New pipeline for TACP

[Johca]

A ROMAD is great for helping the JTAC, but in reality is not really needed. Any good JTAC worth his salt really does not need one.

The benefits of miniaturized solid state technology, more efficient batteries and SATCOM replacing much of the HF long over the horizon communication makes it so.
The current ground environment not being armor, artillery, or mechanized infantry sort of does put much more reliance on hoofing and man packing (ruck marching) the communications around too. If you look at the Koran War and Southeast Asia conflict many pictures of jeeps with large radio suite in the back. Not saying radio were not rucked marched in with the rest of the infantry in those days, just saying equipment and Air Force aircraft support to the ground fight tactics have changed much since then and now.

Radio repair and maintenance has changed some as result of miniturized solid state circuitry technology too.

 

[amlove21]

Couple of follow up questions.

No-kidding is not the same as just-kidding and the slots are there implies practice.

Sorry if that statement implied practice. It does not. There are currently 0 TACP's occupying any positions at any active duty RQS that I am aware of. There are not plans to fill any TACP slots, speaking specifically of my RQS, although they have been included in our train ups recently. So, in theory, those slots exist. In practice, they aren't filled and there aren't immediate plans to fill them. Red-Dot any insight as to why?

Gender isn’t an issue or a consideration however the Direct Ground Combat Exclusion Rule was rescinded this January so in this regard females are technically able to be PJs, CCT, and TACP.

Not following. From the NY Times
"A military official said the change would be implemented “as quickly as possible,” although the Pentagon is allowing three years, until January 2016, for final decisions from the services.
Each branch of the military will have to come up with an implementation plan in the next several months, the official said. If a branch of the military decides that a specific job should not be opened to a woman, representatives of that branch will have to ask the defense secretary for an exception."
From what I understand of the combat exclusion, each branch has until 2016 for their final decisions. No SOF career field has opened their selection course to women to my knowledge. As you stated, the USMC publicly announced that females won't be allowed in "infantry, recon, or special operations MOS's", showing that regardless of what combat exclusion was passed, individual services control what career fields are/aren't open to women until January 2016, at which time they can further lobby to keep certain career fields closed. I interpret that as "technically, women are not able to become PJs, Controllers, or TACPs", unless the Air Force has specifically allowed it. Has the Air Force publicly stated that Pararescue, Combat Control, and TACP are open to women?

 

[CDG]

Not following. From the NY Times
"A military official said the change would be implemented “as quickly as possible,” although the Pentagon is allowing three years, until January 2016, for final decisions from the services.
Each branch of the military will have to come up with an implementation plan in the next several months, the official said. If a branch of the military decides that a specific job should not be opened to a woman, representatives of that branch will have to ask the defense secretary for an exception."
From what I understand of the combat exclusion, each branch has until 2016 for their final decisions. No SOF career field has opened their selection course to women to my knowledge. As you stated, the USMC publicly announced that females won't be allowed in "infantry, recon, or special operations MOS's", showing that regardless of what combat exclusion was passed, individual services control what career fields are/aren't open to women until January 2016, at which time they can further lobby to keep certain career fields closed. I interpret that as "technically, women are not able to become PJs, Controllers, or TACPs", unless the Air Force has specifically allowed it. Has the Air Force publicly stated that Pararescue, Combat Control, and TACP are open to women?

Female ALOs are allowed, but not TACPs. We have two here right now. One is about a month from graduating and the other was eliminated after failing the FTX three times.

 

[DA SWO]

Female ALOs are allowed, but not TACPs. We have two here right now. One is about a month from graduating and the other was eliminated after failing the FTX three times.

What happens to an ALO that fails?

 

[DJM]

Slightly disagree, ALO's need to go outside the wire every now and then to get a feel for what you guys do. Ride along, give someone a break;doesn't matter, just do it.

I second that. Ride along and be a help, not a hindrance.

 

[0699]

What happens to an ALO that fails?

Promotion...

 

[Johca]

From what I understand of the combat exclusion, each branch has until 2016 for their final decisions.

Part of the confusion is you read the PR interpretation put forth in poorly researched news articles. The reality is when and how the decision gets implemented.

