AFI 36-2903 and dress/uniform regs and issues

[Hammer]

When Olds was told to remove his iconic mustache, he said "yes sir," and he did it, end of story.

The difference is that General Olds was told to shave it after he was home. Nobody stopped him as he was stepping to his jet to tell him that his mustache was out of regs. The author is missing the point...standard

Edit for pro-noun clarification.

Edited September 13, 2011 by snizz

[Rokke]

The difference is that General Olds was told to shave it after he was home. Nobody stopped him as he was stepping to his jet to tell him that his mustache was out of regs. He is missing the point...standard

Yeah. That, and it was the Chief of Staff of the Air Force who personally told him to shave it off. Not some admin clerk NCO with a hard on about the Air Force song and sock colors.

Some of the most effective leaders I have served with in the Air Force have been SNCOs, but I must have missed the AFI that now requires the most misguided, poorly developed and ineffective SNCOs to leap to the front of the "leadership" train. I'm assuming it's an AFI, because that seems to be the only force that provides vector in today's Air Force. Every single one of these buffoons works for a senior officer. Where the hell are they? WHO are they? I guess in the absence of real officer leadership, it's not surprising that someone else is stepping into the void. But frankly, the net result is making the entire Air Force look like a three ring clown act.

I guess this is the inevitable result of building "leaders" through online PME.

[Jimmy.The.Engineer]

Yeah. That, and it was the Chief of Staff of the Air Force who personally told him to shave it off. Not some admin clerk NCO with a hard on about the Air Force song and sock colors.

Some of the most effective leaders I have served with in the Air Force have been SNCOs, but I must have missed the AFI that now requires the most misguided, poorly developed and ineffective SNCOs to leap to the front of the "leadership" train. I'm assuming it's an AFI, because that seems to be the only force that provides vector in today's Air Force. Every single one of these buffoons works for a senior officer. Where the hell are they? WHO are they? I guess in the absence of real officer leadership, it's not surprising that someone else is stepping into the void. But frankly, the net result is making the entire Air Force look like a three ring clown act.

I guess this is the inevitable result of building "leaders" through online PME.

AFI 36-2618

5.1.4. Demonstrate, inspire, and develop in others an internalized understanding of Air Force Core

Values and The Airman’s Creed. Know and understand the Air Force Symbol.

We get water boarded with this type of kool-aid. I try to just go to my circle.

[Seriously]

Yeah. That, and it was the Chief of Staff of the Air Force who personally told him to shave it off. Not some admin clerk NCO with a hard on about the Air Force song and sock colors.

Some of the most effective leaders I have served with in the Air Force have been SNCOs, but I must have missed the AFI that now requires the most misguided, poorly developed and ineffective SNCOs to leap to the front of the "leadership" train. I'm assuming it's an AFI, because that seems to be the only force that provides vector in today's Air Force. Every single one of these buffoons works for a senior officer. Where the hell are they? WHO are they? I guess in the absence of real officer leadership, it's not surprising that someone else is stepping into the void. But frankly, the net result is making the entire Air Force look like a three ring clown act.

I guess this is the inevitable result of building "leaders" through online PME.

That crap comes from the SNCO academy at Gunter. As a Lt at ASBC, we spent a week with these guys discussing such important issues as "Should you wear your hat while in uniform when you're taking out the trash at your house" and "Why it's important to wear a reflective belt."

[Shiner]

Ugh, fail.

