USAF Maintainers merging jobs

[Fishbone Jones]

Did the RCAF not do this about 20 years ago? I was Safety Systems in the late 70's, early 80's. After I released, I heard they were amalgamating trades, including SS tech into other aircraft tech trades. I forget the details, but I'm pretty sure it was exactly what we are talking about here. If so, it's already been done and proven. There is no argument.

 

[AmmoTech90]

It was not terribly successful. The RCAF have muddled through and made it work, but have still had to break air weapons back out into their own trade. And now that general duties trade, can't remember what it is called.
I was passing through the transit shacks in Borden in the 90s and bunked with two new grads of whatever trade had taken on air weapons. I had worked with Taz's a fair bit so was interested in what had happened. A six month air weapons course had been squeezed into a two week module, everything else would be taught at unit or other specialized courses. It went as well as it sounds.

 

[SeaKingTacco]

Did the RCAF not do this about 20 years ago? I was Safety Systems in the late 70's, early 80's. After I released, I heard they were amalgamating trades, including SS tech into other aircraft tech trades. I forget the details, but I'm pretty sure it was exactly what we are talking about here. If so, it's already been done and proven. There is no argument.

Yes, it was called the 500 series amalgamation and it went too far.

Today we have:
AVN (airframes and engines)
AVS (electrics and avionics)
AWS (weapons)
ACS (aircraft structures and life support equipment)
AOS Tech (reserve only. Parks/starts/fuelling/towing/force protection.

It is probably about right, for us.

The USAF is talking about going from 57 trades to 10.

Given their recruiting and training mill, it remains to be seen if that is too ambitious, given the high release rate at 3 years.

 

[dimsum]

Yes, it was called the 500 series amalgamation and it went too far.

Today we have:
AVN (airframes and engines)
AVS (electrics and avionics)
AWS (weapons)
ACS (aircraft structures and life support equipment)
AOS Tech (reserve only. Parks/starts/fuelling/towing/force protection.

It is probably about right, for us.

The USAF is talking about going from 57 trades to 10.

Given their recruiting and training mill, it remains to be seen if that is too ambitious, given the high release rate at 3 years.

Here is the official website with the types of maintenance folks.

Maintenance and Repair Careers - U.S. Air Force

Explore career opportunities in aircraft maintenance and repair. Join our team of specialized mechanics and help us take on any mission at a moment's notice.

www.airforce.com

Just “aircraft maintenance” alone, not including facilities (which would be RP Ops in the CAF) or airframe maintenance (AVN Techs) you have the following distinct trades:

 

[brihard]

Here is the official website with the types of maintenance folks.

Maintenance and Repair Careers - U.S. Air Force

Explore career opportunities in aircraft maintenance and repair. Join our team of specialized mechanics and help us take on any mission at a moment's notice.

www.airforce.com

Just “aircraft maintenance” alone, not including facilities (which would be RP Ops in the CAF) or airframe maintenance (AVN Techs) you have the following distinct trades:

View attachment 88374

Sounds like they assign MOSs the way CAF would assign qualification competency codes.

 

[SeaKingTacco]

Sounds like they assign MOSs the way CAF would assign qualification competency codes.

That is my guess on how the USAF gets “57” careers fields out of that.

You are probably an “X” tech qualifed on aircraft “Y”, so you are really “XY” and you would never normally leave your fleet.

 

[SupersonicMax]

Questions? Sure. Repercussions? Nope. Let me know when charges are pressed against someone unwilling to take on quals they aren’t comfortable with or not in their trade scope. I’ll wait.

I can, as a CO, 100% order you on a course. I can also order you to complete any task to lead to an authorization. If you fail to get an authorization, I can put you on remedial measures. If I see you’re, on purpose, undermining getting the qualification and authorization, I can charge you. And I would. I would also build a file based on the lack of military ethos and submit an admin review with a recommendation to release if that behaviour is kept over time.

If that supposed trade task amalgamation occurs, it will become part of your trade scope.

 

[Quirky]

I can, as a CO, 100% order you on a course. I can also order you to complete any task to lead to an authorization. If you fail to get an authorization, I can put you on remedial measures. If I see you’re, on purpose, undermining getting the qualification and authorization, I can charge you. And I would. I would also build a file based on the lack of military ethos and submit an admin review with a recommendation to release if that behaviour is kept over time.

I’ve seen my share of shit pumps over the years who’ve never gone above POM, and who shouldn’t even be at that level. No punishments, no admin reviews, no releases. These are all threats that remain on paper however never ever actioned. I’ll be impressed when someone is released over lack of competency and inability to function as an AVS/AVN etc as an A level. Right now, there is no incentive or punishment to go beyond a Cpl POM, because pay isn’t based off quals.