Rant
 

Dear Air Force,

I just want to fly. I am willing to work hard to do so. I don't want to be chief of staff or even a squadron commander. I want to fly the most fun aircraft that you will let me, but at the end of the day a glider at USAFA or even a few months in the McDozen beats the hell out my DELL OPTIPLEX with three monitors.

I have wings on my chest, please let me use them!

I'm sick of worrying about getting shoe horned into a UAV. I don't want to wastefully spend TA and my time on some useless online degree from a for profit school just to check a box. I don't want my job performance to be based on how much I volunteer at the special Olympics.

If you own an NFL team, do you compare your #1/40 hot dog seller with your #1/40 cheerleader with your #1/40 football player? That's EXACTLY what the Air Force is doing. Hey sorry Joe, I know you're a hard worker during practice but we're going to have to let you go because Timmy over here not only makes a mean Nacho and Cheese but he also helps special needs kids at the youth center while you're at summer camp training.

Being fair and politically correct will ALWAYS come at the expense of combat capability.

I remember thinking the day after UPT all those millions of pushups, long nights studying and marching BS where worth it - ten year commitment?! Scoff - I'll be doing something I LOVE. I've met more than one brand new Lt from USAFA who was PQ but did not fly because of the ten year commitment and what he saw is happening to pilots. WE ARE FAILING! How long with the Air Force make short sighted decisions with it's manning completely oblivious to second and third order long term effects.

Why am I being rated on my abilities as an action officer verse my check rides and tactical proficiency?!

You have to dedicate the better part of a DECADE to become a proficient tactical aviator, whether you fly a raptor or a C-17. It costs millions in training, with the current budget how in the hell are we wasting this time and money with pilots out of the cockpit or cross training to UAV hell?

I didn't see it at the time, but the very fact that we have a ten year UPT commitment is nothing more than the symptom of some very serious underlying issues. If it was so great, why would anyone want to leave? I certainly had no intention of anything other than staying twenty plus years as long as I got to fly. United may not have A-10's but they don't have predators or random 365's to the desert either.

Please Air Force, let us do what we signed up for, what we've trained for, and what we've worked our asses off for - it will increase our combat capability, retention and morale.

Some have served in the military in *completely* non flying roles because we thought we ought to serve our country.

Not just the USAF
 

HEAR HEAR!

This sentiment is felt throughout the U. S. Military. I've seen this issue in the USCG and dealt with it while flying for the USN. My friends who were U. S. Army commissioned officer aviators (O-1 and above) barely flew at all.

This isn't the case overseas. I flew with a commonwealth air force and can tell you that flying ability went a long way towards retention and promotion. Staff tours were still mandatory, but mainly for those who sought the career officer leadership track. There were several pilots who took the "Spec Aircrew" track and stayed in the cockpit for their entire career.

I had three FIC (aka PIT or FITU) instructors who were over 50 and still active duty military. The best pilots I have flown with.

Aircraft handling skills were important, and the I got to teach these to 18 yo high school grads (a university degree isn't a requirement for commissioning).

Spec Aircrew track is cheaper for the military in the long run. It's done in the U. S. military reserves. No clue why it's not part of AD military officer career track. The USN experimented with this a few years back with a flying WO career path. It was the dream track that all USN aviators have wanted.

I'm sure you'll get lots of replies. Vote with your feet and join the reserves or transfer to the USCG via its DCA program. You have to take a demotion to O-2 (for 2.5 years, not 2 years like all other services) if you become a DCA, but it's a way to guarantee 20 years of AD military flying.

If you really feel this way, then you ought to get out at your earliest opportunity. In fact, you probably should not have joined in the first place, because you are only going to suffer disappointment in the end.

We can discuss all day how other nation's militaries do it, etc .... all irrelevant. The bottom line is, the US Air Force does not need a Lieutenant Colonel who only flies jets. Nor does it need a Major who does only those things. So if that's what you want to do, great! Get promoted to Captain (ie, show up every day and don't get caught with a live boy or a dead girl) and then get out and go Reserves/Guard or just go to the airlines.

