Leaderboard

Your loss. You might learn something...

I read the forums often and seldom post. It's my impression that the purpose of this particular thread is to provide an outlet for people to vent. In proper brainstorming sessions all ideas are accepted and not deemed BS. That is for later. Seems this thread is similar - to blow of steam about an institution that I imagine we all love (in some fashion) and that we want to see succeed at its mission. I think frustration builds when a person feels like they are inhibited in contributing fully to its mission or if the focus of said institution seems to have drifted from what's truly important. First, I'll write what I think is right about the USAF - 1st rate training and equipment for its aircrew. I helped run many LFE's in AK and Nellis. I saw the noticable difference in the capabilities of our USAF vs. many of our Allies and sister services. Unfortunately our equipment has suffered in the last 10+ years. Also the professionalism of our CAF aircrew is bar none. As an airlifter and ATC IP (yes I was actually in ATC) by trade, I was an outsider looking in with the CAF. But damn, I was impressed. I think it is an attitude that is permiating to the MAF via the WIC (my observation). Also, I think our UPT is the best. I may be biased since I was an IP at Willy and Randolph. I saw products from other services and from a few Allies. Again the difference was telling. I don't know how UPT is now, but when I went through 25+ years ago, we all flew the T-38, had to be able to fly fingertip at the 3G, 90 degree bank standard. The program was 48 weeks and my class had a 50% wash-out rate. Standards were high. If you graduated you were good, if you got a fighter, you were great. I don't know how it is now with SUPT with the different tracks. I like to think the standards are just as high now as they were then. Regardless of yes or no, from what I experienced/observed throughout my career was that USAF aircrew are outstanding at what they do WHEN GIVEN THE OPPORTUNITY. Now for what's wrong with the USAF: The personel system. Many times it does not allow our aircrew to achieve their potential in their particular mission skill. It is the great inhibiter, whether it's a demand for an advanced degree, PME, 3-years at one place and then move, ALO tours, etc. The USAF has shown many an exceptional aviator the door because their career, "on paper", wasn't satisfactory or tried to send them down a career path that didn't allow them to do what they loved or for what they were trained. Also the USAF takes a cookie cutter approach to all career fields. I think we all know how important cyber security and space ops are becoming. IMO, there is no way the USAF can recruit the best and the brightest in these fields by expecting them to fit the USAF norms and put-up with all the Micky Mouse BS. They can do the same type of job in the civilian world with better pay and no nonsense. I think pilots can put up with it better. Yes, there are the airlines, but that is not the same as flying military jets. I was a spin-demo IP in the T-37. Loved it and doubt I could find a comparable job in the civilian world. Also, I'm worried about our emphasis on LO and RPA's (shouldn't go into much detail about either). The cost of the JSF is taking needed $$$ for other platforms, like a new AWACS, more F-22s, updated F-15s, block-60 F-16s, non-lethal SEAD platorms, more strat-airlift, and more tankers than programmed. RPA's are leaching skilled aviators from jobs where they need to remain and it's misguided to think that they will be of any use in a contested environment. We cannot afford the $$$ in our diminished budget to put $$$ and people into an airframe that can only operate uncontested. What good will they and the aircrew be when we are fighting a determined foe with an air-defense? I also think it will be a huge mistake to moth-ball the A-10 fleet. The A-10 community has a skill set at a level that is not easily gained. It would be a shame if that is lost. So, I'm worried about our ongoing airframe procurement strategy. I think it is misguided. Again, my opinion only, based on working many LFEs. One last thing on what's wrong - to me rank shouldn't have its privileges, it has its responsibilities. I've heard and seen too many instances of senior leaders making themselves the focus of what matters instead of things truly important. Examples: had an aquantaince that I ran into at the Deid back in '03 who worked DV issues at the CAOC who told me about all the O-7's and above who wanted rides on aircraft to different places in theater, but didn't want any cargo on the plane, a certain USAFE/CC who wanted the motor pool arranged by taller-tap, wanted leaves raked out of trees, missappropriated funds for personal preferences and when visiting Nellis, demanded that a running course on base be marked specifically for him with mile markers posted (I guess the jogging path at runner's world wasn't good enough), an ATC/O-9 who demanded all the mailboxes on Randolph AFB be painted beige (against the wishes of the USPS) and who was caught using the C-word in reference to a female who had just briefed him (he had to make a sexual harrasment video for us to watch for that), a 3 WG/CC who wanted all the street names and numbers changed because he couldn't figure out how to navigate around Elmendorf (even though everyone else managed over the years), a C-130 WG/CC (463 TAW) who ordered a training mission to Berumuda and then happened to put his family Space-A on the flight, two CSAFs who seemed to care more about changing the uniform than anything else, etc. etc. I have many more examples and imagine all of you have your BS stories about senior leadership privilege. Senior leadership focus should always be on the mission and those that do the mission. IMHO, everything else is fluff. I read a lot of good stuff on Base Ops. I appreciate the forum. Regards, RF.

God bless Texas. http://news.yahoo.co...-181856390.html A comment I liked from the peanut gallery: "When I carry a gun, I don’t do so because I am looking for a fight, but because I’m looking to be left alone. The gun at my side means that I cannot be forced, only persuaded. I don’t carry it because I’m afraid, but because it enables me to be unafraid. It doesn’t limit the actions of those who would interact with me through reason, only the actions of those who would do so by force. It removes force from the equation…and that’s why carrying a gun is a civilized act."

CENTCOM AOR = 3 beers, GO-1, PT Gear, etc. EUCOM AOR = ? From Allied Force to Unified Protector...I've never experienced a booze restriction when deployed to a EUCOM operation. I never did Northern Watch, but I have heard the squadron bar stories. Now for the shocking part...we managed to get the mission done. Oh yeah, and this.