What's wrong with the Air Force?

[Lord Ratner]

On 7/24/2024 at 8:23 PM, dream big said:

Our leaders need to grow a pair because their army counterparts are not special. 

Imagine for one second *wanting* to be like the Army or Marines. Yikes. 

 

 

[HuggyU2]

What's wrong with the AF... and with Boeing?

They are supposed to be working TOGETHER on the T-7 procurement,  not against each other. 
 

The AF never put out a requirement for an internal ladder in the signed contract.
 

And how does Boeing get so far into the development without calling the AF and saying "hey, did you want a crew ladder?"  They are (or were) the design "experts".  They didn't catch this?

Now it's too late and the "solution" is they will carry a portable ladder with them. And apparently, it will lean against the side of the jet because the side rails are not capable of hanging a T-38 style ladder there. 
 

How is the incompetence that bad on a $30M trainer?  Shameful.

Edited July 26, 2024 by HuggyU2

[HeloDude]

46 minutes ago, HuggyU2 said:

What's wrong with the AF... and with Boeing?

They are supposed to be working TOGETHER on the T-7 procurement,  not against each other. 
 

The AF never put out a requirement for an internal ladder in the signed contract.
 

And how does Boeing get so far into the development without calling the AF and saying "hey, did you want a crew ladder?"  They are (or were) the design "experts".  They didn't catch this?

Now it's too late and the "solution" is they will carry a portable ladder with them. And apparently, it will lean against the side of the jet because the side rails are not capable of hanging a T-38 style ladder there. 
 

How is the incompetence that bad on a $30M trainer?  Shameful.

The real question is was the Air Force/DoD this bad over 20 years ago and I just noticed it my later years or has it been getting worse and worse?  Either way, it’s not good.

[ClearedHot]

15 hours ago, HuggyU2 said:

What's wrong with the AF... and with Boeing?

They are supposed to be working TOGETHER on the T-7 procurement,  not against each other. 
 

The AF never put out a requirement for an internal ladder in the signed contract.
 

And how does Boeing get so far into the development without calling the AF and saying "hey, did you want a crew ladder?"  They are (or were) the design "experts".  They didn't catch this?

Now it's too late and the "solution" is they will carry a portable ladder with them. And apparently, it will lean against the side of the jet because the side rails are not capable of hanging a T-38 style ladder there. 
 

How is the incompetence that bad on a $30M trainer?  Shameful.

Go look at what Boeing has done with Wedgetail....selling the Air Force a piece of crap and overcharging for it.  AEW community could have done so much better but they have Stockholm syndrome and settled for the 20 year old shinny toy because E-3 was so bad.  Horrible company.

https://breakingdefense.com/2024/07/air-force-strikes-deal-with-boeing-for-e-7-wedgetail/

[Majestik Møøse]

On 7/27/2024 at 7:55 AM, ClearedHot said:

Go look at what Boeing has done with Wedgetail....selling the Air Force a piece of crap and overcharging for it.  AEW community could have done so much better but they have Stockholm syndrome and settled for the 20 year old shinny toy because E-3 was so bad.  Horrible company.

https://breakingdefense.com/2024/07/air-force-strikes-deal-with-boeing-for-e-7-wedgetail/

Just like the KC-767, the common wisdom was that buying something that already exists should’ve been a clean kill. Requirements creep destroyed that dream.

FWIW, everyone wanted the T-50 because it was already in service, but our acquisitions process would’ve  messed that up as much as the T-7. 

[HuggyU2]

The T-50 was the obvious choice. 

But... they couldn't let Lockheed win another big contract. 

[brabus]

On 7/26/2024 at 6:26 PM, HeloDude said:

The real question is was the Air Force/DoD this bad over 20 years ago and I just noticed it my later years or has it been getting worse and worse?  Either way, it’s not good.

It’s been this bad since about the 60s. Watch the pentagon wars - it’s probably the most accurately representative thing Hollywood has produced.

[HeloDude]

1 hour ago, brabus said:

It’s been this bad since about the 60s. Watch the pentagon wars - it’s probably the most accurately representative thing Hollywood has produced.

Oh I did a staff job many years ago with the acquisition/test world…that movie is like their “Top Gun” lol.

But seriously, this is what I don’t understand about even those on the right—they literally want us to spend more money on “defense” and desire more wars/conflict.  Talk about throwing more good money after bad.

[08Dawg]

The shoes pulled a fast one and changed 36-2903 to remove the verbiage allowing for a “given” or go-by name on flight suit name tags, essentially eliminating “call sign, last name” nametags. Now, it reads “first name last name”
 

They’re really not gonna be happy until every single shred of aircrew morale has been ripped away, are they?

 Guess my middle name using ass is just gonna be illegal…

[brabus]

I haven’t even had the correct wings on my name tag for 2 years, so zero fucks given chief. Also make sure you ask about my lack of hat and blue lens sunglasses (that are on my cranium). Thankfully I don’t really run into a lot of those douches in the guard. 

Edited July 30, 2024 by brabus

[Ebony zer]

3 hours ago, 08Dawg said:

The shoes pulled a fast one and changed 36-2903 to remove the verbiage allowing for a “given” or go-by name on flight suit name tags, essentially eliminating “call sign, last name” nametags. Now, it reads “first name last name”
 

They’re really not gonna be happy until every single shred of aircrew morale has been ripped away, are they?

