Doesn't seem very well thought out to me. IMO you can't treat Alaska which is really a special entity unto itself as just another Guard state.

Task & Purpose:

A plan to replace 80 active duty spots with 88 civilian-style jobs could disrupt the 24/7 NORAD-mandated alert missions held by Alaska guard members.


Alaska Air National Guard may miss half its alert missions under new manning rules

This is going to have a huge impact if not corrected. The Alaska Air Guard performs a lot of search and rescue work of civilians here. They also perform medieval missions to remote areas when the weather is severe and no one else can fly in. Like everything else from this administration, it's not well thought out at all.

It seems every time there is a high profile rescue that makes the news someone always has to criticize, "How much in my tax money did this cost?" Personally I don't mind my tax money going for this, it's public safety not to mention it's damn good training and practice for them in their combat operations.

https://www.176wg.ang.af.mil/Units/176OG/212RQS/

Some of this is a bit of smoke and mirrors. When I was in the guard, technicans did the same job as they did when they wore the uniform on the weekend, just different accounting buckets that covered pay health care etc. sounds like a way to cut costs and still have people available.

Crazy thing - when federalized state techs have to take military leave to do federal stuff. When AGR personnel go on state mission they have take leave to perform it. Goofy system. One thing the tech system does do, is it allows someone in a low ranking military slot gain promotion on the tech side, so their pay is not linked to military rank.
For example someone may have a company armorer slot that maxes out at E-4, but can have a state tech small arms repair slot and get regular pay increases far above that of the military pay scale for that job.
Seems to me regardless of status ( agr, state tech etc) the ability to be ordered to do a mission shouldn’t matter.

Another idea - instead of bringing large groups of troops on drill weekend, assign crews to ready status duty days spread out through the month / year. I was always amazed when the guard for example has companies full of truck drivers but contracts with a civilian company to move stuff. Why not bring your truck drivers in to do it in lieu of a drill weekend?

quote:

Originally posted by 2000Z-71:
This is going to have a huge impact if not corrected. The Alaska Air Guard performs a lot of search and rescue work of civilians here. They also perform medieval missions to remote areas when the weather is severe and no one else can fly in...

They also stand alert with KC-135R tankers at Eielson.

https://www.168wg.ang.af.mil/

50+ years ago I was stationed at nearby Ft Wainwright in the Army.

Well shit. Now who’s going to airlift abandoned buses out of the woods?

Unbelievably dumb. The Alaska PJs and the aircrews are a huge resource for the state rescue mission.

Spreading everything out so everything is "fair" is incredibly short sighted.

quote:

Originally posted by 2000Z-71:
They also perform medieval missions to remote areas when the weather is severe and no one else can fly in.

This doesn’t look like a typo; what are they?

quote:

Originally posted by TMats:

quote:

Originally posted by 2000Z-71:
They also perform medieval missions to remote areas when the weather is severe and no one else can fly in.

This doesn’t look like a typo; what are they?

I’m sure he meant medical missions.

I would think it is referring to Medical Evacuation Missions. Abbreviated as Medevac which autocorrects to “medieval”

Considering the latest budgetary demands the DoD put out, which reflects the direction of the current administration, everyone is being told to Do More with Less and this trickles all the way down to the unit level, with some commands being more literal than others.

quote:

Originally posted by Sauer Kraut:
I would think it is referring to Medical Evacuation Missions. Abbreviated as Medevac which autocorrects to “medieval”

Yes, medevac, thank you autocorrect...

quote:

Originally posted by 2000Z-71:

quote:

Originally posted by Sauer Kraut:
I would think it is referring to Medical Evacuation Missions. Abbreviated as Medevac which autocorrects to “medieval”

Yes, medevac, thank you autocorrect...

Sorry man

quote:

Originally posted by sigcrazy7:
Well shit. Now who’s going to airlift abandoned buses out of the woods?

That was the army guard.

I pulled a lot of those alert shifts as a traditional guardsmen. The shift is away from AGR positions to trad guard and civilian state positions (full time guard are traditional guardsmen on weekends and state workers in USAF uniform during the week - GS & WG positions).

The hardest hit are the PJ positions in this manning roster shift.

Despite appearances, I think the shift is not all bad. It means that the mission will be more of a state funded mission, and our Governor controls it better.

For those that don't know, our AKANG picks up the slack for the Coasties who don't have aerial refueling capabilities. We bail out their more difficult rescues frequently.

quote:

Originally posted by AKSuperDually:

...For those that don't know, our AKANG picks up the slack for the Coasties who don't have aerial refueling capabilities...

Minor thread drift:

Why did USCG not equip their -60s and -130s for air to air refueling? Was it a turf, er...water battle with USAF?

I was having more fun imagining “medievel” missions….just sayin

Why did USCG not equip their -60s and -130s for air to air refueling? Was it a turf, er...water battle with USAF?[/QUOTE]

Because the Coast Guard is not big enough nor funded enough to support those capabilities. The CG has a lot of responsibilities besides Search and Rescue (SAR), although that is THE primary mission.

I've been out of CG aviation since 2002, but aviation has always been a support component, not really a primary entity of its own. The aircraft support the traditional missions of the ships and whoever decided the operational requirements of the H60s and C130s didn't deem it important enough to have aerial refueling capabilities.

The CG transitioned from seaplanes and amphibious helicopters in the late 70s to early 80s. The statistics for SAR show the majority of the cases are a certain distance from the coast and the aircraft are bought to meet those types of cases. Aerial refueling capabilities weren't requirements they deemed necessary for the vast majority of the SAR missions, and the aircraft they bought reflect that.

The Falcons were replaced with CASA 235s when the decision was made to replace dash capability with loiter time. Again the types of SAR cases and the need to support other missions dictated a switch from a fast jet to a slower turbo prop.

I was lucky enough to spend my entire CG aviation career in the Falcon as I started very shortly after they were first introduced. Lucky for me I was able to retire before the Falcons were completely replace by the CASAs.

quote:

Originally posted by cgode:
I was having more fun imagining “medievel” missions….just sayin

Who doesn’t like helicopter joisting?