Did folks entering the above program have to sign sanctuary waivers? I was speaking with my IMA Program Manager last week and he said this is a current practice. To prevent folks from invoking the sanctuary option on that first day of AD after the 18yr point.

Lifter

There was supposed to be a statement on their EAD orders to the effect that sanctuary would not be denied. I don't know if that made it onto everyone's orders. AFPC and HAF are granting it automatically. Remember, these guys came back on AD in 2009/2010, before the overmanning crisis we're in now.

You're welcome. It's nice to know that I can help.

No, 4 yrs is the max that the program was established for. I don't know if that's a statutory limit, but that's as far as HAF has authority to extend us under the LPRP or RRORP. Sanctuary is a separate statutory entitlement.

Not for mobility guys. They simply can't justify extending mobility guys given that the community as a whole is over 140% manned, and we're throwing other guys out to get down to our total AF end-strength. The rated manning guys at HAF can't win that fight with the manpower and money guys, and the higher ups can't justify it politically to SAF, SecDef, Congress, etc.

I'm curious about said "non-vol tour." Do you mean a normal 179 deployment, or something longer? If it's a 365 iTDY or a remote, then it should have come to your unit with a name attached.

Wow, really? How'd that happen? For years we were always [told] we were undermanned in the 17. And based on Ops tempo, it sure seemed like it.

Correction to previous. Mobility manning is only about 130% right now. Projected to exceed 140% in a couple years. And yes, they did account for increased airline hiring. Though we'll see how accurate their projections are

Sorry for the inaccurate data in the post.

This point is what makes many of us in the LPRP program nervous about "declaring sanctuary" earlier than we really need to. If indeed it is true that once you do so the LPRP contract is void and they are free to abuse you as needed, then it would be best to declare as late in the 2 yr window as you comfortably can. I am in sanctuary now and am happy with my flying assignment--why would I want to risk that unless somehow the AF could reneg on sanctuary and boot me to the street at 19 years and 7 months when my unextended 3 yr LPRP gig is done?

Sanctuary is not automatic, it must be invoked by the member. There is no prohibition to a member's orders ending whenever the term is over no matter how many years of service have been accrued. If the member lets the orders end voluntarily without taking advantage of sanctuary protection, it's too late. That being said, there is no advantage to invoking sanctuary early because you are exposing yourself to the AF discretion earlier than necessary.

Kikuchiyo,

It was a 3-4 year PCS to be an Active Duty Liaison with a nearby guard unit, flying the same jet. I was in the guard for five years and would have been a pretty good fit for the job in my humble opinion. Nobody wants the job because they think it's a promotion killer. I'll pin on terminal Lt Col here soon so I'm not bothered. Again thanks for the good scoop. I'll just have to wait until the next round of recalls in two years.

K--

I know I'm beating a dead horse that's off topic but...why stop now.

I'm not getting it, from the outside it appears the only way manning can increase is airframe reduction or accession. Are we cutting mobility airframes in the next few years? I know there are problems with cutting accessions, though that doesn't appear to have ever stopped AFPC.

What's causing the manning increase, and if it's in the future why can't it be stopped?

I'm not trying to be argumentative, I just feel like I'm missing something.

Terms:
Production: UPT and FTU output. UPT is producing near 100% capacity, as are the FTUs of most MWS's.

Absorption: the capacity of an MWS to take in UPT grads and make "experienced" aviators. Limited by iron, flying hours, UTE rates, and unit manning, among many other variables.

Experienced pilots: Ones that have met the experiencing criteria of their weapon system. They can then fill staffs, ALO billets, teach UPT, teach at FTUs, etc. They also fill other flying billets ("non-absorbable") that require experienced pilots (WIC IP, aggressor, some VIP/SAM MWS's, E-4, test, etc).

Attrition: loses from all causes

RL/BL - the Red Line/Blue Line charts produced by AF/A1PP and A3O-AT. RL is the requirements (billets), BL is the actual bodies (manning).


Right now the AF is producing at near max capacity, and it's just enough to keep the total number of pilots at 100% of requirements. So, for the foreseeable future the Total AF Pilot RL/BL charts are matched up. But it's the mix of pilots within those RL/BL totals that's the problem.

The AF drastically cut fighter production (BRAC'd 2 FTU sq's at Luke, etc) and absorption capacity (fighter redux, TAMI21, etc) several years ago. But they didn't cut requirements for experienced pilots (UPT IPs, ALOs, staffs, aggressors, WIC, etc). So the fighter BL is dropping fast. The FTUs can't push them through fast enough, and then there's not enough iron and flying hours available to experience them.

On the other hand, mobility production hasn't decreased, and they've been using OCO flying hours to absorb and experience their pilots faster then they would be able to normally. You can send a UPT grad to a C-17, and have him come out as an experienced pilot in half the time it takes to make an experienced fighter pilot. Then you can use said experienced mobility pilot to teach at UPT, or work on a staff, etc.

