Jump to content

What's wrong with the Air Force?


Catbox

Recommended Posts

Just stop expecting me to put in 8 hours flying and 4 hours for queep, if you want to be promotable.  Yes, if you pay me 50-100k more, I’ll consider working this investment banker hours job, but it won’t make me invested in the organization - it will just keep me around for a paycheck. 

Numerous SQ/CCs and OG/CCs have told me that the expectation is that you should be working 12 hours a day.  Literally, the only point of that is so they can put a line on your OPR: “#1 Flt/CC/ADO/FGO/etc.  Totally rehauled something that didn’t need to be fixed!  He doesn’t care about the crushing hours, promote this man!”

The truth is, I want a job where I can fly and concentrate on flying, I can either eat breakfast or dinner with my family every single day that I’m not on the road, and I can make O-5 without having to jump through hoops so I can get a decent retirement.  

Current Air Force active duty value proposition is sketchy at best:  “Stay in!  We need you to stay in to become a GP/CC and WG/CC!  Did we mention that only the top 10% of you that do decide to stay will have a realistic opportunity of even having a chance at these positions?  Don’t worry about that, we won’t tell you where you stand until it’s too late, but, trust me, you’re either in or you’re not at this point in your career.  Oh, and 30-40% of you will either be passed over or relegated to do jobs that you never expected or wanted in a shocking response to your years of what you thought were decent performance reports?  Hope you enjoy the Deid/not flying - remember, service before self and this is why you joined!”  

Whereas, if you join the guard, you get promoted to O-5 damn near guaranteed, fly at the same rate of active duty guys, and often don’t even have a real queep job.  You don’t have to move, you’re pulling in extra money doing what you want on the side, and you have significantly more control over TDYs/Deployments.  Where is the value in AD if you don’t want to, or, worse, can’t and don’t even know it, become a WG/CC or GO?

I think talent management is a big deal.  Personally seeing dudes I really look up to get f*@%ed without any notice I know has scared a lot of guys about to make the bonus decision. Up or out has to go.  APZ needs to be a thing. HPOs as a quota have to go.  Fix DOPMA.  OPR/promotions have to get better so people can plan their lives.  And we need to stop working just to work.  Everyone is burned out and tired. 

  • Like 1
  • Upvote 8
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, raimius said:

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.

Reduce causes AND pay more. At the end of the day I need to know I am offering my family the best financial future possible.

Being able to pay for whatever number of kids college and being set up for stability (=$) for the last 45 years of our lives would be nice... is there any job that offers that?

If I had to choose loving my job for 10 more years or getting that future for my family, it’s the future. Airlines are offering it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, brawnie said:

I think talent management is a big deal.  Personally seeing dudes I really look up to get f*@%ed without any notice I know has scared a lot of guys about to make the bonus decision. Up or out has to go.  APZ needs to be a thing. HPOs as a quota have to go.  Fix DOPMA.  OPR/promotions have to get better so people can plan their lives.  And we need to stop working just to work.  Everyone is burned out and tired. 

This is it. Plus transparency. Did anyone else know that not all jobs are going to be posted on MyVector? Ever. There are hundreds being held in reserve for hand-picked folks. I’m not against competitive selection, but they should still advertise the jobs and put whatever criteria they want in the description.

Also, AFPAK Hands. Wtf. It’s like the symbol of all that is wrong with the AF and just hearing it disgusts me. When higher leadership is asked in public about it they always say, “Oh yeah, it’s great, but... you should meet with your Sq/CC to discuss some of the... uh... career implications.” Transparency. Just say it dude. We don’t need your closed door meetings.

What do we value? It shouldn’t be the same across the board. It should depend on the job. We should match to skills not to career progression. It shouldn’t be that “this guy needs to do this job to stay on track” but rather “this person is the best for this job.”

Trash the career timeline. Tie positions to rank like they do with O-9 and O-10. You want a job with more responsibility? Go for it. Apply for it. May the best person win. F*<£ your 24-yr pole year (which I just heard a General emphasize last week with respect to developing a specific person’s career)

“But we can’t promote the most qualified for a job to that job!”

