14 hours ago, brwwg&b said:

AF Mortuary Affairs Patch

Since it's been making the different group facebook pages this week...the fact this patch still exists as is, is appalling

According to Mort Affairs and PA, that is just your privilege showing

*Cliff Claven voice to ON:

 

As a former reserve USAF historian, official unit emblems/patches cannot display specific MWS (there are historical, and approved exceptions from WWI/WWII).

The no specific aircraft rule is why we have the goofy triangular thingie on various badges, i.e., ABM badge and wings, et al, and on various squadron patches.

Most likely, this isn't/wasn't designed with specific silhouttes of a Flanker, just either a bad drawing sent to the manufacturer by the unit originator and/or a bad production of said design.

 

Is this really what we have to worry about today in "What's wrong with the Air Force?"

I’d say it just adds to the list. Some Lt Gen just sent me another survey to fill out; I love more material. 
 

I actually think the cultural “only pilots need to know if that’s a Russian airplane” is equally disturbing.

1 hour ago, SurelySerious said:

I’d say it just adds to the list. Some Lt Gen just sent me another survey to fill out; I love more material. 
 

I actually think the cultural “only pilots need to know if that’s a Russian airplane” is equally disturbing.

True story, I'm at OAMS and I have a new guy I send out to C-5 to ask a pilot if everything is good and if they will be leaving on time. He went out to a IL-76 . Yes knowing the correct MDS is important, you can't park 4 KC-10s in the same space as 4 KC-135's.  

True story, I'm at OAMS and I have a new guy I send out to C-5 to ask a pilot if everything is good and if they will be leaving on time. He went out to a IL-76 .

Uh, Prosuper, I uh, talked to the pilot.

He was smoking, he was coughing, he didn’t smell very good and he was wearing a tight blue flight suit. He didn’t speak much English but I think he said they would be leaving on time.

5 hours ago, brickhistory said:

Most likely, this isn't/wasn't designed with specific silhouttes of a Flanker, just either a bad drawing sent to the manufacturer by the unit originator and/or a bad production of said design.

Is this really what we have to worry about today in "What's wrong with the Air Force?"

But it *is* a specific aircraft silhouette -- a Flanker -- and even if it weren't the front-line fighter of our peer-state enemies, it would be in violation of the "rule" in that it *does* depict a specific airframe.  It should have never made it past the initial design review for that to begin with.

Of course it wasn't intentional, but the fact that the mistake made it through multiple levels of review is what is disturbing.  Even worse, the apathy shown toward fixing the error (and, bizarrely, the doubling down on the mistake and digging in of heels to *not* fix it) is a *real* cultural problem, yes.

In a culture that is steeped in symbolism -- as in, nearly everything the military does has symbolic meaning -- having an organizational emblem with Flankers overflying the graves of dead American soldiers and a folded American flag is a Russian or Chinese propaganda victory if there ever was one. We should *all* find that disturbing and offensive and massively disrespectful to those who've given the ultimate sacrifice, the very people that organization purports to treat with dignity, honor, and respect.

Would you be okay if, say, the "mistake" was putting a folded Chinese flag on there instead of an American flag?  Or if a casket came back with a Liberian flag over it by accident?  Ludicrous.  I guess "excellence in all we do" is just as empty a saying as "Dignity, Honor, Respect".

 

Edited August 17, 20205 yr by Hacker

And if it didn't have the dildo poking out the back, it'd be an F-15-ish silhoutte.(sp?)  Kinda, sorta, but generic enough.

Of course, if this was intentional, it's terrible.

I just know how government, including ours, works.  And would put money down that there's an unintentional goof in the pixels that either were sent or translated by the manufacturer (unless, of course, it was a Chinese company, then full marks to them for taking the effective shot at Uncle Sam and bad on us for not catching it before distro).

As to the rest of your comparison and asking if I'd be ok, there's an Anglo-Saxon phrase that fits.  But I don't think you really meant your question as trying to impugn my respect for our Service's fallen and our Nation's honor.

Should have been the triangles, triangles with the triangle notch cut out in the back, or even the ANG-style generic aircraft.


YGBSM that multiple Intel weenies can’t even deal with WEFT. We’ve been ing teaching it for decades...

45 minutes ago, brickhistory said:

I just know how government, including ours, works.  And would put money down that there's an unintentional goof in the pixels that either were sent or translated by the manufacturer (unless, of course, it was a Chinese company, then full marks to them for taking the effective shot at Uncle Sam and bad on us for not catching it before distro).

My suspicion is it wasn't an issue on the manufacturers part. The exact silhouette shown (depending on your browser / search engine) would often be the first response on a search of "fighter jet silhouette"

The issue is laziness and a lack of effort from the Air Force Historians, Air Force Historical Research Agency, and The Institute of Heraldry. Each of which had a role in creating this propaganda...albeit, I suspect unintentionally.

As Hacker said - their defending of the patch now is the larger issue. Like whining in a debrief. There should be no tolerance for defense of such ignorance.

59 minutes ago, brickhistory said:

As to the rest of your comparison and asking if I'd be ok, there's an Anglo-Saxon phrase that fits.  But I don't think you really meant your question as trying to impugn my respect for our Service's fallen and our Nation's honor.

No, it was a generic "you", not *you* specifically.  Really I meant "The AF".

