Air Command Staff College

Strick · January 23, 2009, 08:46:14 PM

I just recently enrolled in the ACSC course. Does CAP members recive college credit for completing the course?

Thanks,

AlphaSigOU · January 23, 2009, 08:50:32 PM

Depending on the college. ACSC does offer a master's program, but CAP isn't eligible.

Gunner C · January 23, 2009, 10:00:47 PM

Quote from: Strick on January 23, 2009, 08:46:14 PM
I just recently enrolled in the ACSC course. Does CAP members recive college credit for completing the course?

Thanks,

Depending on the school, you can get up to 27 graduate hours. Some schools will allow you to apply these to undergraduate credits.

Gunner

capes · January 27, 2009, 05:11:27 PM

I am about to enroll as well. Anyone here know how different it was from SOS? Longer? Harder? How many tests, etc. I put about 6 months into SOS.

dwb · January 27, 2009, 05:13:57 PM

It's longer than SOS, seven tests instead of five (I believe). I would assume it's more academically dense (a.k.a. harder).

James Shaw · January 27, 2009, 06:24:15 PM

I plan on tackling this towards the end of the year.

bosshawk · January 28, 2009, 01:10:03 AM

Having been through similar schools in the Army and graduating from the Air War College, I can perhaps shed some light on what is different about these schools. SOS, I believe, is mostly for Captains and addresses those subjects which are most important for AF Captains and junior Majors in their progression through the various jobs in the AF. Air Command and Staff is primarily for AF Majors and it addresses subjects that those folks need for elevated responsibilities in their careers. The Air War College is designed for Lt Cols and Cols to prepare them for higher level command and staff positions.

If you follow this progression, each school prepares officers for increased levels and complexities of command and staff. Therefore, they generally are increasingly more complex and difficult. In some cases, especially in the Army, favorable consideration for promotion hinges on the level of professional schooling which you have completed. It is not an iron-clad rule, but you can bet that most Full Colonels are War College graduates. To quote a personal example, when I was being considered for 0-6, my career manager noted that I was a War College Graduate and said that it was a good thing.

This was a long way around to explain the Professional Military Education progress. Hope that it helps.

Cecil DP · January 28, 2009, 07:16:05 AM

Before enrolling, keep in mind that ACSC is a long commitment. Once you've enrolled you can't back out. Be sure that this is what you want to do and if not, chose an other option (NSC or if you're prior military one of the equivelent courses listed in 52-17).

O-Rex · January 29, 2009, 02:30:40 PM

Quote from: Cecil DP on January 28, 2009, 07:16:05 AM
Before enrolling, keep in mind that ACSC is a long commitment. Once you've enrolled you can't back out. Be sure that this is what you want to do and if not, chose an other option (NSC or if you're prior military one of the equivelent courses listed in 52-17).

I absolutely agree.

Strick: pace yourself and keep your 'eyes on the prize' ACSC is a great accomplishment, will give you a sliver of commonality with the USAF officers you may interact with, and is something you'll always take with you.

The PITA of actually doing is lasts 12-18 months, the pride and satisfaction of having completed it lasts a lifetime.

To quote Tom Cruise in A Few Good Men, "Do it, Harold, it's a hockey season" (or two...)

Strick · January 29, 2009, 02:52:49 PM

Thanks for the advice

I am looking forward to the course. It would be great to be able to get some college credit for it.

dogboy · February 17, 2009, 10:47:45 PM

It is up to the individual college to determine whether to award credits. The ACE RECOMMENDS but each college makes it's own determination. In general you will find that almost no college will give you all the units recommended by ACE because they constitute almost enough for a masters in themselves.

I did find that that it was possible to work out a distance Masters degree from Mountain State University in WV, incorporating the ACSC curriculum. I would be happy to send you my correspondence on this.

