What's wrong with the Air Force?

[Inertia17]

Just now, war007afa said:

You do realize an extra $15-20 per ticket TRIPLES TO QUADRUPLES the airline profit margin, right?

http://www.iata.org/pressroom/pr/Pages/2016-12-08-01.aspx

Yes. If they keep the market share, which they would likely need to reduce ticket prices to do with less/no crew. It is not as simple as throwing that on top of their profit margin.

[Sprkt69]

7 minutes ago, war007afa said:

You do realize an extra $15-20 per ticket TRIPLES TO QUADRUPLES the airline profit margin, right?

http://www.iata.org/pressroom/pr/Pages/2016-12-08-01.aspx

How much of that profit would be soaked up in new infrastructure and lawsuits?

[raimius]

10 hours ago, Weezer said:

Saw this post on Reddit...interesting pre-command prep strategy.

The first step is admitting you have a problem, right?

Crowd sourcing leadership training is surely a sign of a problem, but at least "New SQ/CC X" is trying to mitigate...

[FlyinGrunt]

On 5/15/2017 at 1:40 AM, Seriously said:

 We also have very inexperienced IPs (technically experienced by the AFI).

Confirmed for AFSOC as well.  It's getting terrifying.  They're not even experienced by the AFI.  We used to tell AC students that their AC potential was already proven, hence being there in the first place; now, we were evaluating their ability to be IPs.  It is no longer an exaggeration.  I can already point to 1 or 2 AC students that I 100% expect to see back at the schoolhouse for IPUG within a year, given the outlook.

[Seriously]

4 hours ago, raimius said:

The first step is admitting you have a problem, right?

Crowd sourcing leadership training is surely a sign of a problem, but at least "New SQ/CC X" is trying to mitigate...

I'd say it's a very good idea, actually. As long as he can separate the wheat from the chaff, I'm sure some of the responses will be valuable.  

[raimius]

1 hour ago, Seriously said:

I'd say it's a very good idea, actually. As long as he can separate the wheat from the chaff, I'm sure some of the responses will be valuable.  

Looking for feedback is wise...the AF "training" consisting of some speechifying and a blind intro, not so much.  It sounds like the new cc feels extremely unprepared.

[Toro]

15 hours ago, Weezer said:

Saw this post on Reddit...interesting pre-command prep strategy.

It's a decent idea, but a Reddit blast won't answer what's needed at your unit.  One of my jobs at my last assignment was Wg/DS, where I had around 20 folks (mostly enlisted) assigned to me.  A couple days after I took over, I pulled every single one of those people into my office individually for a few minutes to chat about them and to ask questions similar to that Reddit post.  I got some pretty damn good ideas from one and two-stripers who had been in the office longer than I had been on the base, but they had never thought to offer them up.  After our talk, an A1C told me that not only had she never been in the DS office, but the two previous DSs hadn't so much more to her than "Hello" and "Good Bye" on a daily basis.  

That is the problem with leadership.  At least the author of the Reddit post is making an effort to look down in the trenches rather than up the chain of command.

[Weezer]

1 hour ago, raimius said:

Looking for feedback is wise...the AF "training" consisting of some speechifying and a blind intro, not so much.  It sounds like the new cc feels extremely unprepared.

What stuck out to me wasn't her strategy...getting 360-degree feedback is great (although I'm not sure about the sample that reddit provides).  What stuck out to me was that she did feel unprepared both personally, and, by her statement regarding "a week of training and some speechifying...", by the Air Force.  Whereas other services (and some communities within the AF) spend 10-15 years preparing and grooming someone for command, that does not seem to be the case with this particular individual.  I find the whole thing interesting and revealing.

[pawnman]

19 hours ago, raimius said:

The first step is admitting you have a problem, right?

Crowd sourcing leadership training is surely a sign of a problem, but at least "New SQ/CC X" is trying to mitigate...

I concur.  If you ever want to get the unfiltered feedback of your front line folks, an anonymous and retribution-free site like Reddit is the place to do it.  Sure, there will be some bad answers and a lot of jokes...but how many of us lament that our senior leadership doesn't understand our problems?  At least this SQ/CC is attempting to understand what the junior guys int he squadron actually want, rather than what the SNCOs and other officers have told them to say when the new SQ/CC comes in.

[17D_guy]

On 5/16/2017 at 7:59 AM, Weezer said:

 Whereas other services (and some communities within the AF) spend 10-15 years preparing and grooming someone for command, that does not seem to be the case with this particular individual. 