It seems like every SNCO wants to be back at BMT. They truly cannot distinguish between training to be in the military and actually being in the military. Military appearance standards, bearing, etc are part of an important foundation, but that's the extent of such things. These items are essentially all a trainee has to worry about and are stressed during BMT so one can quickly adopt the culture/sense of urgency/SA/attention to detail to be carried through out their career. Following BMT, the lessons learned should be - "Fixing this jet in a timely, flawless manner was sort of like making my bed perfectly each day at BMT..." NOT "I need to make my bed perfectly everyday and if it takes time away from fixing this jet then too bad..." All of these SNCOs and support leadership have a hard-on for stupid buzzwords and took the lessons at BMT/OTS/wtfever too literally. People need to realize that creating/enforcing ridiculous rules are detrimental to the actual mission because it takes duty hours away from it, distracts/confuses younger troops from their core skill set, and it degrades morale. If you are the best at your job, you ensure everyone around you is the best at their job, have mastered multiple other skills/hobbies/languages/etc, developing a cure for cancer, and still have free time, then go ahead and make your bed with hospital corners, but don't expect me to.

I am not rebelling against standards; I am rebelling against assholes who suck at their job and waste everyone's time by trying to make the real warriors look bad by minute technicalities, ie minor uniform infractions.

Example:

CMSGT: "Excuse me Captain, your flight suit sleeves should not be rolled up even if it is 120 degrees out here..."

Capt: "Noted."

Later that day...

CMSGT: "Sir, there seems to be a bit of rebellion out here with sleeve rolling..."

WG/CC: "I'll address it."

Later...

WG/CC: "So, I hear you have a problem with the uniform regulations..."

Capt: "No sir!"

WG/CC: "I don't know anything about you or that you routinely EQ, but I now know your name and it is on the shitlist...you should be more like Capt ReachAround who spent his time finding a way to polish green boots and consequently Q3'd."

Capt: "FML."

All I ask is that everyone do their job, do it well, and not do stupid things like tattoo their face or wear their uniform inside out. They might ask, "How can we can expect you to fly a good jet if you can't even wear the correct color socks?" Simply reply, "Easily and skillfully because I took the time to study and perfect my skills rather than worry about stupid shit that has zero impact on ANYTHING." Enough of this crazy talk, taking things out of context, and mistaking a mission accomplishment concern for rebellion.

[Skitzo]

Why we need more enforcement

[Homestar]

That's probably an authorized combination, like combat boots in PT gear at the Deid.

[Herkdrvr]

The original issue at hand though is uniform regulations. When a general signs a uniform regulation...why are we blaming NCOs for enforcing the regulations?

When the Commander-In-Chief tells the United States Air Force to service a target, airlift supplies, or refuel fighters, his direction (after much translation from commander's intent and so forth) is encapsulated in a document, much like a uniform reg. We follow the the "O" in ATO, and the "T" comes from our JFACC -- who is also a General. Sometimes to accomplish the mission, we have to flex on uniforms. [someone used the example of a maintainer working on an engine having to place their sunglasses on their cranium in a previous post].

In any case, what needs to improve is the complete lack of situational awareness on the part of individuals who think 'enforcement' is somehow inextricably related to an improved mission. It's not! What's the higher priority? Getting your crew fed after a 12 hour mission? Or being refused entry to the DFAC for no reflective belt in the daytime. (Actually happened). If an NCO enforces the latter, without a thought about the former, then yes, they do need to absorb the blame--and shame--of their misguided actions.

...and a wing commander sends out an email...

Leadership + e-mail = oxymoron. What would be better is if the Wg/CC showed up to their afternoon meeting with grimy ABUs or a flight suit full of armpit sweat. When the NCOs see the Wg/CC working with the operators--seriously working--not a b.s. dog & pony show, I'm certain they'd respect that person much more than the faux leader typing electronic edicts from their air-conditioned PowerPoint palace.

[GovernmentMan]

I know it's retarded, but...I don't think it actually says anywhere that you have to wear matching boots. I skimmed through 2903 but I don't think he's breaking the regs per se.

He still looks like an idiot, though I'm curious about why he did that in the first place. There's no way he did it without noticing.

[Jimmy.The.Engineer]

When the Commander-In-Chief tells the United States Air Force to service a target, airlift supplies, or refuel fighters, his direction (after much translation from commander's intent and so forth) is encapsulated in a document, much like a uniform reg. We follow the the "O" in ATO, and the "T" comes from our JFACC -- who is also a General. Sometimes to accomplish the mission, we have to flex on uniforms. [someone used the example of a maintainer working on an engine having to place their sunglasses on their cranium in a previous post].