In my personal experience, I found distance ACSC to be very unsatisfying. The curriculum was at a very low level and seemed designed to discourage, rather than encourage, critical thinking. Much of it was typical Air Power nonsense, more propaganda than education. The intellectual level was far, far below what one would get at a quality graduate school.

aveighter · February 17, 2009, 11:55:34 PM

Quote from: dogboy on February 17, 2009, 10:47:45 PM
Much of it was typical Air Power nonsense, more propaganda than education. The intellectual level was far, far below what one would get at a quality graduate school.

Speaking as someone in the first segment of the ACSC material, perhaps you could elaborate on just what "typical Air Power nonsense" consists of.

dogboy · February 18, 2009, 02:28:25 AM

Understand that I no longer have the texts for the course, so my comments will have to be somewhat general.

For example, one article in the assigned reading claimed that Operation Allied Force, the 1999 bombing of the rump state of Yugoslavia, designed to force the withdrawal of Serbian forces from the disputed territory of Kosovo, was the "first war ever won by air power alone".

In fact, Operation Allied Force was a complete fiasco despite the fact that over 1000 NATO aircraft were used. They did almost no damage at all to the Serbian forces, which is unsurprising since it is extremely easy to camouflage ground forces not in motion or in the desert.

The Serbs eventually did quit Kosovo but, as everyone except ACSC, knows it had nothing to do with the air campaign. What settled the matter was that Hungary entered NATO, giving allied ground forces potentially easy access to the disputed area and the withdrawal of Russian support from the Serbs.

Instead of "the first war won by air power alone", Operation Allied Force should have been used as an example of the limitations of air power, and how a resolute enemy can ignore the loss of control of the air if the air power is unwilling to use ground forces.

This is one example of what I refer to as "typical air power nonsense", the constant need by the Air Force to claim that air power offers an economical, casualty, technological means of winning wars. This claim was false in WWII, false in Korea, grossly false in Vietnam, false in the Gulf War, and false in the present conflicts.

Short Field · February 18, 2009, 02:34:28 AM

Having completed ACSC by correspondence and in-residence, don't let facts interfere with the course material - you will just lose points on the essays and tests.

The USAF is all about Air Power - anything that supports it must be good....

RiverAux · February 18, 2009, 02:47:17 AM

Even if you accept what is apparently the AF version of the Kosovo operation, it seems to be the exception that proves the rule that you can't win on airpower alone. That doesn't take away from the importance of airpower -- you might be able to avoid losing without it, but just because you have it doesn't mean that you're going to win all the time. Air and ground must always be working to really hammer things home as both are very important.

Short Field · February 18, 2009, 05:17:02 AM

The belief that Air Power alone can win wars is the primary justification for the creation of a separate air force. Otherwise we would still be a branch of the army.

dogboy · February 18, 2009, 05:33:40 AM

Quote from: Short Field on February 18, 2009, 02:34:28 AM
Having completed ACSC by correspondence and in-residence, don't let facts interfere with the course material - you will just lose points on the essays and tests. The USAF is all about Air Power - anything that supports it must be good....

This is exactly my point.

Now if ACSC included an essay explaining why Operation Allied Force, the 1999 bombing of the rump state of Yugoslavia was a complete failure, a utter wastes of billions, and a disastrous reinforcement of Air Power delusions, then I would have some respect for the course.

Short Field · February 18, 2009, 10:00:03 PM

If you don't respect the course, then have enough self-respect to not take it.

aveighter · February 19, 2009, 12:34:34 AM

Quote from: Short Field on February 18, 2009, 10:00:03 PM
If you don't respect the course, then have enough self-respect to not take it.

Don't scoff. I understand the point dog is making. I once had a similar experience while visiting the Vatican. I was shocked that the place was populated almost exclusively by Catholics.

I appreciate the tip-off and will maintain a high alert level for the air power foolishness as I go through the course. I have also sent a heads-up to Capt. and Lt. sons of aveighter to be on the lookout for same.

Short Field · February 19, 2009, 02:39:36 AM

One problem with the distant learning programs is you really do miss out on the very diverst speakers and follow-on seminar discussions that take place in ACSC to "temper" the written course material. You can meet absolute heretics as well as dyed in wool true believers. It makes for a great learning environment. However, when it comes to test time, you need to toe the Doctrine line.