USAF Enlisted Pilots, The Right Stuff, Stolen Bikes, AIC, and SWO pipe dreams.

[Farva01]

https://www.airforcetimes.com/news/...-is-launching-a-test-that-could-lead-to-that/

Warrant Officers seems like a great idea to fill the drone operator spots. Beyond that, I don’t think this is going to move the needle for the Air Force’s manning problem.
On another note, why did the Navy’s warrant program go away?

 

[robav8r]

https://www.airforcetimes.com/news/...-is-launching-a-test-that-could-lead-to-that/

Warrant Officers seems like a great idea to fill the drone operator spots. Beyond that, I don’t think this is going to move the needle for the Air Force’s manning problem.
On another note, why did the Navy’s warrant program go away?

I think it ultimately ended up being a "supply versus demand" issue. I was one of the first VP LDO/CWO to NFO bubbas (designed to bring cold war, ASW experience back to the MPRA community), and while it achieved good success (initially), there just weren't enough qualified (and willing) candidates that could get through API, VT's 562nd and VP-30. I know the Flying Warrant program considered younger, more junior personnel who weren't LDO/CWO's, but again, don't think there were enough folks who made it through to the fleet and could sustain the program. I don't think President Trump supported it either, so there's that

 

[RadicalDude]

How about just let existing service members in good standing (and with community knowledges and expertise) stay at their current rank/job and continue to serve in that capacity?

Cut down on bloated staffs, rotate them through the fleet as super JOs or fill-in DHs. Might prevent the snowstorm of sep letters raining on PERS these days.

I know, I know... it might mess up timing and cause some people to have to rethink the current squadron/staff concept... but isn't that already on the horizon with our manning (non)issues?

 

[BACONATOR]

How about just let existing service members in good standing (and with community knowledges and expertise) stay at their current rank/job and continue to serve in that capacity?

Cut down on bloated staffs, rotate them through the fleet as super JOs or fill-in DHs. Might prevent the snowstorm of sep letters raining on PERS these days.

I know, I know... it might mess up timing and cause some people to have to rethink the current squadron/staff concept... but isn't that already on the horizon with our manning (non)issues?

Not sure at the PERS/manning level what the intent of the program was, but in terms of warrants especially being SMEs in their aviation community, they would naturally be the heavy-flyers, and in today's age of slim flight hours and ample-collateral bullshit, this seemed to be a failure from the start. Why introduce more pilot-only types who won't ever go on to man the under-manned DH and above level billets, when we're overmanned at the JO level in terms of flight hour love to spread?

 

[RedFive]

We have seven pilots on my staff. We need one and maybe an AW.

 

[sevenhelmet]

How about just let existing service members in good standing (and with community knowledges and expertise) stay at their current rank/job and continue to serve in that capacity?

Cut down on bloated staffs, rotate them through the fleet as super JOs or fill-in DHs. Might prevent the snowstorm of sep letters raining on PERS these days.

I know, I know... it might mess up timing and cause some people to have to rethink the current squadron/staff concept... but isn't that already on the horizon with our manning (non)issues?

Heresy! They'll send you to sea with 5 JOs and 2 DHs before they'll cut down the aviator numbers on any staff.

My favorite was when I asked the CO of TPS about being an instructor there after my DH tour. His response was "Sure, but I'm obligated to tell you it's not career enhancing. That's why I'm always looking for people."

YGTBSM...

 

[wlawr005]

https://www.airforcetimes.com/news/...-is-launching-a-test-that-could-lead-to-that/

Warrant Officers seems like a great idea to fill the drone operator spots. Beyond that, I don’t think this is going to move the needle for the Air Force’s manning problem.
On another note, why did the Navy’s warrant program go away?

A couple of my friends did the program, it initially required an Associates Degree to apply. They were told to finish their Bachelors and become a LT or stay a Warrant and quit flying. Eventually the communities (specifically HSC) figured out that if all the Warrants ever did was fly and get quals then few resources would be left to train/promote the URL pilots. They realized that if all the WTIs in the community were Warrants, it would lead to a problem when it came time to select WTI candidates and so forth. How this was ever a surprise baffles me, but it is what it is.

 

[hscs]

On another note, why did the Navy’s warrant program go away?

