Leaderboard

TL;DR: We like to think that pilots have to run the Air Force, but they got us into this mess. What other conclusion is left to be drawn? With very few exceptions, the Air Force is helmed up and down the chain by pilots. Groups, wings, NAFs, MAJCOMs, staff positions, functionals, CAOC spots, deployed units, IGs... Lots and lots of pilots. Who is responsible for the failings of an organization if not for the leaders? How many excuses are we supposed to make for them? And let's not play the "good dude" game either. Being a successful organizational leader is not about how fun you were to drink with 10 years ago, or how sh*t-hot you were in the jet, or how much you "get it" when you're having a closed door town hall with a random unit in their bar heritage room. There is only one measure-- how is the organization doing. The examples are legion. I'll give a few that have, over the years, stood out as very distilled, specific instances of poor leadership. 1. DV visits. If I had a dollar for every DV that said they didn't want the base to stop doing it's mission to prepare for their arrival after they arrived, you'd think I was paying my way through medical school the old fashioned way. If you can't fathom the way your rank and position affect your subordinates in an organization you've been a part of for 30+ years, on what planet should you be leading it? Can we all just finally admit that yes, they do want it? They like it a lot. Even if not for themselves, then for what they believe the military should look like. But most likely because that type of treatment is addictive. Name one theory of leadership taught in any level of PME that promotes the type of behavior we see when senior leaders visit a base. Did they skip those classes? Because I have a f*cking masters degree in it from ACSC. 2. We have been at the Deid since what? 2002? I have no clue. A long time. And of those years, every. single. summer. has been excruciatingly hot. Yet somehow, despite there being an airport right down the road in the exact same climate with hundreds of flights per day, leadership at AUAB has not figured out how to get every plane suitable air conditioning for the preflight. Seriously? Some flight doc measured the internal surfaces of the aircraft at over 160F, and the air temp inside a boom pod at over 140. This isn't a war against the Axis in an austere location, it's normal ops. If you can't look at that as a leader (and one who has flown planes!) and deduce that there should be adequate cooling for the aircraft... RyanAir is the human equivalent of a Pakistani poultry trailer without the rights activists, yet they manage to keep the planes cool on the ground. Oh, and let's not forget about the black mold that no leader saw fit to address until Congress heard about it. 3. Of course, the pilot crisis. And not that it happened, not the years of neglect that led up to it, not the countless forums and round-tables, and hangar-flies that went ignored, while the CGO/Maj force screamed for attention. I actually understand how we got to where we are today. What I don't get is how now that the problem exists, announced, published, and even presented to congress, how can we still be bungling the response? This thread is proof. Changes to the promotion process? Secret. Timeline? Mystery. People who apply for the bonus early? Gotcha! I'm not saying pilots can't make great organizational leaders. I'm sure some are great. But we have two things to compare: A. That a war-fighting organization can be effectively led by selecting from a small percentage of the overall population (pilots) those who demonstrate over the first half of their career a talent for paperwork, physical fitness, administrative tasks, and personal presentation, but who generally have little to no experience leading people until squadron command. This, as of today, is an unproven theory. B. That a war-fighting organization led by a small percentage of the overall population (pilots) who demonstrated over the first half of their career a talent for paperwork, physical fitness, administrative tasks, and personal presentation, but who generally have little to no experience leading people until squadron command, will crumble under external pressures, e.g., Congressional inquiries, workforce competition, etc. This, as of today, is supported by the evidence. If pilots make such great organizational leaders, I'd love to see it. Check rides aren't graded on who had the best attitude. I'd rather choke that go through it, but I'm guessing WIC grads, the best of our pilots, didn't get their patch because they filled out the 781s better than anyone else. No one cares how your flight suit looks if you show up the the ARCP late. The flying world, last I checked, prides itself of results-based assessment, yet when it comes to leading the organization, we abandon the principal for proclamations of past dudeliness... At some point we have to assign responsibility. If you want to say that it's just because we are picking the wrong pilots for the job, fine, but guess what? Pilots are the ones doing the picking. Pilots are the ones who have signed off on our ludicrous promotions system. Pilots are the ones standing by silently while the legal system is twisted to suit the preferences of a vindictive wing commander. Pilots are the ones telling congress it's pretty darn good. Pilots are the ones telling young captains to quit if they don't like it, someone will gladly replace them. Please, tell me why I'm wrong.

