Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
August 21, 2018, 11:45:56 AM
Home Help Login Register
News:

CAP Talk  |  General Discussion  |  Membership  |  Topic: Air Force inches closer to warrant officers: Could they fix the pilot crisis?
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
Pages: 1 [2] 3  All Print
Author Topic: Air Force inches closer to warrant officers: Could they fix the pilot crisis?  (Read 4837 times)
abdsp51
Salty & Seasoned Contributor

Posts: 2,559
Unit: Classified

« Reply #20 on: April 21, 2018, 08:51:59 PM »

I  think the WO grades would be good for mission related personnel who are only interested in ES. This would allow for the upgrade of educational requirements for officer grades. College degree is now required for national commander and vice commander. This will now be moving down to other positions. Unlike FO grades, WO grades would not be only for 18 to 20 year olds. If we had a full enlisted grade program it may be different. My opinion.
Agreed. I am moving towards ridding the seniors of the USAF uniforms and grades. I get the reasons on both sides, but very much lean towards corporate uniforms these days.

I doubt that will happen anytime soon if ever.
Logged
SarDragon
Global Moderator

Posts: 10,366
Unit: NAVAIRPAC

« Reply #21 on: April 21, 2018, 09:05:47 PM »

As you may, or may not, have noticed, a couple of posts have disappeared. The "offenders" know who they are. Let's try a little harder to keep it clean and on topic. And keep the spoons pit away. Got it?
Logged
Dave Bowles
Maj, CAP
AT1, USN Retired
Mitchell Award (unnumbered)
C/WO, CAP, Ret
J2H
Seasoned Member

Posts: 200
Unit: MER-MD-031

« Reply #22 on: April 22, 2018, 06:09:51 PM »

Why dump the AF style uniforms for Senior Members?  We ARE an Auxiliary of a Branch of Service.  The Corporates are for folks who cannot or do not want to adhere to the Dress and Appearance for the AF-style uniforms (not judging, just fact).
Logged
SSgt Jeffrey Hughes, Squadron NCO
Glenn L. Martin Composite Squadron MD-031
#217169
grunt82abn
Seasoned Member

Posts: 243

« Reply #23 on: April 22, 2018, 06:36:28 PM »

Why dump the AF style uniforms for Senior Members?  We ARE an Auxiliary of a Branch of Service.  The Corporates are for folks who cannot or do not want to adhere to the Dress and Appearance for the AF-style uniforms (not judging, just fact).
Many SM cannot and do not want to adhere to the Dress and Appearance for the AF-style uniforms and still wear them anyway. Just fact


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Logged
Sean Riley, TSGT
US Army 1987 to 1994, WIARNG 1994 to 2008
DoD Firefighter Paramedic 2000 to Present
abdsp51
Salty & Seasoned Contributor

Posts: 2,559
Unit: Classified

« Reply #24 on: April 22, 2018, 07:12:58 PM »

Why dump the AF style uniforms for Senior Members?  We ARE an Auxiliary of a Branch of Service.  The Corporates are for folks who cannot or do not want to adhere to the Dress and Appearance for the AF-style uniforms (not judging, just fact).
Many SM cannot and do not want to adhere to the Dress and Appearance for the AF-style uniforms and still wear them anyway. Just fact


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Which means CC's need to be taking corrective action and not let it slide..
Logged
grunt82abn
Seasoned Member

Posts: 243

« Reply #25 on: April 22, 2018, 08:11:15 PM »

Why dump the AF style uniforms for Senior Members?  We ARE an Auxiliary of a Branch of Service.  The Corporates are for folks who cannot or do not want to adhere to the Dress and Appearance for the AF-style uniforms (not judging, just fact).
Many SM cannot and do not want to adhere to the Dress and Appearance for the AF-style uniforms and still wear them anyway. Just fact


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Which means CC's need to be taking corrective action and not let it slide..
I doubt that will happen anytime soon or if ever


