AF considers “stop-loss” for pilots
Roll Call reports that times are tough for the Air Force – they’re having trouble meeting their responsibilities in the war against ISIS because of their pilots heading for the exits. Gen. Carlton Everhart, chief of the Air Mobility Command told Roll Call that there is a meeting scheduled for next month between the Air Force and airline executives;
The goal of the meeting will be to find ways to solve the exodus of Air Force pilots to the industry in a way that is mutually acceptable for the U.S. military and the airlines — without the Air Force having to resort to “stop-loss,” a means of forcing Air Force personnel to stay in the service beyond the period of their commitment.
Everhart said he has already told airline executives that stop-loss is an option. “I said to the industry … if we can’t meet the requirements, the chief could drop in a stop-loss — and you need to understand that,” he said.
The shortages, especially in fighter pilots, are beginning to hurt the Air Force’s fight against the Islamic State, or ISIS, Everhart said.
“If I don’t have pilots to fly, the enemy has a vote, and if I can’t put warheads on foreheads, then [ISIS] is winning,” he said.
There is talk of boosting the bonus pilots receive for staying in their blue uniforms, but the bonuses haven’t stopped the Air Force from coming up short 1550 pilots of whom 950 are fighter pilots. They’re also short 3400 maintenance folks.
Category: Air Force
“Warheads on foreheads” – OK that’s funny right there, haven’t heard that one before.
Not since the first Gulf War, anyway.
Imagine that–treat people like shit and no amount of money will keep them around. And stop loss will only “fix” the problem short term. Good luck with recruiting tomorrow’s pilots knowing what they’ll face.
WTH is wrong with the air farce? Those morons not too long ago were throwing people out!!
Dumb question, perhaps: What % of USAF pilots leave the service before retirement?
Anyone know?
Maybe the Air Force should stop enforcing MRFF demands as official “policy”.
‘warheads on foreheads’ – I like that. I will so steal it from the USAF, as a return on my tax investments in them.
“The so-called “take rate” of pilots accepting the bonuses shows not as many are interested as the Air Force would like. According to statistics provided to Air Force Times, the Air Force usually hopes to have 65 percent of all eligible pilots take the retention bonus. But in fiscal 2015, the Air Force recorded an overall pilot take rate of 55 percent. And as of Aug. 1, with two months left in fiscal 2016, the Air Force had a take rate of 42.9 percent.
Among fighter pilots, the take rate is even lower. Last year, 47.8 percent of 11F fighter pilots took the bonus. And in the first 10 months of 2016, 34.4 percent of fighter pilots had signed up for at least five more years.”
A bit dated, but the latest I could find on the fly.
https://www.airforcetimes.com/story/military/2016/08/09/432000-bonus-air-force-may-nearly-double-fighter-pilot-retention-pay/88464154/
Man. I should have been a pilot. Too bad I was not born smart. That would have been cool.
I wonder why valor thieves focus on special operations instead of fighter pilots.
Sounds like a morale problem to me!!
They might look here. After all, they want THEM. http://transgenderpilots.org/
That will require a nomenclature change: from Cockpit to Cock?pit.
When one of them is at the controls, how about snip-pit? I figure no matter which direction of them goes, snipping is required.
yeh, and there will be NO ‘pussy footin” around!;)
YGBFSM!!! A web site devoted to helping those mentally confused about their sexuality! So those who are on hormone therapies, which might affect them in who the hell knows what emotional, mental and physical manners, can more easily get around the FAA medical certification system. So they can fly with their skirts up or zippers open I guess. I’m looking at the skies and feeling safer already. FFS! Glad I don’t live in the local flight path.
Yeah, cause I want some drama queen attention whore Bradley Manning wannabe responsible for my life at 35,000 feet.
Ok, so what exactly were you browsing for when you ran across this website???
“Transgender pilots” is what I Googled. Why? Because I still can’t get over the USAF bending over backwards to accommodate transgenders c/o Lisa Disbrow. She will soon be out of a job. Trump’s pick is pending Senate confirmation. Disbrow disgusted me with her pom-pom transgender bullshit.
They jerked pilots (and others, both officer and enlisted) around so many times over the last few years, then stabbed a bunch in the back, and now they wonder why pilots don’t want to stay in the Air Force, even with juicy bonuses?
Not to mention the lack of maintenance which has grounded a lot of planes as well.
Yeah, they keep tying up the maintenance folks (the ones that are left) with emptying and sprucing up the hangars for DV visit after DV visit, and all of the silly box-check briefings they get saddled with. And the maintenance folks were among those who got jerked around by the personnel folks, as well.
Seems like either the number of pilots needs to go up or the number of missions needs to go down. At this point the USAF is kicking the can down the street and/or robbing Peter to pay Paul but there will be a reckoning sooner or later.
Maybe it’s time to think about whether or not we actually need 450 ICBMs at 3 different bases in the American West? What would it save the USAF to shut down two of those squadrons? Between the cost of maintaining the 50+ year old technology and all the personnel, I’ll bet it would be quite a lot.