At this rate people will pin on before the results even come out.

Oh, there it is. The problems are within! Fix thyself. So, to be clear: It is not the leader's job to identify the problem, nor develop a solution, nor implement it. Instead, identify the fighter pilots as "whine children" and ask them for solutions, but "plausible" ones, because we have to start from a position of impossibility. Did you read my post? What about it was lacking reason or construction? It's amazing how many people in charge keep telling their subordinates it's their responsibility to fix this problem. Discuss it? I gave you a whole page to discuss, and you blamed it on my age. Sounds like the old guys telling us we whippersnappers just don't get it, but hang on while I tell you about how great it was when I was a captain and SF would escort you driving home drunk. Great story, Colonel. Could I solve this problem? Maybe. Probably not though. Either way it's a pointless argument. I'm not in a leadership position. Lots of people are (maybe you)? Now that DOD, Congress, AMC, CAF, and CNN have all agreed there is a shortage, who should constructively argue for a fix? I would have guessed the leaders might, but apparently it falls to the line flyers? You mistake me for a leader, or a source of solution. I am neither. I am a symptom. The Doctor (AF Leadership) looks at the symptoms (retention, morale, opstempo) to create treatment plan (organization changes) for the patient (Air Force). The doctor doesn't ask the patient to suggest which course of antibiotics would best alleviate their ailment. Once again, I pose this: Under fighter pilot leadership the Air Force is imploding, with the fighter pilots allegedly "worst off." So when I say, this isn't working, you say.... Well it's not my job to fix it. You'll be a general in no time.

So the only thing we know for sure is that nobody knows what's going on. Standard AF. Lol Sent from my iPhone using Baseops Network Forums

While I am sorry my 08 bros have to wait, if they are indeed getting rid of "school selects" then me says that is a very positive change in terms of promotion and career progression. It may eliminate the unnecessary box checking leading up to majors board (exec, moving jobs every 6-9 months) and otherwise polluting the time of a critical demographic in the squadrons. Instead, hopefully we can spread out the "leadership selection" over several years and maybe find better leaders, possibly "late bloomers." I'm for it!

I agree with everything you said except blaming it on pilots. Shoeclerks and weakling leaders are responsible for ruining the Air Force, and "shoe clerk" is independent of AFSC. Some of the best and worst leaders I've seen have been Pilots. Many of the issues I have with the Air Force is the lack of mission focus, where the CE commander whining that we aren't doing enough Chem gear exercises takes place over the OG advocating for the flying that should take place while copilots and half the IPs can't land the airplane. In my opinion, the pilot corps has been neutered. It's not about fly fight and win anymore. It's about political correctness, queep and BS that has nothing to do with flying. In an organization charged with flying airplanes into combat, who else do you suggest lead the Air Force? I don't think pilots are the issue.

Aaaaaaaaaand......'08 board release pushed back again. From the bomber functional at AFPC, expect it out "by the end of the month". Something about finishing up public affairs guidance....which only adds to the suspicion of a major change and they're figuring out how to sell it... For real though....WTF, AFPC assholes?? Can you not stick to your own stated timelines for once?? This is now what ,the third or fourth time it's been pushed back? "Yeah, sir, that TOT I gave you....I can't make it...oops, still can't make it....ok, one more time....you really didn't want those bombs on target on time, did you?"

The best leadership for the Air Force is rooted in the pilot community....unfortunately "most" of the best pilot leaders are in the guard already or not on a path in the AD system to be in control. Sad fact, the system doesn't promote the best leaders into leadership...which is why you see the kid who got picked on his whole life until he figured out that he could join the USAF, fill some squares and be the mfwic. Most of the great pilots and bros I respected when I was a LT are gone...many of the ones I saw as ass-kissing careerist, risk adverse square fillers are now the decision makers you are blaming for the USAF woes. There are still some great ones though. Sent from my iPhone using Baseops Network Forums

Was in the C-130H...so many issues there with proficiency and MX rates, in the J now and life is much better.

As if there was any other way?

