Jump to content
Baseops Forums
Catbox

What's wrong with the Air Force?

Recommended Posts

18 hours ago, war007afa said:

In response to your commander, I would have emphasized that pilots are a part of that one team, and that support agencies also need occasional reminder they’re part of a greater mission. Sometimes that reminder is in the form of visual presence of an aviator.

There’s a reason we consciously decide to put aviators in some support positions: the organizations have typically lost the bubble on what they’re actually there for. I’ve seen a few anecdotes where some agencies thought aircraft existed on the installation to support them, not the other way around.

Need more of you in Cyber. 

Started my folks doing "Threat of the Week" briefs and it was like a Holy Crusade against their no-work-Fridays.

I've got maybe...4 people that really understand what Ops means/feels like.  All prior aircrew or Mx.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, Guardian said:

See how the rest of the Air Force likes that.

They wouldn't notice, man.  Very few AF units are supported by AF flight ops.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
33 minutes ago, Guardian said:

I think we should have no fly (I mean work) Monday’s or fridays in ops and mx. See how the rest of the Air Force likes that.

 

They would be thrilled because Transpo wouldn't have to drive crews to the flight line and MDG wouldn't need a flight doc on standby

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, Guardian said:

They don’t realize or take stock that their very jobs depend on the flight happening.

Their jobs rely on the flight happening EVENTUALLY.  Don't kid yourself that a single down day will have anything but a positive effect on the morale of the support units.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, HarleyQuinn said:

https://www.airforcetimes.com/news/your-air-force/2018/11/20/muslim-airman-granted-air-forces-first-beard-waiver/

I want a beard because I hate shaving. Otherwise, this is unfair. If my peers are promoted because I didn't do ACSC, that's not fair either. Sarcasm rant off...

Before I PCS'd, I no kidding had a Capt tell me his schedule was unfair and he threatened to go to the IG on the CC. Talking about unfreaking believable.

I remember some dudes in BMT who faces looked liked chopped liver due to shaving. Of course they received shaving waivers, but they weren't rocking beards like our boys in special forces though.

 

 

6F6D7965-747D-4C50-AE88-3CA4EDD53E84.jpeg

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The only thing 'wrong' about this is that it took 4 years to get approved; I saw worse abuses of religious accommodation on active duty...

  • Upvote 3
  • Downvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, HarleyQuinn said:

https://www.airforcetimes.com/news/your-air-force/2018/11/26/air-force-base-defenders-upgrade-their-weapons-training-and-fitness-standards-to-meet-near-peer-threats/

I kind of prefer having a Task Force or Special Ops Task Force at the airfield. Also, having attack helos on the ready comes in handy. I wouldn't feel safe with Security Forces trying to project power outside the wire. Not like they are going to be able to call in CAS. This is a joke right? Willing to bet a shiny penny came up with this concept.

PersonalCrispArrowworm-max-1mb.gif

Did you read the article?  The point is there won't be two main airifields in the War/conflict.  The article mentions minor upgrades in weapons, some  more training more often, and apparently a new fitness test.  Do you really have an issue with that?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Did you read the BG quote on an obvious comparison between 11B and SF?  Good lord.  Being prior Army I just had to laugh.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, slc said:

Did you read the BG quote on an obvious comparison between 11B and SF?  Good lord.  Being prior Army I just had to laugh.  

“We size up very similar to the Army’s lightest of the light infantry," said Brig. Gen. Andrea Tullos, the Air Force’s “top cop” and a career security forces officer.

“We have strong expeditionary roots,” she said. "We’re somewhat of a blend between a light infantry unit and a military police company, and we’re not as expensive as a lot of the Air Force’s weapon systems, so I like to say we bring a lot of bang for the buck."

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, HarleyQuinn said:

https://www.airforcetimes.com/news/your-air-force/2018/11/26/air-force-base-defenders-upgrade-their-weapons-training-and-fitness-standards-to-meet-near-peer-threats/

I kind of prefer having a Task Force or Special Ops Task Force at the airfield. Also, having attack helos on the ready comes in handy. I wouldn't feel safe with Security Forces trying to project power outside the wire. Not like they are going to be able to call in CAS. This is a joke right? Willing to bet a shiny penny came up with this concept.

 

The idea has been thrown around to get some of the more specialized SF guys that do go out side the wire (Ravens/Guardian Angels, Dagger types) some familiarity with local ISR/Attack assets and some expierence on the radio. I have actually been able to do a little of it with some of the guys at my base, it was very much a more bro level deal than anything official, but I think it was good training for them. 

As a armed ISR/CAS asset I don’t nessisarly need the guy on the ground (especially guarding the wire) to give me a 9 line, if they can get on a radio and in a clear and concise manner tell me where ish they are taking fire from I can provide great info on enemy movement/numbers/etc for them to take proper action. Worse case I can always shoot under self defense ROE, especially if we are talking about the wire about to breached. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I don't understand how any one can consider a "conflict" like Afghanistan a "War" zone.  Yes stuff is exploding, people are dying, but I'm sorry when you've been at it this long it can't be considered a War any more.  It's like the 3 star making a plea to a auditorium full of pilots that are approaching their ADSC to please stay in because we are needed to keep releasing bombs, support the war etc etc.  I'm sorry but when I've been deploying to that conflict for my entire 12 years in, when that conflict was already 6 years old the whole point becomes lost.  This isn't an excuse for people to get complacent, because that can easily mean you are risking others and your own lives while out there. But calling this long term live action shooting range a "War" gives it too much credit.    

 

 

Dude seriously... This... exactly what you just said is the attitude that fuels the notion the Army gets that the Air Force is disconnected and uninterested in supporting the warfighter.