Why not?

“*computing* *wheezing* strats! *black smoke from ears* school! *uncontrollable shaking* ta ta ta timeline! nya nyanyanyanya zzzittzzzazzzait pp ppp puuuuushhh lii li liiiinnnneeesss!!! *BOOM* *Mind blown*”

  • Like 2
  • Upvote 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 hours ago, JeremiahWeed said:

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.

To be fair, these responsibilities can be separate. And I feel more dudes would be inclined to stay if they were.

On a fighter ANG hiring board the squadron commander asked me "How would you feel knowing that you likely won't have an opportunity to be the squadron commander due to your USMC and Hornet background, as well as your year group?"

"Sir, I want as much responsibility in the airplane as possible. And as little as I can get away with outside of it."

He looked to his patch, then to the third member of the board and turned to me and said, "That is the best possible answer you could've given."

  • Like 2
  • Upvote 8
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Klepto said:

This is it. Plus transparency. Did anyone else know that not all jobs are going to be posted on MyVector? Ever. There are hundreds being held in reserve for hand-picked folks. I’m not against competitive selection, but they should still advertise the jobs and put whatever criteria they want in the description.

Also, AFPAK Hands. Wtf. It’s like the symbol of all that is wrong with the AF and just hearing it disgusts me. When higher leadership is asked in public about it they always say, “Oh yeah, it’s great, but... you should meet with your Sq/CC to discuss some of the... uh... career implications.” Transparency. Just say it dude. We don’t need your closed door meetings.

What do we value? It shouldn’t be the same across the board. It should depend on the job. We should match to skills not to career progression. It shouldn’t be that “this guy needs to do this job to stay on track” but rather “this person is the best for this job.”

Trash the career timeline. Tie positions to rank like they do with O-9 and O-10. You want a job with more responsibility? Go for it. Apply for it. May the best person win. F*<£ your 24-yr pole year (which I just heard a General emphasize last week with respect to developing a specific person’s career)

“But we can’t promote the most qualified for a job to that job!”

Why not?

“*computing* *wheezing* strats! *black smoke from ears* school! *uncontrollable shaking* ta ta ta timeline! nya nyanyanyanya zzzittzzzazzzait pp ppp puuuuushhh lii li liiiinnnneeesss!!! *BOOM* *Mind blown*”

I'm all for more transparency.  They advertised that Talent Marketplace thing (which, to be honest, does seem like a real step up from the old ADP)...but then a bunch of folks, myself included, were removed from the VML and not even able to submit preferences because the functional already knew AFPC couldn't afford to move us.

  • Sad 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, brawnie said:

Whereas, if you join the guard, you get promoted to O-5 damn near guaranteed, fly at the same rate of active duty guys, and often don’t even have a real queep job.  You don’t have to move, you’re pulling in extra money doing what you want on the side, and you have significantly more control over TDYs/Deployments.  Where is the value in AD if you don’t want to, or, worse, can’t and don’t even know it, become a WG/CC or GO?

I think talent management is a big deal.  Personally seeing dudes I really look up to get f*@%ed without any notice I know has scared a lot of guys about to make the bonus decision. Up or out has to go.  APZ needs to be a thing. HPOs as a quota have to go.  Fix DOPMA.  OPR/promotions have to get better so people can plan their lives.  And we need to stop working just to work.  Everyone is burned out and tired. 

While the Guard is better, it is not a solution. The Guard is also deteriorating. It's become Active Duty Lite. However, in the Guard, when people get pissed, they simply don't show up. Try getting anything done on a base with poor morale. This is a very recent change.

I cleaned out a desk drawer the other day an on top was a document that referenced Air Force Basic Doctrine: Centralized Control, Decentralized Execution.