I think that Lord Ratner is hitting center of mass on this one but with one exception: the bureaucracy has become so stifling that even the best-intentioned leaders are struggling to make a difference. I do not blame pilots. A bunch of MSG Colonels and Generals wouldn’t do any better. Exhibit A: When Gen Welsh was appointed CSAF everyone was fired up about him righting the ship. By most accounts people were disappointed. I think it was death by a thousand cuts once the bureaucracy got it hands on him. And by bureaucracy I mean HAF, SAF, OSD, and Congress. Having seen these monstrous staffs from the fringe I can't imagine how we accomplish anything.

I'm neither (10 minutes of searching would have helped you there...), but please allow me to clarify: I mean millennial in only the most derogatory, degrading, and hurtful possible sense. Much as I would use the term "gay" while having absolutely no reference to sexual orientation or lifestyle. Here I mean "millennial" to reference the 5-year-old minded 28-year-old who points out injustices that are, in fact, wholly just, but that leave said millennial getting an outcome they don't like. The "millennial" response being to whine and complain instead of seeking a rational, effective, and practical solution. These "millennials" want the world perfectly presented on a silver platter, in a safe space free of insult or discomfort, at a time that perfectly suits their whimsically felt 'need' at that specific moment. To be honest, I know a lot of people that fall in that associated generation who are in no way shape or form "millennial." I've worked 6 month deployments with them. I've flow combat missions with them. They are what I profess to be: professionals focused on the employment of combat airpower. Look at any generation and you will find that the true military professionals have a hard time wholly identifying themselves with the Gen-Xers, millennials, hippies, grudge rockers, oregon trailers (my year group), or whatever other subculture/sociological term might be blanket applied to that year group. That's because we have a culture rooted in who we presently are, not an identity externally stamped by sociological academia. You sound like a whiny child instead of an airpower professional. Improve yourself. Find and present a plausible solution through reasoned and constructed argument so we can discuss it instead of just bitching how some non-specific people group wronged the world and it hurts.

If you ignore the likely mass casualties from all the artillery and ballistic missiles to the south, it's an untapped market. Millions of people with no car or phone...and no money, but ignore that.

Not throwing this spear at you....but why the damn secrecy??? Leave it to the AF to make a major change and find the shadiest, most opaque way possible to do it. "We're going to make a major change to the way we do promotions....and not tell any of you about it".

It just says "complete." But since you get a TR from it and it shows as a year in your duty history on the OPB it is moot.

I agree that it is the right direction I'm just a little disappointed that there was no attribution to Lt Col Raible.

I say keep it up. Thanks for being a voice for those that have been told for so long "you volunteered", as if by volunteering I waived my ability to use common sense. Sent from my iPhone using Baseops Network Forums

Is "great dude" really the test you want to roll with? Mark Welsh was widely regarded as a great dude. James Post too. Brian Hastings -- great dude according to many people. Britt Warren can be a great dude overall and still be dead wrong to punish people for exceeding fitness standards but falling short of his pet standard. As for Laughlin ... I don't think I'll ever be over Macho Grande.

A lot of things wouldn't have gotten done without JQP. Remember the mold problem at AUAB? Or the Laughlin IP issues? Those alone make me thankful for the JQP readership. While I don't always agree with the conclusions, I read the articles and will stay subscribed for a long time.

I suppose that's a fair take, even if I don't see it that way. We got some huge wins and moved the needle consistently for three solid years. We continue to get wins occasionally, but two things have changed. The first is that I can't personally dedicate the time to the blog that I was able to commit from '13-'16 (because as you intuit, I went to work) and have therefore grown to rely on others. The second is that I believe the USAF is genuinely trying to turn things around. As opposed to the season of darkness, when I felt Welsh and James needed to be called out on every valid example that came around the bend because they didn't even have the right intent, I'm interested in giving Goldfein and Wilson a bit of space and time to pursue their valid objectives. There was never a shift away from pursuing the vendetta against shit leadership. In fact, I caught hell for pursuing that vendetta further than many felt was wise or constructive. Likewise, I never shifted to making editorial decisions for the sake of generating clicks. Of course I want people to visit the blog, but it's because I want them to read what I'm writing. I don't get paid by the click and no one edits my work or decides what I will publish. I don't write click-bait headlines and I don't (purposely) bury leads. My writing is too clunky and complex to ever prevail in a click-for-cash environment. Honestly, if I wanted to get rich online, I'd roll with cat videos or a meme generator ... not a military affairs website only interesting to a tiny sliver of the population. Entering into business to make the site self-sustaining was a tough call, but on balance the right one. The site is still doing good things and the USAF still has to keep it in the cross-check. If it tars my image with some of you guys for the time being, I can live with that. Edit to add: meant to say that yes, there have been missteps and stories I wish I hadn't written or permitted others to publish. My response above shouldn't be taken as a claim that everything's been done perfectly. The intent has been right, but not always the execution.

