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

5 hours ago, HarleyQuinn said:

I’m for it, no more middle man.  No more “I’ve got 8 bosses bob.”  No more scrambling to get slides ready for the OG meeting only to brief the same god damn info at the Wing meeting.  Hopefully, no more OG to MXG/CC fighting on a Friday afternoon while the schedulers are sitting around wondering what schedule to execute. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Until you get a shit stick sq/cc, that was somebodies boy, and is an untouchable HPO. 

 

Then youre fucked for 2 years. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Buddy Spike said:

Maybe they should put finance/admin under the SQ/CC so it's easier to get paid.  

Our finance cringes every time our OG calls or shows up at the office.  He's pretty much 100% on reg-offs vs our finance and they can't stand it.  I can't even imagine their response if this were to happen.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Seems like a good idea until you realize that all it will do is concentrate even more power upward.  WG/CC will become the new GP/CC.  The AF as a whole already doesn't trust SQ/CCs and sees them as just baby leaders on probation being closely babysat by GP/CCs who themselves are on O-6 probation.  So now the O-6 probation job will be the WG/CC who babysits the SQ/CCs, and no real decision making power will exist at the base level anymore, it will just further fuel the "mother may I" bullshit where every little decision needs to be run through NAF or MAJCOM staff.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think that more distance from an O-6 the better when it comes to Sq/CCs doing their job (some Gp/CCs are an exception and let their Sq/CCs run their own show).  More time was spent trying to feed and care the OG than was spent trying to work for the folks.  Ever talk to someone running a GSU where the big boss is hundreds/thousands of miles away? 

Now at the wing level, I can see more of a CC and DO tag team construct coming.  "Joe, you make sure the operations of the wing runs, and I'll so all that commander stuff."

Lastly, I can see some interesting dynamics between ops and mx.  Many a place where we had great working relationships with our MX counterparts, but got fucked up by the group level fighting.  It's like a big family get together where everyone's kids play well but the parents just bitch at each other.

Out

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is interesting, by removing Gp/CCs we will remove the requirement for our O-6s to command twice (we are the only service that does that). This will give the USAF more opportunity to develop O-6s.

My question is, while developing O-6s is a good thing (aka more staff experience, I know that sounds blasphemous, but, trust me we get our ass handed to us because we as operators do touch n go's on staff and we lose out in the one and 2 circle pentagon fights at the joint level because of it.) but it is at the expense of command experience. Currently, having Gp/CCs stay put for 2 yrs gives the organization continuity and much needed guidance while letting O-6s have the opportunity to lead Sq/CCs.

The best WG CCs I've worked with had the opportunity to learn how to lead senior leaders as GP/CCs.  We've now taken that away.  There are also plenty of span of control questions.  in the 80s and early 90s this was the way things were we had a Base Commander (MSG/CC) a DO (OG/CC) and a DM (MXG/CC).  I assume the old Gp Staff Jobs (mainly Ops and Mx Stan Eval) will fall under the new COS position or under the DO/DM position?  To me this looks like the COS position will get all the stray cats that were at the group, and all of Wing Staff.  And according to this article some Intel and Comm bubbas.  What's there role, is it to be the shit filter from the MAJCOM A2 and A6 and I guess they'll come out of hide (aka OSS and Comm Sq losing bodies).  This is has similarities to an Army BCT.  As they have lettered staffs.  But they fight and deploy as a BCT so that's needed.  We don't as a wing, even though the announcement said this setup will enable the WG/CC to integrate better down range (that's not gonna happen.)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, disgruntledemployee said:

 Ever talk to someone running a GSU where the big boss is hundreds/thousands of miles away? 

Doing this now and it is rather eye opening from the way I was raised. Lots of autonomy and freedom to do things. Kind of a pain in the ass for most of the support functions that I have taken for granted for most of my career. 

Share this post


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

So it's like the Navy.  

Maybe they should put finance/admin under the SQ/CC so it's easier to get paid.  

Don't you start making sense! There will be none of that talk here.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/23/2018 at 3:04 PM, bennynova said:

We need to reduce NAFs first.   Groups are not necessarily the problem....

We could probably just dissolve the NAFs entirely.  Do they actually do anything?  In my somewhat limited experience on the Group and Wing staff, I've never sent anything to 8th Air Force...it always goes directly to AFGSC.  

Get rid of the NAFs and you may have a decent shot at staffing some of the MAJCOM billets currently going unfilled due to the Rated Staff Allocation Plan (or whatever we're calling it now).

Share this post


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

We could probably just dissolve the NAFs entirely.  Do they actually do anything?  In my somewhat limited experience on the Group and Wing staff, I've never sent anything to 8th Air Force...it always goes directly to AFGSC.  

Get rid of the NAFs and you may have a decent shot at staffing some of the MAJCOM billets currently going unfilled due to the Rated Staff Allocation Plan (or whatever we're calling it now).