I thought, Big AF is applying this doctrine not to war fighting, but nearly every aspect of the organization. Many of the daily stressors that I hear about in the squadron pertain, in a very large part, to the ceding of control and authority to "data collection" organizations off base. Finance, Persco, Comm... I went down to the Comm Sq last week to raise hell. I sat down with a TSgt and just asked why everything seemed broken. "Lack of manpower, lack of funds, lack of authority to fix anything, higher level organizations do not respond." It was the same when I stormed over to Finance demanding answers recently. My anger turned to apathy when, through conversation, I realized it really wasn't all their fault and there was little they could do, even if my issue became their full time job. It's the same shit everywhere I go on base.

People want meaning in their work that comes through giving our people the means, flexibility, and responsibility to make progress. Nearly all of that has been removed and given to central authorities. The production order comes down from on high and you merely execute. We've all been relegated to double-shift factory work and few find satisfaction in that.

Trying to work through this and checking myself for both pessimism and optimism, and allowing only realism - there's no way to untangle this mess without a comprehensive overhaul that likely will not happen until the most dire of circumstances.

 

 

Edited by torqued
  • Like 2
  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 hours ago, HU&W said:

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.

 

Thank you for your constructive criticism. Until now, I have not considered the relationship between a passion for aviation and aerial combat effectiveness. I too am deeply concerned that we will not survive the next shooting war. Here are some more thoughts. I place a lot of value in retaining experienced pilots.  Retention of experienced aviators is down and mishaps are up. Coincidence? Pilots with 10 years of experience are walking away from a bonus and retirement that is only 8 years away to start over with the airlines. What is the reason? I guess it doesn’t matter. I have a theory or two, but who cares.  We aren’t retaining experience. In addition to being safer, I believe that a seasoned combat force is more lethal than an inexperienced force.

There is probably an intelligence officer in Russia or China who is paying very close attention our experience level. The relationship of experience and mishaps and will likely be discussed and a potential adversary's intelligence analyst might advocate that our inexperienced fighting force should be exploited in some way. Those intelligence officers might comment on bonus take rates or whatever. But inexperience will probably be briefed.

Quality of life is usually mentioned as a factor for pilots or officers or whatever choosing to leave Active Duty. I have heard Senior Leaders and SECAF talk about QOL improvement. I just haven’t seen those QOL improvement measures at my level. Experienced Pilots are walking. I talk to the pilots who leave. It’s not about the money. The threat of a 365 continues to be the most efficient force reduction tool the Air Force has.

I like airplanes, that’s why I’m here. If being a warrant officer was the requirement to fly for the Air Force, I would be a warrant officer. I am mission focused. The most important thing I do for the country is flying a student training line at a UPT base. I won’t be able to change the Air Force. My record won’t promote. The wing exec will probably promote. He might be more lethal than me, but I doubt it. He is flying less than a third of the amount that I am.  Consider the mission of Columbus AFB “Cultivate Airmen to be innovative leaders, Create the world's most advanced military Pilots, and Connect to each other, our families, and community.” The first sentence of the mission statement of a UPT base isn’t even about producing pilots. Creating a leader is their first priority. Is that wrong?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 hours ago, brawnie said:

Current Air Force active duty value proposition is sketchy at best:  “Stay in!  We need you to stay in to become a GP/CC and WG/CC!  Did we mention that only the top 10% of you that do decide to stay will have a realistic opportunity of even having a chance at these positions?  Don’t worry about that, we won’t tell you where you stand until it’s too late, but, trust me, you’re either in or you’re not at this point in your career.  Oh, and 30-40% of you will either be passed over or relegated to do jobs that you never expected or wanted in a shocking response to your years of what you thought were decent performance reports?  Hope you enjoy the Deid/not flying - remember, service before self and this is why you joined!”  

I think talent management is a big deal.  Personally seeing dudes I really look up to get f*@%ed without any notice I know has scared a lot of guys about to make the bonus decision. Up or out has to go.  APZ needs to be a thing. HPOs as a quota have to go.  Fix DOPMA.  OPR/promotions have to get better so people can plan their lives.  And we need to stop working just to work.  Everyone is burned out and tired. 

