Cave_Pilot
-
Posts
14 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Gallery
Blogs
Downloads
Wiki
Posts posted by Cave_Pilot
-
-
16 years of being the redheaded stepchild of AFSPC didn't help either.
That's 16 years of future commanders of ICBM units growing up in a MAJCOM that didn't really understand or care about our mission.
-
Looks like Lt Gen Wilson doesn't want the input of his FGO's or commanders. Quite a statement.
The missile world has, historically, had a strong tendency to discourage questioning of the status quo. Someone questions whether we really need to do things a certain way, and they get told some variation of "it's that way because it's always been that way" or "stop complaining and suck it up, you're in the military" and now they've got a reputation for being a troublemaker. Point in case: a few years ago at the club, someone raised a concern to a local commander about a certain new policy that had been implemented, that was widely seen as unnecessary and cumbersome to the crewforce. Rather than address the concern, his response to this was to ask everyone at the table how long they'd been in the Air Force, then told all of us that he had more time in the AF than all of us combined and that he thought it was a good idea, so deal with it.
And, over time, the people who have bought into the status quo get promoted, get command, and perpetuate the cycle, and the people who questioned it get disillusioned and get out. (There's exceptions, but that is largely the way it goes.) As a result, we have numerous leaders that don't listen to or address our concerns, but instead tell us to shut up and color and report up the chain that everything is fine. So if I were LtGen Wilson and I really wanted to know what was going on with the ICBM crewforce... I'd be bypassing the chain too, because nobody's going to say anything honest if they think there's any chance their commander will find out they said anything negative to a higher-up.
It's going to be interesting to see what people end up saying when the fear of retribution is removed. When the CSAF/SECAF were making the rounds a couple weeks ago, they met with the junior CGOs separately from our leadership - and from what I've heard, the junior CGOs gave them some very candid opinions about certain commanders and the cultures they promulgated.
-
3
-
-
Funny...AF Times always finds that one officer willing to talk without permission.
I keep seeing former missileers (including one that I know personally) quoted in articles here and there.
Look, I get that you're out of the Air Force and speaking out without fear of retribution is awfully tempting, but spare a thought for the people who are still in and whose lives are going to get worse because you did!
-
Actually, if they do give Missileers incentive pay, make it tied to pulling alert like flight pay. That would be awesome.
I'm not a huge fan of incentive pay, because the problems we're having right now aren't happening because we aren't getting paid enough.
That said, if they give us incentive pay, they need to give it to everyone in the missile field. At least I'm getting officer pay for doing a job that sucks - the 19 year old cop patrolling a concrete pad at 2AM in -20 windchill because the security system won't reset, is not.
-
If a missileer is assigned to EWO/Weapons Shop/Scripts/OGV they do not pull alert. This means that the people making the tests are not currently CMR. The wing and group leadership do not pull alert. I think that the sq leadership pulls alert but not too often. Also the instructor/evaluator dynamic is much different than in the flying world. Evaluators are not instructors and then only for their crew position. So if you are a deputy commander (co-pilot) you first pull crew, then you upgrade to instructor, then to evaluator, Once they move to crew commander (AC) then they start the entire process again.
Close.
"Line" instructors/evaluators are CMR, but only pull alert twice a month. The EWO plans/training shops aren't CMR and don't pull alert. Squadron commanders pull alert twice a month, group/wing leadership doesn't.
Ideally, you spend a year or so as a deputy crew commander, then you go to be either an instructor or an evaluator for a year, then upgrade to crew commander, spend about a year doing that, then go back up to be an instructor or evaluator again. Instructor/evaluator hires are competitive though, so only ~20% of crewmembers get selected for either. (Based in part on - you guessed it - test scores.)
-
Why are EWO tests not standardized between the bases? How come tanker/bomber aircraft that take EWO tests don't have to cheat to pass them?
They are now. That's one of the things that's resulted from all this - all three wings now get the same test, written by 20AF.
As for the second, you're off slightly. Like the SECAF said, people aren't cheating to pass, they're cheating to get 100% and stay off their leadership's radar. Other than that, I'd say there are two main reasons... tanker/bomber crews are allowed to test as crews (as are sub officers.) We aren't - all our tests are "individual effort." So if you're a brand new deputy who hasn't even pulled a single alert yet, and your first EWO test just happens to be one of the "trick question" tests... too bad, your crew commander (who you'd be working with on literally any real-world EWO scenario) can't help you, or you're cheating. The other reason is because aircrews don't place the same emphasis on testing that the ICBM side does - the "100% or you're a disgrace to the service" culture doesn't exist.