In any case, what needs to improve is the complete lack of situational awareness on the part of individuals who think 'enforcement' is somehow inextricably related to an improved mission. It's not! What's the higher priority? Getting your crew fed after a 12 hour mission? Or being refused entry to the DFAC for no reflective belt in the daytime. (Actually happened). If an NCO enforces the latter, without a thought about the former, then yes, they do need to absorb the blame--and shame--of their misguided actions.

Leadership + e-mail = oxymoron. What would be better is if the Wg/CC showed up to their afternoon meeting with grimy ABUs or a flight suit full of armpit sweat. When the NCOs see the Wg/CC working with the operators--seriously working--not a b.s. dog & pony show, I'm certain they'd respect that person much more than the faux leader typing electronic edicts from their air-conditioned PowerPoint palace.

No truer words. Once upon a time, when I was a young Airman, I was deployed to a Clintonesque CF near the Adriatic. We set up bare bases in various locales. At one, the CC (O-6 type) helped out - and I don't mean he "supervised". The dude even had on some bad-ass suspenders. You could tell, because he - wait for it - took off his blouse. He had weekly pow wows at the smoke pit and he would start em off with, "Smoke em if ya got em!" The guy used the f word and carried a rifle. We all had man crushes on him.

[GKinnear]

http://abcnews.go.co...led-up-sleeves/

It's not just the AF that decides to kill morale on a whim. As of 24 Oct, the USMC is no longer allowed to roll their utility jacket sleeves. The given reason is that deployed Marines aren't rolling their sleeves and the Commandant wanted one uniform policy. So much for having a distinctive uniform. I always question the parentage of my buds who are Jarheads, but I've always respected their choice to be the Navy's bullet blocker. They've only been fighting a war against terrorists (sorry, overseas contingency operation against man-made disaster perpetrators) for a decade now. Let them wear their sleeves how they want at home!

[JarheadBoom]

As of 24 Oct, the USMC is no longer allowed to roll their utility jacket sleeves. The given reason is that deployed Marines aren't rolling their sleeves and the Commandant wanted one uniform policy.

Christ-on-a-crutch, not this "The deployed folks are __________, so we're gonna ____________ everywhere else, too" bullshit again.

I remember when, every spring & fall, HQMC would publish the date when the "winter uniform period" would end and the "summer uniform period" would begin. Sleeves down in winter, sleeves up in summer. So easy to follow, even for Marines...

[MKopack]

As of 24 Oct, the USMC is no longer allowed to roll their utility jacket sleeves.

Quote from several Marines in news reports I've seen is "We might as well just be in the Army."

This new rule was released at the same time that the Commandant allowed the wear of KIA bracelets - seems that Marine regulations have always allowed "POW/MIA bracelets", so some in supervision decided that "Prisoner" and "Missing" was fine, but "Killed" was a no go. Afterall, if the Reg doesn't say "Yes", it must mean "No". I think they almost had a riot on their hands.

So now on deployed bases we've got Airmen with their sleeves up and Army and Marines with theirs down and buttoned. How long before Big Blue in the spirit of jointness... No, I'm not even going to go there.....

[GovernmentMan]

Good job. By this time tomorrow, the Shoebot 9000 (which scours the internet for trending topics related to 2903, Jointness, Net-centric...ness, etc.) will have flagged it as an awesome idea, worthy of being the first bullet of somebody's Bronze Star 1206.

[stract]

So now on deployed bases we've got Airmen with their sleeves up and Army and Marines with theirs down and buttoned. How long before Big Blue in the spirit of jointness... No, I'm not even going to go there.....

umm, it's been against the regs since I've been deploying (05) to have sleeves rolled up in the AOR.

[jazzdude]

Don't Marines put their wallet in their sock while wearing chucks in the name of professional image?

