I assume you mean VT-(not jets) here?
-
Please take a moment and update your account profile. If you have an updated account profile with basic information on why you are on Air Warriors it will help other people respond to your posts. How do you update your profile you ask?
Go here:
Edit Account Details and Profile
NEWS Air Force leadership talks frankly about pilot retention
- Thread starter ChuckMK23
- Start date
I assume you mean VT-(not jets) here?
From my vantage point, VFA/VAQ don't play the quality spread game for due course production tours. There may be some lip service paid, but in reality, we tend to send our top folks to the FRS and (to a greater extent) to get patches. YMMV
Glad to see that change from what I saw ages ago in VAQ.
Ok - seems like other communities don't deal with it. Certainly no one (or at least, very rarely) gets sent to become a SWTI without having the pre-reqs prior to the nomination round; but, anecdotally, I personally know of 2 girls (one of my squadron and one who was dating my roommate) both be told after asking for either FRS "Oh, you're replacing LT X" at the West Coast Weeapons School. And... not so coincidentally during my time, there has always been 1 female pilot on staff. No more, no less. Again: more than just quality (and desire) at play.
Mostly agree with you. However my point remains the same: HSC picks its future Skippers on the day they are assigned their first shore tour jobs. Those shore tour jobs are not given out in a manner that selects the "best and brightest" in the community anymore because we have introduced a form of quality spread, gender diversity, and (I assume) racial diversity into the mix. If that's the perogative, then that's the preogative fair or not, but stop saying that "the best and fully qualified" are being selected when in reality it's "the people with the right timing, the right gender, the right background, the right squadron, and just the right level of quals to make the quality spread for the FRS or Weapons School are our future Skippers!"
Guess it just doesn't have the same ring to it, and of course, the people doing the selecting want to think they are, in fact, the best and most qualified to be there in the first place, I suppose.
Bro you need to sit down and have a beer. Here's Hotdog's career advice:
The six simple steps to help you get orders where you want (assuming you have quals):
1) Walk into meeting with your detailer/monitor
2) Drop a six pack of his favorite (properly researched of course) beer on the desk
3) Tell him that you want XYZ orders and if you don't get them you'll drop your papers
4) He'll say fuck you and call your bluff....
5) Pull out said paperwork and put in on the desk in front of him/her...
6) Tell him the ball is in your court and walk the fuck out.
I have seen this tactic (minus the beer) work many times.
You're a bit Naive if you think HSC skippers pick future skippers that late... usually they've got an idea within the first 6 months of folks checking into the squadron. How else do you think they get them the JO tickets required to make it to those primo shore tours?
As for the women and minorities taking your jobs... your rant sounds a bit like those washed up regional lifers so I'll give you the same response I give them- of course that's the case... the aviation industy in the US in general is greater than 90% white and 90% male. As a white male you're a dime a dozen, so you have to work harder and do more to stand out from the crowd.
It also isn't always a death sentence. @MIDNJAC and I had an instructor at Meridian that got picked up for the Blues. Not sure what he's up to these days.
And multiple people that "came back". Not the numbers that the NAE sold a lot of them on in that timeframe, but many did get back to the fleet. If you went VT(props) from VFA, you probably have no future.
A friend of mine just made O-4 out of that situation. Can't think of anyone else I know that ever has though.
I'm not saying we don't send good dudes to advanced but that for the most part I understand why they are sent there.
Not getting along with the front office, doing stupid shit on liberty, or being a douche in general a few examples from guys I've seen being sent there. I'm not saying I agree with those decision 100% of the time but I understand why they were made.
He is an awesome American and is doing just fine now. I'm pretty sure I know why he was "punished" with the VTs but I'm glad the system stuck it to the man.
I was trying to tread lightly there, and knew it was only a matter of time before getting called on it. I'm just saying there are more factors at play than being the best and having the most quals. Out of all the front offices I've encountered so far (5 Skippers, 6 XO's), I've only even caught whiffs of bias from one Skipper and 1 XO to date in favor of or against women and minorities. I do not intend on making this an argument about diversity, I really don't. I just call B.S. on pre-ordaining FRS instructors and WTIs as Skippers if they aren't always sending your top players there. If literally every single #1 and #2 was given the option to become a WTI or an FRS instructor, then I'd buy into it. But seeing 1's an 2's get passed up for by the people behind them, then they get selected for a rung lower (presumably to balance out the quality of CNATRA instructors) why unfairly punish them for being good at their job and shoring up CNATRA into a good command?
I thought about this more, and here may be an equally bad outcome: I mentioned a #1 and a #2 earlier in these posts - female - who were sent (deservedly, I mean these were great pilots and good officers) to the Weapons School and told specifically because they were female (both had asked for the FRS on either coast before becoming a WTI). If instead they were given CNATRA billets and told "you need to replace the 2 females that are already there," would you not think they have a legitimate complaint about the glass ceiling that was just imposed on them? Of course, no one says anything because they have generally the same (if not better) opportunities than their FRS counterparts.
Again, my beef isn't ultimately with women, minorities, colocation, etc. But this:
1. People who go to RWWS and the FRS go on to become Skippers.
2. People who go to CNATRA commands generally don't.
3. Why is that the case if the people getting sent to CNATRA have equally good or better first tour FITREPS than their peers sent to the RWWS and the FRS? (As in the case with HSC.)
If there is a "quality spread," why isn't there a "quality outcome" for lack of a better term?
If you think I'm making up stats, I'll throw in evidence from my HSC CVW squadron and one from the east coast:
The east coast squadron from my FITREP peer group has their #1-4 EP's down here.
My old squadron, over 2 FITREP Cycles has a #1, 2 #2's, and a #4. (The other #1 and #3 EP got the FRS). So tell me why we are limiting the 2 #1's, the 3 #2's because they went to CNATRA, meanwhile that #3 has a big leg up now? In that whole group, note that a single #1 went to the FRS (read: was selected for). Assume all had a pretty standard company line nom sheet of asking for the FRS or WTI in some order.
Last edited:
I don't think you can judge based upon the FITREP rankings alone. A lot more goes into the selection than pure rankings. As someone who was on the other end of the 1st tour selection process, I cared about pilot skills, quals, and officer qualities when I ranked a candidate. I would even try and interview the candidate. Given equal FITREP breakouts - I always went for the guy that would fit the mission needs the best. I suspect that Fallon / WS do the same - looking at tactical quals and hours with those quals.
HSC has had an HT instructor make Commodore - he finished up not too long ago. He killed it at HT-8 and was recognized as such.
The best always find a way to rise to the top.
HSC has had an HT instructor make Commodore - he finished up not too long ago. He killed it at HT-8 and was recognized as such.
The best always find a way to rise to the top.