PERS essentially killed the program before it could start by not bringing in enough warrants and not allowing warrants to be in Stan or QAO billets. Reason given was that this would prevent JOs getting EPs as NATOPs/QAO. This is the exact opposite of the Army's approach. What's wrong with #1/2 (in a helo sqdn) being AOPS / A-pick another dept?

Serves as another example where PERS (and higher ups in some communities) are afraid to move from status quo. They all do not realize that they write the precepts (which defines who gets the nods for promotion/ selection). Even the SECNAV brief for statutory boards could be modified to account.

Warrants might also help us a ton with our UAVs.

 

[picklesuit]

PERS predictably fucked up a program proven by the Army to work effectively.

Serves as another example where PERS (and higher ups in some communities) are afraid to move from status quo. They all do not realize that they write the precepts (which defines who gets the nods for promotion/ selection). Even the SECNAV brief for statutory boards could be modified to account.

NCO’s might also help us a ton with our UAVs.

FIFY

 

[RadicalDude]

Not sure at the PERS/manning level what the intent of the program was, but in terms of warrants especially being SMEs in their aviation community, they would naturally be the heavy-flyers, and in today's age of slim flight hours and ample-collateral bullshit, this seemed to be a failure from the start. Why introduce more pilot-only types who won't ever go on to man the under-manned DH and above level billets, when we're overmanned at the JO level in terms of flight hour love to spread?

Some communities are not overmanned at the JO level.

 

[nittany03]

PERS essentially killed the program before it could start by not bringing in enough warrants and not allowing warrants to be in Stan or QAO billets. Reason given was that this would prevent JOs getting EPs as NATOPs/QAO. This is the exact opposite of the Army's approach. What's wrong with #1/2 (in a helo sqdn) being AOPS / A-pick another dept?

This is a ridiculously parochial argument. I know different communities == different priorities, but my squadron in TACAIR land sent a metric shit ton of JOs to the RAG without any of them filling either of those billets. And the world didn't end. Yet. And if it does, it's still probably North Korea's fault, not theirs.

If a CO gives a breakout EP comfortably above his/her cumulative average and summary group average, the actual billets someone held ought to mean precisely dick. It's still a CO saying "I hereby stake my professional reputation on this person being a rock star." I mean, sure, if the guy was Legal O for 3 years or something, the board might look sideways at that. But as long as it's within reason . . .

 

[Gatordev]

This is a ridiculously parochial argument. I know different communities == different priorities, but my squadron in TACAIR land sent a metric shit ton of JOs to the RAG without any of them filling either of those billets. And the world didn't end.

I think that was his point.

I filled neither NATOPS or QAO billets, but still beat out both for the JO Jamble when it came to January. Ironically, the QAO went to the FRS, but at least a little bit of that had something to do with me knowing better (for my goals) and asking for what I wanted...the "dreaded" Orange and White. In the end, only one of us is retiring with an active-duty O5 retirement, but I'd argue we're both very happy with our decisions.

 

[Brett327]

but my squadron in TACAIR land sent a metric shit ton of JOs to the RAG without any of them filling either of those billets

That also happens to be an artifact of the Growler transition, where the demand for new RAG instructors has been significantly higher than the preceding steady-state Prowler production. 10-15 years ago, going to the RAG was a much more selective process that usually required a fleet Skipper to RAG Skipper conversation prior to orders getting cut. That was not the case during transition, which is what you are referring to. We're getting back to managing who goes there through the JO slate process.

 

[HackerF15E]

The lengths to which the Air Force will go to not face the actual reasons they're short on pilot manning.

 

[hscs]

This is a ridiculously parochial argument. I know different communities == different priorities, but my squadron in TACAIR land sent a metric shit ton of JOs to the RAG without any of them filling either of those billets. And the world didn't end. Yet. And if it does, it's still probably North Korea's fault, not theirs.

If a CO gives a breakout EP comfortably above his/her cumulative average and summary group average, the actual billets someone held ought to mean precisely dick. It's still a CO saying "I hereby stake my professional reputation on this person being a rock star." I mean, sure, if the guy was Legal O for 3 years or something, the board might look sideways at that. But as long as it's within reason . . .

We are in agreement- the part you have in bold was in the navadmin. I agree - A #1 is a #1.