Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
HarleyQuinn

No more group commanders? Air Force tests new wing design that gives squadron commanders more leeway

Recommended Posts

Hate to say it, but in cyber the NAF made sense.  Probably because of the diffuse, overarching requirements of cyber.  Subordinate to AFSPC (or ACC when it happens) for ADCON, but reporting to CYBERCOM for ops stuff and TACON for our ops units.

It took me moving to the ops side for it to become clear...some heavily obfuscated lines that don't become recognizable until you realize the 3 hats Wedge was wearing.

We do a shit job training our Lt's to understand the point of the CC structure, and even worse joint.  No HPO who bounces in and out is going to ever get it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, HU&W said:

T-2 is MAJCOM.

Yep, that's my point.

T-0 - Outside the Air Force

T-1 - HAF

T-2 - MAJCOM

T-3 - WG/CC

There's no tier for NAF.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, HU&W said:

T-2 is MAJCOM.

This I know (authored the verbiage for SAF/AA, including the expansion of the T-3 option down to SQs). The T-2 is delegable to NAF/CCs, if the MAJCOM/CC desires to do so. AFRC did this with nearly all of their T-2 requirements. 

Edited by war007afa
Autocorrect

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Yep, that's my point.
T-0 - Outside the Air Force
T-1 - HAF
T-2 - MAJCOM
T-3 - WG/CC
There's no tier for NAF.


T-1 is MAJCOM with HAF concurrence.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Skeptical about any of this. There's basically two Air Forces, the operation itself, and the bureacracy that exists to perpetuate itself first (and support the operation second).

I can't imagine the bureacracy willingly giving up even a tiny slice of power in favor of improving the operation. I mean, the operation is literally in danger of failing due to a labor shortage because the bureaucracy is that powerful and unwilling to change. No way this plan sticks.

Edited by joe1234
  • Like 1
  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, joe1234 said:

Skeptical about any of this. There's basically two Air Forces, the operation itself, and the bureacracy that exists to perpetuate itself first (and support the operation second).

I can't imagine the bureacracy willingly giving up even a tiny slice of power in favor of improving the operation. I mean, the operation is literally in danger of failing due to a labor shortage because the bureaucracy is that powerful and unwilling to change. No way this plan sticks.

We can't train enough pilots, maintainers, SARMs, CSS, and the list goes on. Love to give you more admin help in the squadron, but giving you a brand new Amn is going to mean he/she will be limited in a CSS. There are certain programs they cannot run. I have a friend who is a SARM that hasn't been PCS'd in 6 years. They are at 40% manning. 

Army Air Corps version 2.0 here we come.

Share this post


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

We can't train enough pilots, maintainers, SARMs, CSS, and the list goes on. Love to give you more admin help in the squadron, but giving you a brand new Amn is going to mean he/she will be limited in a CSS. There are certain programs they cannot run. I have a friend who is a SARM that hasn't been PCS'd in 6 years. They are at 40% manning. 

Army Air Corps version 2.0 here we come.

Could be worse. Our airfield management is hovering around 40% manning, but AFGSC had turned down our last three reclamas and PCSed the OIC, and now they are trying to deploy the last officer in the shop.

Share this post


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

Could be worse. Our airfield management is hovering around 40% manning, but AFGSC had turned down our last three reclamas and PCSed the OIC, and now they are trying to deploy the last officer in the shop.

Did that in my workcenter as well on Staff.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I wonder how this new construct would actually work if implemented Air Force wide. Since we have groups who report directly to NAFs & GSU Groups. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
35 minutes ago, BuffBro said:

I wonder how this new construct would actually work if implemented Air Force wide. Since we have groups who report directly to NAFs & GSU Groups. 

I bet if we deleted the NAF and the Group, everything would work just fine.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/27/2018 at 2:04 PM, joe1234 said:

... I mean, the operation is literally in danger of failing due to a labor shortage because the bureaucracy is that powerful and unwilling to change...

there-are-levels-of-survival-we-are-prep

The fat is hardest to get rid of and muscle the hardest to build, true on the personal level and institutional.

 

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
Sign in to follow this  



×