The actual pertinent 9 January 2013 DOD policy guidance is “ The Services and U.S. Special Operations Command (USSOCOM) will proceed in a deliberate, measured, and responsible way to assign women to currently closed MOSs as physical standards and operational assessments are completed and ass it becomes possible to assign cadre as described above. The services and USSOCOM must complete all studies by 1st quarter, FY 2016, and provide periodic updates each quarter beginning in 3rd quarter FY2013.”
The cadre guidance is—“Ensuring that a sufficient cadre of midgrade/senior women enlisted and officer women are assigned to commands at points of introduction to ensure success in the long run. This may require adjustment to our recruiting efforts, assignment processes and personnel policies. Assimilation of women into heretofore “closed units” will be informed by continual in-stride assessments and pilot efforts.”

Potential pilot effort IMO is new TACP pipeline decision and implementation with concurrent strong preference to move the TACP tech school from Hurlburt Field to Lackland AFB. The official party line preference reasoning is this location has favorable weather conditions, training efficiencies, and beddown costs.
Consider the following other possible training efficiencies gained:

Access to midgrade/senior women enlisted and officer Security Forces military training instructors already supervising and training female security force in land navigation, ruck marching and many other skills taught to the TACP tech school student.
No extra cost or difficulty to ensure the SERE positions already existing at Lackland AFB are filled with more female SERE trainers .
Plenty of barracks available to collocate in close proximity a male and female student trainee barracks.

The TACP career field under going transformation of all holding TACP AFSC will be JTAC qualified and concurrently increasing the training time and cost to produce a 3-skill level TAP from a couple of month to being as much in duration as it needed to produce a 3-skill level PJ and 3-skill level CCT with required combat ready mission qualifications. It should be noted TACP doesn’t actually have any award of and retention of AFSC classification PAST standards and has difficulties without making JTAC a core 3-skill level requirement explaining why TACP’s human performance classification and combat ready Physical Ability and Stamina standards must be more robust than AF EOD’s and USAF Security Forces.

Perhaps I’m reading too much between the lines with Hurlburt Field no longer having room to train TACP and TACP reengineering its classification description to being JTAC more so than being drives and radio maintenance, but the appearances of such actions gives me strong thoughts TACP has volunteered itself to lead the Air Force way in providing continual in-stride assessments and pilot efforts. 13L ALO first, TACP second and everybody will know second how and when NLT 1st quarter, FY 2016.

 

[CDG]

What happens to an ALO that fails?

They will be re-classed into something else, as I understand it. The female that failed was already a Munitions Officer, so I believe she ended up going back to that. The cadre down here have been pretty open about their opinion that ALOs shouldn't be here at all due to the minimal "operating" they will actually do. A couple have said they don't think ALOs should be anywhere below Brigade level.

 

[Johca]

The cadre down here have been pretty open about their opinion that ALOs shouldn't be here at all due to the minimal "operating" they will actually do. A couple have said they don't think ALOs should be anywhere below Brigade level.

Interesting considering the 13L ALO utilization is either Air Support Operations Center (ASOC) or JTAC. I’m pretty sure being a nonrated Battalion Air Liaison Officer (BALO ) is integrated in there someplace. I wonder how these officers will get the required “Must have a minimum of two (2) years operational experience as a JTAC” to perform these BALO duties?

 

[CDG]

The consensus seems to be that ALOs don't need that much operational experience, and shouldn't get it. The prevailing thought process is that this job is for enlisted and the officers should worry about approving 1972s and making sure the TACP has what they need to accomplish the mission. The only time an ALO should be outside the wire is when he is going to check on his dudes. Let me make it clear that this is not my opinion, but it is what I have heard down here.

 

[DA SWO]

The consensus seems to be that ALOs don't need that much operational experience, and shouldn't get it. The prevailing thought process is that this job is for enlisted and the officers should worry about approving 1972s and making sure the TACP has what they need to accomplish the mission. The only time an ALO should be outside the wire is when he is going to check on his dudes. Let me make it clear that this is not my opinion, but it is what I have heard down here.

Weak NCO Leadership then.

What they want is a Col Potter who signs anything they (RADAR) put in front of him.

They can then whine that their officers are clueless (ignoring the part where they set him/her up to be clueless).

The career field (as a whole) constantly bitched that the Fighter Pilots were clueless and didn't understand the operating conditions (among other bitches), now they want the career ALO's to be the same way.

Pathetic.

 

[Johca]

The consensus seems to be that ALOs don't need that much operational experience, and shouldn't get it.

