Top Leadership in the AF...

[Guest MizzNav]

We have a guy at my det whois getting an aeronautical (flying) degree at a nearby college. He got pilot and thinks he is so ######ing awesome it makes everyone sick. He goes around telling everyone he is already a pilot and other nonsense because he has a commercial licence and he was in the guard before college and worked on A-10s.

I remember once iwas making fun of him for assuming he was a "pilot" and he tried to tell me it is hard going to get a degree like his. He said "have you ever taken a test with an FAA official sitting next to you?'' i replied "no, but i took my drivers test with a state trooper in my car at 16" he hasn't spoken to me since.

Anyways, nobody really cares where they came from, it where you are going that matters. The only people that care are tools that either flash thier ring or talk about how they are better cause they went to "real college". so i would say the starter of this post is a huge tool.

And ROTC guys just can't dance like the AFA guys, so maybe he's jealous?

[Guest superD]

Stating facts, huh? So tell me how many Academy grads you've met as a "new LT ROTC grad"? ######ing dipshit.

ROTC, USAFA or OTS, they all produce capable and talented officers. Some individuals happen to be better officer material than others from the beginning.

I'm glad to see that you took a random sample of bases from which to get your data and draw conclusions. You'll do well in senior leadership one day.

If you want to bash somebody for "having all the facts" then why don't you enlighten us Jerk Driver?

Here's the truth: the Academy produces officers that are different because their training is different than that of ROTC or OTS. It's the age old theory that we are products of our environment, and when it comes to training and the military that theory is pretty much fact. If you are trained to do something or think a certain way, you will act differently. I majored in sociology in college, so I can attest that these behavioral theories hold up pretty well even under intense scrutiny. Having said all that, the higher up's tend to be Academy grads because their training at the Academy better adapted them to be career military (some others have made reference to this). They come in with a certain mindset and I would think that the majority of them keep some part of that mindset for the rest of their careers. That is not to say that somebody out of ROTC or OTS couldn't do the same by having a similar mindset, but the Academy provides training saturation for every minute that you are there. Why wouldn't you come out of there a little bit different than everybody else? Most of the officers I work with in my office are academy grads, and I can see that they are a little bit different than the rest of those who didn't go to the academy. Is that a bad thing? No Mr. Jerk Driver, it's not a bad thing at all so don't freak out. Different attitudes and viewpoints only add to the viability of the Air Force.

I happen to know cessnajockey personally, and I think he'll be a damn good pilot and an even better officer.

[Guest superD]

I think cessnajockey has a long, productive AF career ahead of him.

I couldn't agree more good sir.

He has the respect of his peers and he works hard. Respect is earned and goes both ways. Maybe you need to learn that. So maybe YOU should be the one studying what leadership is all about.

[Duck]

Think about it, to get into the academy you have to start thinking about it as a junior in High School or earlier. A lot of ROTC guys and gals get into the program their sophomore year of college, then there is OTS who get in AFTER they graduate college. There are definitely different mindsets for each commissioning source.

I am not saying they want it more, they just figured it out a little bit earlier than the rest. Just an opinion and there are always exceptions, but I think there is some truth in it.

[Herk Driver]

If you want to bash somebody for "having all the facts" then why don't you enlighten us Jerk Driver?

Here's the truth: the Academy produces officers that are different because their training is different than that of ROTC or OTS. It's the age old theory that we are products of our environment, and when it comes to training and the military that theory is pretty much fact. If you are trained to do something or think a certain way, you will act differently. I majored in sociology in college, so I can attest that these behavioral theories hold up pretty well even under intense scrutiny. Having said all that, the higher up's tend to be Academy grads because their training at the Academy better adapted them to be career military (some others have made reference to this). They come in with a certain mindset and I would think that the majority of them keep some part of that mindset for the rest of their careers. That is not to say that somebody out of ROTC or OTS couldn't do the same by having a similar mindset, but the Academy provides training saturation for every minute that you are there. Why wouldn't you come out of there a little bit different than everybody else? Most of the officers I work with in my office are academy grads, and I can see that they are a little bit different than the rest of those who didn't go to the academy. Is that a bad thing? No Mr. Jerk Driver, it's not a bad thing at all so don't freak out. Different attitudes and viewpoints only add to the viability of the Air Force.

I happen to know cessnajockey personally, and I think he'll be a damn good pilot and an even better officer.

Wow. I've been called worse. And I suppose that you have the experience and the facts to back up your assertion that your buddy will make a damn good pilot in the USAF and an even better officer?

Great to see that two gents so willing to jump to conclusions are in bed together (sts).

Fact: You're buddy cessnajockey shorts asked a question that has no factual basis. His facts are backed up by, while I was surfing a lot of AF bases webistes today, I noticed... I wonder what the statistical error is for that number.