Post of the year IMO, well said.  I can see the appeal of a new OPR process with a top, middle, and bottom third hard strats (similar to how the E's do it) and static close outs.  At least then you'd know where exactly you stand and shouldn't be surprised when you don't get promoted, miss out on some developmental "opportunity," or not put on a command track.  I also believe the HPO system as it stands now is poisonous and creates a "haves vs the have nots" culture that disincentivises those not on the track by removing any chance of moving into meaningful higher leadership roles (if that's what one desired) while not holding those on the HPO track accountable if they screw up.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 hours ago, Clark Griswold said:

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.

Thanks for the feedback.  

Here is the recruiting pitch of the Air Force: Pursue your interests, find your strengths and elevate your skills while serving your country in the U.S. Air Force. We provide unparalleled career options, growth opportunities and challenges to set you up for success and bring out the greatest potential in every one of our Airmen.” -AF.com

Here is the recruiting pitch for Air Force doctors: “When you become a doctor in the U.S. Air Force, you can care for your patients without the red tape of managing your own practice or dealing with insurance claims. Our doctors receive a top-notch education and serve around the world in their chosen profession.” -AF.com

Recruiting pitch for Pilots: “We employ some of the most advanced aircraft in the world to complete our missions and defend our country. Utilizing extraordinary skill and precision, Air Force Pilots push each aircraft’s limits with complete control. While successfully completing their missions is paramount, their role as leaders and character models, training and commanding crews, is just as important. These skilled professionals deploy around the world to wherever there’s a need as fighters, trainers, bombers, advisers and more.

What??? Role as leaders?  Why is employing a fighter aircraft in combat as a 4 ship flight lead is not seen as being a leader in the Air Force?

The Core Values are an interesting part of this discussion. Who gets to choose what our core values are? Who writes those values? Does a pilot that gets out at 10 years get to write the core values? How about the squadron commander who only stays in for 20 years? Nope. The officer first who stays in to 40 years of service. Maybe. What year were the core values incorporated? Any idea?   

Core values were written in 1995 and formally published 2 years later in the “little blue book”. 1997 was an interesting year for the Air Force. Version 2 (or 3?) of the dear boss letter was written. A mass exodus of pilots was occurring.  1997 was the same year the UPT commitment was raised from 8 to 10 years.

Why can’t we change? Because “yes men” get promoted. Its Doctrine: Air Force Doctrine on Service Before Self: “This value also demands each Airman keep “faith” in the system. This does not mean we may not question what we are doing or that we will blindly follow our leaders without a second thought. It means that we place our trust in the processes, procedures, and other Airmen to get the job done and in the right way”

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, ygtbsm said:

Thanks for the feedback.  

Here is the recruiting pitch of the Air Force: Pursue your interests, find your strengths and elevate your skills while serving your country in the U.S. Air Force. We provide unparalleled career options, growth opportunities and challenges to set you up for success and bring out the greatest potential in every one of our Airmen.” -AF.com

Here is the recruiting pitch for Air Force doctors: “When you become a doctor in the U.S. Air Force, you can care for your patients without the red tape of managing your own practice or dealing with insurance claims. Our doctors receive a top-notch education and serve around the world in their chosen profession.” -AF.com

Recruiting pitch for Pilots: “We employ some of the most advanced aircraft in the world to complete our missions and defend our country. Utilizing extraordinary skill and precision, Air Force Pilots push each aircraft’s limits with complete control. While successfully completing their missions is paramount, their role as leaders and character models, training and commanding crews, is just as important. These skilled professionals deploy around the world to wherever there’s a need as fighters, trainers, bombers, advisers and more.

What??? Role as leaders?  Why is employing a fighter aircraft in combat as a 4 ship flight lead is not seen as being a leader in the Air Force?

The Core Values are an interesting part of this discussion. Who gets to choose what our core values are? Who writes those values? Does a pilot that gets out at 10 years get to write the core values? How about the squadron commander who only stays in for 20 years? Nope. The officer first who stays in to 40 years of service. Maybe. What year were the core values incorporated? Any idea?   

