Jump to content

What's wrong with the Air Force?


Catbox

Recommended Posts

33 minutes ago, ThreeHoler said:

Gotta be fit to fight...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Funny thing is if you talk to the ASOSs most of their Airmen can't even pass the new PT test. 

I do see some benefits though. People will practice what they test on. Given the science correlating muscular strength to fat loss and overall health putting a deadlift on was a good move. Is it dangerous? To the idiot yes. But you can make the argument that the military was already insufficiently giving training on physical fitness. Everything I knew about exercise I gained from sports. I saw tons of dudes who never did anything athletic and really had no idea how to meet a baseline fitness. So many people that think you have to run ungodly mileage to stay lean and pass test and that is just not true. 

Edited by FLEA
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Mattis Erupts Over Niger Inquiry and Army Revisits Who Is to Blame

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/12/07/us/politics/niger-mattis.html

So anyone can drive onto Nellis AFB and security forces will not report it to anyone? I wonder who will be fired for this blunder. And these are the folks you want going outside the wire in combat...smh

http://www.businessinsider.com/nellis-investigating-base-security-breach-alleged-kidnapping-2018-12

 

Edited by HarleyQuinn
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, HarleyQuinn said:

Mattis Erupts Over Niger Inquiry and Army Revisits Who Is to Blame

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/12/07/us/politics/niger-mattis.html

So anyone can drive onto Nellis AFB and security forces will not report it to anyone? I wonder who will be fired for this blunder. And these are the folks you want going outside the wire in combat...smh

http://www.businessinsider.com/nellis-investigating-base-security-breach-alleged-kidnapping-2018-12

 

Whole situation (Niger ambush) is an ethical knot of responsibility. At stake, is the fact that staffs continue to issue tasks to subordinate units without adequate time to prepare a quality representation of facts. The higher leadership wants to blame a Captain for misrepresenting a situation when the Captain argues he did the damn best he could for a tight suspense and limited resources. 

To top this, SOCOM as a whole has been negatively portrayed in the media far too much recently and I think Mattis is looking to take some heads for the organizational culture that seems to be faltering. 

Edited by FLEA
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, FLEA said:

Whole situation (Niger ambush) is an ethical knot of responsibility. At stake, is the fact that staffs continue to issue tasks to subordinate units without adequate time to prepare a quality representation of facts. The higher leadership wants to blame a Captain for misrepresenting a situation when the Captain argues he did the damn best he could for a tight suspense and limited resources. 

To top this, SOCOM as a whole has been negatively portrayed in the media far too much recently and I think Mattis is looking to take some heads for the organizational culture that seems to be faltering. 

I was in Africa when this happened and there were a lot of cultural issues that had become accepted norms, that, once this happened made everyone step back and go ‘wtf?’.

 

That said, the Captain was getting scapegoated and we all saw it happening. I’m glad Secretary Mattis recognized what was happening, but it’s sad it took the SecDef to do so. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Bigred said:

I was in Africa when this happened and there were a lot of cultural issues that had become accepted norms, that, once this happened made everyone step back and go ‘wtf?’.

 

That said, the Captain was getting scapegoated and we all saw it happening. I’m glad Secretary Mattis recognized what was happening, but it’s sad it took the SecDef to do so. 

Because we don't have leaders anymore. Just yes men. I think you have to know when to stand up for people and when to shut up. It's a fine line because if you go against the norm, you put your career at risk. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 12/7/2018 at 9:44 PM, HarleyQuinn said:
Quote

"Defense Secretary Jim Mattis was livid last month when he summoned top military officials to a video conference at the Pentagon to press them about an investigation into a 2017 ambush in Niger that killed four Americans on a Green Beret team."

"More than a year after the ambush — the American military’s largest loss of life in Africa since the 1993 “Black Hawk Down” debacle in Somalia — top military leaders continue to battle over how to apportion blame and who should be held accountable."

Oh really?

https://www.hurlburt.af.mil/News/Article-Display/Article/204913/four-hurlburt-airmen-die-in-u-28a-crash-in-djibouti/

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

What’s wrong with the Air Force? Why can’t the Air Force change?

I spent a lot of time soul searching this question: What is wrong with the Air Force? I spent countless hours wondering why the Air Force has a “pilot crisis”. I think about my fellow officers who separate at 11 to 12 years of service who are only 8-9 years away from retirement. Is active duty Air Force really that bad to prevent a pilot from continuing to retirement? Especially considering that pilot at the end of a UPT commitment is over half way there. Why can’t Air Force leadership change policy to snap us out of the rut we are in? I think I know the answer.

