Jump to content

What's wrong with the Air Force?


Catbox

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, 08Dawg said:

I’d say it’s more a bastard child of ACC trying to live up to its grand pappy SAC but with a massive inferiority complex.  

I gave them the benefit of the doubt until they took Phoenix and turned it into Vista. Seems to be a program without a direction. Pathfinder even more so. Common theme of those? Not focused on having a tactically competent force. 

Edited by SurelySerious
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 3/19/2020 at 7:28 AM, jazzdude said:

Part of the problem is that many times either: your loggies have failed you (didn't build the requirement), or your unit hasn't communicated what you need to the loggies (bad requirements), or the loggies haven't communicated the business rules/what can be reasonable expected (bad communication).


All the services are guilty of this, but it seems to be worst with AFCENT because they seem to think "we own the cargo airlift, so we can do whatever with them."

Holy balls this is like dealing with CYBERCOM.  CYBERCOM - "We own you 24/7, and you need permission to do ADCON duties."  When we ask what we're supposed to do if we're not "operating" we get this:

O5-O9 - "Sprinkle some CyberOps over there."

Tactical/Ops Minion - "Yes sir, what's the effect you'd like?"

O5-O9 - "CyberOps?"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I gave them the benefit of the doubt until they took Phoenix and turned it into Vista. Seems to be a program without a direction. Pathfinder even more so. Common theme of those? Not focused on having a tactically competent force. 
The Pathfinder program seems to produce personnel that are competent at being a general's aide.
  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Question for the group.  I work at Wright-Patt where they fly people in from all over the country for IFC exams, tech training, flight doc training, etc.  So our exposure to Corona is a bit high.  Now they are telling us if we leave the local area (defined as the area between our home and work) we have to quarantine for 14 days before we're allowed back to work.  I've never experienced this before and it seems a bit illogical given that my highest risk for exposure is at work.  Has anyone else experienced this?  I understand the DoD can pretty much do what they want, but is this really legal?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, 17D_guy said:

Holy balls this is like dealing with CYBERCOM.  CYBERCOM - "We own you 24/7, and you need permission to do ADCON duties."  When we ask what we're supposed to do if we're not "operating" we get this:

O5-O9 - "Sprinkle some CyberOps over there."

Tactical/Ops Minion - "Yes sir, what's the effect you'd like?"

O5-O9 - "CyberOps?"

That’s Army 101, sorry “joint 101.” Inability to comprehend the idea of desired effect vs. emotional attachment to a specific platform/MDS/weapon. 

Edited by brabus
  • Haha 1
  • Upvote 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, stuckindayton said:

Question for the group.  I work at Wright-Patt where they fly people in from all over the country for IFC exams, tech training, flight doc training, etc.  So our exposure to Corona is a bit high.  Now they are telling us if we leave the local area (defined as the area between our home and work) we have to quarantine for 14 days before we're allowed back to work.  I've never experienced this before and it seems a bit illogical given that my highest risk for exposure is at work.  Has anyone else experienced this?  I understand the DoD can pretty much do what they want, but is this really legal?

In short, yes. If you are AD, the commander can lawfully order you to refrain from certain activities including travel. This is not normal and in 11 years in the military I've never seen it before to this scale. Usually curfews or temporary travel bans or night club bans are common, but this has been a bit extreme. I tell you this because undoubtebly this will pass and you will have a mostly normal life again at some point. But we are doing almost the same thing at our base. (Must remain within 1 hour of base). 

Edited by FLEA
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, FLEA said:

In short, yes. If you are AD, the commander can lawfully order you to refrain from certain activities including travel. This is not normal and in 11 years in the military I've never seen it before to this scale. Usually curfews or temporary travel bans or night club bans are common, but this has been a bit extreme. I tell you this because undoubtebly this will pass and you will have a mostly normal life again at some point. But we are doing almost the same thing at our base. (Must remain within 1 hour of base). 

Thanks for the response.  I believe they are saying the policy applies to AD, civilians and contractors.  It's not that I'm personally opposed to the policy as I'm not leaving my house except to go to work and do the essential trips to stay alive (food, gas, alcohol).  I just thought it a bit draconian.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks for the response.  I believe they are saying the policy applies to AD, civilians and contractors.  It's not that I'm personally opposed to the policy as I'm not leaving my house except to go to work and do the essential trips to stay alive (food, gas, alcohol).  I just thought it a bit draconian.


Installation commander may restrict travel to AD folks at their discretion. The home/work commute verbiage is actually the AFI definition of local area.

My understanding (after working this at the unit level for the past week) is that leave travel of government civilians (GS employees) cannot be restricted, but *could* result in a situation where the individual is quarantined, and would not automatically be paid (individual could have to use personal leave/comp time, etc).

Contractors get their guidance from their companies, but installation commander could always restrict their base access.

Regular civilians (dependents, etc) are not subject to these rules but their actions could impact their sponsors (spouse travels to China, may result in quarantine for sponsor).

I learned a lot this week about all this and this is my best understanding.

Open for spears if anyone has other info. Crazy times indeed.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

33 minutes ago, daynightindicator said:

 


Installation commander may restrict travel to AD folks at their discretion. The home/work commute verbiage is actually the AFI definition of local area.

