Communications & Information Transformation

If you haven't received it already, keep your eyes peeled for a briefing titled "C& I Enlisted Workforce Transformation. "

It contains very specific concepts regarding the near future and far future goals for transforming the current workforce including missions, training & mergers, and career progression.

Link to the pdf version of the C&I Enlisted Workforce Transformation briefing

I've seen it, discussed it w/ leadership (which really doesn't have any answers).

The real question is are they really going to pursue this?
I know the AF wants to get below 100 AFSCs as soon as possible, but there are many MANY questions about how they're going to get this accomplished and how the mission is going to get done. With little to know direction from the powers to be on realignment of the new 3DXXX's it will be very interesting to see how this all shakes out. Seems like we'll end up in the quandry we've been in for the past 10 years. (At least wrt the 3C1X1 AFSC). They've been talking about getting rid of 3C1X1's for 10 years or at least calling them something else, but when other AFSC's are asked to do what we do (COMSEC, Tactical Radio Ops, Special Ops, etc) they all shy away and the plans fall through. I would like to be a fly on the wall at the U&TW's but alas I haven't garnered an invitation. Anyone with some ground truth's on this, (not conjecture and/or rumor) please share with the community.

When I was in (yes the "Stone Age", when tubes were still the norm in many comm sites), there were a gazillion AFSCs for comm. What really was detrimental was the over-specialization and Keesler and Shepard AFBs had it easy because they could get away with "teaching the test" and just teaching the airmen what they needed for that particular part of comm.

I was a bit happy after I got out and saw some fields getting merged but I also knew that training would have to be much more extensive.

The AF had, and maybe still does have, two fallacies about maintenance:

1. If you follow the tech order you can solve ANY problem. Maybe for maintaining an engine, but not for extensive comm systems.

2. A troubleshooting routine can be made to catch all possible problems. Again, if that's true, why did every major base have an SMT (Special Maintenance Team)?

If career fields merge like this, the requirements for training and skills will rise astronomically.

A fine example is the Navy: their basic electronics is much longer than the ol' 6 weeks of basic electronics the AF had. Their main school is 18 months, because that guy on the ship has to be fully trained on all kinds of stuff.

Merging too much means the training requirments (and costs) needed for good maintenance in the field will skyrocket.

This plan is the reality of C&I and it is coming fast. I work with the folks that created this along with the functionals at the Pentagon. My personal opinion is that the CST (Client Support Tech) will be the worst of all the new jobs. Your responsibilities will basically be from everything on the customer's desk to the building demarc. This will include computers, LMRs, Cellulars, Telephones, etc. This career field is going to get beat up pretty bad since you can never make the customer happy.

swansong: Sounds like you may be a person "in the know". Can you answer any of these questions:

--Are the timetables presented in the brief correct?
--Will people be given a choice to cross-train or just get hit by a bus in a few months and told what their new AFSC is?
--3C1X1 Speicific: How is this going to work. I think most 3C1's (Radio Opr's) more closely align with Transmission Systems, but the brief indicated Spectrum Ops and EW. At what level is the decision made as to which new function folks will assume. Again, I think for me personally, and many others, we're basically Transmission Systems, but is someone 'somewhere' going to flip a coin and put me in Spectrum or Electronic warfare. I don't see how this can be done reasonably.
--If someone does flip a coin, how the he## are they going to teach me advanced electronics without sending me to the school? I really don't the think the AF has the budget to support a field training scenario. After all, we're cuttin AFSC's to save money, not spend more.

If you can engage any of these questions I'll drop me in the thread.

stoneface