Core values were written in 1995 and formally published 2 years later in the “little blue book”. 1997 was an interesting year for the Air Force. Version 2 (or 3?) of the dear boss letter was written. A mass exodus of pilots was occurring.  1997 was the same year the UPT commitment was raised from 8 to 10 years.

Why can’t we change? Because “yes men” get promoted. Its Doctrine: Air Force Doctrine on Service Before Self: “This value also demands each Airman keep “faith” in the system. This does not mean we may not question what we are doing or that we will blindly follow our leaders without a second thought. It means that we place our trust in the processes, procedures, and other Airmen to get the job done and in the right way”

Agree with your sentiment (incredulity that the AF does not view tactical operational leadership as "leadership" per se or a demonstration of ability that is indicative of future leadership potential, that it mistakes management of the day to day and admin of the AF more highly) and that yes men, shoe clerks, some other disparaging epithet, etc... are the impediment to change but in other news water is wet.  

We know what "the problem" is but it is the questions that arise from "knowing" that are important (IMHO):

Is the problem cultural or procedural / structural?  Both?

If so, then what can be done?  By whom?  

How do you convince an authority that could change / fix the "problem" that:  

a) the problem exists when the institution is basically functional (engine runs but sometimes backfires and belches smoke but it runs) and symptoms that would be recognized by someone not in the institution exist when it appears from the outside looking in that it works?  Planes still fly, missiles are on alert, satellites are controlled, wrenches turn, gates guarded, etc... yeah, stories of cluster-foxes make the news occasionally but to the average citizen, reporter, congressman / staffer... the AF still works seemingly well.  How do you transmit your insider perception to someone who could change things but has an outsider perspective?

b) if you do get the traction to get the "problem" fixed, can the AF do it in a vacuum or do you need / have to get all the branches fixed?  If the AF is changed in a way that is more operationally focused but very different than the way the other 3 branches matriculate their leadership (particularly the officer cadre) will that put the AF at a disadvantage in the arena of Joint Leadership?  Will their be enough guys with enough staff experience and rank that the AF would have equal representation? 

c) if you get the authority to change, do we really know what to do?  dog finally catches car and now wtf?  We can all rattle off any number of immediate actions but I would guess that those would either be highly specific and limited to the little corner of the AF we are in or too vague to be implemented and have a desired effect institution wide.  "Stop all the PC crap", "Focus on the mission", etc... are good ideas but what are they really?  Start at the bottom or top?  How do you change but are still ready for the call over the number of years it will take?

That's a lot questions without a lot of answers / suggestions but the proponents of major change / reform (count me as one fwiw) need to say why we need to change, what we want to change to, how we are going to change and why going thru the pain / cost of changing is worth it.  

Until then, we're just going to be yelling into the void.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, ygtbsm said:

The threat of a 365 continues to be the most efficient force reduction tool the Air Force has.

This seems irrational to me. There are far fewer 365s for rated officers now than there were 5-6 years ago. 

Im not saying that the threat of 365s isn’t causing people to get out, because I continually hear people say it’s a factor. But it’s kind of like saying you won’t go to the beach because people get killed by sharks. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This seems irrational to me. There are far fewer 365s for rated officers now than there were 5-6 years ago. 
Im not saying that the threat of 365s isn’t causing people to get out, because I continually hear people say it’s a factor. But it’s kind of like saying you won’t go to the beach because people get killed by sharks. 
Because while the 365 was the best example of the problem, it was not the actual problem.

A better way of putting it might be: "I'm not willing to commit to an undetermined yet assuredly significant time away from my family, for a cause that is no longer obviously patriotic, led by people who are not concerned with minimizing that time away, compensated in a way that does not recognize dissimilar contributions, in an organization that prioritizes the bureaucratic process over the operational skill set.

The 365 was just a bold, underlined version of that statement I think, but plenty of tanker pilots trapped in 2-on 2-off Qatari hell will tell you it still exists in smaller dose deployments

  • Like 2
  • Upvote 8
Link to comment
Share on other sites

33 minutes ago, Homestar said:

This seems irrational to me. There are far fewer 365s for rated officers now than there were 5-6 years ago. 

