Jump to content

What's wrong with the Air Force?


Catbox

Recommended Posts

7 hours ago, 17D_guy said:

So...never update the uniforms, or research new materials.  

Ok.

No.  Just don't have a board do it.  The Air Force still hasn't learned that you can't lead by committee...this is how we get things like terrible PT gear and reversing the patches on the OCPs from the flight suit AND from the current AFGSC guidance.

  • Upvote 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, pawnman said:

No.  Just don't have a board do it.  The Air Force still hasn't learned that you can't lead by committee...this is how we get things like terrible PT gear and reversing the patches on the OCPs from the flight suit AND from the current AFGSC guidance.

AND current AFCENT, ACC, AETC guidance as well.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, HarleyQuinn said:

A uniform board is about as useless as comm fixing a share drive outage at 1500 on a Friday.

Not true.  Nothing worse than showing up to a mandatory drill thinking you're finally going to attack the great queep monster, only to see all the AF systems  you need, "down for mx."  VPC/Outlook/DTS we're all down last drill...apparently no one in the military works weekends.

 

8 hours ago, viper154 said:

How about no more PT uniform. Just wear your civilian gym clothes, or you’re grandpa jeans and kitty ear hat. No one gives a shit. One less thing to dig out of the closet for the annual pt test or ‘stan deployment. 

If the PFT is truly going back to the squadron, I highly doubt I'll ever wear my AF PT gear again.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, war007afa said:

Actually, the ABU was part of the struggle in Iraq/Afghanistan. Insurgents routinely targeted the dudes in the “different” uniform first because they had learned who was talking to aircraft.

But that has nothing to do with the change in service dress uniform which *might* happen “eventually”. 

Are you trying to talk about the guys who wore the same uniform as their assigned unit but had a big JTAC patch and a radio strapped to them?  The ABU was terrible in the field and should not have been worn in combat as it melts to you. As cubicle camouflage, fine whatever.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Sprkt69 said:

Are you trying to talk about the guys who wore the same uniform as their assigned unit but had a big JTAC patch and a radio strapped to them?  The ABU was terrible in the field and should not have been worn in combat as it melts to you. As cubicle camouflage, fine whatever.

This! Initially, JTACs probably wore their ABUs until someone said this is stupid and you guys will be issued the same uniforms as the units you are supporting. I was in Afghanistan back in 2010 so I could be wrong. If you were going to spend time at a FOB with a Task Force, they wanted you in their uniform. No ABUs because they didn't want you to stand out. Pretty sure someone here has more information on this than I do.

Edited by HarleyQuinn
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 8/17/2018 at 7:12 PM, Sprkt69 said:

 The ABU was terrible in the field and should not have been worn in combat as it melts to you. As cubicle camouflage, fine whatever.

We appear to be in violent agreement. Initially when our guys went out in the ABU, they were targeted more often because of it. Didn’t take long to quit doing that. 

20 hours ago, HarleyQuinn said:

Pretty sure someone here has more information on this than I do.

You mean like the guy who literally said the exact same thing as you did in your argument above?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, war007afa said:

We appear to be in violent agreement. Initially when our guys went out in the ABU, they were targeted more often because of it. Didn’t take long to quit doing that. 

You mean like the guy who literally said the exact same thing as you did in your argument above?

There is a difference in a JTAC wearing the uniform on missions vs other AF personnel having to wear the uniform on FOBs so they blend in with everyone else. I guess you glossed over that last point?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, HarleyQuinn said:

There is a difference in a JTAC wearing the uniform on missions vs other AF personnel having to wear the uniform on FOBs so they blend in with everyone else. I guess you glossed over that last point?

Who F#cking cares what uniform people wear?

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

You're telling me the enemy, in the middle of a gun fight, could tell the difference between the ABU and the ACU? I call BS on that.

I remember shopping for ABU's when they first came out and everyone was laying them on the floor to try and get a matching shade of gray and one Lt Col tried to buy an ABU top with an ACU bottom. They look really freaking similar.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 hours ago, StoleIt said:

You're telling me the enemy, in the middle of a gun fight, could tell the difference between the ABU and the ACU? I call BS on that.

I remember shopping for ABU's when they first came out and everyone was laying them on the floor to try and get a matching shade of gray and one Lt Col tried to buy an ABU top with an ACU bottom. They look really freaking similar.

Depends on where the firefight starts. Think urban where the troops are among the populace before the fight initiates. To your point about firefights, the enemy liked to target the dude wearing a backpack radio or the HMMWV/MRAP with extra antennas on it. 

