WAFP -

"Fourth. To address the Pilot vs Officer debate, I don't agree that your flying career should be based on your ability to whip out a PowerPoint slide show better than any other officer. Flying upgrades should be based soley on that, FLYING! I have seen many a great pilot get hosed because they didn't do a great office job, and seen too many schmucks get upgraded because they kissed the right butt. That is a flaw in the military system."

Well that first sentence kind of makes my point then. We're not talking about your FLYING career, we're talking about your MILITARY career.

Unless the USAF or the FRED community is different from a lot of the military, you're going to spend quite a few years in a staff job whipping out numerous PowerPoint presentations. So if you want that good fitrep - your graphs had better be complete with multiple colors and various fonts!

Agree wholly that FLYING upgrades should be based on FLYING (section lead, division lead, NVG(I), LATT(I), SFTI, ACTI, etc....), but then we aren't talking about promotion then are we? And since the military is an up or out system - if you don't promote (which has to do with your total job - not just flying) then you will need to leave. I know LOTS of excellent pilots who didn't make rank too.

It has been a good thread.

USMCFLYR