The US military needs a certain number of people to be 4 star generals. Those people need to have had a wide variance of experience prior to getting into those positions, and ideally the AF would have 2-3times (or more) viable candidates for each position when the time comes. In order to have that, they need a pool of 3-stars with a good breadth of experience, both operational and otherwise. To get that pool, they need a pool of 2-stars ... and 1-stars ... and Colonels. You get the point.

The military will continue to shrink, so the opportunity for someone to "just fly" is going to be reduced even more.

I am not saying it is right or wrong ... I'm saying it is what it is. You will not change it. The sooner you accept that fact and start making plans for your post-active-duty career, the happier you will be. :-) And, don't worry ... someone else who understands and accepts the "up-or-out" philosophy of the US military will be there to fly your old jet for you -- and when he lands, he will clear out his in box and take the paperwork home, because that is the job he signed up to do.

Nobody went through UPT with the acknowledgement that they'd be pulling staff tours for a decade. It is true that such is the reality, but it is pretty disingenuous to suggest people line up for a UPT slot for the promise of silver oak leaves and joint tours.

That said, this job has a shelf life of 10 years, sometimes less. This job is best served part-time, where you can fly without it being viewed in the pejorative light it is viewed in the Active Duty. I think Marvin overshot the mark by suggesting those who only want to fly should have not applied in the first place. Straight from the senior leadership playbook, only lifers and careerists are worthy of the distinction of serving as pilots. gimme a break.

The problem with being so shoulder shruggin about the reality that only people inclined to being desk jockeys are adept to a military career is that it absolutely and positively does not retain tactical experience, only lifer coasters or yes men with questionable stick and rudder skills. I've seen first hand what an up or out system and the utilization of aircraft seat quals viewed primarily as promotion fodder does to the mission. It's sickening. so there is something of value to be held by lifer flyers. But as has been highlighted already, the chair force dismissed that track long ago. It is indeed a pre-announced war. Most are best served doing 10 and pulling chocks. Being able to live with my choices in life is much more valuable than a check to me. Which is why i went Reserves. And if and when that too becomes too active duty like to be worth the effort, i'll do something else. Life's too short. Good luck.

This attitude is the fundamental root of the issue IMHO.

I had several Commanding Officers, who were arguably some of the best tacticians ever to grace the F-18. It was maddening trying to fly with them sometimes (or fight them) because they were just that good. Keeping up as a new guy was sometimes the only thing you could accomplish. The standards they set and the force they fostered in our squadron was nothing short of eye watering, and they did it with a quiet professionalism that we may or may not have carried on in our off hours. That experience for them came from uninterrupted careers in the jet. Weapons School grads, instructors, training officers... they had spent their entire careers becoming lethal masters of their art. Both I would follow back into combat at the drop of a hat.

Compare that to others that had done the joint/post grad/staff tour, color all the boxes green that came back to the jet as a squadron CO and couldn't fight their way out of a wet paper bag. Sure they knew how to run a squadron, but they couldn't lead lead a horse to water and it showed.

Guess which crop went on to post command tours?

Before the Goldwater-Nichols act, we some how managed to foster a lethal fighting force, with GO and Flag ranks that had grown up in their weapons systems. They made mistakes, they crashed airplanes, they ran whole fleets aground. They also understood their war fighters needs, and some even gun decked their own careers to go back (Robin Olds anyone?).

For evidence of this today, one need look no further than Army Warrants. Guys that can spend an entire career in their steed, and have proven in combat time and time again that experience counts for so much more than any bean counter can ever quantify with his slide rule and pocket protector.

Dreamers take heed the above posts. An entire generation of combat experienced warriors are so disenfranchised, and have been so demoralized that the ideals that got them there in the first place have been completely begrudged by the absolute desire to jump ship at the first chance they get.

My .02, YMMV.

Many are! Our squadron is like a revolving door of active duty guys looking for a job.

Numbers have been showing that the AD is going to be 1,000 pilots short soon! Couple that with the possible airline hiring soon (if you believe that)...it could get worse, quick!

That's a bit much...

Ugh...this is a problem! Show up early and then that's not early enough. Stay late, then that becomes the new standard...then someones needs to look better so they stay even later! Now you're are working 14 hours a day doing nothing the last 2-3 hours...gotta keep up that face time.

This!