Air Force has "Officers who happen to be Pilots" and "Pilots who happen to be Officers." Those two don’t understand each other. There are individuals who join the Air Force to fly airplanes. The “pilot who happens to be an officer” is only an officer because that’s what the Air Force requires of them to fly airplanes. If the Air Force required its pilots to be a warrant officer, the “pilots who happen to be officers” would all be warrant officers.  This is a majority of the Air Force pilots. They will leave the organization because of the leadership responsibilities placed upon them at the end of their UPT commitment.

There is also a group of "officers who happen to also be pilots". Those officers are excellent officers but  would have been just as content to be a maintenance officer, or an intelligence officer.  Those officers are here to be officers and lead men. The “officer who happens to be a pilot” doesn’t care about flying. He doesn’t have a true passion for aviation. The officer who happens to be a pilot will not retire or separate after their commitment ends and become an airline pilot. He or she will continue service to 20 years and beyond.  The “officer who happen to be a pilot” will become a senior Air Force leader. That officer will make the rules and values for the organization. They will continue in service and say "officer first, pilot second"

The "officer who happens to be a pilot" will drive the pilot who is an officer to separate at 10 years or 20 and join an airline. 

  • Upvote 1
  • Downvote 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, ygtbsm said:

What’s wrong with the Air Force? Why can’t the Air Force change?

I spent a lot of time soul searching this question: What is wrong with the Air Force? I spent countless hours wondering why the Air Force has a “pilot crisis”. I think about my fellow officers who separate at 11 to 12 years of service who are only 8-9 years away from retirement. Is active duty Air Force really that bad to prevent a pilot from continuing to retirement? Especially considering that pilot at the end of a UPT commitment is over half way there. Why can’t Air Force leadership change policy to snap us out of the rut we are in? I think I know the answer.

Air Force has "Officers who happen to be Pilots" and "Pilots who happen to be Officers." Those two don’t understand each other. There are individuals who join the Air Force to fly airplanes. The “pilot who happens to be an officer” is only an officer because that’s what the Air Force requires of them to fly airplanes. If the Air Force required its pilots to be a warrant officer, the “pilots who happen to be officers” would all be warrant officers.  This is a majority of the Air Force pilots. They will leave the organization because of the leadership responsibilities placed upon them at the end of their UPT commitment.

There is also a group of "officers who happen to also be pilots". Those officers are excellent officers but  would have been just as content to be a maintenance officer, or an intelligence officer.  Those officers are here to be officers and lead men. The “officer who happens to be a pilot” doesn’t care about flying. He doesn’t have a true passion for aviation. The officer who happens to be a pilot will not retire or separate after their commitment ends and become an airline pilot. He or she will continue service to 20 years and beyond.  The “officer who happen to be a pilot” will become a senior Air Force leader. That officer will make the rules and values for the organization. They will continue in service and say "officer first, pilot second"

The "officer who happens to be a pilot" will drive the pilot who is an officer to separate at 10 years or 20 and join an airline. 

An AD OG not so many moons ago was yet again faced with that question as we BS'd amongst each other in the bread van on our way to the parking row. His response to the collective question about that proverbial technician/pilot track inquiry was : "We already have that, it's called the Guard/Reserves". As the sole Reservist in that van, I just quietly shook my head. They don't get it, and never will. 

For those who fell off the math bus, it is increasingly difficult to attain an Active Duty retirement by that metric. Not impossible, just laborious to a non-starter degree, given the nuances of double commuting and the pay/QOL deltas of major airline flying work. 

Furthermore, that second class treatment of the flying track disincentivizes the retention of tactical combat corporate knowledge, and dilutes the value of it  (80 cents on the dollar by my last count, in the ARC), if one is to suspend disbelief for one second and assume 100% experience retention of separating members into the ARC component. And Lord knows it isn't...hell we have people quitting with no 20-year letters over ¡flu shots! I shit you not. Airlines are that frothy.

A true technician track would allow someone to attain an active duty retirement while remaining in ops for the duration, with the recognition that O-5 may be just as scarce as it is in the FTS component of the ARC flying unit ecosystem. But recalcitrant AD just won't barter with their human property as a matter of principle, so we have what we have today. A completely fraudulent and gratuitous apathy toward point blank hemorrhaging of the experienced demographic. It is terrible stewardship of the People's money, and completely uninspiring as a fellow "pilot who happens to be an officer". 

This particular iteration of the see-saw has convinced me that nothing will change. If they are unwilling to stem the loss in this environment, there really isn't a single additional variable that would compel them to do so. They'll stop loss and then allow it to get worse, while they continue to run the clock offense until the next airline hiccup. The only people who could take them to task would be Congress, and they seem aloof as to the criticality of this manning deficit if we were to get mouth-punched with a peer fight today.