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Logged
Sean Riley, TSGT
US Army 1987 to 1994, WIARNG 1994 to 2008
DoD Firefighter Paramedic 2000 to Present
HandsomeWalt_USMC
Member

Posts: 55
Unit: NER-MA-019

« Reply #26 on: April 22, 2018, 09:37:36 PM »

Happens in my unit, and my Wg/CC is pushing compliance. At my squadron we have started to conduct weigh-ins biannually. I have the blessing of the Sq/CC to call out other SMs on uniform discrepancies including grooming. One of the huge problems is the lack of basic instruction for new members, but once you've been informed then there is no excuse for looking like 10 pounds of bovine excrement in a 5 pound bag, or having stupid Elvis chops in the AF style uniform. To those of you in corporates, get down with your bad selves. I saw a dude with an epic handlebar mustache in BBDUs recently. Mad props.

So far we've yet to have to send someone home, but it has been put out that if you shouldn't be wearing the AF style uniform due to weight or grooming issues, or flagrantly disregard uniform standards, you will fix yourself or you will leave until you have. Keep breaking the rules, further disciplinary action will be taken, up to termination if need be.

I look at it as a matter of integrity. If I can't trust you to wear the proper uniform, then I can't trust you to tell me your true weight for balance on an AC, etc. I am not concerned with people's feelings. If you can't put on your big boy/girl pants and play by big boy/girl rules then you don't belong flying SAR missions, on a ground team, running a comm set, driving a van loaded with members or especially training future leaders of America. This stuff is Barney-style easy once you learn it.

All that being said, there's a time and place. I can understand someone not having a clean shave when they've been roused out of bed at zero dark to go hunt an ELT, mission first, do your thing and shave if you can. Now, if you show up to a regular meeting in ABUs with two days growth on your face, you're a turd who I don't want around my cadets. Here's a cheap bic razor. Go fix yourself. No? Okay, bye Felicia. Try again next week.
Logged
Semper Fidelis
shuman14
Salty & Seasoned Contributor

Posts: 955
Unit: NHQ-996

« Reply #27 on: April 22, 2018, 09:46:06 PM »

Oh no! NOT another Shuman!


 :o

The one and ONLY my Friend!  ;D
Logged
Joseph J. Clune
Major (Promotable), Military Police

USMCR: 1990 - 1992                           USAR: 1993 -1998, 2000 - Present     CAP (National Patron) 2013 - Present
INARNG: 1992 - 1993, 1998 - 2000       USCGAux: 2004 - Present
arajca
Salty & Seasoned Contributor

Posts: 4,270

« Reply #28 on: April 22, 2018, 10:34:58 PM »

I  think the WO grades would be good for mission related personnel who are only interested in ES. This would allow for the upgrade of educational requirements for officer grades. College degree is now required for national commander and vice commander. This will now be moving down to other positions. Unlike FO grades, WO grades would not be only for 18 to 20 year olds. If we had a full enlisted grade program it may be different. My opinion.
You could easily include those who are not interested in command, instead of just ES. Several years ago, there was a pretty well developed idea for a new Flight/Warrant Officer program in CAP floating around CAPTalk.
Logged
ColonelJack
Salty & Seasoned Contributor

Posts: 1,362
Unit: SER-GA-153

« Reply #29 on: April 23, 2018, 06:41:28 AM »

Why dump the AF style uniforms for Senior Members?  We ARE an Auxiliary of a Branch of Service.  The Corporates are for folks who cannot or do not want to adhere to the Dress and Appearance for the AF-style uniforms (not judging, just fact).
Many SM cannot and do not want to adhere to the Dress and Appearance for the AF-style uniforms and still wear them anyway. Just fact

Nobody doubts that ... we see it all the time.  However, does that mean you take the uniform away from those who do follow the guidelines, or do you deal with those who don't in a way that they don't break the rules any more?

The phrase "throwing the baby out with the bath water" comes to mind here.