One base would still be 150 Minuteman ICBMs, more than enough to turn any potential aggressor into a field of glass.
Edit: Wings not Squadrons. There are three, at FE Warren AFB in Wyoming, at Minot ND and at Malmstrom in Great Falls, MT. Each with 150 Minuteman silos.
That reduction would greatly simplify an opponent’s targeting efforts, would it not?
Also, there are several nuclear capable hostile countries that might need precision targeting.
—
Dirty trick: commercial airline pilot license changed to require 15 years or more satisfactory service in uniform, flying. Commercial ground crew, ditto.
Ouch.
Not just grunts can be “drafted” and if things do not get fixed soon, the powers that be might start thinking that way.
The only enemy that has the ability to take out 150 silos can take out 450 just as easily (the Russians and maybe the Chinese.)
But even then they’d still have to deal with the other two legs of our nuclear triad: SSBN submarines and manned bombers.
The only enemies that we actually have a chance of fighting (i.e. Iran and possibly North Korea) will be deterred just as effectively by 150 ICBMs as they would be by 450.
Closing down two of the three existing missile bases would save a huge amount of money with no real diminution of our retaliation capability.
Let’s face it, if we ever have to actually use those missiles, it won’t matter if we have 150 or 450 because we’ll likely all be dead.
Based on your logic, we need none onland because we have others?
150 is not much if it gets wiped out in a first strike, leaving us with no choice to go genocidal on cities because they also knocked out GPS, thus the subs cant hit anything smaller than cities. AF cant guarantee delivery by wing, due to peer level opponents.
There is also the effect of “no thugocracy can afford the ability to kncock it all out”. We are -not- looking for a notional parity. That invites miscalculation,
The effective win here is “you cant hope to win. Dont bother”. That aint cheap, but it beats the snot out of ongoing use of nukes.
There is also the utility of a second salvo available if some -other- power gets frisky after we deal with a stupid one. “Dont bother. We have more.”
Whats the price of that current force versus an actual decapitation attack on the one we keep? Ouch.
No thanks. Keep what we have. Keep improving them. No further weakening unless the major/nuclear thugocracies get replaced with more reasonable regimes.
Yes, because shutting down missile bases will free up men for aircraft maintenance & piloting, since a missile group has so many pilots & mechanics on staff… {smh}
No doubt this will increase the ability of the Navy to attract pilots, I mean it’s not like college educated officers are sharp enough to ascertain when they might signing onto a shit deal or anything.
I seem to recall a line in the contract that stated my enlistment was for X years, or one year after the cessation of hostilities. I’m fairly sure the officer’s were pretty much the same.
And what a morale boost when invoked!
“All right, sweethearts, what are you waiting for? Breakfast in bed? Another glorious day in the Stop Loss! A day in the Stop Loss is like a day on the farm. Every meal’s a banquet! Every paycheck a fortune! Every formation a parade! I *love* the Stop Loss!”
Aah, Quotes from Sergeant Apone.
The not too distant future’s version of Gunnys Highway and Hartman rolled into one.
Yep, The Navy was created so the air farce and army could have heros too!
….Upon reading this, did anybody else flash back on Clevon Little holding a gun to his own head in ‘Blazing Saddles’?
Just to be clear: the USAF, in it’s infinite wisdom, is going to hold on to pilots beyond their DOS and destroy any faith future flyers may have in the service and the system….so that they don’t lose any more pilots.
Got it.
(sound of head slamming on desk)
(sound of head slamming on desk)
(sound of head slamming on desk)
(sound of head slamming on desk)
Mike
Yep! That’s the way MPC (or whatever they call personnel these days) rolls.
Some Navy pilots are on strike and the AF can’t fill enough aircraft. Yeah, there’s a problem.
The Navy pilots weren’t on strike–they were refusing to fly an unsafe aircraft. Well within their authority as pilot in command. The Navy rightly responded by grounding the whole fleet of unsafe T-45s.
Maybe add John Q. Public to the Blog Roll here.
He’s been beating the dead horse that is Air Force retention for a LONG time.
And other AF specific issues. Sort of a CDR Salamander for the zoomies.
Big Air Force is aware of him, sometimes visits and offers responses/rebuttals to the issues he raises. And occasionally attempts to troll him.
Some interesting reads there
Oh, LOTS of good stuff over at John Q. Public. He’s actually visited here, but I do agree that his blog should be added to the blog roll here.
Phase out the Air Force and let the Navy pilots handle it.
Or put the AF back into the Army.