Having run around the higher levels of a Sq a few times now, this is the feeling I get from most 1st time CC's in Comm/Cyber.  I don't know how you fliers do it, but unless our O's dig into the many areas of a Sq (finance, civ relations, first shirt issues, etc.) we get no experience from it.  My last boss was great, and brought me into a lot of the CC's issues...but I'd say that was the exception.

The MAJCOM Sq/CC courses are a joke.  Last boss said it was basically "Call the Command Post if there's a suicide/rape/assault/etc." with little else about dealing with being a commander, working with other commanders, etc.

Can you give an example of this grooming/preparing?

[RTB]

1 hour ago, 17D_guy said:

Can you give an example of this grooming/preparing?

In the Army, a 22 year old 1 or 2Lt is a platoon leader in command of 30-50 people.  As a 26 year old Capt he/she is a Company Commander leading 100-200 people.  Then later, after lots of experience already leading, they get Battalion Command as an O-5.  So when an Air Force officer gets their first true command experience as an O-4/5, an Army or Marine counterpart has had multiple command tours by that time.  They get experience as commanders at a very early age dealing with all the associated issues but in gradually increasing levels of responsibility.  

 

[panchbarnes]

In the AF, you are fit for command when you have demonstrated the ability to excel at Exec duties. 

I wished this was sarcasm...

[17D_guy]

37 minutes ago, RTB said:

In the Army..

 

Reading fail on my part, I thought someone was saying the AF did this and I was generally wondering which community.

[Weezer]

19 minutes ago, 17D_guy said:

Reading fail on my part, I thought someone was saying the AF did this and I was generally wondering which community.

STOs/CROs probably do this, as do security forces and some elements in CE.  Maintenance and LRS, I think, get good opportunities to lead sections/flights.  However, when an Army/USMC captain is a company commander, he/she actually has UCMJ command authority.  AF flight commanders (I'm sure there are exceptions) cannot issue Article 15s, etc.  Being an actual commander on g-series orders is an order of magnitude different level than supervisory flight "commander."

I think fliers/space dudes are at a huge disadvantage when they are suddenly thrust into Wing command.  MXG officers get a pretty decent exposure to both supporting flying operations and the mission support side (through dealing with so many Airmen).  MSG officers co-exist in a multi-function group of 6 different types of squadrons.  Most fliers/space Os go from operations squadron commander of their primary type of squadron, to operations group commander of their primary type of group, to Wing commander of everything there is.  And its all well and good to lead through your Group/CCs, until something comes out of left field that catches you off guard because you couldn't read the tea leaves because it's a whole other language (contracting, for example).

[Guest]

I think an interesting way to prepare pilots for command would be to do away with or substantially cut the MX officer career field and have fliers voluntarily rotate through for a 2-3 year assignment. It would give fliers an early opportunity to see if command is for them or not. It sure would function better than our current system where we end up with leaders who know when to use straight vs curly quotation marks.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Weezer]

18 minutes ago, ihtfp06 said:

I think an interesting way to prepare pilots for command would be to do away with or substantially cut the MX officer career field and have fliers voluntarily rotate through for a 2-3 year assignment. It would give fliers an early opportunity to see if command is for them or not. It sure would function better than our current system where we end up with leaders who know when to use straight vs curly quotation marks.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Oooorrrr...you could incorporate maintenance back into OGs and have it be a legit leadership position and still fly.

[VMFA187]

4 hours ago, Weezer said:

Oooorrrr...you could incorporate maintenance back into OGs and have it be a legit leadership position and still fly.

It's a difficult life to balance leading 30-40 maintainers who do something you have no training in, while also perfecting your skill in the air and learning flight leadership.

Not un-doable, but difficult.

[dream big]

8 hours ago, 17D_guy said:

Having run around the higher levels of a Sq a few times now, this is the feeling I get from most 1st time CC's in Comm/Cyber.  I don't know how you fliers do it, but unless our O's dig into the many areas of a Sq (finance, civ relations, first shirt issues, etc.) we get no experience from it.  My last boss was great, and brought me into a lot of the CC's issues...but I'd say that was the exception.

The MAJCOM Sq/CC courses are a joke.  Last boss said it was basically "Call the Command Post if there's a suicide/rape/assault/etc." with little else about dealing with being a commander, working with other commanders, etc.

Can you give an example of this grooming/preparing?

Exec, weapons school, Phoenix programs (AMC side,) auto stratifications in the top 5% regardless of job performance, new job every 4 months, very little actual flying to focus on career stuff.  

[sqwatch]

In the Army, a 22 year old 1 or 2Lt is a platoon leader in command of 30-50 people.  As a 26 year old Capt he/she is a Company Commander leading 100-200 people.  Then later, after lots of experience already leading, they get Battalion Command as an O-5.  So when an Air Force officer gets their first true command experience as an O-4/5, an Army or Marine counterpart has had multiple command tours by that time.  They get experience as commanders at a very early age dealing with all the associated issues but in gradually increasing levels of responsibility.  
 