Jack
Logged
Jack Bagley, Ed. D.
Lt. Col., Civil Air Patrol
Gill Robb Wilson Award No. 1366, 29 Nov 1991
Admiral, Great Navy of the State of Nebraska
TheSkyHornet
Salty & Seasoned Contributor

Posts: 1,276

« Reply #30 on: April 23, 2018, 08:57:00 AM »

Top Gun? Is not Top Gun for the Navy?

We need one of its own.

What about Air Force, Strategic Command, or A Gathering of Eagles?

Or maybe a new one titled simply Red Flag?

Oh, come on...

Strategic Air Command came out in 1955 starring Mr. Jimmy Stewart
Logged
THRAWN
Salty & Seasoned Contributor

Posts: 1,867

« Reply #31 on: April 23, 2018, 10:15:16 AM »

Top Gun? Is not Top Gun for the Navy?

We need one of its own.

What about Air Force, Strategic Command, or A Gathering of Eagles?

Or maybe a new one titled simply Red Flag?

Oh, come on...

Strategic Air Command came out in 1955 starring Mr. Jimmy Stewart

Brigadier General Stewart.
Logged
Strup
"Belligerent....at times...."
AFRCC SMC 10-97
NSS ISC 05-00
USAF SOS 2000
USAF ACSC 2011
US NWC 2016
TheSkyHornet
Salty & Seasoned Contributor

Posts: 1,276

« Reply #32 on: April 23, 2018, 03:06:32 PM »

Top Gun? Is not Top Gun for the Navy?

We need one of its own.

What about Air Force, Strategic Command, or A Gathering of Eagles?

Or maybe a new one titled simply Red Flag?

Oh, come on...

Strategic Air Command came out in 1955 starring Mr. Jimmy Stewart

Brigadier General Stewart.

He was still a Colonel when he filmed that movie. He was an O-7 from 1959-1968.  8)
Logged
ZigZag911
Salty & Seasoned Contributor

Posts: 1,982

« Reply #33 on: April 23, 2018, 06:38:52 PM »

Warrant ranks are for technical specialists and leaders.

They are officers, but normally not commanders.

They focus on one thing -- perfect track for those who "just want to _____________"  (fly, work with cadets, do ES and so forth)

It addresses the current concern that inexperienced members are having more responsibility thrust on them than they are prepared to undertake.

Professional development for WOs, beyond Level 2, should focus almost exclusively on their specialty track.

Likewise, if it becomes necessary or desirable for a warrant officer to switch to the command/generalist track, there needs to be an expectation that missing PD would be made up, quickly.
Logged
Cliff_Chambliss
Seasoned Member

Posts: 408

« Reply #34 on: April 24, 2018, 10:06:19 AM »

The problem with aviator retention is not in the grade structure, titles, uniforms, etc.  As long as commercial airlines, top end charter operators, private businesses are able to recruit high quality pre-trained aviators from the military nothing will change.  In the past the military has tried bonus payments to keep aviators, they have tried longer lock ins, and a few other programs that at best offer only short term solutions to a long term problem.
Although the Air Force does not as a matter of course go out and play in the mud as Army and Marine aviators, nor do they have to contend with months long ship deployments like the Navy, they are still subjected to frequent PCS Moves, TDY's, and deployments to hostile fire areas. 
So where is the answer?  I don't know.

Logged
11th Armored Cavalry Regiment
2d Armored Cavalry Regiment
3d Infantry Division
504th BattleField Surveillance Brigade

ARMY:  Because even the Marines need heros.    
CAVALRY:  If it were easy it would be called infantry.
THRAWN
Salty & Seasoned Contributor

Posts: 1,867

« Reply #35 on: April 24, 2018, 10:22:29 AM »

Warrant ranks are for technical specialists and leaders.

They are officers, but normally not commanders.