My understanding (after working this at the unit level for the past week) is that leave travel of government civilians (GS employees) cannot be restricted, but *could* result in a situation where the individual is quarantined, and would not automatically be paid (individual could have to use personal leave/comp time, etc).

Contractors get their guidance from their companies, but installation commander could always restrict their base access.

Regular civilians (dependents, etc) are not subject to these rules but their actions could impact their sponsors (spouse travels to China, may result in quarantine for sponsor).

I learned a lot this week about all this and this is my best understanding.

Open for spears if anyone has other info. Crazy times indeed.

 

Thanks.  I guess I just need to shut up and color.  I didn't agree with the policy, but it sound like we're keeping in step with Big Blue so I just need to accept it and move on.  Strange days indeed!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, stuckindayton said:

Thanks.  I guess I just need to shut up and color.  I didn't agree with the policy, but it sound like we're keeping in step with Big Blue so I just need to accept it and move on.  Strange days indeed!

It is definitely draconian. I just stumbled upon a tweet of (probably real) measures from 1918. It’s like a “can you spot the difference” exercise with what we are doing 100 years later. 
C74DEE1A-1CDC-43B0-AB53-AF56EB137C19.thumb.jpeg.26211f58c997ac27e655873eb1a4d7f1.jpeg

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 3/18/2020 at 2:23 AM, Springer said:

Nice! Panama?

Yes

I was at Howard from 84 to 90. Started out with a few O-2As and UH-1Ns. In 85 we got rid of those and got 20 OA-37Bs. 

 

After the Just Cause they gave away all of the aircraft. And closed the 24th TASS.

Aircraft_(2).jpg

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

https://www.stripes.com/news/europe/this-is-discrimination-germany-seeks-income-taxes-from-us-airman-because-he-s-married-to-local-woman-1.624553

The fact that his command isn't aggressively jumping in to protect him is really dissapointing to me. Having been stationed in Germany, I don't feel like the German government strongly appreciates our presence and we'd be better off moving our larger bases and hubs to Poland. 

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

https://www.stripes.com/news/europe/this-is-discrimination-germany-seeks-income-taxes-from-us-airman-because-he-s-married-to-local-woman-1.624553
The fact that his command isn't aggressively jumping in to protect him is really dissapointing to me. Having been stationed in Germany, I don't feel like the German government strongly appreciates our presence and we'd be better off moving our larger bases and hubs to Poland. 

Look at the Navy to see what happens to leaders who stand up for their people...


Sent from my iPhone using Baseops Network mobile app
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 3/17/2020 at 5:15 PM, MC5Wes said:

OA-37B My favorite aircraft to work on.

OA37B.jpg

Where is this picture from? It's not Howard. Looks like someone is going to tear up some shit with BDU33s.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This picture was taken at La Aurora airport  in Guatemala City. Around 87 or 88.  It was a great TDY till we had an NDI E-6 eject in the chocks after an incentive flight. 
The canopy almost took me out as it flew off and landing off to the side. The seat went up and about 100 feet forward. Landing on top of the guy still strapped in. 
 

He didn’t make it

Edited by MC5Wes
  • Sad 1
  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, MC5Wes said:

This picture was taken at La Aurora airport  in Guatemala City. Around 87 or 88. 
 

It was a great TDY till we had an NDI E-6 eject in the chocks after an incentive flight. 
 

The canopy almost took me out as it flew off and landing off to the side. The seat went up and about 100 feet forward. Landing on top of the guy still strapped in. 
 

He didn’t make it

Damn. For us no fliers - NDI and eject the chocks?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, MC5Wes said:

This picture was taken at La Aurora airport  in Guatemala City. Around 87 or 88.  It was a great TDY till we had an NDI E-6 eject in the chocks after an incentive flight. 
The canopy almost took me out as it flew off and landing off to the side. The seat went up and about 100 feet forward. Landing on top of the guy still strapped in. 
 

He didn’t make it

Handgrips - Raise

Triggers - Squeeze

?

How and why?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What I was told is he grabbed the one handle by mistake. Trying to pull himself forward to see the hole the pin went in to on the other side. Trying to put the seat pin back in. 
 

This was a backshop guy who didn’t work the line. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, MC5Wes said:

Howard the first couple days of Just Cause.

5zDFaeU.jpg

I recognize that for sure. So you were there when the two gunships got stuck? I spent a lot of time at Howard flying on the AC-Hs 83-89 including the Just Cause. Last trip there was in 95 on the MC-E. There were worse places to be than there.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 3/19/2020 at 3:29 PM, dream big said:

Nothing against airline hopefuls but nothing bothers me more as a WO than when I show to mission plan and guys are just flying the flagpole and like you said, ILS to a full stop; or the guys who min run their tactical flying and try to stay off station as much as possible.  This is a cancer in the MAF and sets the younger dudes up for failure and complacency. 

Is it really a cancer, though? I mean, if your concerns are clearly and logically valid, then you should have no trouble getting the currency requirements increased. Go and raise the minimum standard by which the pilots are expected to maintain. Ah, but then that's the trick, because now you're making it harder for squadrons to send people on the road to fill taskings coming down from the dudes wearing stars. Which means your priorities are in direct conflict of the other 25 agencies who all think their priorities are the most important thing in the world, too.

 

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...