So do your 12, fly your ass off, then punch to make whatever life and vocational priorities are the center piece of your life. We managed to pull ourselves out the ropes of Pearl Harbor like Rocky in the fourth movie, so I guess we can keep winging it like that when China sucker punches us. "Late to the melee...", the American Way it seems. LOL

 

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The real way to fix this would be to have pilots simply fly and do minimal qweep, which would instead be done by dedicated support personnel embedded in the sq.

Imagine flying, studying and if not on the schedule, free to hit the gym, go home etc with no guilt or fear that just doing your job is going to get you and your family screwed over come assignment time.

That’s how it should be.












Sent from my iPhone using Baseops Network mobile app

  • Upvote 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, di1630 said:

The real way to fix this would be to have pilots simply fly and do minimal qweep, which would instead be done by dedicated support personnel embedded in the sq.

Imagine flying, studying and if not on the schedule, free to hit the gym, go home etc with no guilt or fear that just doing your job is going to get you and your family screwed over come assignment time.

That’s how it should be.












Sent from my iPhone using Baseops Network mobile app

And I want $100 million.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, di1630 said:

The real way to fix this would be to have pilots simply fly and do minimal qweep, which would instead be done by dedicated support personnel embedded in the sq.

Imagine flying, studying and if not on the schedule, free to hit the gym, go home etc with no guilt or fear that just doing your job is going to get you and your family screwed over come assignment time.

That’s how it should be.












Sent from my iPhone using Baseops Network mobile app

What ifs r open!  Haven’t even called roll yet!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, ygtbsm said:

I spent a lot of time soul searching this question: What is wrong with the Air Force? I spent countless hours wondering why the Air Force has a “pilot crisis”.

"Countless hours" and this is what you came up with.  Please tell me you're not in a position to affect AF retention policy going forward. 😉  The reason for the pilot crisis isn't the mystery you make it out to be.  Read the "Dear Boss" letter from whatever decade you prefer and you'll find your answer.

12 hours ago, ygtbsm said:

This is a majority of the Air Force pilots. They will leave the organization because of the leadership responsibilities placed upon them at the end of their UPT commitment.

Really?  They leave because of added responsibility?  A 4-ship FL or Mission Commander leading a Flag mission or doing the real J.O.B. in the AOR has accepted a pretty significant level of responsibility.  If you think that individual is reluctant to accept an ADO, DO or CC job because of the leadership responsibilities, you truly don't understand the problem.

 

12 hours ago, ygtbsm said:

There is also a group of "officers who happen to also be pilots". Those officers are excellent officers but  would have been just as content to be a maintenance officer, or an intelligence officer.  Those officers are here to be officers and lead men. The “officer who happens to be a pilot” doesn’t care about flying. He doesn’t have a true passion for aviation.

How do you know they're "excellent officers"?  There's no guarantee of that any more than there is that every pilot can be one either.  One thing's for sure:  "Leading men" 🙄 in the true sense (i.e. on the pointy end into actual combat) isn't going to happen in Intel or the Maintenance squadron.  Taking an 8-ship into true combat isn't the same as showing up for the morning Intel PPT slide show or generating tail numbers for a 12 turn 8.  The leaders required to do those jobs are not interchangeable.  Until the USAF is willing to acknowledge that lost piece of very important information, it will continue to lose its best pilots and leaders.

I have yet to meet a pilot who was truly a "leader of men" and can bring game to an actual combat mission, inspire his pilots to put their lives on the line and do what is require to accomplish the mission who didn't care or have a passion for flying and all that goes along with it.  Tactical competence doesn't just happen save for the occasional gifted savant.  Without caring or passion, a so called "officer who happens to be a pilot" will never attain that level and more importantly, understand and appreciate the mentality of those under him who are striving to achieve it.

12 hours ago, ygtbsm said:

 The “officer who happen to be a pilot” will become a senior Air Force leader. That officer will make the rules and values for the organization. They will continue in service and say "officer first, pilot second"

They will continue to try to deny it takes a very different officer AND pilot to fly daylight attacks on Germany, tangled with MiGs in the alley, go downtown in Pak-6 and take the fight to our enemies of the last 30 years.  You don't magically create those pilots from the PC, no squadron bar, no nametag, no o-club, peacetime, make everyone feel like equal war fighters USAF.  Being willing to bring game, put your life out there daily in training and combat requires a special officer and pilot.  If the USAF finds a way to keep those guys around, that will be a huge step in the right direction.  In the meantime, we have the ones that do dumbass things like take "Home of the Fighter Pilot" off the main gate at Nellis.