Fact: You're buddy jumped into an argument that is timeless and will never end with no factual basis presented for the assertion that he made.

Fact: The percentage of USAFA grads that make the USAF a career versus ROTC and OTS is statistically insignificant.

Fact: Every time that I have had this discussion in my office the very people who are saying USAFA grads this and that, can't from a list of names accurately pick out the commissioning source a majority of the time. That alone makes this argument one in which I love to engage.

That's a great start SuperD.

[Coasta]

Interesting thread here guys... I think most everyone gets the point that a commissioning source is a moot point as far as AF career progression. There are quailty people at each one and outright shitbags at each one. I happen to be a USAFA grad and graduated probably at the bottom 2%. On graduation day, the playing field is leveled once again (for EVERY butter bar) and then you get to see what people are really made of.

The fact of the matter is that the AFA is not unlike any ROTC Det or fraternity. I think everyone that graduates from that hell hole is a lot more risilient than those from other commisioning sources, and that is how we identify with each other as Zoomies. However, there are also those that graduated with a 4 year degree in whining or tool shed building. I got my degree in cynicism and was glad when the motivated ROTC and OTS grads volunteered for that coveted Exec position on my first day of casual status. Thanks again for helping me take the 10 strokes off my golf game .

As for the ring wearing, I only wear mine when AFA Football is nationally telivised--about once every 3 years. If anyone has an inferiority complex because they weren't a Zoomie, then those individuals really need to grow up and concentrate on being the best pilot/officer they can be. Yes, I said pilot before officer because I've never seen an OPR or spit shine takeoff and land an aircraft.

Fast, Neat, Average...

Flame on!

Coasta

[brickhistory]

I majored in sociology in college, so I can attest that these behavioral theories hold up pretty well even under intense scrutiny.

Well, that's good enough for me. Based upon your major, you say? So what specific evidence based on this specific premise do you base your conclusion upon? You determined the result based upon what experimentation?

Having said all that, the higher up's tend to be Academy grads because their training at the Academy better adapted them to be career military

Yeah, VMI/A&M/other four year cadet schools, what a waste of time, they must do it totally differently................

And your theory about what the Academy instills and how it does that is based upon what? Oh, we're back to your opinion again...........

I happen to know cessnajockey personally, and I think he'll be a damn good pilot and an even better officer.

I hope so. But your vouching for him is based upon what? You can evaluate his pilot skills based upon expert knowledge? And for his officership, you have logged how much total commissioned time?

A great adage - never miss an opportunity to not speak.

Academy/ROTC/OTS - farm teams for the big league. It's not how you got there, it's how you play and if your teammates want you on the team at all......

[Whitman]

Ok lets leave this one to the motivated PME students at Maxwell (SAASS). In 2001, WM BRUCE DANSKINE wrote "Fall of the Fighter Generals: The Future of Air Force Leadership".

It's a little outdated but it beats conjecture and opinions from "well-educated" sociology majors with split personalities.

Here's what he had to say regarding Education, specifically commissioning source of AF officers:

Current Navy senior leadership, for example, is much more heavily

populated by U.S. Naval Academy graduates than found in the Air Force (see Figure 14).

But this does not appear to be as strong for the Air Force. Academy graduates make up

59.4% of Navy, and only 34.6% of Air Force, senior leadership.176 The often-held

perception that the Chief of Staff must be an Academy graduate does not appear

sacrosanct. Ten of the first thirteen USAF Chiefs of Staff were graduates of West

Point.177 Since then, the position has been held by two Air Force Academy graduates,

but also one ROTC graduate.178 Figure 15 shows that, despite popular misperception,

the percentages of officers from the Academy and ROTC remains fairly evenly divided at

the most senior ranks.179

Figure 15 - USAF Senior Leadership (3 or 4 stars)

USAFA - 35%

ROTC - 49%

OTS - 12%

Other - 4%

The article can be found here: http://www.au.af.mil/au/awc/awcgate/saas/danskine.pdf

[Guest Flyin' AF Hawaiian]

I've only been on active duty ~6 months, but it seems to me that a general rule applies to the AF just like it does to anywhere else- There are assholes everywhere. There are also cool people. Energy is probably better spent finding the cool dudes to hang out with, rather than concerning yourself with the random idiots.

[sky_king]

There are assholes from every commissioning source. Take me for example, I represent ROTC proudly.

[brickhistory]

There are assholes from every commissioning source. Take me for example, I represent ROTC proudly.

and '2'

[M2]

Somewhat related and I didn't feel like starting another thread, but there was a good article in this month's Air Force magazine titled "Why Airmen Don't Command" that's worth reading.

And while your at it, also read "Beyond the F-22 Problem - Why, on an issue of supreme importance to the Air Force, does the Pentagon find itself unable to agree with USAF's leadership?," which highlights another key leadership issue within the USAF going on right now.

Cheers! M2