What's wrong with the Air Force?

[Liquid]

Just as I would never trivialize the sacrifices or challenges our airmen faced in Vietnam or WWII, I would expect our officers to not trivialize the sacrifices and challenges our military has faced since 9/11 in Iraq and Afghanistan. Our Air Force crews have not experienced anywhere near the losses we did in previous wars, but our military has suffered sufficient losses to not be marginalized by reminiscing of better times when fighter pilots felt more appreciated. We shouldn't hope for the times when air to air combat and incredible losses resulting from ground to air fires define our Air Force's worth, contribution and legacy. We should be proud of the asymmetrical advantage we provide our nation as we engage this enemy during this time. And we should be very careful about marginalizing our military's most recent combat experiences to our joint partners. Our Air Force exists today, with significant investment of taxpayer dollars, so we don't have to experience the challenges and losses that we experienced in WWII and Vietnam. It is foolish to wish for "real air combat" and losses to fix our problems and define our worth.

My Dad flew Huey gunships during two tours in Vietnam and my grandfather flew B-17s in Europe. There was plenty of admin bullshit and useless bureaucracy then. Robin Olds rebelled against the same. Don't view the past through rose colored glasses and think we are so much worse than we were in the good old days when aircraft were shot down, ground forced needed Beyer air support and morale was high. Especially when it pisses off those who sacrifice, kill and serve.

[Flaco]

Just as I would never trivialize the sacrifices or challenges our airmen faced in Vietnam or WWII, I would expect our officers to not trivialize the sacrifices and challenges our military has faced since 9/11 in Iraq and Afghanistan. Our Air Force crews have not experienced anywhere near the losses we did in previous wars, but our military has suffered sufficient losses to not be marginalized by reminiscing of better times when fighter pilots felt more appreciated. We shouldn't hope for the times when air to air combat and incredible losses resulting from ground to air fires define our Air Force's worth, contribution and legacy. We should be proud of the asymmetrical advantage we provide our nation as we engage this enemy during this time. And we should be very careful about marginalizing our military's most recent combat experiences to our joint partners. Our Air Force exists today, with significant investment of taxpayer dollars, so we don't have to experience the challenges and losses that we experienced in WWII and Vietnam. It is foolish to wish for "real air combat" and losses to fix our problems and define our worth.

My Dad flew Huey gunships during two tours in Vietnam and my grandfather flew B-17s in Europe. There was plenty of admin bullshit and useless bureaucracy then. Robin Olds rebelled against the same. Don't view the past through rose colored glasses and think we are so much worse than we were in the good old days when aircraft were shot down, ground forced needed Beyer air support and morale was high. Especially when it pisses off those who sacrifice, kill and serve.

Nothing I have said trivializes any of our service, including my own. I'm quite proud of it, actually.

My concern is the prevention of losses in the next major conflict. Since we don't have the tempering process of intense combat to keep us focused, we will need bold, forceful leadership to cut through the bullshit that has filled the vacuum during 10+ years of a low-intensity conflict and keep us focused on fighting and winning the next war. Right now we are failing at that, miserably.

If you can't see the bullshit that I speak of, perhaps it is you that is wearing the rose-colored glasses.

[WheelzUp]

Just as I would never trivialize the sacrifices or challenges our airmen faced in Vietnam or WWII, I would expect our officers to not trivialize the sacrifices and challenges our military has faced since 9/11 in Iraq and Afghanistan. Our Air Force crews have not experienced anywhere near the losses we did in previous wars, but our military has suffered sufficient losses to not be marginalized by reminiscing of better times when fighter pilots felt more appreciated. We shouldn't hope for the times when air to air combat and incredible losses resulting from ground to air fires define our Air Force's worth, contribution and legacy. We should be proud of the asymmetrical advantage we provide our nation as we engage this enemy during this time. And we should be very careful about marginalizing our military's most recent combat experiences to our joint partners. Our Air Force exists today, with significant investment of taxpayer dollars, so we don't have to experience the challenges and losses that we experienced in WWII and Vietnam. It is foolish to wish for "real air combat" and losses to fix our problems and define our worth.