You all follow checklists, right? Your decisions are verified by standard coded procedures, right? In the aviation world we test on at least two basic concepts. Our closed book tests evaluate information that should be able to be recalled immediately, ala in the cockpit. We have public MQFs to study for those. Our open book tests evaluate information that is good to know to perform your job, but not time critical hence open book to find the answer. Pardon my apparent naiveté, but how do these logic rubik cube tests prepare you to do the job? If our aviation exam program has worked well, why don't other operational fields follow suit?
No argument here. People have been asking similar questions for as long as I've been a missileer.
Nobody likes what's going on right now, obviously. But as much as I hate being under pressure from the SECDEF/SECAF/etc., the fundamental review of our culture and standards that we need would never have happened if we weren't getting this level of outside attention.
-
Hey guys, I just heard some stuff in an important meeting that directly impacts all of your futures. However, I am not allowed to tell you anything about it. Sorry.
Sorry, I didn't mean to come across like that. But that said, when OSI is investigating 1/3 of the CGOs in your AFSC, it makes you a little paranoid about what you say online.
I was talking to a former missileer about this very thing the other day. He described a question regarding high beams while driving. My first reaction was, "They ask you a question about using headlights?!?" Yes, yes they do. Question went something like this:
You're driving to site 69 at 2200L with your high beams on. You observe an oncoming vehicle. Q: When are you required to go to low beams? A: 100m Correct. You continue on your drive and observe a second oncoming vehicle. Q: When would you turn off your high beams? A: 100m? WRONG! You never went back to high beams after the first vehicle. Gotcha' ######er! Sorry, FAIL, your career is over.
Really? I mean, REALLY? So you use trick questions about trivial bullshit to evaluate performance and general knowledge? Fantastic. No wonder morale is in the toilet.
This captures it perfectly. Our monthly EWO tests should be straightforward tests to gauge whether you understand a particular concept. Unfortunately, every so often, we have people writing tests who get off on writing "trick questions" designed to fail people, which then has a ripple effect on crewmembers - people start looking for tricks in questions that don't have any, and end up convincing themselves out of a right answer.
There was a point in the press conference where she said that people weren't cheating to pass, they were cheating to get it perfect. I can't/won't condone cheating, but I'd be lying if I said the culture didn't make it tempting for some people.
-
Withholding commentary, on the grounds that we've all been warned to avoid doing so in public.
-
I have not seen my OG this grim, ever.
-
I knew a missile guy turned rpa operator. He was the happiest guy in RPAs.
There's a running half-serious joke around here, that the people who escape to pilot/CSO/ABM/RPA/STO/CRO have the biggest motivator of anyone not to wash out of the training pipeline.
-
Because we are run by missileers and they want to micromanage every part of flying ops. FEW is required to brief the OG/CC for every flights risk assessment. We need OG/CC coord to fly 45 minutes away to do instruments
Welcome to Global Strike
If you think that's bad, try being a missileer... the micromanagement is even worse!
-
It's pretty much exactly what you'd expect if you put a bunch of careerists and shoes in a room & told them to re-create SAC based only upon the shittiest horror stories they'd heard about it.
It's sad because it's true, and I'm going to go drink and cry now.
-
Stress/burnout comes in different flavors.
Deploying to a shitty part of the world and getting shot at is terrifying and generally awful; I get that.
But four years of micromanagement, schedule instability, and constant fear of making a minor administrative screw-up and being labelled as a potential shitbag can take a toll on you mentally as well.
-
1
-
New Base Ops Malware issue?
in AFTO-781
Posted · Edited by Cave_Pilot
Every so often, when I try and access the forums (which isn't that often, to be fair) I get randomly redirected to some shady-looking site and then the window closes itself. I found this article about a worm that went around in 2012, which exploited a (later patched) vulnerability in IP Board to inject itself into the PHP code for the forums, and activate itself at random to redirect users. Doesn't happen to me on other sites and it's happened on AF and personal computers.
Might be something worth checking into: http://peter.upfold.org.uk/blog/2013/01/15/cleaning-up-the-ip-board-url4short-mess/