 Guess my middle name using ass is just gonna be illegal…

But you can still wear a morale nametag.

"Commanders may authorize the wear of morale nametags on Fridays or during special events. AFR and ANG commanders may authorize wear during weekend drills on Friday, Saturday, or Sundays or during special events."

[08Dawg]

56 minutes ago, Ebony zer said:

But you can still wear a morale nametag.

"Commanders may authorize the wear of morale nametags on Fridays or during special events. AFR and ANG commanders may authorize wear during weekend drills on Friday, Saturday, or Sundays or during special events."

Honestly that’s kind of besides the point. Point is some HAF shoe found out aircrew were doing something, and changed the rule to disallow them from doing it. 

[Boomer6]

Is the example of the name tag "First Name Last Name" or does it explicitly say, " Nametag must display first name and last name."? If it's the former I'd say that's just an example like "John Doe." If it's the latter, easy, we just all change our legal names.

[SurelySerious]

News piece is still posted on the website announcing it, leadership page says awaiting confirmation/assumption of command.

cat 5 takes over

[dream big]

14 hours ago, SurelySerious said:

cat 5 takes over

They couldn’t just find him a random desk job in the Pentagon while he awaited retirement? Instead they have to go poison an already cynical and queep ridden organization holding about a third of our future officers? Slife definitely protected his own here. 

[McJay Pilot]

1 hour ago, dream big said:

They couldn’t just find him a random desk job in the Pentagon while he awaited retirement? Instead they have to go poison an already cynical and queep ridden organization holding about a third of our future officers? Slife definitely protected his own here. 

I’ve got $1 that says they’re trying to run the clock and bring him back after USAFA. We’re already in an episode of Black Mirror, why not make it a little more dystopian?

[Muscle2002]

27 minutes ago, McJay Pilot said:

I’ve got $1 that says they’re trying to run the clock and bring him back after USAFA. We’re already in an episode of Black Mirror, why not make it a little more dystopian?

Doing so would require a waiver of the law by SecDef. https://uscode.house.gov/view.xhtml?req=granuleid:USC-prelim-title10-section9321&num=0&edition=prelim

[McJay Pilot]

3 hours ago, Muscle2002 said:

Doing so would require a waiver of the law by SecDef. https://uscode.house.gov/view.xhtml?req=granuleid:USC-prelim-title10-section9321&num=0&edition=prelim

I will happily lose a dollar!

[Danger41]

14 hours ago, dream big said:

They couldn’t just find him a random desk job in the Pentagon while he awaited retirement? Instead they have to go poison an already cynical and queep ridden organization holding about a third of our future officers? Slife definitely protected his own here. 

Amen. And not to be a prick, but why is he entitled to get moved to another job as a 3 star? It didn’t go well in charge of a MAJCOM, that’s it. Retirement time. Thanks for your service.

[HeloDude]

9 hours ago, Danger41 said:

Amen. And not to be a prick, but why is he entitled to get moved to another job as a 3 star? It didn’t go well in charge of a MAJCOM, that’s it. Retirement time. Thanks for your service.

This…and you’re not being a prick.  Additionally, how embarrassing to go from being a MAJCOM CC to being in charge of the zoo.  The fact that he (I’m assuming) didn’t request retirement says a lot.

[DirkDiggler]

9 hours ago, Danger41 said:

Amen. And not to be a prick, but why is he entitled to get moved to another job as a 3 star? It didn’t go well in charge of a MAJCOM, that’s it. Retirement time. Thanks for your service.

He personally called the 27 SOW/CC to request (demand really) a two-ship flyover of MCs for his USAFA CoC, because with everything else we have going on, yeah sure, we've got the time and assets for that.

Edit to add: my first question when this came down was "Does anyone care/does it matter that he got soft-fired?"  Anyone, I'm the only one, ok I'll shutup now.

Edited August 4, 2024 by DirkDiggler
afterthought

[ClearedHot]

6 minutes ago, HeloDude said:

This…and you’re not being a prick.  Additionally, how embarrassing to go from being a MAJCOM CC to being in charge of the zoo.  The fact that he (I’m assuming) didn’t request retirement says a lot.

And indicative of the rot that remains in some of our senior leaders.  That fact that he survives to have his style be the mentoring force at the Zoo says a LOT.

[McJay Pilot]

40 minutes ago, DirkDiggler said:

He personally called the 27 SOW/CC to request (demand really) a two-ship flyover of MCs for his USAFA CoC, because with everything else we have going on, yeah sure, we've got the time and assets for that.

Edit to add: my first question when this came down was "Does anyone care/does it matter that he got soft-fired?"  Anyone, I'm the only one, ok I'll shutup now.

A formation of MC’s… ironic coming from him since he, you know, wanted to kill formation.

[DirkDiggler]

7 minutes ago, McJay Pilot said:

A formation of MC’s… ironic coming from him since he, you know, wanted to kill formation.

That was an amusing discussion amongst the bros, that had the request happened a year later, there may not have been enough form qual'd pilots to do it.  I guess they could've stayed 30 seconds in trail; that would've looked awesome/s.

[08Dawg]

2 hours ago, ClearedHot said:

And indicative of the rot that remains in some of our senior leaders.  That fact that he survives to have his style be the mentoring force at the Zoo says a LOT.

What a juxtaposition, following Rich Clark.