Next Chief of Staff

[Spoo]

On ‎5‎/‎21‎/‎2016 at 11:28 AM, Spoo said:

Roger that shipmate!

According to PM, I was too subtle. I was using the term shipmate in one of two ways:

[pawnman]

On 5/19/2016 at 11:00 PM, General Chang said:

Two thumbs up for this selection.  He will continue the great works started by Gen Welsh.  Get excited; our future is in good hands, Airmen.

We thought the same thing about General Welsh.  I'm starting to think there is not one we can pick to do this job that won't get raked over the coals by congress and ignored by his wing commanders (see - volunteerism as a factor for commander's recommendation on EPRs, master's degrees still tracked by WG/CCs for promotion to major).

[Jaded]

Welch's policies had no teeth. 

"Any wing cc who uses a master's degree for strats is fired, and will submit their retirement paperwork." BAM. Problem solved. 

Stop trusting your mid level managers to do the right thing. They've proven that they are incapable of it. 

[08Dawg]

On 6/2/2016 at 9:53 AM, Jaded said:

Welch's policies had no teeth. 

"Any wing cc who uses a master's degree for strats is fired, and will submit their retirement paperwork." BAM. Problem solved. 

Stop trusting your mid level managers to do the right thing. They've proven that they are incapable of it. 

It's a sad state of affairs when an O-6 thinks they can not obey a directive from the CSAF.  "I know Gen. Welsh said this, but I know better, so get your master's done or you're not getting a DP". 

[Prosuper]

Do you think if O-6's are disobeying CSAF due to the fact that is the way they made O-6? 

[Fuzz]

Hat's off to General Goldfein...

Edited June 5, 2016 by Fuzz

[deaddebate]

http://www.armed-services.senate.gov/hearings/16-06-16-nomination_-goldfein

Personal highlights of the Advance Questions for General David L. Goldfein, USAF / Nominee for the Position of Chief of Staff of the U. S. Air Force

In your view, what are the major challenges that will confront the Chief of Staff of the Air Force?

The most pressing challenge for the United States Air Force is the rise of peer competitors with advanced military capabilities rivaling our own. Adversary advances are challenging our control of the Air. Space, long considered a sanctuary, is an increasingly contested environment. Airpower contributions to the rise of revisionist states will compete for resources with the ongoing demands of intractable conflicts and continued fiscal uncertainty. The next Chief of Staff, in support of the Secretary, must enable the innovation and agility of our Airmen, preserve the Air Force’s competitive advantages, find solutions for readiness and modernize force structure and capabilities.

Assuming you are confirmed, what plans do you have for addressing these challenges?

The Air Force is taking a number of steps to position us to fly, fight and win against a peer competitor with advanced capabilities. It starts with the continued development of Airmen and then we have to address a number of important modernization programs—including new platforms such as the F-35 and B-21, which will ensure a qualitative edge against likely adversaries. We also have a number of upgrades to existing platforms, which will extend their life and ensure their survivability in all but the most denied environments. But more importantly than platforms, we have a detailed, multi-year strategy to become a multi-domain force that integrates air, space and cyberspace capabilities to accomplish Air Force missions. This is a new way of thinking about the application of airpower, where once separate and distinct mission areas will operate synergistically to offer the Joint Force Commander multi-domain solutions.

What do you consider to be the most serious problems in the performance of the functions of the Chief of Staff of the Air Force?

Balancing the demands of Combatant Commanders for the capabilities the Air Force provides today, against the requirement for a healthy, ready Air Force that is prepared for contingencies against peer adversaries with advanced capabilities tomorrow. This is the central challenge for all Service Chiefs. In our role as members of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, we work closely with the Secretary and Chairman to articulate requirement to preserve readiness and modernize our aging fleet to be prepared for future threats.

If confirmed, what management actions and time lines would you establish to address these problems?

The first step is to acknowledge that the Air Force will almost assuredly be engaged in continuous combat operations for the foreseeable future. So the central question is how to conduct persistent combat operations while also recovering readiness and modernizing the force under the current budgetary constraints. We must continue to find more efficient ways to present forces to forward combatant commanders with less cost and footprint. And we must also continue, in line with Secretary James’ priorities, to make every acquisition dollar count. And finally, we must recognize that we’re not going to buy our way to a more capable Air Force. Tomorrow’s Air Force will be built on the new concepts, developed by Airmen and enabled by technology. If confirmed, I’ll focus on harnessing the innovative spirit of our Airmen to find opportunity in the challenges we face.

[...]

What do you view as the major readiness challenges that will have to be addressed by the Air Force over the next 4 years, and, if confirmed, how will you approach these issues?

Decades of constant deployment and focus on counterinsurgency operations have reduced the Air Force’s overall readiness. These issues along with critical skills shortages and an aging aircraft fleet and training infrastructure that need recapitalization to ensure viability and readiness against a near-peer adversary continue to provide challenges for the Air Force. I will address these issues by balancing our effort between top acquisition programs, sustaining our current force, modestly growing end-strength, and investing in our full spectrum training and exercise programs. Sequestration in FY18 would further exacerbate these challenges and limit the AF’s ability to recover readiness.

[...]

What do you consider to be the key to the Air Force’s success in recruiting the highest caliber American youth for service and retaining the best personnel for leadership responsibilities?

The Air Force is known as a technological force. It is also known as a force that values its personnel and their individual and collective contributions. We are meeting our recruiting targets both in numbers and quality, however the size of the youth market, propensity to serve, and market competition (especially for highly-skilled areas such as aviation/remotely piloted aviation, cyber, engineers and special operators) are all growing concerns. As such, it is important that we continue to offer a competitive compensation package, give individuals challenging opportunities to lead, and have a talent management system designed to extract the most productivity and value from an organization’s greatest asset – its people – to meet mission objectives.

[...]

Do you agree, if confirmed, to reevaluate the Air Force’s practice of offering the aviation retention bonus equally to all platforms, as a way to better shape and manage the Air Force’s pilot force across disciplines?

We will tailor any potential bonus based upon specific platform and overall Air Force requirements. The requested increase is not a set amount. If approved, this will give us the flexibility to tailor bonus amounts and contract terms by platform.

[...]

Do you believe additional rounds of BRAC are warranted at this time?

Yes. Drawdowns in force structure have greatly outpaced reductions in infrastructure. As a consequence, we pay to maintain and sustain installations that we don’t need. Closing unneeded bases is one of the few ways we can achieve significant savings and use that money to recapitalize and sustain our weapons systems, enhance our readiness training, and invest in the quality of life of our airmen.

If so, how do you quantify the Air Force’s excess capacity driving your decision?

The Air Force estimated excess capacity through parametric analysis of force structure to quantity of infrastructure. DoD’s April 2016 report to Congress stated the AF had 32 percent excess infrastructure capacity based on the projected FY19 force structure. In the last round of BRAC, the Air Force reduced its infrastructure by less than one percent, and since then we’ve reduced our size by hundreds of aircraft and thousands of personnel. Reductions in force structure have greatly outpaced reductions in infrastructure.