 

You say this to some Ranger riding in the back of a Chinook to the X night after night or to the poor bastard that’s rolling down Route 1 doing yet another IED clearance patrol and you get (and largely deserve) a complete scoff. To think otherwise means Kuwait is a Deployment, active combat operations actually ceased, and dudes getting IDF’d at Dahlke we’re tragic victims of some accident as part of a forward deployed “supporting effort.”

 

Is it perpetual and self serving, absolutely. Does our collective leadership seem to be writing its guidance in sand/crayon... no doubt. Are we still actively engaged in combat with a military force who seeks to do us harm both there and abroad... to deny otherwise would be foolish.

 

And no that attitude isn’t exclusive of service. God knows the Army Fobbits turning people away at the Independence Chow Hall because they have dirty uniforms don’t understand it’s a war either.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
. Also, having attack helos on the ready comes in handy.


No.... no they do not. I have been fighting this mentality for years. Even Army leadership doesn’t understand the error in this thinking. We were told the same BS this last rotation through Iraq with the security risks from some of our “partner forces.”

Having Apaches or Cobras on the field did literally nothing at Bastion. They will do literally nothing the next place and time either. You’ve got an enemy dressed like the good guys fighting small pockets of good guys in close proximity with nobody aware of where anybody is. Even if you could get the aircraft launched under fire then what? I get to just start picking and choosing my best guess and laying out 30 and rockets?



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
36 minutes ago, HarleyQuinn said:

Watch the Bagram footage.... unless you can't. Everybody who was there was talking about the Apache and how lead was raining down. I arrived 2 months after the fact.

If the visibility is shot then nobody is taking off which from my understanding was the case at Bastion.

What an odd comment to make to an Apache guy.  You come across as a weird and ignorant dude.  I mean that in a constructive way.  Recommend not making every comment about yourself.  

  • Thanks 2
  • Upvote 8
  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
55 minutes ago, HarleyQuinn said:

You sound mad and a bit like an ignoramus if I must professionally say so myself. To say helos were ineffective at Bastion during an attack with zero visibility is shortsighted don't you think?

During a TIC not too far from an airbase in Afghanistan, the attack helos helped saved my convoy. Happy? If they weren't at the AB there could have been a lot of injuries or casualties. A troop was shot in that same convoy a week later and I remember the pilot bursting out into tears after landing. So yes, I am going to disagree from experience.

My comment was not directed at the specifics of this conversation but rather your style of communication;  although lecturing an Apache guy about the proper way to employ Apaches is a bold move. 

Your points are frequently hard to understand. Talking less about yourself would perhaps make it easier for others to comprehend what you’re trying to communicate.   It’s free advice, take it or leave it. Cheers. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
You sound mad and a bit like an ignoramus if I must professionally say so myself. To say helos were ineffective at Bastion during an attack with zero visibility is shortsighted don't you think? During a TIC not too far from an airbase in Afghanistan, the attack helos helped saved my convoy. Happy? If they weren't at the AB there could have been a lot of injuries or casualties. A troop was shot in that same convoy a week later and I remember the pilot bursting out into tears after landing. So yes, I am going to disagree from experience. 

 

Dude not just an Apache guy (though former now), I was overhead at Frontnac  

We were useless.

 

And that was a situation where I didn’t have to spend 8 minutes launching an aircraft while the horde closes in around me chucking grenade and small arms fire at my incredibly vulnerable aircraft.

 

Yes despite the fact making fun of SF is fun, they do in fact have a point. Security is produced and maintained at the lowest level and will be made or broken there. Saying “who needs crew serves and other stuff we’ve got Apaches on the flight line we can launch” is something said by idiots.

 

Either maintain and train a security personnel cadre that is equipped to deal with the real world threat (small team synchronized raid style attack not drunk mom in minivan breaching an ECP) which we could find both in COIN or as an asymmetric use in near peer (NK SF forces on OSAN for example) or just kill the mission entirely and pay the Army or somebody else to do it for you. Otherwise you’ve learned nothing that hasn’t been repeatedly demonstrated since the Rat Patrol first took the legs out from under the Luftwaffe in NA with nothing but a couple Lewis Guns and Jeep’s.

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

 

  • Upvote 7

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
52 minutes ago, HarleyQuinn said:

His issue is no different than AMC guys complaining about moving pallets around with the same tires on them.

Hold on... that's a bad thing?! 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Well lets just roll your huge ego outside the wire if you don't think having attack helos at an airbase is necessary when the base is attacked. See how long you last with suicide bombers coming at you. Probably lock up like a school girl. 
His issue is no different than AMC guys complaining about moving pallets around with the same tires on them.

24106a01dd8866e6a1a3bf45b42cc952.jpg



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
  • Like 1
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, HarleyQuinn said:

You sound mad and a bit like an ignoramus if I must professionally say so myself. To say helos were ineffective at Bastion during an attack with zero visibility is shortsighted don't you think?

During a TIC not too far from an airbase in Afghanistan, the attack helos helped save my convoy. Happy? If they weren't at the AB there could have been a lot of injuries or casualties. A troop was shot in that same convoy a week later and I remember the pilot bursting out into tears after landing. So yes, I am going to disagree from experience.

Certainly there's no difference between an attack on a convoy in the open, with an easy way to tell friendlies and enemies apart, and an attack inside the wire of aFOB in close proximity to friendlies, friendly buildings, and friendly aircraft.

Glad you made it out safely... But there's a huge difference in your situation and what happened at Bastion.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Lol. I love how you have no clue what the hell you are talking about at all. I guess at Bagram where they hammered insurgents attacking the base with an Apache goes against every comment you just made. Shhhhhhhhhh you weren't there.


Neither were you jackass.




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
  • Haha 1
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
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



×