With how many non-combat deployments (TSP, etc) there have been in the last 15 years, I'm actually surprised there aren't more senior guys with no combat experience. Maybe other types of air frames are different, but for fighters you are at the mercy of your squadron's tasking. With the possible exception of one or two random attached guys who may be given the option, you're either going or not going and it makes no difference if you want to go or not. I personally have known multiple fighter guys who as majors and lt cols had 1000+ hrs and zero combat time just due to timing and bad luck. I also have known capts with more combat time than non-combat time and they were well over the 1000 hr mark. Timing is everything and there is no justice.

This is what I don't get with him.. He was my sq/cc and a fairly balanced guy in person. For being Harvard-educated and a previous (successful) leader in the military, I'm surprised how closed minded he is to new information. I've occasionally talked to people "in the know" on various bits he's written who have said they contacted him privately to say he was railing on the wrong guy/girl/office, but he wasn't interested in changing his tone or narrative.

That is not exactly correct. Complaints are definitely screened for frivolity, but a complaint against a local IG will never be transferred to that IG to self-investigate, in much the same way a local IG does not investigate a complaint against his/her wing commander boss.

Wow, JQP's writing has become difficult to read. That said, I would advise the complainant to review AFI 90-301, 6.6.2.3 (and sub-paragraphs). I would also advise the complainant to consider contacting the DOD IG Hotline at https://www.dodig.mil/Hotline/, MAJCOM IG, or SAF/IGQ https://www.af.mil/Inspector-General-Complaints/ if he/she feels there is wrongdoing by the local IG office.

I know a dude that cross-flowed from EC-130s back in 2010-2011 as a Major. Good dude; upgraded quickly. I'm not sure how he did it/I'd have to ask him. I've heard rumors of the Reserve unit spinning up hiring late Fall into the new year. Reserve sq/cc is going through B-course now; rumors of more to follow this fall. I've heard of Dyess leadership desiring some active dudes to transition to Reserves... I'm not sure there's a whole lot of interest amongst active Dyess guys yet. Haven't heard of anyone being successful in coordinating the move yet.

Important suffixes to know: Able= able (pliable, returnable) Al= belonging to (legal, regal) Ance, ence= state of (abundance, indulgence) Ate= one who (candidate, advocate) Cy= State or position of (adequacy, presidency) Ence= State of (presence, credence) Escent= becoming (adolescent, putrescent) Fy= make (beautify, sanctify) Ic, id= of or like (bucolic, acrid) Il, ile= capable of being (evil, servile) Ion= act of (desperation, perspiration) Ious= characterized by (spacious, illustrious) Ish= like (boyish, foolish) Ive= relating to (abusive, plaintive) Ness= quality of (willingness, shrewdness) Ous, ose= full of (ponderous, verbose) Some= characteristic of (loathsome, fearsome) Y= full of (unruly, showy)