Sounds like a MX officer in the Air Force


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Fuzz]

From talking with leadership here in AMC, it seems that the OSS/CC position is being highly looked at for future upper leadership because it deals with so many non-rated careers fields similar to what a WG/CC might have to deal with.

[dream big]

27 minutes ago, Fuzz said:

From talking with leadership here in AMC, it seems that the OSS/CC position is being highly looked at for future upper leadership because it deals with so many non-rated careers fields similar to what a WG/CC might have to deal with.

My old OSS/CC would have loved that...when he got the job (he's a flyer) he told me point blank that it was the JV SQ/CC position to the flying squadron commander; and that was pretty much his off ramp to "tier II" colonel billets, whatever that meant.  Pretty sure he's trying to bail for the airlines now.

[HU&W]

When I was a logistics 2Lt, I led a flight of over 200 people.  I dealt with unbelievable discipline issues, a multi-million dollar budget, and complex daily issues regarding the mission of my flight.  Had I remained in that silo, instead of switching to pilot, I would have been extremely well prepared to lead large complex organizations.  I also would have been woefully ignorant of how to integrate and employ airpower at the tactical, operational, and strategic levels and do the mission our service exists to do.

We are not the Army, where the weapons system is people.

Edited May 18, 2017 by HU&W

[Chuck17]

18 hours ago, 17D_guy said:

The MAJCOM Sq/CC courses are a joke.  Last boss said it was basically "Call the Command Post if there's a suicide/rape/assault/etc." with little else about dealing with being a commander, working with other commanders, etc.

Recently attended one - and had the exact opposite experience. It included some of the best one-on-one mentoring of my entire career, and has facilitated further discussion since then. 

Half-assing it sucks and I'm sorry to hear that not all are created equal. Like anything else, you get out what you put in - for the individual and the command, it seems.

Chuck

[Hacker]

I started my career as a MX officer before I went to UPT, and quite frankly learned more about leadership during that time I was in charge of 100-ish people than I did in the majority of the rest of my career as a flyer.

The unfortunate truth is that leading a 30-aircraft LFE as a Mission or Package Commander is not the same type of leadership skill.

[Weezer]

7 hours ago, HU&W said:

We are not the Army, where the weapons system is people.

Can't do much with that weapon system without effectively leading and managing people...I'm pretty sure there are countless examples on this very forum of how the AF has failed to manage people.  It doesn't do well to have billion dollar weapons systems sitting idle because all of our pilots have walked out the door because no one's doing leadership above the tactical level.  I have no doubt every general in the AF can operate their weapon system effectively and I have no doubt they can tactically lead.  It's the leadership of large and complex organizations that we're often missing. 

6 hours ago, BeerMan said:

I usually get a blank stare, and words to the effect of..."I don't care about that stuff, that's your job." 

This infuriates me. 

Support functions are important. Hell, OCA-Escort is a support function. I think increased leadership opportunities outside the cockpit are important, but we shouldn't forget that a package lead, mission commander, or weapons officer (speaking from a CAF perspective) does a whole lot of leading and does/should apply that leadership experience. Somewhere in the last 10-20 years in the Air Force and DoD we decided to downplay that experience; at our detriment in my opinion. 

Don't be an asshole, but we need to stop downplaying tactical leadership. Working well with others, not being a jerk, as well as leading, planning, executing, and debriefing with 300 other aviators to get better after flying a 40 v 60 is pretty relatable to leading a squadron. Just one man's opinion...

 

The problem is not lack of tactical leadership.  But, we're not translating that tactical leadership into the large organization management skills that are required to run the AF.  As a result, all of that tactical leadership is heading out the door.

Quick side note, though...other services graduate to operational and strategic leadership much earlier than we do.  As a result, we are behind when we sit on joint staffs.  Joint staffs (specifically COCOMs) are what does the strategic and operational planning to fight the nation's wars.  Those plans are what drives the demand for the combat power the AF provides.  We need to make sure we're dialed into the bigger picture, while maintaining tactical expertise.

It is garbage that some mission support O's are not dialed into the mission of our service...the questions you give above are pretty easy ones (although a non-pilot can't be a JFACC).  I will say that the more successful ones who have risen to Sq/CC level and above that I've met are well aware of these things and don't lose an opportunity to connect their squadron mission with the wing and theater mission.  I wouldn't expect them to know how to but an OCA package together, but knowing the acronym should be something they learned way back in per-commissioning, or at least ASBC/SOS.