Ouch-that’s a consensus that’s doing the TACP career field more harm than good.

TACPs reliance on having a Col Potter or General Potter who signs anything they (RADAR) put in front of him is only secondary contributing of why TACP is floundering with what to do now that the combat exclusion policy has been rescinded.
The actual problem is NCO lacking understanding of Force Structure in terms of roles-and-mission, how and why the Air Force gives JTAC combat support to the Army and more importantly what performance standards are and what standards are not.
What does TACP in terms of performing duties in the field as combat support to the Army that distinguishes its training and performance standards from performing Security Forces Air Base Defense, DAGRE, and RAVEN duties in terms of physical ability and stamina performance standards? Answering this question must also take into consideration the percentage of TACP duty positions currently existing to support those performing BALO duties and in the rear support to TACP (radio serviceability and other equipment serviceability for TACP performing JTAC duties.
TACP is combat support to the Army and its force structure purpose has encompassed primarily doing duties at the ASOCS and Army tactical command centers to coordinate the availability of aircraft sorties with the appropriate munitions to support Army tactical operations in the field. The Army puts more daily support requirements on the table than the Air Force has aircraft to support. Part of the ALO and TACP job is to help the Army prioritize an order of importance to what it put on the table and to should a sudden emergency need occur figure out what to divert to the emergency. Having JTAC experience is a necessity in making those decisions as is having a service member of NCO or officer rank doing these duties. Consequently, the attitude ALOs don’t need that much operational experience is a painful attitude to have as a clasificationdescription change that TACP is JTAC and nothing but JTAC doesn't eliminate needing JTAC experience to perfrm BALO duties and ALO duties in the ASOCS.
Another clue to this operational experience is needed are the STO and CRO commissioned officer AFSCs.

 

[xGenoSiide]

To revive this, is there any news on when the pipeline will roll out and if it will, in fact, contain JTAQC as a school?

 

[Johca]

The latest Air Force Enlisted Classification Directory (September 2013) still identifies JTAC qualification course completion as being a requirement "only" for award of the 7-level. No revision to the TACP CFETP since September 2012 either.

From September 2013 AFECD:

3.3. Training. The following training is mandatory for award of the AFSC indicated:
3.3.1. 1C431. Completion of the following courses:
3.3.1.1. Tactical Air Control Party Preparatory Course.
3.3.1.2. Tactical Air Control Party Apprentice Course.
3.3.1.3. S-V80-A Survival, Evasion, Resistance, and Escape (SERE) Course.

3.3.2. 1C471. Completion of the following courses:
3.3.2.1. Tactical Air Control Party Craftsman Course.
3.3.2.2. USJFCOM-accredited Joint Terminal Attack Controller (JTAC) Qualification course.
3.4. Experience. The following experience is mandatory for award of the AFSC indicated:
3.4.1. 1C451. Qualification in and possession of AFSC 1C431. Also, experience in ASOC or TACP operations.
3.4.2. 1C471. Qualification in and possession of AFSC 1C451. Also, experience in supervising ASOC or TACP operations.
3.4.3. 1C491. Qualification in and possession of AFSC 1C471. Also, experience in managing ASOC or TACP work centers. Experience in both ASOC and TACP operations is desired.

My suspicions is the funding to make JTAC a 3-level core skill (mission need) requirement for TACP is lacking.

 

[xGenoSiide]

If any TACP are available, I would appreciate a PM from a 7-level TACP.

Thank you

 

[Red-Dot]

If any TACP are available, I would appreciate a PM from a 7-level TACP.

Thank you

You will need to be vetted before any questions are answered. Who are you?

 

[xGenoSiide]

You will need to be vetted before any questions are answered. Who are you?

I submitted my paperwork for vetting when I created my account months ago, but as I have read, patience is a virtue. I am currently Combat Arms for an STS.

 

[Red-Dot]

I submitted my paperwork for vetting when I created my account months ago, but as I have read, patience is a virtue. I am currently Combat Arms for an STS.

If it has been months you may want to take some initiative and check to see what the hold up is....I will answer your questions when I see some vetting going on...sorry, that's how I roll.

 

[xGenoSiide]

No issue with that. I just had no valid reason to press the vetting issue until now.

 

[goon175]

@xGenoSiide re-submit your vetting request and we'll get it taken care of.