When you break the RL/BL charts out by community, fighters are and will be undermanned, but mobility is and will be overmanned. Mobility overmanning was directed by CSAF and is intentional in order to keep total AF pilot manning at 100%. The AF can't afford to stop the overmanning of mobility. If we did, we wouldn't be able to fill all the pilot requirements. Mobility will continue to pay a higher share of the bills - UPT IPs, staffs, etc - than they would in a perfectly balanced world.

So when a mobility recallee asks for an extension, it's hard to justify approving it given mobility manning, total pilot manning, and the AF's total manning issues combined.

Bravo!
 

Kikuchiyo:

That is the most eloquent and lucid explanation I have ever read on the subject. With you, we get honest, concise, clear answers.

Will you please run for President in 2012? Under a new party: The "Sanity and Reason" party. ;)

I am often accused of being too long-winded and thorough in my responses to questions. My answers won't fit in a 5-second TV-news sound bite. But thanks for the vote of confidence.

K-

No longer as confused. Thanks.

Btw, you'd never know there was an 11F shortage by looking at the number hanging out at the USAFA airfield.

(that sounds like a knock, it's not meant as one)

Extension Limits?
 

I'll primarily direct this at Kikuchiyo, unless someone else has knowledge:

I'm on the standard 3-year order. I'm applying for an extension. Secretary tells me she was told that if granted an extension, the total service length for anyone in any of the recall programs is 48 months.

Is that correct? I know the email from Randolph said you could apply for 1 or 2 year extensions.

I think she's right, but looking for verification (she's new).

She is correct. The total amount of time served on either RRORP or LPRP orders is 48 months.

They wrote it as "1 or 2 year extensions" to cover all the possible tour lengths that people took initially. Remember, those guys that took staff jobs in the CONUS only incurred 2 year tours up front, as did anyone coming overseas unaccompanied. Versus guys who did flying assignments who had 3 years after training, or overseas accompanied tours which were 3 years. It was just a catch-all phrase.

Also note that I said "on either RRORP or LPRP orders." Once an ARC member declares sanctuary, they are no longer considered to be in the LPRP program. They get new orders to AD, the rules change, and they are no longer limited by the 48-month maximum of the LPRP.

OK, this may be splitting hairs...but this a relevant question for the guys like me that need a one year or less extension to get 20 yrs AD. Can you apply for a shorter than 1 year "extension" of your LPRP and still be in the LPRP program vice simply declaring sanctuary? Does it have to be the full year? If you can, then I suppose applying for the extension couldn't hurt--if you don't get it you can at some point just declare sancutary and get it that way...

Yes, you can request any length of extension, up to 4 years total time on your LPRP (or RRORP) orders. I know a guy who is requesting an 8 month extension to line him up for a summer move and the end of kids' school. The simple fact that it's not a nice, round year isn't going to cause them to deny it.

Turtle, they won't approve an extension for you, being a mobility guy. I just talked to the guys at HAF again this week, and there's still no chance of mobility guys getting extensions.

Kikuchiyo--Do you have any insight on extensions for guys in 11R billets. Even though I'm in rescue, we still come under Recce:confused:. I'd like the one more year and have the letter from my Wing King. I was led to believe that if you had commander concurence, you were supposed to get it. Obviously not the case anymore. Thanks for any info you might have.

Kenn, you can give it a shot, but I'd bet against it. They denied an extension for a bomber guy in a Key Nuclear Billet, even though they know that we're short of nuke-knowledgeable guys and the emphasis that nukes got after the incidents of the last couple years.

Although extensions were on the table when we all came back a couple years ago, they're now only being approved for fighter guys. Times changed.

Kikuchiyo,

Please check your PM when able. Thanks.

Thunder1

Thanks Kik

I received the "Denied Extension" letter today. It clearly states 11F billets are still undermanned and those are the only billets they are approving.

Cheers,

WarE

I just spoke to a friend who is with me in the LPRP program and has heard that sanctuary declarers will actually be staying within the LPRP program until their 20 yr retirement point. The LPRP office has said that this will end up being easier than putting folks back on regular active duty. One reason given was the pain of having to meet AD promotion boards...which is not required under the LPRP program.

War Eagle, what was the exact routing that your package went through and who was the final authority in your denial? HQUSAF? Which directorate? Names? Are you a mobility guy?
Thanks

test message

I'm a recce guy, and it was disapproved at AFPC.

Sir, this e-mail and the attached letter (atch 1) serve as official
notification that your Recall Extension request, although strongly
considered was disapproved. The most pressing need for recall extensions at
this time is to provide 11F (Fighter Pilot) capability to augment the AD force.

Voluntary Officer Recall to Active Duty Section Officer Accessions Branch
DSN 665-2288 Comm (210) 565-2288

Kikuchiyo,

Have you or anyone else heard of the possibility of them running another limited recall program after this one expires for targeted AFSCs/specialties that the AF is critically manned in?

Thanks in advance,

Bunker

No, in fact, they've ruled out the possibility for FY 12 for sure. FY 13 not likely, and beyond that, who can say.