[pawnman]

Don't Marines put their wallet in their sock while wearing chucks in the name of professional image?

http://terminallance...g-professional/

[JarheadBoom]

Don't Marines put their wallet in their sock while wearing chucks in the name of professional image?

Thanks asshole, I had finally managed to forget about that gem...

At least 36-chowmyhog doesn't tell you in excruciating detail what constitutes "acceptable" civilian attire. As an example, in addition to the above-quoted stupidity, the Marine Corps order on dress and appearance (MCO P1200.____; I forget the exact number and don't care anymore) states that if your .civ pants have belt loops, you will have a belt on, and don't think some overly-motivated SNCO won't do a belt-check on you out in town.

Edited October 21, 2011 by JarheadBoom

[Guest AFsock]

On a positive note -

9.11.1 Special Operations Units. Campaign (bush) hat with ABU and BDU.

Lots of rumors on this one, but we've been having a lot of fun with this and it's spreading.

http://www.store.aircommando.org/Bush-Hats_c_23.html

[nsplayr]

Dude...good find. It's heritage, and would drive shoes crazy...I say we do it.

[Beaver]

Dude...good find. It's heritage, and would drive shoes crazy...I say we do it.

I saw an Army Air Cav squadron enter the bar at Nellis during Red Flag with full spurs and Stetsons. The XO jumped up on a chair and announced the entrance of the Sq CC and the rest of the squadron. Then the commander came in and rang the bell. It was awesome. Go for the bush hats and own it.

[Skitzo]

Already been done, I saw my first AFSOC bush wearing hat today. Complete with air commando tab

[Hacker]

As much as I love the Air Commando boonie hat, I find it bizarre that the rest of 36-2903 was an assault against the flying community (fighter community more specifically, with the friday shirts and patches) with the rationale being that "the enlisted troops, the non-flyers can't do it, so why should the flyers be able to."

So WTFO with the Spec Ops community getting special status. Again, I'm all for it -- legit heritage, go for it AFSOC bros, good for you, wear it well.

More WTFO toward the individuals who penned and approved the new 2903 and their consistently inconsistent rationale for making everyone not-special sorta.

[Guest Hueypilot812]

I find it bizarre that the rest of 36-2903 was an assault against the flying community (fighter community more specifically, with the friday shirts and patches) with the rationale being that "the enlisted troops, the non-flyers can't do it, so why should the flyers be able to."

I find it bizarre that we can't be smarter about it and let the non-flyers have Friday shirts. FYI, Friday shirts and patches were common in the tac airlift community too...now it's being hunted to extinction. I've heard the argument that it's not fair to the non-flyers. Dammit people, we do this to ourselves...if we have the authority to change the rules to prohibit said items, we also have the authority to authorize it for the non-flyers as well. But that would make too much damn sense. Instead we get chiefs giving a talk to a bunch of flyers telling us that morale patches, friday patches (that often were historical past patches used in WWII in the Herk world) and Friday shirts have nothing to do with heritage, but moving to an "every size fits all" policy where we do away with anything that's remotely unit-specific is supposedly our heritage. WTFO?

[Guest Hueypilot812]

We still do Friday patches (heritage-based), and many of us have pen-tab patches of various kinds. Lots of non-flyers in the unit, and no one cares.

From what I've noticed, the non-flyers here at LR were only upset that the USAF took away the patches they wear on their utility uniform. Then the USAF turns around and bans flying squadron items like Friday patches and shirts, citing the anger of the non-flying crowd. I call bullshit because Big Blue did it to themselves and could have very easily allowed non-flyers to have those same things.

At LRAFB, the E-10s specifically hunt down anyone with a non-tan shirt or patches that aren't the usual authorized ones. Then they give us the talk about how it's US that's destroying AF heritage...as if they switched their brains off and just parrot the party line. Lucky for you that your leadership's give-a-shit factor is low. It's not that way in my wing.