Unfortunately, a great majority of the good ones get sick of the crap and get out before they reach that level. It seems most of the good ones get their careers cut short because they are not willing to be a Yes man.


Both True statements!

I wanted to fly as much as possible too - but in the end - you were commissioned as an officer in the USAF; not *just* a pilot. If all you wanted to do was fly - you should have gone the route of Army WO imo. I knew what I was signing up for, and I did my best on my out of cockpit tours, but I always looked for a way back into the cockpit again too; but you make it sound like the USAF lied to you or something when you joined.

So you signed up thinking that the ONLY thing you would ever do was fly?

The Australians have that Spec. Aircrew track that propfails2FX mentioned. I think it is a great thing and something that I probably would have pursued if it had been an option. Props - you mention the USN experimented with the flying track idea. They were allowing WOs to fly again in the P-3 community I thought I remembered. Did this go away so soon? I agree btw that MANY pilots I knew would have preferred this track to the more traditional career oriented track, but this was no secret.

Grumble - I've all those same things in Commanding Officers and even just lowly Department Heads and MANY of them had staff tours, or tours with the GRUNTS :), and are just as good a tactician or instructor as those FEW who are lucky enough to never have a tour out of the cockpit. You can strive for that - but it is in the VAST minority. You know the boxes that have to be checked to attain command and the Navy is even easier than other services to always spend time in the cockpit because you can be-bop around Oceana or Lemoore on those dreaded staff tours and STILL fly.

USMCFLYR

What he said.

I NEVER wanted to do anything other than operate, but on the back side of twenty I don't have a choice (other than retire) so I've gotten some exposure to staff. It's been enlightening, in some ways good, some bad.

It's not that we don't need O-5's (or really old O-4's) flying airplanes, rather it's that we need their slots to attract young talent.

This doesn't just apply to aviation, but other "cool" jobs as well.

If you think officers should allowed to do nothing but fly, then you may as well just let the enlisted do it. And the idiots who think we should do THAT to save a few bucks REALLY don't get it. We need top people at O-6 and above, and that means we have to recruit them at age 18-25. Most kids in that demographic are not interested in or attracted to staff work, so the opportunity to fly airplanes (or jump out of them, or dive, or whatever) is a key recruiting and retention tool. By the time they hit 20 in service some have mellowed and have the patience for grownup work (not me). Letting enlisted fly should only be a last resort if you simply can't recruit enough college grads for whatever reason. It works for the army because they don't need or want pilots as senior officers...their fast-trackers are all in infantry, armor, arty, SF anyway.

Now I'm OK with the idea of letting a VERY few guys fly forever, based on pure skill so they can teach others. These would be the true living legends and would rotate between squadrons, weapons school, aggressors (capped at O-5). This would probably be more competetive than making O-7 of course...

All that said, I don't necessarily think that the services are doing the right things with their career tracks (sounds like AF is really FUBAR). PC BS and fake degrees should not replace real leadership experience and education.

Probably been posted on here but its worth a reread.

Why Our Best Officers Are Leaving - Magazine - The Atlantic

Here is a more satirical look at what is happening, but more true to what is happening now.

OPR review - YouTube

I know this has been mentioned time and time again, but AD needs to develop a senior leadership track for those that desire and have shown promise of command. Develop them young and send them to appropriate schools instead of for-profit factory schools to check boxes. As for the rest, develop their combat effectiveness. These officers can run the squadron/group departments without PCS...kind of like ARTs and stay at the top of their game. They can deploy and do certain staff tours requiring expertise. Cap them at LtCol. The point is, we are in the business of logistics, breaking things and killing people. Combat effectiveness is not served by a graduate degree from some crap college or tour as wing exec pushing paper. Leave that for the guys who are selected for command and teach them to be good commanders. We are so broke right now with the system in place. The staff officers are running the show and not the warriors. Except for Gen Welch.

In many ways the Military is cyclical and depends on budget and posture, retention is tougher when times are better on the outside and easier when times are tough on the outside and wars demand more manpower.

I don't regret my time in at all, and I owe the Military a debt of gratitude.
The Military, like any well run corporation is going to do what it determines to be the best course of action. Don't count on changing that, at the same time you have to determine your best course of action.