The personelists that understand the issues that affect rated have to deal with the larger AF issues of being over end strength. As I've said before, it's very difficult for them to convince the corporate structure of the need to recall a bunch of non-promotable, non-PCS-able, retirement-eligible individuals when they're simultaneously kicking out upwardly mobile young guys.

In addition, the ARC felt like they got shafted by the last recall. It apparently wasn't fully coordinated with them beforehand. They lost a bunch of guys back to AD, many of whom will hit 20 yrs of AD time during their recall tour. They'll never go back to the ARC, which wasn't accounted for in the ARC's manning projections. It's likely that the ARC will push back on another round of recalls unless the AD side addresses their concerns better.

Of course, this is all likely to change by 2014 if the airlines really start hiring and the 10-yr pilot training ADSC guys all bail.

Is AFPC doing anything to address this issue that's looming just beyond the horizon? Or are they taking the standard wait-and-see approach, before instituting knee-jerk policies like stop-loss and 20 year UPT ADSCs?

FWIW, I think a significant number will bail regardless of the status of airline hiring. People are pretty fed up.

To clarify, AFPC does not set personnel policy. HAF/A1P sets the policies and initiates new programs. They're the ones that generate RIFs, SERBs, new ADSCs, Bonus', and recalls. AFPC executes the policies, but they have no power to "address this issue" until HAF tells them how to address it.

Kikuchiyo,

Thanks for your reply......so based on what you're hearing, even though there's a huge bathtub of 11F/12F guys, there's no real effort to target these guys for another round of recall/extensions to help with the manning shortage on the staffs for this background?

Allow me to clarify my question: does AFPC recognize a potential issue, and if so, what are they doing to convey that issue to HAF so that HAF can create policy? Does AFPC even have the ability or "want to" to address this issue with HAF?

Somehow I doubt the message makes it through all the yes-men filters, if it's even being sent. Sad.

I share your cynicism and distrust of the system. In this case, the leadership is hearing the message loud and clear. But there are other issues (money and time primarily) that affect leadership's ability to fix things right away.

In case you didn't hear, the 4-stars had a summit on this in Sep. There's another this coming Sep. The MAJCOM A3's had 2-days of meetings on it just a couple weeks ago. Have you ever done a real staff tour? If not, you have no idea of have many hundreds of hours go into prepping the O-6's, then the 2-stars, then the 3-stars, then sitting down with your 4-star so he can intelligently address the issues. I can assure you there's no "yes-men filters" on this issue. Don't believe me? Come do my job at any of the MAJCOMs.

I've got weekly telecoms with HAF and AFPC on this. O-6's, GS, O-5, O-4, RAND, are all trying to fix the fighter pilot shortage. But it's not gonna happen overnight. Another recall is not possible in the current fiscal and manning environment. Just like buying a new weapon system to replace a broken one takes years, this too is a long term fix.

Thanks. I should have clarified that I wasn't curious about how HAF was addressing the 11F shortage alone, but how they were addressing the potential mass exodus that may or may not be coming in the near future. And it's interesting that the best they can come up with after multiple Coronas, etc is to provide a 50% up-front option to the ACP bonus. LOL.

Extensions?
 

Kikuchiyo:

I have about 15 months left on my orders (three-year rated-retired recall). I applied for a 12-month extension last year when they were asking for guys to apply, but they said "Too early for you...apply July 2012."

The most I can legally get is another 12 months. Do you think they will entertain extensions, as a provision of the previous recall, or would they view it in the light of "New recall" that you and Thrust have been discussing?

I am an 11F guy in an 11F billet (albeit an 11F from a jet relegated to museums and the bottom of the Gulf of Mexico......)

All I know from watching the UAL/CAL forums here: I'm in no rush to go back to the airline business. It's like watching three seagulls fight over a french-fry.

Ah, okay. They are looking at the potential mass exodus, and the numbers have them convinced that it won't be that bad for rated overall. I don't particularly agree with their analysis.

They're completely focused on the 11F shortage. The bonus was the tiniest piece. They're making pretty significant changes in force structure, unit missions, FTU syllabi, etc. The problem has not recently been retention. The problem was caused by a lack of FTU and absorption capacity due to the 2nd and 3rd order effects of BRACs.

Go ahead and apply again now. The guy at HAF that approves them told me he'd rather get them a little early for planning. If the Recall Shop at AFPC rejects it cause you're too early, PM me.

Extensions are still be granted to 11F's in 11F billets under the current (old) VRAD/RRORP/LPRP. It will only be for 1 year.

There won't be another recall in the near term. The discussion on why not is several posts earlier.

Check your pm folder

Question for all those that might be a few months ahead of me in this program. I'm just curious how the separations process worked out for you, particularly how quickly you got your orders after filling out the worksheet? I was told that I will be able to get to the separation worksheet online when I am 6 months out from my orders ending. Does that check with other's experiences? I'll hit that 6 month point in about 3 weeks and am hoping to get the ball rolling on the move sooner rather than later since it takes so long to get stuff shipped back to the mainland from Hawaii and I'll actually go terminal in about 4 1/2 months. Any other gotcha's that people experienced? Thanks in advance.

Floater