8th AF probably made sense...in WWII. 

Share this post


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

We could probably just dissolve the NAFs entirely.  Do they actually do anything?  In my somewhat limited experience on the Group and Wing staff, I've never sent anything to 8th Air Force...it always goes directly to AFGSC.  

Get rid of the NAFs and you may have a decent shot at staffing some of the MAJCOM billets currently going unfilled due to the Rated Staff Allocation Plan (or whatever we're calling it now).

They have their uses overseas.  Think PACAF; you have a NAF for Air Forces Japan, Alaska, Hawaii etc. It makes sense for different sub-AORs.  However, I think you could absolutely get rid of 18th AF in AMC for example.  Now, would it be weird for Wing Commanders to report directly to a 4 Star MAJCOM/CC? Not sure. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

NAFs are supposed to be the assigned Air Force component to a COCOM.  So, if you did away with 12 AF and AFCENT, would ACC report directly (under COCOM authority) to two different Combatant Commanders?  I guess it works in USAFE-AFAFRICA, somehow, but proximity helps there.  SOUTHCOM and CENTCOM would be hard-pressed to share stuff.

That said, you probably have some unnecessary ones (18th AF and anything in AETC stand out).  Global Strike may or may not need them either.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The GSC NAFs are the component commanders for the STRATCOM OPLAN missions. 8th AF covers the bombers and 20th AF covers the ICBMs. Now whether they’re needed considering that it’d be an NCA-directed response is another  discussion.

Edit: Looks like that changed last fall with the AFGSC/CC now acting as the STRATCOM JFACC.

Edited by Breckey

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, Weezer said:

NAFs are supposed to be the assigned Air Force component to a COCOM.  So, if you did away with 12 AF and AFCENT, would ACC report directly (under COCOM authority) to two different Combatant Commanders?  I guess it works in USAFE-AFAFRICA, somehow, but proximity helps there.  SOUTHCOM and CENTCOM would be hard-pressed to share stuff.

That said, you probably have some unnecessary ones (18th AF and anything in AETC stand out).  Global Strike may or may not need them either.

Except that 12th doesn't send all of 12th at a time. So they're already splitting COCOMs. Just like when we send BUFFS to Guam (PACOM) and Bones to AUAB (CENTCOM). 

How hard would it be to dissolve those staffs and put their positions at the MAJCOM?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
50 minutes ago, pawnman said:

How hard would it be to dissolve those staffs and put their positions at the MAJCOM?

We are about to find out. That was a table slap from the last Corona. 18AF will be a shell (ADCON responsibilities only) in a matter of weeks, 3-Star goes back to the MAJCOM Vice...

No clue exactly how ops will fit into the OT&E world of the MAJCOM but they’ll make it work, it’s been done before.

Big changes coming in lots of places.

Chuck

Edited by Chuck17

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
57 minutes ago, Chuck17 said:

We are about to find out. That was a table slap from the last Corona. 18AF will be a shell (ADCON responsibilities only) in a matter of weeks, 3-Star goes back to the MAJCOM Vice...

No clue exactly how ops will fit into the OT&E world of the MAJCOM but they’ll make it work, it’s been done before.

Big changes coming in lots of places.

Chuck

It’s probably going to work like when AETC absorbed 19 AF for 1-2 years...then reactivated 19 AF. They probably got tired of the MAJCOM being the waiver authority for everything everything flying related.

Edited by Azimuth

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Azimuth said:

It’s probably going to work like when AETC absorbed 19 AF for 1-2 years...then reactivated 19 AF. They probably got tired of the MAJCOM being the waiver authority for everything everything flying related.

Idk about AETC but almost 100% of our waivers in AMC bypass the NAF and go directly to the AMC A staff.  The only thing I’ve seen the NAF do is get rid of toxic Wing Kings 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Azimuth said:

It’s probably going to work like when AETC absorbed 19 AF for 1-2 years...then reactivated 19 AF. They probably got tired of the MAJCOM being the waiver authority for everything everything flying related.

AFGSC is already our waiver for anything above the WG/CC. Remind me which tier of waiver authority the NAF holds again?

Share this post


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

AFGSC is already our waiver for anything above the WG/CC. Remind me which tier of waiver authority the NAF holds again?

Delegable T-2. Efforts were made to expand delegation down to even Wing CCs but the HAF Directors lost their collective shit when they heard we wanted to let CCs make risk-based decisions without asking mom and dad 🙄

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, war007afa said:

Delegable T-2. Efforts were made to expand delegation down to even Wing CCs but the HAF Directors lost their collective shit when they heard we wanted to let CCs make risk-based decisions without asking mom and dad 🙄

T-2 is MAJCOM.

  • Like 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
Sign in to follow this  



×