Times and budgets change, but the teeth of the tiger are always small in relation to the whole. The body has gotten a lot bigger since WWII, in fact it has exploded in size and the teeth are a lot smaller. The teeth may be sharper and stronger, but they are now miniscule in relation to the whole.

Yeah, like Gen Cody, poor guy never made it anywhere. Or younger guys like Gen Richardson.

That's BS, the Army promotes pilots. Or more specifically, they promote officers who are pilots.

Of course they do, but it's not the cornerstone of their service. Frankly I suspect that the army enjoys the highest percentage of officer accessions who actually have an interest in becoming a GO someday. Navy and AF JO's...I think we all just wanted to drink, screw, and fly (or whatever).

If the AF turned flying over to enlisted, all the talented folks would either just enlist or go to medical school instead. What would you do for leadership?

1.1. Program Description. The USAF Military Personnel Exchange Program (MPEP) is an instrument by which the USAF builds, sustains, and expands international relationships that are critical enablers for our Expeditionary Air and Space Force. MPEP allows the USAF to exchange personnel in substantially equivalent grades and specialties with foreign nations, enhancing our ability to perform coalition opera- tions with global partners.

Nice to avoid the mistakes foreign defense forces make, and possibly implement some of their successes.

In the Navy a common saying was, "The good guys get out". A lot less true in the USCG. And even less accurate in the RNZAF. The USCG and commonwealth air forces share a similar trait, the ability for aviators to stay in the cockpit for a longer part of their career.

@ USMCFLYR, not sure if the flying WO program is still running. From what I remember it was open to P-3 and Helo communities.

@ BILLY PILGRIM, an active duty retirement pension may not be worth sticking in for. Hard to put a price on piece of mind. Read "My Secret War" by R. S. Drury. You'll find this argument has been going on for years now. Again, the USCG DCA program is a chance for you to fly for 20 on active duty.

-Conformity is not a virtue. It will kill your system because you won't get fresh ideas. -Richard S. Drury "My Secret War"

And yet many times that a senior commander passes on all we hear about is what a great leader and teacher he was and how warriors would follow him into battle......case in point Lex - who didn't get out.

That is a popular saying by many frustrated with the situation and the process. MANY good ones get out. MANY good ones stay in. A sad few never get the chance one way or the other, and yes, a few that shouldn't make it do. It is life.

Yes - that is what I remember of the program too but haven't heard hide nor hair of it since leaving.

I'm confused with your leads on saying the USCG pilots can stay in the cockpit longer than other services. Are you saying that it is common for a pilot in the USCG to rise in rank AND retire at 20 or more while *choosing* to stay in the cockpit or that there is some sort of WO-like flying track in the USCG? I know that some do their fair share of HQ staff tours and such; one that is trying to get on with FC and get gets the yearly mins because he is flying so little on his USCG HQ staff tour (C-130 background). Are different communities handled differently?

USMCFLYR

Very true! However, when many of us decided to serve our country, we were "selected" or given a choice in which manner we wanted to serve. To not take advantage of this option to me would have been silly. I don't think that Billy is saying he doesn't want to serve his country but that he wants to do it in the way he was given specialized training to do. I personally don't think that it is an outrageous expectation. How many Air Force nurses(also air force officers) do you see being assigned something not in their career field? Doctors for that matter? They're officers too?

BP

The 10 yr commitment is perfect to decide if you want to leave or not. The air force isn''t saying that they will guarantee a cockpit til retirement. IMHO, being non vol'd to a non flying assignment prior to your first 10 point, is not a smart use of an asset. You have definitely completed your training obligation and have become an expert in your career field. To me, if one decides to stay after that, all bets are off. The Air Force needs leaders and exposure in other areas is crucial to accomplishing this.

The new variable to a flyer is the UAV. It is in aviation but most flyers don't consider it flying. Unfortunately, being the wave of the future, it is a tough one to avoid.