My Dad flew Huey gunships during two tours in Vietnam and my grandfather flew B-17s in Europe. There was plenty of admin bullshit and useless bureaucracy then. Robin Olds rebelled against the same. Don't view the past through rose colored glasses and think we are so much worse than we were in the good old days when aircraft were shot down, ground forced needed Beyer air support and morale was high. Especially when it pisses off those who sacrifice, kill and serve.

Thanks for the re-cage Liquid. These are dark times for our service/military/country as a whole, so it's easy to lose the big picture. Like the others, I find myself hungry for some great flying, a clearly defined mission, and a no-kidding focus on its execution. While you are undoubtedly right about the BS and admin in past wars, I can say that in my 10 years of service, the garbage has snowballed considerably. I don't think that folks want the combat of years past. They want the focus in the right place. General Welsh is trying for sure, but there is a lot to fix. Flaco makes some great points. I for one still love my job, but you must admit that our beloved service has become somewhat wussified and distracted in recent years. I would imagine our Joint brethren feel much the same about their own services. Edited March 18, 2014 by WheelzUp

[FBomb]

Firings in USAFE. Maybe someone in AFPC or A1 is next.

https://www.military.com/daily-news/2014/03/17/air-force-sacks-two-commanders-in-europe.html?comp=7000023317843&rank=3

[stract]

General Welch

It would be more credible if you could at least get the CSAF's name right.

[Rusty Pipes]

I was wondering how long it would take Tony to weigh in on this one...

https://www.jqpublic-blog.com/emails-edge-toxic-leadership-air-force-squadrons/

[FBomb]

I was wondering how long it would take Tony to weigh in on this one...

https://www.jqpublic-blog.com/emails-edge-toxic-leadership-air-force-squadrons/

I love how he still manages to slam AFPC while addressing a totally unrelated topic.

[xaarman]

He raises a very valid point. Toxic leader found, now what?

[WheelzUp]

It would be more credible if you could at least get the CSAF's name right.

Valid. Fixed.

[pawnman]

He raises a very valid point. Toxic leader found, now what?

Immediate promotion and Air War College in residence?

[10percenttruth]

Immediate promotion and Air War College in residence?

Make him an OG so he can arbitrarily cancel all leave to ensure maximum manning for every one of the wings 79 annual inspections & exercises, thereby enforcing service before self. After all, the core values are AFIs, right?

God help that squadron if this dude is an Evaluator.

[Bender]

It is often easy, sometimes too easy, to highlight the negative. For some reason, highlighting the positive is seemingly less important. After all, that’s the way it’s supposed to be, right? I sometimes fret these types of things reach out and touch the wrong people. I really hope that does not happen here.

I can attest personally that this is not representative of my experience with my home station Squadron Commander (I am not in the squadron that email came from, so I can’t/don’t speak from any personal experience on that squadron). When faced with a similar situation (operating in a 6 month on, 6 month off tempo leaves everyone in the situation), I knocked on the Squadron Commander’s door and asked to sit down and talk to him about what was on my mind. Part of the reason for this is my personality, but in larger part it is because he is approachable and I knew he wanted to know.

I understand the responsibilities that both these squadrons have. The MC-12 is a unique challenge as a squadron command; I know of no other squadron that is a school house that directly feeds downrange squadrons (one is now “ops”, but that’s not that important here). Filling deployment billets is the sole purpose of those squadrons and for years now it has done an acceptable job, even when the “good idea fairy” has suggested additional challenge. There is a legitimate test presented to both meeting the squadron’s responsibility and taking care of your people. Often, something must be sacrificed…

I believe in service before self. I swore my oath just like you. I am prepared for sacrifice, as I was not naive about what I was signing up for. There were many ways I was naive, but that was not one of them. Holding this belief is different than offering unconditional, arbitrary sacrifice of massive proportion when a little time and effort can prevent it. Taking care of your people often means going out of your way to prevent unnecessary sacrifice, or even trading one sacrifice for another of less significance. It takes a great deal of energy to apply this across an entire squadron, but if that isn’t something one is willing to do, then they should let someone else have the opportunity and step aside. That is the only right thing to do. If a squadron command is nothing but a stepping stone, morale will be the big loser.