Important prefixes to know: A, ab, abs= from or away (avert, abjure, absent) Ad= to (adhere). By assimilation, ad takes the forms of a, ac, af, al, an, ap, as, and at (aspire, accord, affect, allude, annex, appeal, assume, and attract) Ante, anti= before (antedate, anticipate) Anti= against (antidote, antislavery) Arch= first or chief (archangel, archenemy) Bi= two (bilateral, bisect) Circum= around (circumnavigate, circumvent) Com, con, col, cor, co= together (commit, concord, collect, correct, co-worker) Contra, contro, counter= against (contradict, controvert, counteract) De= down or away from (descend, depart, describe) Dis, di, dif= apart or not (dissension, division, diffident) Equi= equal (equinox, equivalent) Ex, e, ef= out of or from (extract, eject, efface) Hyper= too much (hypercritical, hypersensitive) Hypo= too little (hypochondriac, hypodermic) In, il, im, ir= into, in, on (invade, illustrate, immerse, irritate) In, il, im, ir= not (indistinct, illegal, impossible, irresponsible) Inter, intro= between or among (interpose, introduce) Mal, mis= bad (malevolent, mistreat) Non= not (nonentity, nonconformist) Ob, of, op= against (obviate, offend, oppose) Omni= all (omniscient, omnipresent) Ortho= straight (orthodox, orthopedic) Pan= all (pantheism) Peri= around (perimeter, periscope) Poly= many (polygon, polygamy) Post= after (postpone, postmortem) Pre= before (predict, preliminary) Pro= forward (proceed, provide) Re= back or again (recur, recede) Se= apart (seduce, sedition) Sub= under (submarine, subversion) Super= above or beyond (superpose, supernatural) Syn, sym= with or at the same time (synonymous, sympathetic) Trans= across (transcontinental, transmit) Un= not (unaware, uninformed) Uni= one (unanimous, uniform) Vice= instead of (vice-chancellor, viceroy)

Important word roots to know Ag, act= do or act (agent, counteract) Alt= high (altitude, altar) Am= friend or love (amity, amorous) Aper= open (aperture, aperient) Apt= fit (adapt, aptitude) Bas= low (debase, basement) Bell= war (bellicose, antebellum) Ben= good (benevolent, benefactor) Brev= short (brevity, abbreviation) Cad, cas, cid= fall (cadence, casualty, incident) Cand= white, shining (candid, candidate) Cap, capt, cept= take or hold (capable, captive, intercept) Ced, cess= yield or go (cede, procession) Celer= swift (celerity, accelerate) Clin= lean or bend (inclination, recline) Clud, clus= close or shut (conclude, recluse) Curr, curs= run (current, cursory) Dic, dict= speak or say (indicate, contradict) Dign= worthy (dignity, indignant) Duc, duct= lead (induce, ductile) Equ= equal (equity, equanimity) Fac, fact, fect, fic= make or do (facile, factory, infection, fiction) Fer= bear or carry (fertile, confer) Fid= faith or trust (confide, infidelity) Fin= end (infinite, final) Flect, flex= bend (reflect, flexible) Fort= strong (fortitude, fortify) Frag, fract= break (fragile, fracture) Fug= flee (fugitive, refugee) Gen= kind, race, birth (generate, generic, generation) Grad, gress= step or go (graduate, digress) Grat= pleasing (gratitude, congratulate) Integr= entire or whole (integrate, integral) Ject= throw (inject, projection) Junct= join (conjunction, juncture) Lat= carry (translation, dilate) Leg, lig, lect= Choose or gather (legible, eligible, collect) Liber= free (liberate, libertine) Loc= place (dislocate, local) Luc, lum= light (translucent, illuminate) Magn= great (magnitude, magnificent) Man= hand (manufacture, manual) Micro= small (microscope, microfilm) Migr= wander (migrate, immigration) Mit, miss= send (admit, submission) Mon= advise or remind (admonish, monument) Mort= death (immortality, mortal) Mult= many (multitude, multifarious) Mut= change (mutation, transmute, immutable) Nat= born (natal, innate) Neg= deny (negate, renege) Nov= new (novelty, novice, innovation) Oper= work (cooperation, operate) Pel, puls= drive (compel, expulsion) Pet= seek (impetus, petition) Plic= fold or bend (complicate, implicate) Pon, pos= place or put (component, compose) Port= carry or bring (porter, import) Poten= powerful (potentate, impotent) Prot= first (protagonist, prototype) Quer, quir, quis, ques= ask or seek (query, inquiry, inquisition, quest) Reg, rig, rect= rule or govern (regent, rigid, corrective) Rupt= break (rupture, erupt, interruption) Sci, scio= know (conscious, omniscient) Scrib, script= write (describe, prescription) Sec, sect= cut (bisect, secant) Sent, sens= feel or think (sentiment, sensible) Sequ, secut= follow (sequel, consecutive) Solv, solu= loosen (dissolve, absolution) Spec, spect, spic= look or appear (specimen, prospect, conspicuous) Stat, stab= stand (status, stability) Teg, tect= cover (tegument, detect) Ten, tain= hold or reach (tenant, tension, retain) Term= end (terminal, terminate) Tract= draw (attract, extract) Umbra= shade (umbrella, umbrage) Urb= city (suburb, urban) Vac= empty (vacate, evacuation) Val, vail= be strong (valid, prevail) Ven, vent= come (convene, prevention) Ver= true (veracity, aver) Vert, vers= turn (convert, reverse)