Im not saying that the threat of 365s isn’t causing people to get out, because I continually hear people say it’s a factor. But it’s kind of like saying you won’t go to the beach because people get killed by sharks. 

It only takes one!

 

shark, that is.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

38 minutes ago, Lord Ratner said:

but plenty of tanker pilots trapped in 2-on 2-off Qatari hell will tell you it still exists in smaller dose deployments

This is more rational. It’s like being scared to drive because drunk drivers kill thousands every year. 

But I get your point. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Homestar said:

This is more rational. It’s like being scared to drive because drunk drivers kill thousands every year. 

But I get your point. 

On a more serious note, I was always told if you stay in for 20, you WILL take a 365.

IMO it still waits to be seen if that remains the case.

lightning strikes aren’t likely, but stand in an open field...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hell, the threat of even a crappy 6 month air advisor non-flying deployment is enough to drive me off active duty. The last flying deployment was only marginally more satisfying when the jets were flyable. The sustainment phase of the never ending war gets old after countless trips to the desert. Everyone is burned out and looking for something more satisfying, more rewarding, and with greater control over their own lives. I’m not sure there’s a solution to that.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

  • Like 2
  • Upvote 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 12/10/2018 at 3:27 AM, 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

Plus all your mx folks got to do is fix jets, nothing else, no PME, no swing or mid shift, no weekend duty. They can have a family life and close the flightline down every other Wed for in house training. Contractors lube and wash the jets. All parts coming from the depots are good and jets don't ever break. Debriefs are professional between pilot and mechanic not officer vs enlisted. Sounds like the Civil air patrol.

  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

This seems irrational to me. There are far fewer 365s for rated officers now than there were 5-6 years ago. 
Im not saying that the threat of 365s isn’t causing people to get out, because I continually hear people say it’s a factor. But it’s kind of like saying you won’t go to the beach because people get killed by sharks. 

In the past two years, I’ve seen three guys get tagged with 365s just over a year prior to their UPT ADSC or retirement eligibility date. I’ve seen several others volunteer for a 180 in order to stave off a 365. A 365 is a serious kick in the junk, especially if the job is worthless, unfulfilling, or could easily be performed from a CONUS location.


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

Unless you’re an 0-6 or higher, in a command billet, nobody needs to be doing a year deployment, period. I can understand needing that continuity at the 0-6+ level....outside of that you’re damn hard pressed convincing me there’s any good reason someone needs to spend a year over there. You tell me what job exists at the 0-3 ~ 0-5 level that absolutely must have the same human being in it for a whole year. I call BS on that noise. 

Edited by MooseClub
Grammar
  • Like 2
  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, pelexecute said:

As I was reading this 3 new 365’s came on my email for O-5’s.  All next summer to an undesired location. 

May the odds be ever in your favor.

 

Meanwhile, the quiche-eating airline guys are busy working 12, maybe 15, days a month for double the money.  The low point...being gone for 3 nights in a row! 😂

Love ya Big Blue, but the madness has to stop.  Run!  Fucking Run fellas!!

 

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, MooseClub said:

Unless you’re an 0-6 or higher, in a command billet, nobody needs to be doing a year deployment, period. I can understand needing that continuity at the 0-6+ level....outside of that you’re damn hard pressed convincing me there’s any good reason someone needs to spend a year over there. You tell me what job exists at the 0-3 ~ 0-5 level that absolutely must have the same human being in it for a whole year. I call BS on that noise. 

While I tend to agree, I can also see the flip side of the coin whereas the constant rotation of personnel causes equal issues...

The better solution is actually having an end game to this ridiculous and endless "conflicts" we've been engaged in for the past 17+ years.  At this point we are just throwing fuel on the flames and not actually working to a solution to put the fire out. 

I know that's grossly simplified, but until that happens, there will be no "fixing" the USAF or any other services...

  • Like 4
  • Upvote 4
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...