They focus on one thing -- perfect track for those who "just want to _____________"  (fly, work with cadets, do ES and so forth)

It addresses the current concern that inexperienced members are having more responsibility thrust on them than they are prepared to undertake.

Professional development for WOs, beyond Level 2, should focus almost exclusively on their specialty track.

Likewise, if it becomes necessary or desirable for a warrant officer to switch to the command/generalist track, there needs to be an expectation that missing PD would be made up, quickly.

Or....and I'm just tossing this out there, you could always remain as a SMWOG, and not even bother participating in the PD program. Want to do ES or CP or AE exclusively and not deal with other stuff? Just don't....
Logged
Strup
"Belligerent....at times...."
AFRCC SMC 10-97
NSS ISC 05-00
USAF SOS 2000
USAF ACSC 2011
US NWC 2016
PHall
Salty & Seasoned Contributor

Posts: 6,149

« Reply #36 on: April 24, 2018, 08:38:38 PM »

One of the biggest reasons for the current military pilot shortage is the fact that we have been "at war" for about 17 years now.
Depending on the airframe you fly, it's back to back to back deployments. Not exactly good for morale.
Logged
ZigZag911
Salty & Seasoned Contributor

Posts: 1,982

« Reply #37 on: April 24, 2018, 10:14:23 PM »

Or....and I'm just tossing this out there, you could always remain as a SMWOG, and not even bother participating in the PD program. Want to do ES or CP or AE exclusively and not deal with other stuff? Just don't....

There is a certain minimum of basic, essential  information a member needs to be an effective CAP member...which I would say tops out at Level 2 for those not looking to command squadrons or serve in higher headquarters.

Just my opinion.

Also, I'm not fond of the SMWOG as a long term rank for anyone, makes them seem, at least at first look, uninvolved in the program.
Logged
Geber
Member

Posts: 68

« Reply #38 on: April 25, 2018, 10:07:28 AM »


Or....and I'm just tossing this out there, you could always remain as a SMWOG, and not even bother participating in the PD program. Want to do ES or CP or AE exclusively and not deal with other stuff? Just don't....

CAP is vastly different from active duty military because active duty officers are either promoted or separated. Staying a captain (for example) indefinitely is not an option. Since promotion depends on increasing leadership responsibility, there is an argument for a path for technical specialists who continually improve their technical expertise without commanding larger and larger groups.

In CAP, you can remain a captain indefinitely, so there is no need to create a separate path for those who want to concentrate on increasing technical skills rather than command.
Logged
THRAWN
Salty & Seasoned Contributor

Posts: 1,867

« Reply #39 on: April 25, 2018, 10:34:34 AM »


Or....and I'm just tossing this out there, you could always remain as a SMWOG, and not even bother participating in the PD program. Want to do ES or CP or AE exclusively and not deal with other stuff? Just don't....

CAP is vastly different from active duty military because active duty officers are either promoted or separated. Staying a captain (for example) indefinitely is not an option. Since promotion depends on increasing leadership responsibility, there is an argument for a path for technical specialists who continually improve their technical expertise without commanding larger and larger groups.

In CAP, you can remain a captain indefinitely, so there is no need to create a separate path for those who want to concentrate on increasing technical skills rather than command.

Yeah. That's the point. Don't want to do it? Just don't do it. One of the best squadron level CP guys I ever knew was a SMWOG for about 15 years. Never did PD, just did a fantastic job developing leaders. The other stuff just wasn't important to him.
Logged
Strup
"Belligerent....at times...."
AFRCC SMC 10-97
NSS ISC 05-00
USAF SOS 2000
USAF ACSC 2011
US NWC 2016
Pages: 1 [2] 3  All Print 
CAP Talk  |  General Discussion  |  Membership  |  Topic: Air Force inches closer to warrant officers: Could they fix the pilot crisis?
 


Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP SMF 2.0.14 | SMF © 2017, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!
Page created in 0.05 seconds with 18 queries.
click here to email me