Do we invest the same amount of resources per person managing our folks as other countries do?
No matter the resources it is a much more difficult task to manage folks numbering in the hundreds vs dozens.
Do we invest the same amount of resources per person managing our folks as other countries do?
This is flat out wrong. If resourced properly, the task is not any harder than that for a smaller country. We just have to give a shit.No matter the resources it is a much more difficult task to manage folks numbering in the hundreds vs dozens.
If only we had a three-star command to do all this difficult work. We could even give them a bunch of civilians, too. If only . . .No matter the resources it is a much more difficult task to manage folks numbering in the hundreds vs dozens.
This is flat out wrong. If resourced properly, the task is not any harder than that for a smaller country. We just have to give a shit.
Read a few of the autobiographies and histories of when we didn't have up or out in the US military and there definitely are some possible minuses . . .
Did you read my post about the new Permanent Instructor Pilot program?Not really, although that sounds interesting.
I was speaking more to becoming an O-3/4 and staying an O-3/4 while staying in a flying billet, for as long as is appropriate, possibly for 20+ years.
Maybe the answer isn't when you're promoted to O-3 you're forced to choose between "command track" and "flying" track. Maybe you are permitted to stay at O-3/4 in a flying position and if you choose to pursue all the PME, staff tours, etc, that are required for command, you can take the command track after staying at O-3/4 for a while. That is kind of akin to your comment.
I don't know what the answer is. Just spitballing ideas. I do think that when the economy sours there may be less of a problem on the aviation side and this discussion may go by the wayside until the next boom economy. Maybe there will be robots flying airliners and the economy will be booming w/o a military pilot shortage.
No matter the resources it is a much more difficult task to manage folks numbering in the hundreds vs dozens.
Did you read my post about the new Permanent Instructor Pilot program?
There's no real "passive aggressiveness" about it. I don't really care if the aviation structures its community for personnel to permanently fly as O-3s or not. What I take issue with is the implicit argument that the entire statutory promotion structure has to change itself because it doesn't fit around aviation career timing.Word. I also don’t understand the passive aggressiveness towards people that want to be a 20 year O-3 or O-4 and do nothing but fly, and be really good at it. And I don’t mean just “flying” like you’re just here to do 1v0s all day like I think some people are implying/thinking, but being good at LFE mission planning and employment, teaching, etc, as well, because those are just as important.
Other countries have that model, probably because they don’t have enough money to have poor policies and get away with it.
Do we really think that we’re so shit hot that we can get away with part time pilots flying just above opnav mins in a larger conflict where we don’t have a large qualitative advantage and may be at a quantitative disadvantage?
Or, as I see it, the need to change to accommodate a very small minority of officers. Programs which give those folks some other options will be a good thing, but it doesn't mean the system is broken/needs overhaul simply because it doesn't work for 100% of the officer corps.What I take issue with is the implicit argument that the entire statutory promotion structure has to change itself because it doesn't fit around aviation career timing.
Software isn’t acceptable unless it can handle edge cases without breaking. I don’t see why a system that determines people’s livelihoods should be any different. Junk it, reform it, whatever. But throwing up our collective hands and saying “meh, we only unnecessarily fucked X percent of the officer corps” is not an acceptable COA.Or, as I see it, the need to change to accommodate a very small minority of officers. Programs which give those folks some other options will be a good thing, but it doesn't mean the system is broken/needs overhaul simply because it doesn't work for 100% of the officer corps.
Software isn’t acceptable unless it can handle edge cases without breaking. I don’t see why a system that determines people’s livelihoods should be any different. Junk it, reform it, whatever. But throwing up our collective hands and saying “meh, we only unnecessarily fucked X percent of the officer corps” is not an acceptable COA.
I think you're conflating several different things here. Your software analogy misses the mark here for a couple reasons. First, the system isn't breaking - it functions just fine. No system will provide an optimal outcome for 100 percent of the people. It's competitive by nature, and that provides selectivity and ultimately enhances the overall quality of the force. Second, whatever retention challenges we have for one designator in 1 or 2 communities is not a function of people not being able to get off the command path and fly continuously for a 20 year career. We do ourselves a disservice to chalk up that highly complex problem merely to perceived shortcomings of the promotion system.Software isn’t acceptable unless it can handle edge cases without breaking. I don’t see why a system that determines people’s livelihoods should be any different. Junk it, reform it, whatever. But throwing up our collective hands and saying “meh, we only unnecessarily fucked X percent of the officer corps” is not an acceptable COA.
Software is a poor metaphor. One great officer not making the next milestone may be an edge case, but it doesn't cause a stack overflow or halt of any sort.Software isn’t acceptable unless it can handle edge cases without breaking. I don’t see why a system that determines people’s livelihoods should be any different. Junk it, reform it, whatever. But throwing up our collective hands and saying “meh, we only unnecessarily fucked X percent of the officer corps” is not an acceptable COA.