I shared my story in hope there was some way to meet both commitments, the one I made to my family and the one I made to my squadron. I had no interest in shirking either. There was little leeway, but both the Squadron Commander and the (at the time) Director of Operations both stood in front of the white board in his office, for at least an hour, drawing arrows, changing dates, and bouncing ideas off each other. They came up with what they believed was the best plan they could and shared it with me.

I have five specific thoughts:

1. That was far more than I would have ever expected from them (why I don’t know),

2. I am very grateful that they found an opportunity for me to accomplish all of my goals, not just one (certainly not just the Air Force’s…a possibility I was prepared for),

3. I am very grateful to the person that accepted (begrudgingly) a sacrifice of less significance (something he will be repaid for someday),

4. I want to be a Squadron Commander just like that, and

5. I can’t wait to meet my new little baby boy/girl when I get home (with travel plans in hand, it looks like I’ll be waiting for him/her).

There is a lot wrong, but not all of it.

Bendy

Edited May 18, 2014 by Bender

[Skitzo]

Just a suggestion. MC12 guys should talk to U28 guys. We do have an FTU now but a lot of these challenges you mention in your community were addressed years ago. There should be a cross talk and just because it's ACC vs AFSOC doesn't mean that there isn't some common ground.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Crewdog135]

Bendy,

I'll echo your thoughts a bit. I've got a TERA app in and validated. We all know the failures associated with that. But I was apparently on the short list for a 365 to the 'stan. Not unexpected as a 16 yr continued Maj and no tin foil conspiracies. My FM couldn't even see that my TERA app was validated, so when he told my boss they worked to get the deployment turned off since a validated TERA makes me ineligible. Stand up all the way around in my book.

And to quell any questions, no I didn't know about it before the TERA app was submitted and yes, I'll be eating a 365 post-haste if I'm denied. I know that and I'm not trying to pass the shit sandwich to someone else. I'm just appreciative to not have to do the leg work to make it right. It was handled professionally at the appropriate levels by guys looking out for their folks. A big thanks to them.

Edited March 18, 2014 by Crewdog135

[TarHeelPilot]

I understand the responsibilities that both these squadrons have. The MC-12 is a unique challenge as a squadron command; I know of no other squadron that is a school house that directly feeds downrange squadrons (one is now “ops”, but that’s not that important here). Filling deployment billets is the sole purpose of those squadrons and for years now it has done an acceptable job, even when the “good idea fairy” has suggested additional challenge. There is a legitimate test presented to both meeting the squadron’s responsibility and taking care of your people. Often, something must be sacrificed…

I don't mean to heckle, but the two squadrons BR 150/400m from the two you mention have operated in the same manner since pre-1990.

[Bender]

I don't mean to heckle, but the two squadrons BR 150/400m from the two you mention have operated in the same manner since pre-1990.

..but you do. No worries...I debated deleting the sentence, but opted to just leave what I had initially wrote the first time. You can remove the entire sentence and it does not change my point. Every squadron holds this same challenge...I was merely trying to personalize it to my current squadron, a bit of a fail on the sentence as every squadron really exists to fill deployed billets in some fashion.

Point accepted (Skitzo's too),

Bendy

Edited March 19, 2014 by Bender

[Kaman]

Too many good people lost over the history of the USAF to ever trivialize the service of today's Airmen.

[17D_guy]

Because one email on it wasn't enough...

From: ## WG/CCE
To: ## WG Users
Subject: March Madness

(Potential Criminals),

March Madness is upon us. Please keep your work centers safe and legal this NCAA season, and remember:

1) The Joint Ethics Regulation and AFI 1-1 prohibit gambling in the workplace or on duty.

2) Gambling with a subordinate may be a violation of Articles 92, 133 and 134 of the UCMJ and AFI 36-2909, Professional and Unprofessional Relationships.

3) DoD personnel should not use their government computers to place bets (See #1 above)

"Gambling" has three elements: (1) an activity requiring payment or wagering something of value (money or a tangible item); (2) involves an element of "chance"; and (3) its goal is to win a reward or prize.