  • Like 9
  • Upvote 8
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 12/9/2018 at 8:56 PM, ygtbsm said:

There is also a group of "officers who happen to also be pilots". Those officers are excellent officers but  would have been just as content to be a maintenance officer, or an intelligence officer.  Those officers are here to be officers and lead men. The “officer who happens to be a pilot” doesn’t care about flying. He doesn’t have a true passion for aviation. The officer who happens to be a pilot will not retire or separate after their commitment ends and become an airline pilot. He or she will continue service to 20 years and beyond.  The “officer who happen to be a pilot” will become a senior Air Force leader. That officer will make the rules and values for the organization. They will continue in service and say "officer first, pilot second"

Chang deux.  I know the last round was a troll, and well done.  I expect this one is too.  If this attitude becomes pervasive among our combat corps, we won't survive the next shooting war, and these things won't matter.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 12/9/2018 at 8:56 PM, ygtbsm said:

...

There is also a group of "officers who happen to also be pilots". Those officers are excellent officers but  would have been just as content to be a maintenance officer, or an intelligence officer.  Those officers are here to be officers and lead men. The “officer who happens to be a pilot” doesn’t care about flying. He doesn’t have a true passion for aviation. The officer who happens to be a pilot will not retire or separate after their commitment ends and become an airline pilot. He or she will continue service to 20 years and beyond.  The “officer who happen to be a pilot” will become a senior Air Force leader. That officer will make the rules and values for the organization. They will continue in service and say "officer first, pilot second"

The "officer who happens to be a pilot" will drive the pilot who is an officer to separate at 10 years or 20 and join an airline. 

Then why did they become pilots?  The AF never held a gun to my head to apply for pilot and pilot was not the only career choice selectable from my commissioning source (ROTC).

If they are doing something that is highly sought after by cadets and requires much personal investment (enthusiasm, perseverance in the attainment of skill in it and professional focus) solely for future career possibilities are they really serving the AF with that choice or themselves?

If the former, is it realistic to expect them to put 100% into mastering that operational skill and if the latter then how is that inline with the Core Values?  

Did the AF select someone that is personally committed to executing the majority of its operational responsibilities or pretended to so that they would be selected for something that would help them ostensibly in their career?  Were they honest with the AF as to their intentions?   Doesn't seem so based on your proposition they would be equally happy being in MX, Intel, etc...

Excellent officers?  Hmmm, don't think you can say that based on your explanation of your thoughts and some examination of them, just my two cents.

Edited by Clark Griswold
Link to comment
Share on other sites

This thread is almost 200 pages, but at the end of the day it comes down to 4 words: "Fuck you, pay me"

There is a price point at which enough people will tolerate all the deployments and military bullshit, and we are nowhere close to it yet.

Procurement programs out of control and eating up your personnel budget? Fuck you, pay me. Congress won't authorize a higher bonus? Fuck you, pay me. Profession of arms, service to the country, whatever, fuck you, pay me.

  • Like 3
  • Upvote 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think he has a point. I know a few fighter pilots who only flew because they got a pilot slot back in the day. They are fine but it’s not their passion.

We have a saying that there are fighter pilots and there are pilots who fly fighters.

When I see a fighter pilot General with 24 years and 1,700 hours flying time, I can usually tell what the career focus was.

And f-ck you, pay me plus give me flying hours in a sweet location.



Sent from my iPhone using Baseops Network mobile app

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

36 minutes ago, joe1234 said:

This thread is almost 200 pages, but at the end of the day it comes down to 4 words: " you, pay me"

There is a price point at which enough people will tolerate all the deployments and military bullshit, and we are nowhere close to it yet.

Procurement programs out of control and eating up your personnel budget? you, pay me. Congress won't authorize a higher bonus? you, pay me. Profession of arms, service to the country, whatever, you, pay me.

Need some of these. Edited bc the link wouldn’t work. 

432C857F-A160-4C20-B4D7-BFE98CAA5DCF.png

Edited by FlyArmy
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, joe1234 said:

This thread is almost 200 pages, but at the end of the day it comes down to 4 words: "Fuck you, pay me"

There is a price point at which enough people will tolerate all the deployments and military bullshit, and we are nowhere close to it yet.

Procurement programs out of control and eating up your personnel budget? Fuck you, pay me. Congress won't authorize a higher bonus? Fuck you, pay me. Profession of arms, service to the country, whatever, fuck you, pay me.

There is that break-even dollar value, but I'd argue that reducing the causes of the "F you" part would be more cost effective than paying pilots more than Delta or United can offer.

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...