 11, 2015 by Homestar Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
D_Vezencuando Posted June 11, 2015 Share Posted June 11, 2015 The "non-select" phone call came Monday. Unfortunately, a Wg/CC DP wasn't enough... But here's a toast to the selects. To those who didn't - To those who did! A round on me... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brwwg&b Posted June 11, 2015 Share Posted June 11, 2015 Don't have all the stats.. but overall 72% promotion rate. As far as AFSOC... the "P" had a promotion rate of 28%....just wow. Also know of one WIC (DG) passed over as well. Guess it's not an O5 patch anymore. Overall those with only a "P" promoted at 36% across the board Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nineline Posted June 11, 2015 Share Posted June 11, 2015 (edited) Here's some more stats I pulled from the promotion list: 1,451 total selects - 145 were BTZ with school - 72 were I/APZ with school - 1,234 were I/APZ Personally, I'd like to know more about the DP non selects... Is this because SRs are trying to play the system? Or items missing from their promotion folder? I'm sure these guys are good dudes, and we're supposed to have checks and balances to double check that the DPs go to the right people. -9- Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Edited June 11, 2015 by Nineline Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Azimuth Posted June 11, 2015 Share Posted June 11, 2015 So it's good to be a Mission Support guy with no PME and a DP. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nineline Posted June 11, 2015 Share Posted June 11, 2015 (edited) So it's good to be a Mission Support guy with no PME and a DP. The MSG and no PME qualifiers are red herrings. Truth be told, it's good to be a line officer with a DP regardless of any other qualifiers (IPZ speaking). -9- Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Edited June 11, 2015 by Nineline 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HeloDude Posted June 11, 2015 Share Posted June 11, 2015 The "non-select" phone call came Monday. Unfortunately, a Wg/CC DP wasn't enough... But here's a toast to the selects. To those who didn't - To those who did! A round on me... Were you IPZ? If so, damn, that sucks. Any negative indicators (if you don't mind sharing)--failed PT test in the past, LOR, etc? Quick math shows me that 58% of those IPZ got DP's...without doing the math for the previous years, I wonder how this compares to the recent past? 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