The restrictions are not new. Here's one example of an impermissible betting pool from an AF News Story published at Dyess AFB in March 2009:
"...Air National Guard Members ran a fantasy football league on their government computers. Each member paid $10 to play, and the winner was obligated to buy pizza for the rest of the members. The winner actually spent more buying the pizzas than he even won. In addition, the members only participated in the fantasy football league during breaks and at lunch time. This was still found to be gambling. These activities were also a misuse of government resources because the computers were government property.

Read more in Capt NAME article below and don't hesitate to contact the legal office for a sanity check in the midst of the "Madness."

NAME, Lt Col, USAF
Staff Judge Advocate, ## Wing

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Staying Legal with March Madness
by Capt NAME, ## WG/JA

March Madness is a great time for sports enthusiasts. Basketball. School spirit. Underdogs. Cinderella stories. However, you do not want to add UCMJ violation to that list of great times in March. With March Madness comes NCAA brackets and the potential to violate federal ethics rules against gambling. So here is what you need to know about filling-out those brackets this year.

No gambling while on base or on duty. Gambling is defined as any game of chance where the participant risks something of value for the chance to win a prize or reward. Office basketball pools are an example of what constitutes gambling. It usually starts with an email from one person saying you can join the office pool with a buy-in of some amount of money. This is gambling. Federal ethics regulations prohibit you from participating in this type of game-of-chance while at work or during official duty time.

No gambling with subordinates. A reminder that you may be in violation of Articles 133 and 134 of the UCMJ if you gamble with a subordinate. Although you may want to build office camaraderie, betting on NCAA brackets with a subordinate is not the way to do it.

Lastly, it is a misuse of government resources to use your office computer to fill-out those NCAA brackets.

So how can you stay legal? Fill-out those brackets when you are not on a government computer, not on duty, and not at the workplace. Avoid office pools that involve money or something of value.

Bottom line: Stay legal with March Madness. It is prohibited to bet on NCAA tournament pools while on duty or at the workplace. Don't hesitate to call your friendly legal office for a sanity check during March Madness at (PHONE)

[ThreeHoler]

So, how does that set of gambling machines at Ramstein's KMCC keep operating if gambling is illegal on base?

[Seriously]

And how exactly are all of these raffles that require you to buy a ticket legal?

[Dupe]

Isn't VSP really "gambling?" Its applied game-theory at least...

[Warrior]

More like a prisoners dilemma really...

[Who?]

So, how does that set of gambling machines at Ramstein's KMCC keep operating if gambling is illegal on base?

Where does the article say that gambling is illegal on base? It just talks about not gambling while on duty or in your workplace.

[Fuzz]

Second paragraph, first sentence of the Captain's email. I think it was just poor wording on his part.

[BattleRattle]

THIS is what's wrong with the AF. From a MC-12 squadron. If six on, six off deployment cycle wasn't bad enough; now pre-deployment leave is not allowed outside of the local area and sex life must be coordinated with the ADO.

Subject: Outlining expectations and policy

XXXXXX,

A couple of recent incidents are prompting this squadron advisory email so please read and heed.

1. Leave beyond the local area WILL NOT be approved after BDOS. Local area is somewhat subjective but if you can't be recalled to the squadron within 2 hours then you will probably be denied. This is completely subject to my discretion so please be ready to explain your leave plan to me prior to approval. If I approve your local area leave and you have uncompleted pre-deployment prep or job related handoff then expect your leave to be cancelled at anytime.

2. Take charge of your deployment and major life events. Babies generally require 9-10 months to be fully operational post merge. There is plenty of time for you and your wife to execute the merge, deploy and return for your baby's solo flight. If you choose to advise me of your upcoming major life event with less than 7.5 months notice then you are failing to take charge of your deployment and are completely at my mercy. If you can't plan for your own future I have no pity. Come talk to me and I will help you evaluate your options. Bottom line, waive your dwell, deploy and return in time for your major life event and you have taken charge of your life and your wife and country will celebrate your sacrifice. If you desire to acquire a wife/husband with which to execute the merge then you should also consider taking charge of your major life event in a similar fashion.

I am quickly becoming the evil and soulless field grade officer that the Air Force desires.

XXXXXXXXXX, Maj, USAF

### RS Assistant Director of Operations

Beale AFB, CA

Has there been any additional 'fall-out' in the past week or two? Has the individual recanted or been set straight?