Or maybe they should consider Warrant Officer pilots
No real need for a degree to pilot an aircraft
Here is the problem straight-forward. Certain airframes are old, worn-out, and parts are harder to find due to obsolescence. As a result, the aircraft become harder to maintain, and aircrew cannot train as much. Sadly, in 2009-2010, the AF took a hatchet to manning, which gutted senior NCOs (specifically E-7s) and many junior officers. The thought process was to save money on personnel and shift to new aircraft. The SOF adage of people are more important than hardware was lost on whomever made that decision. It turns out the money saved on personnel did not cover the cost of certain programs, but the damage was done. There was a loss of crucial expertise in the enlisted maintenance side, which is felt currently. Retention for maintenance personnel with certain skill levels is poor. Maintenance is a thankless job. Worse, the AF gutted good NCOs, which were the backbone of our maintenance. As for the pilots, here is what they face. Expect to spend upwards of 12 hours a day studying in a vault to be the best. Fly simulators and jets when you can, but remember, you have additional duties which somehow take the place of your primary duty (flying). You can do one to two operational tours. Your third tour will be a school house instructor or some other instructor position. If you are solid, expect to leave the cockpit to go to a year long PME school, followed by a year long advanced school (if lucky), followed by a 3 – 4 year staff tour (non-flying). When complete, you may go back to flying as a Director of Operations and then Squadron Commander. This will guarantee you another 3- 4 years of flying. Afterwards, more school and staff. In the meantime, your family is tired of moving. The bonus…well, the bonus is offered at the end of the third tour (10 years after pilot training. Background: After pilot training (receiving wings), it still takes about a year to train a fighter pilot, plus, time to get him/her CMR…upwards of 3 total from entry into pilot training). Is staff important?… Read more »
Here is/was the REAL problem, the worthless maggot turd from Kenyan, cut funds to everything military, to help out is muslim slime friends…ships in drydock (carriers), cut back in personnel,, cut back in parts and maintenance, cut back in EVERYTHING..There is a NEW SHERIFF IN town and he is ready to kick some ass and take some names! HALLELUJAH!
Doesn’t the Navy have a dual-track system for officers? I seem to recall hearing the term “limited duty officer” in the past.
My understanding (and perhaps I had it wrong) was that LDOs were more like technical experts in certain areas – when an officer chose the LDO path he/she knew that they wouldn’t progress in rank as fast nor as far, but the tradeoff was that they also were not expected to do the “ticket punching” assignments that full duty officers (shooting for Captain or Flag rank) were expected to do.
Couldn’t the USAF have a similar system? Let officers choose, when they reach, say Captain and ~ 7 – 10 years of experience – whether to stay on the “flying track” or the “command track.”
“Flying track” pilots would stay in the cockpit and not be assigned to command details (though it occurs to me they’d likely make excellent instructor pilots.)
Those on the “Command Track” can punch their tickets in joint commands, go to the advanced leadership schools, and be first in line for the promotions (and the heavy responsibilities that go along with them.)
I would guess there are probably plenty of pilots out there who wouldn’t mind topping out at O-4 if they could stay in the cockpit vs. going on the ticket-punch route.
Many of us have said a dual track like the RAF and Luftwaffe have would go a long way to helping. One of the big issues now is a lack of flying at home. As an instructor I was sent to a job at the wing and had to beg to fly once a week. Meanwhile the squadrons were canceling sorties because there weren’t enough instructors. When I wasn’t flying I was doing the “important” work of creating a plan to put n the shelf for something that had less than one percent chance of ever happening. Except for maintenance, who were also overworked with additional duties I was getting no help from the other support functions on base to complete an assignment from the higher headquarters. They were too busy being closed for training at the base pool or softball fields. When the AF gave me an out I gladly took it. I am actually home with the family less and am making about the same money, but now I am paid to fly. Not to attend “don’t rape your wingman briefings”
LDO are former enlisted.
This isn’t about the money. Military pilots generally make more than civilians, especially at entry level and training is free.
It is easy to fake being SOF. Stay in a Holiday Inn and watch the Discovery Channel all night. The rest is classified and you can’t talk about cuz you caught the PTSD.
Pretending to know how to fly is a lot tougher. People might expect you to know something about it.
If it makes you feel better, when you fly on these little outliers to the majors like Mesa, Republic, American Eagle etc. according to the investigation of the crash (I think outside Cleveland? when the plane rolled over and it turned out the pilot was exhausted) those pilots make something like $25-28K a year. Attendants more like $18-20K. So much for that glamorous flying lifestyle
It used to be that jetting around was the glamorous way to travel. Now it’s more like riding the night bus.
If we fougt wars the old fashioned way, stomp the bastards into surrender, kill all who wont give up, -declare war and -conquer- the assholes,
-then- we have folks lining up to do so.
Victory is a powerful motivator for young men. Has been so for millenia. All the moreso for Americans, who until recently seemed genetically hardwired for winning.
(Now why would Trump emphasize “winning”, hmmm?)
The current “nice war” thinking is another way of saying “piss on a bonfire while trying not to burn your dick”. Young men might try for the sheer novelty, but the older folks aint that stupid.
Commit to Victory, or walk away.
Stick to Victory, and the manpower issue is fixed.
x2
The AF is meeting with airline execs. Why is that? What is it that airline execs can do to help the AF with its problem? Not hire applicants now in the USAF? Provide some sort of credits to those pilots who could leave, are approved for hiring but remain in blue for another two or three years? I wonder.
AF CoS now says stop loss is a no-go short of a national emergency.