This has been the organizational emblem of USAF Mortuary Affairs Operations since 2014.

Is 6 years not long enough for the AF to un-fornicate a logo? Is it incompetence or apathy?  Or worse?  Literally a symbol of "what's wrong with the Air Force."

Edited August 18, 20205 yr by Hacker

There’s a disorder called Face Blindness that keeps people from recognizing different faces. These people (maybe including brickhistory) simply have Flanker Blindness and don’t understand why the rest of us would care.

edit: someone please post the Facebook link

Edited August 18, 20205 yr by Majestik Møøse

Just tell mortuary affairs that you are a lesbian former Russian transgender male who came to America to transition to a dolphin and the sight of that patch triggers feelings of oppression to your gay/trans/aquatic lifestyle at the hands of the Russian patriarchy and it’ll change in about 5 minutes.

22 hours ago, Hacker said:

Plus, there's this great vis-recce powerpoint making the rounds.

pa_vis_recce-2.pptx 2.77 MB · 60 downloads

To be fair, she get's a pass...

The train will not be derailed for the golden children!

https://www.military.com/daily-news/2020/08/19/inspectors-said-her-toxic-leadership-was-worst-seen-20-years-she-just-became-1-star.html?

 

Quote

Investigators interviewed more than 60 witnesses, according to the report obtained by Military.com. The inspector general substantiated three complaints made about Grant: that she created an unhealthy work environment, failed to treat people with dignity and respect, and improperly accepted a gift from a subordinate.

 

"I don't challenge her intelligence. I don't challenge her vision and her direction she wants to take the wing," one person testified. "... Col. Grant has definitely made this wing a better place in terms of its warfighting capability for the joint command downrange. However, [her] leadership style has limited her ability to take the wing to where it could have been."

 

So is this posted because of the pissing and moaning of subordinates or her leadership style? They became better at their primary mission even if some feelings got hurt. I know I'm old, but that was standard ops back 30 years ago. I acknowledge that people don't have to be dicks to get the job done and there is a middle ground on holding idiots accountable and/or being a total prick vs. helping people achieve and excel through encouragement and mentorship.

On 8/18/2020 at 9:17 AM, M2 said:

To be fair, she get's a pass...

That's a nice set of Floggers right there

1 hour ago, bfargin said:

"I don't challenge her intelligence. I don't challenge her vision and her direction she wants to take the wing," one person testified. "... Col. Grant has definitely made this wing a better place in terms of its warfighting capability for the joint command downrange. However, [her] leadership style has limited her ability to take the wing to where it could have been."

 

So is this posted because of the pissing and moaning of subordinates or her leadership style? They became better at their primary mission even if some feelings got hurt. I know I'm old, but that was standard ops back 30 years ago. I acknowledge that people don't have to be dicks to get the job done and there is a middle ground on holding idiots accountable and/or being a total prick vs. helping people achieve and excel through encouragement and mentorship.

I think you get a pass on being a jerk if your name is Patton or LeMay. Some random space wing CC has no reason to be a doosh. 

I would’ve loved to see climate surveys on Curtis LeMay and SAC back in the day. 
 

I know nothing about this woman and her command style. But as an American citizen, when I hear that she “definitely made the wing a better place in terms of its war fighting capability”, then I am a fan of it. Completely agree that you don’t need to be a jackass to get results, but I swear in today’s military that being “mean” is viewed as worse than letting your warfighting capability slip. I don’t get it.

i wasn't around when it happened but when the air force went "corporate" in the early 90s...man i feel like that really started the down spiral in terms of PC leadership.

On 8/17/2020 at 9:57 AM, SurelySerious said:

What ing self respecting 14N doesn’t know the difference between an F-16 and a SU-27? Can we fire people? WTAF

As a prior 14N once upon a time, my instinctive response is point out the poster's final words and say "Lts are best seen and not heard". But I'd be lying if I didn't say that career field, like most others in the AF, has placed the rockstar holiday party or morale day coordinator well above the dude/dudette who can actually do their damned job. I know I'm preaching to the choir. But I'd wager that Lt has spent more time calculating when he/she will be due for PME, 0-4 board, etc. than he/she has spent in the 3-1 or on JWICS reading products that have to do with their current job.

Do they still show 12 O'Clock High at SOS?

Is it bad if I've never known or care to have known the difference between a Canadair and an Embraer? Asking for a friend.

2 hours ago, torqued said:

Is it bad if I've never known or care to have known the difference between a Canadair and an Embraer? Asking for a friend.

Are they potential threats the Air Force pays you to know?

Is it bad if I've never known or care to have known the difference between a Canadair and an Embraer? Asking for a friend.

Yes.

Sincerely,
An Embraer pilot

On 8/17/2020 at 4:55 PM, Scooter14 said:

 

Uh, Prosuper, I uh, talked to the pilot.

He was smoking, he was coughing, he didn’t smell very good and he was wearing a tight blue flight suit. He didn’t speak much English but I think he said they would be leaving on time.

 

The airfield manager (Flugplatzmeister) made me park a uke in front of IL-76 once to prevent them from leaving and sleep it off, they were 3 sheets to the wind when they landed and making slurred transmissions to ATC and would not follow the marshallers.  Their jets always smelt like sweat,vodka and feet. 

 

Edited August 21, 20205 yr by Prosuper
content