The only way to try keep this from happening is to take control of your future in aviation. I was lucky and discovered the guard and reserves very early in my career. While you can't control base closures and units converting to UAV/s , you can control if you stay or transfer to another flying operation. Years ago, once you were an 0-4 you couldn't move. Not the case today. 0-4s have no problem moving and I know many 0-5 that have had that option also. But you decide. Do I move the family for a part time job so I can stay flying? Whatever the choice, at least it is your choice. The problem for most is, that they have a very stable, well paying career, a family and the fear of not being able to provide for them. Big Cojones are easy to have when it's just a simple single killin machine LT but, with a wife, 2.3 kids and a dog make things have a different look. That said, if you know what you want, preplanning takes the sting right out of it! Both with sinc home and financially.

So with all that said, my humble recommendation is to serve your country, do your 10 yrs then get out and serve your country with the guard and reserves where you will at least have some input as to where your future is going. If you want to become a general, well then you have to play the reindeer games to make it happen.
Pakaage

Generalize much? I didn't recommend turning flying over to enlisted. But as been already referenced here, the Army seems to have a pretty successful system in place that has worked for decades. We could try that model.

Actually up till last year the AF had a pretty good unofficial dual-track system for pilots--Majors. Most units I've been in had a few random pilots hanging round how didn't make O5. Solid pilots, experts, been around forever and consequently had seen everything there was to see. Continuity.

Wanna fly 20 years? Don't make O5. Seemed to work pretty good. Till they kicked out all the Majors last year anyway.

By the way, there are of course plenty of "talented folks" in the Air Force who aren't pilots or Dr's.

I was on active duty flying Hercs 85-92..... even back then many saw the need for a dual track system.... an Aviation Track if you will.... which more than likely ended at O-4. Many guys would have stayed for something like than rather than suffer endless staff tours.

Are they Staff Corps like they are in the USN?
If so then they join in a specialized service and are not Line Officers - like pilots. I'll use JAGs as an example. You may join because they told you they needed experienced prosecutors in the JAG, but when you are selected, trained, and into the fleet you end up doing Legal Service and Defense work and then other associated staff jobs. In other words - you sign on the dotted line to be an officer in the US military for a certain number of years. They can put you where they best see use for you.

So these *pilots* would have spent 10 years only in the cockpit and then be taken out and put into various important staff billets without any other experience? Nah....I think the answer here still lies in the selective track option.

It seemed that the avenue of using experienced pilots or even UPT graduates was a knee jerk reaction required due to a huge uptick in the use and needs of UAV in the current conflicts. They got caught behind the manpower-vs-requirement power curve and turned to the first source of qualified people they could to fill the void. Isn't there a specific UAV training track now or are pilot candidates still getting UAV on your drops?

USMCFLYR

I am not trying to be be an a hole, I realize the sacrifice that is made for a flying track in the military. However, it is hard for me to come back to the states after seeing peoples' arse shot up (sometimes literally) and listen to people moaning about career progression. :(

It seems folks are pining for something that never was. Or at least hasn't been the norm for the past 20-30 years. The solution, as has been said, is the guard and reserve. You're not going to change the AD culture with a few whiny letters or emails. You might be able to do it with your feet. But, I doubt that will work, either.

Where do we get such "men"...grow a pair and move on dude

Voting with my feet didn't change anything for the AF that's for sure....but sure improved my life......going to see a friend of ours in Chattanooga this week....I'll tell him you said "hi".

He would have made a great GO.

Let me clarify a little. I completely understand that I am an officer first and a pilot second. Until my ADSC runs its course I will hold up my end of the deal and execute whatever job I am given to the best of my ability. I am currently downrange, and certainly not complaining about that. (Even though I feel like I am watching a game from the sidelines sometimes - therein lies some of the frustration.)

My underlying point was simply frustration of not being able to align something that I really enjoy, something I am good at, something I am locked in to, with serving my country. Military flying interests me FAR more than just about anything on the civilian side, I will stay as long as they let me pursue something that I am interested in. I am not naive or stupid enough to think that the Air Force gives a flying ****** about me personally staying in or leaving AD. HA! I'm simply one of many cogs in the machine.

Furthermore, although I am willing to put my life on the line in the line of duty - I'm not going to spend a career doing something that I don't find engaging/challenging/interesting or if none of the former, at least fun. I value my time and effort too much for that. Different people have different strengths, talents etc... Some aspire for rank, some for money - all I want to do is fly tactical aircraft.