I cannot speak for all left-brained individuals, but I always found word analogies to be the hardest to prepare for. Because I might be a weirdo, I have a list of words that appear often on all standardized tests to help the language deficient people like me. I hope someone can benefit from the labor of love this list has been: Abolish, abridge, abstemious, accent, accent(ed), accolade, acquiesce, affirmation, amass, ambivalence(ambivalent), ambulatory, ameliorate, amity, anchor, antediluvian, ascendancy, atrophy. Bane(ful), bizarre, blunder, bungle, burgeon. Capitulate(capitulation), capricious, clemency, coalesce(nce), cohere(nt), compress(ion), confide(ntial), confound, congeal, contaminate(contaminant), converge, convivial, copious, corroborate, corrugated, corrupt(ion), cursory. Daunt, dauntless, debilitate, deplete, discrepancy, disentangle, dsputatious(dispute), distend(distention), drawback. Efface, effervesce(nt), enhance, enigmatic, ephemeral, equilibrium, euphonious(euphony), evacuate, evanescent, expedite(expeditious), expendable(expenditures), exclude. Facilitate, fallow, fertile, flourish(flower), fraudulent, fruitful(fruitless). Garner, guile. Hackneyed, hefty, hideous, hilarity, humane, hypocrisy(hypocritical). Innocuous, irascible. Jettison. Kindle. Leniency(lenient), levity(levitate), listless. Maladroit, mitigate, mobile, munificent, munificence, myriad. Nefarious. Obscure(obscurity), opaque(opacity). Parsimony, paucity, penury, peripheral(periphery), placate, precise(precision), premature, premeditated, prevalent, proclivity, prodigal(prodigious), profuse(profusion), pulverize(d). Rant, recalcitrant, recant, replete, rescind, reverse, ruffle, rupture. Saccharine, salubrious, somber, specify(specificity), spurn, squander, stymie, subtle, summary, summon, sumptuous, surreptitious(ly). Tantamount, tenacious(tenacity), transience(transient), turbulence. Venturesome, viable, vibrancy(vibrant), vilification, virulence(virulent). Whet. Zany. When I have more time, I can create a list of the most important prefixes, roots, and suffixes. Becoming familiar with all of this helped me out a lot, so I am just throwing it out there for the rest of you.

I used these: Barron's Acro Flight Acro Officer I found the Barron's tests to be the most useful, but all three just got me into the AFOQT thinking mindset. I saw it as an investment into my future. I've spent more on one book for college and got less out of it than I did with these three. -Getzen

I'm looking at the whole group (made up of individuals, yes), and how the Air Force is as a result. I don't care about the individuals. But the system where pilots run the Air Force has not yielded results. And the argument that only only those with first-hand experience in the tactical operation of an organization can run it at the strategic level is disproved by many organizations outside of the Air Force. I won't go as far as to say that pilots can't run the Air Force. But the idea that they must in order for it to run well is an unproven theory. And honestly I don't know that it's worth it, or affordable, to keep testing the theory.

Forgive my dumb question, but what's wrong with blue suit and red tie?

I'd like to respond, but I don't honestly know what your point is. I'll aim for what I think you're getting at. Under fighter pilot leadership (for all but four of the past 30 years), the Air Force can't seem to convince a bunch of fighter pilots to stay in the Air Force. And at a time when fighter pilots are doing more fighter pilot-y things than in the past decade. And yes, we should be looking at civilian (and all other successful) organizations to learn from their retention and resource management strategies. Or would you rather keep trying to extinguish this fire with gasoline? Besides, if you're not a millennial, then there's at least a reasonable chance that you're high enough ranking to be part of the problem.