I was informed prior to deploying downrange that my guys were to wear the ABU when outside the wire. I asked if it was a good idea to have my guys wearing something made for 72 degree cubicles that melts to ones body for combat operations in a desert. I was then told to just pick up my container of crayolas and do as ordered. Officially, I informed my guys of the order. Unofficially I made sure they would not be permanently wearing ABUs if things went sideways outside the wire.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, HeyWatchThis said:

Wait....can we discuss this instead of uniforms for a second?  Is this seriously being considered?

Yes it is. From my understanding is that the CC has to send a memo to the fac saying that they are going to test in house. So once that happens I don’t see why you would even have to wear them unless your ptl is being silly about making you wear it. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, cragspider said:

So once that happens I don’t see why you would even have to wear them unless your ptl is being silly about making you wear it. 

Our PTL will likely be a pilot once again...everyone will just laugh at them if they try to make us wear PT gear.  Then they'll be assessed at the next roll call for general douchebaggery. 

  • Like 2
  • Haha 1
  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here’s a great example of what’s wrong in the USAF.

Anybody get the mypers email that had critical info from the ACTF NOTAM? I’m sure everyone on here did, not sure how many read it.

Issue 1—Contractor Support Program.

Every MAJCOM had hired contractors except ours. After a little digging into it a friend got in touch with the guy providing the information. There is no “program, with up to 5 per squadron” it’s just your budget execution and the question was how many contractors have you hired?

So what did the ACTF try to do? They tried to make it look like they / USAF was hiring more contractors when in reality it was POMed out years ago or a UFR from the MAJCOM itself.

Recommend squadron ccs start using innovation funds to hire people...


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Skitzo said:

Here’s a great example of what’s wrong in the USAF.

Anybody get the mypers email that had critical info from the ACTF NOTAM? I’m sure everyone on here did, not sure how many read it.

Issue 1—Contractor Support Program.

Every MAJCOM had hired contractors except ours. After a little digging into it a friend got in touch with the guy providing the information. There is no “program, with up to 5 per squadron” it’s just your budget execution and the question was how many contractors have you hired?

So what did the ACTF try to do? They tried to make it look like they / USAF was hiring more contractors when in reality it was POMed out years ago or a UFR from the MAJCOM itself.

Recommend squadron ccs start using innovation funds to hire people...


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

So, in non-staff-speak (correct if wrong): 
MAJCOMs ain't actually paying shit for your "new" contractors and are directing you to use "Innovation Funds" to cover it.  Therefore getting credit for more contractors and utilization of "new funds" at the same time?

Or that's just your MAJCOM?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 8/1/2018 at 1:40 AM, HarleyQuinn said:

"How many fired commanders were “distinguished graduates” or fellows in prestigious programs? Nearly all."

https://www.airforcetimes.com/opinion/commentary/2018/07/31/commentary-the-air-force-is-not-designed-to-produce-good-leaders/

Col. 'Ned Stark' - You sir are my hero! 👏

 

This caught the bosses eye...

https://warontherocks.com/2018/08/the-air-force-chief-responds-keep-writing-col-ned-stark-and-join-my-team/

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Skitzo said:

Here’s a great example of what’s wrong in the USAF.

Anybody get the mypers email that had critical info from the ACTF NOTAM? I’m sure everyone on here did, not sure how many read it.

Issue 1—Contractor Support Program.

Every MAJCOM had hired contractors except ours. After a little digging into it a friend got in touch with the guy providing the information. There is no “program, with up to 5 per squadron” it’s just your budget execution and the question was how many contractors have you hired?

So what did the ACTF try to do? They tried to make it look like they / USAF was hiring more contractors when in reality it was POMed out years ago or a UFR from the MAJCOM itself.

Recommend squadron ccs start using innovation funds to hire people...


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I particularly liked the one about how they increased Flight Pay, when right now they aren't paying many of us the maximum amount allowed by law.  Pretty disingenuous.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

So, in non-staff-speak (correct if wrong): 
MAJCOMs ain't actually paying shit for your "new" contractors and are directing you to use "Innovation Funds" to cover it.  Therefore getting credit for more contractors and utilization of "new funds" at the same time?
Or that's just your MAJCOM?


No, what I’m saying is that they tried to make it look like there was this huge boost when all they did was report how many contractors were hired thru normal budgetary processes.

I was suggesting sq/ccs will have a faster result by using their innovation funds...


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...