I think a WO in the Air Force is not a good idea. It is a generalization, but being a pilot is a HUGE recruitment tool for officers to apply to USAFA or other commissioning programs. Furthermore, I think it is appropriate and necessary for a commissioned officer to execute the combat arm of the Air Force. The level of responsibility required considering airframe cost and fratricide issues (not to mention the nuclear can of worms) necessitate this.

The amount of training and the sheer expense of that training makes it incredibly expensive to take someone who's just starting to become an expert in his or her career field and then pluck him or her for something else. My first job outside the cockpit was basically a maintenance flight commander to prep for an inspection (UCI). Was all the paperwork fun? No. Was I able to do it? Of course. Would others from other nonflying career fields be able to execute similarly - absolutely. Would they otherwise be able to execute in a combat MWS? Not without extensive and lengthy training.

The 1,000 pilot fighter pilot "shortage". There's not enough cockpits to go around, but a lot of jobs "require" 11F dudes. While this requirement may be true for some positions I think that often it is just a way of saying I want someone who did reasonably well in a difficult and lengthy formal training. This is faulty logic I think and unfairly limits these positions. It was a recommendation of a RAND study I read (Fighter Draw Down Dynamics) to give these jobs to contractors or re-evaluate this requirement. Guess how many positions the CAF eliminated? 2.

What would I do? Simple:

1) No more nonvol UPT trained guys to UAV's. There's a pipeline that costs around 10% that does the exact same job. There are plenty of motivated volunteers for these positions. Give the incentive back to be an ALO so people volunteer - say one year tour with operational follow on. Or two if you can't make that happen.

2) It was brought up before, but allow a career track for the aviator to stay flying, bounce back between operational units and AETC etc... Cap it at O-4, O-5 - whatever. (Oh and don't kick them out at 16 years!)

At the congressional level there is a huge fighter gap - we need fighter aircraft now to keep a proficient CAF. If this nation can't afford more fifth gen aircraft, let's start buying some Block 60's vipers and new eagles that we are selling Korea. Leverage EA instead of stealth if necessary. These programs are bankrupting the military. Why are we getting rid of the A-10 by the way? I think there are insurgents out here that have seen that it is a (slow) but helluva relevant airframe.

3) No more ENJJPT - make UPT more equitable.

An Air Force that may look OK on paper can be horribly weak and hollow without the test of true combat. I would submit that we haven't had a challenge since maybe the opening days of Desert Storm back in the '90's. That expertise is LONG gone. We need experience in our CAF, just as we need experience on the mobility side. Let those who want to pursue command tracks do so. Jack of all trades master of none is excellent for a GO - it is a heinous and costly idea for a CGO!

Side note - +1 for Gen Welsh being an extraordinary GO.

You can make that at least 40 years. I joined in 1970, and it was well-known that a full career would probably include one or more non-flying assignments. That didn't deter any young guys: "Who cares? That's way in the future. I want an F-4 and I want it now!" :cool:

The ENJJPT of today isn't the ENJJPT of 5 years ago. Everyone still flies T-38s, but you're just likely to end up in an tanker/transport aircraft as you are at any SUPT base.

They aren't. They get some incentives due to "the needs" much like flight pay or hazard duty pay. They stay in their career field. Your example of the JAG, although not what he was told, he is at least still doing work within his career field. Ie, things a Lawyer would do. For a pilot, not the case. Don't get me wrong, I did sign on the dotted line, I served as they saw fit. And I get they can put me where they want to use me. I just find it difficult that putting an aviator anywhere else but aviation(considering the time and money put into the trained product) when they have units that can't keep their combat rating due to lack of bodies. But once someone meets his or her initial commitment, no one can fault them to take an active part in their future.


I'm not against the selective track thing. Just because a pilot is still flying doesn't mean there aren't additional duties associated to get the experience you are looking for. This is very common in the Air Force. Not saying it is right or wrong, but why would you have all of the additional training and have a 10 yr commitment and then have half of it not be in the career field. Are there that many jobs that an 0-3 should do that an 0-4 couldn't if they need the experience?

It was a knee jerk reaction due to the huge void in required personnel. They are still stealing from current pilots and UPT grads. Not only do you get to go there, but the bridge is burned behind you, never to return. This is why I say serve your commitment and then see what works for you. That is why the guard worked for me. Flew the entire time, able to be in fight supervision, and still deploy to make a difference.

