JULY/AUGUST AIRFORCEMAG.COM and cyber and then further integrate that with the maritime and
land domains. When you value that, it drives behavior, and that will
drive development and help us eliminate the stovepipes, which
is our going-in position. at’s our way to institutionalize that.
Q. How does this play into the ‘Force We Need’ of 386
squadrons?
A. A couple of things. e Air Force We Need is the 386 opera-
tional squadrons, and then, of course the supporting squadrons
that go behind that.
Another thing is the right level of decision-making. e Secre-
tary and the Chief were working on pushing that down, revitalizing
squadrons, getting folks at lower levels to be comfortable with
accountability and decision-making. at’s another aspect of it.
But it’s all part of making sure we create the right development
paths to build the o cers we need, to build the force we need
for the future. e work we’re doing on promotion categories is
required, but it’s not su cient in and of itself.
Q. What are some of the biggest drawbacks to this new ap-
proach that have emerged?
A. When we ran the mock board we had to gure out how to
group these AFSCs [Air Force Specialty Codes] together. We did a
lot of work to create them, but I’m 100 percent sure we didn’t get it
100 percent right. Goldfein has asked us this summer to broaden
the conversation, which we’re doing by visiting bases, having
virtual town-hall meetings, sharing what we think, and having
folks give us feedback, so we can sharpen what we’ve already
got. And some of that was already underway with the revitalized
squadrons discussion.
Getting those categories exactly right is di cult. We may not
have the categories exactly right.
Q. Are you concerned that this system could create an o cer
corps that’s too specialized and lack the breadth necessary to
operate wider forces?
A. at’s certainly another risk. And when we’ve messaged
this, we talked to both technical depth and breadth. [O cers
are] going to need the breadth to be able to integrate that into a
joint campaign. And so when it’s appropriate, we’ll make sure the
promotion boards value breadth.
Q. It’s unusual for the Air Force to socialize something like
this before it’s policy. Why are you doing it this way?
A. Promotions a ect everybody. is is a rather large adjust-
ment for the Air Force, right? And I think a sign of a very mature
organization is that it’s willing to have open dialogue and discus-
sion. We did this with revitalizing squadrons, where we went out
to the eld and got grassroots-level inputs, talked to the airmen,
made sure they got to be a part of the discussion and the process.
I think we’re doing the same thing here, knowing that this is a
pretty signi cant adjustment to how we’ve operated since 1947.
It makes sense for us as a learning organization to get everybody’s
inputs and make sure everybody understands what we’re doing
before we make the major adjustment.
Q. What feedback are you getting from Congress?
A. We’ve talked a lot with our personnel subcommittees on both
the Senate and House side. ey are very supportive, actually.
ey’ve put language in previous National Defense Authorization
Acts that spoke to the need for each of the services to utilize a
exibility they had been previously given to adjust promotions
and the categories. Congress recognizes the nature of warfare is
constantly changing, and the National Defense Strategy sets new
requirements. ey had previously indicated to all the services
that this was something we should be doing. So from a basic
standpoint, they’re supportive, they’re interested in what we hear
and learn as we go out on our roadshows and get our feedback.
Goldfein has talked with a number of key members in the Air Force
caucus and on sta subcommittees, both House and Senate, as
have the Secretary, legislative liaison, myself, and others. ey’ve
asked us to come back after we’ve gathered feedback and keep
them informed.Q. Do you need permission from Congress or do you have
the go-ahead already?
A. No, we already have the authorities needed.Q. On a di erent topic, General Goldfein has said the pilot
shortage is easing. What’s happening there?
A. ere are multiple lines of e ort we are taking to mitigate
the pilot shortage. e main levers are, we’ve got to produce
more pilots, we’ve got to keep and absorb and train more pilots,
and we have to retain them. And I think we’re making headway
in all three areas.
Last year, we increased production slightly at Air Education
and Training Command, there are plans to increase production
this year, and across the rest of the FYDP (Future Years Defense
Program). So that’s going in a positive direction.
On retention, we’ve focused on quality of life, quality of service
issues. ... Getting rid of some additional duties and things that
were a distraction. And we’ve provided more support sta in a
squadron to help them with associated and administrative duties.
Work was done on the assignment system to help our airmen
have a little more visibility and say on where they’re going to go.
So they have a little bit more control over their careers. All these
things combined—I think—have helped.
e pilot bonus take rate had been declining for almost ve
straight years. Last year, it stabilized. It didn’t get to the level we
wanted to get to, but that was a good sign that perhaps we’re seeing
some easing of the problem.Q. How has the enlisted pilot program on the remotely
piloted aircraft worked out? Will that continue, or are you
reassessing that?
A. e rst thing we learned is what we already assumed, but
veri ed: that our enlisted force is incredibly capable and sharp.
e enlisted pilots we put through the RPA program have all done
remarkably well and are performing great.
We’re going through the process of rethinking, now: How does
that go forward? e rst point—because I don’t want to tie these
together—is that enlisted pilots do not solve a pilot shortage,
right? When you have a production problem, it doesn’t matter
what avor of person you put through a schoolhouse ... there’s
still only a limited number of seats. So we don’t view that as a way
of xing the pilot retention issue.
at said, we’re reviewing the CONOPS and saying, ‘Okay, as
we start to expand, especially in the RPA world, how does our
enlisted force t in?’ at’s what we’ll be looking at to try and get
a long-term plan.Q. General Goldfein is working on a new expeditionary force
plan. When will that roll out?
A. Our A3 team is leading that, and it’s about how we present
our forces. e National Defense Strategy and the Chief have
called out the need to return to our expeditionary roots, and
how we may have to put forces forward in a di erent way than
we have in the past. ... I would look to the fall for that. J