And there is a difference between being a LINE officer and a STAFF CORPS officer.

I wish I had known more about the Guard and Reserves as a young pup :)

USMCFLYR

Right now military aviation is as overmanned as it has ever been, civilian aviation is still waiting the mythical pilot shortage, and most Flag and General officers are as political as any time in history plus they are overeducated dreamers. So they can demand from Pilots both Undergraduate and Masters Degrees from selective institutions, JPME, tours spent doing staff and volunteer work, and being part of numerous professional societies. Exactly like applying to FEDEX except Albie can't help you.

In my career I saw 3 distinct hiring waves. All were different in many ways but all were preceded by early outs both vol and nonvol, BRAC events, and demands for pilots to pass loyalty checks by taking non-flying tours.

2 years ago I heard a very senior officer talk about how his service had broken the code on pilot retention. I signed up for the FE written the next day.

The fight to stay in a cockpit is alive and well whether in or out of the Military. You just have to pick the ground you fight on.

Medical officers are staff but JAG officers in the Air Force are line officers.

As far as the guard goes, I was just lucky a bud clued me in.

Interesting.

I had my chance to go Active Reserve after my first tour (either Hornets in one of the Reserve Units or F-5s in our Aggressor squadron), but I chose one of those out-of-cockpit tours and spent a year with 1stBn/2dMar as an Air Officer. Looking at what some of my peers did who went AR and the time spent in flying billets for a majority of the time, if not the entire time I spend a lot of time doing the 'what-if' game, but I might also not be right where I am at this moment where I am very happy......so I can only say it all works out in the end (so far ;))

USMCFLYR

ENJJPT hasn't been the same since the early '90s and the bank...

I'm not certain I agree with your assessment that military aviation is overmanned. In what regard?


There is a fly-only track in the AF...don't do your PME and you won't get promoted to O5 and you won't go to school and you likely won't go to a staff job. You need to be in a specialized & small field so your talent is valued enough you're not sloughed off somewhere as a "slacker" and pursued for your experience.

As for the commonwealth AFs - I agree. There are aspects of their system that I think are outstanding. I did an exchange with the RAF and loved most of their system...I abhored some of it too. Nothing is perfect.

The Guard & Reserve of today is not the Guard & Reserve of a decade ago. Gone are the flying clubs and "big blue" has infiltrated them all.

Regardless, I do wish I competed with other rated guys and my FEF was part of my evaluation instead of some ancillary duty....

The two retired AF O6's who work for me said this is not the case, AF JAG's are staff. Did it change recently?

The USAF JAG site says they are Line Officers.

USMCFLYR

Nope, just a common misconception.

LowSlow,
I agree that the guard is a different beast from 10 yrs ago but I don't see non flying tours/assignments being passed out unless the individual is doing it for pay days. Correct me if I'm wrong but guys are still getting to fly the entire time there. I get the tempo is greater, but once again, the decision to stay or go is yours. Also, the fear of UAV is a unit thing not just an individual. Even then, you can decide to stay or go. Not the case in Big Blue. The guard is like pizza and ( ), even when it is bad, it is really good and normally beats the alternatives.
Pakage

I like this idea. The Navy is not big into leading from the cockpit much anymore. When I entered 19 years ago and into my first tour, the CO/XO's had 4-5000+ hours flying. Now get CO's with 2000 hours maybe, had one with 1800 total flying time not so long ago. He was not a good stick but I but could do some fantastic power points. Now to each their own, if you want to be a careerist, fine but I do like the idea above, let the pilots lead and the staff officers do what they do best. IMO, the Navy's ability to select quality leaders is lacking, just from my experience.

I've been lucky, only one non flying tour in my career but I dodged and weaved and it cost me rank...but that was my choice. I didn't make O-5 because of my decisions and that's fine as I've done what I wanted to do.

HA! Too true. Funny that some of you other services look at us as "lesser qualified aviators" but then drop your jaws at how much we actually fly in a year and think that it is "unfair".

Who's laughing now? :D

Flying is flying in my opinion. A good aviator will excel no matter what airframe or mission, tactical or garrison.