Jump to content

What's wrong with the Air Force?


Recommended Posts

59 minutes ago, SurelySerious said:

Sounds familiar...

 

Reminds me of when I log a pay card, just to log pay cards.  What used to take less than a minute, has turned into a 15-20 minutes minimum, IF the network is running good.  It was bad enough at one point that one of our pilots wouldn't start his debrief until he successfully logged his pay card.  Either way, he left work at the same time.  

  • Like 1
  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 5.9k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

So the draft outline for the script for Top Gun 2 has leaked (probably Trump and/or Russians.  Same thing, right?):     "TOP GUN 2:  This Time It's Non-Gender Specific"   Having be

I'm deployed and busy. I still check the forum to see what's new. I'm tired of reading posts from whiners who continue to bitch and moan about not being required to get an AAD until Col. Drama quee

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 si

Posted Images

Nah. The problem isn’t technology, it’s bureaucrats. And that applies to the dinosaur civilian companies as much as it does to the government. This dude is talking about sending emails and attachments, FFS. Dinosaur shit.

More tech just makes bureaucrats demand more bureaucratic activities be accomplished. For organizations that actually get shit done, collaboration software accelerates their accomplishments. In the end it’s all about leadership.

  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Majestik Møøse said:

Nah. The problem isn’t technology, it’s bureaucrats. And that applies to the dinosaur civilian companies as much as it does to the government. This dude is talking about sending emails and attachments, FFS. Dinosaur shit.

More tech just makes bureaucrats demand more bureaucratic activities be accomplished. For organizations that actually get shit done, collaboration software accelerates their accomplishments. In the end it’s all about leadership.

Sending emails is just one example. Another is doing your DTS voucher instead of being able to have the squadron CSS just handle it, because we’ve got this great new system that “simplified” and made a task “more efficient “ so that we could get rid of the CSS, thereby taking more time away from you the actual producer of things in the Air Force. That’s his main argument: You’re now finance and IT and every other support agency as we have complained about ad nauseam on the forum. 
 

 

  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Dude that’s still because the bureaucrats suck. The JTR is 690 pages long, but they can’t make an app that works on an iPhone that allows you to just enter expenses in real time. If there was some finance airman manually entering all that shit based on a piece of paper you filled out, you’d be spending a lot of extra time telling him to fix it.

Sort of like filling out a paper 175 and faxing it to Baseops so an airman can translate that to the actual system. Foreflight solved that ridiculousness, and a real travel expense app worth a shit would make you never want to go back to an 18yo attempting to translate your intent.

Link to post
Share on other sites
46 minutes ago, Majestik Møøse said:

Dude that’s still because the bureaucrats suck. The JTR is 690 pages long, but they can’t make an app that works on an iPhone that allows you to just enter expenses in real time. If there was some finance airman manually entering all that shit based on a piece of paper you filled out, you’d be spending a lot of extra time telling him to fix it.

Sort of like filling out a paper 175 and faxing it to Baseops so an airman can translate that to the actual system. Foreflight solved that ridiculousness, and a real travel expense app worth a shit would make you never want to go back to an 18yo attempting to translate your intent.

But you’re still taking the time to do the function previously fulfilled by someone else instead of executing the mission because the computerized system has made it so that the leadership can do away with support. You’re proving his point. 
 

Re Foreflight: There’s definitely a reason airlines have a huge dispatch operation instead of each crew trying to hack out their own Foreflight flight plan. Sometimes the AF pulls this off right in the AOC, but almost exclusively during contingency ops. 

Edited by SurelySerious
Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, SurelySerious said:

But you’re still taking the time to do the function previously fulfilled by someone else instead of executing the mission because the computerized system has made it so that the leadership can do away with support. You’re proving his point. 

The best is when it gets kicked back 6-9 times and you have to fix one minor problem every time.  Then when you fix the problem it has to go through the entire approval process all over again to then just get kicked back by the final approver again.  

Rinse and repeat for eFinance also on the AFRC side...

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
Sending emails is just one example. Another is doing your DTS voucher instead of being able to have the squadron CSS just handle it, because we’ve got this great new system that “simplified” and made a task “more efficient “ so that we could get rid of the CSS, thereby taking more time away from you the actual producer of things in the Air Force. That’s his main argument: You’re now finance and IT and every other support agency as we have complained about ad nauseam on the forum. 


It sucks for the individual, but welcome to the realities of working under a constrained budget (especially for an organization that does not care to be efficient).

Think of it terms of costs paid by the Air Force.

Sure, you *feel* less productive in your primary job. But does your squadron fly fewer sorties/missions because of individuals having to do DTS or fight with MPF? I'd guess no, so from the AF perspective, you're just as productive, so "nothing" is lost. You're a sunk cost as a flyer, AF can't really get rid of you without a potential direct impact on operations like getting rid of a finance airmen. Not saying the AF hasn't or won't cut flyers though, there's still that magic crew ratio that can be manipulated to show there's an excess of flyers.

Same for your secondary job. Do sorties still get scheduled if your a scheduler, pre-deployment tasks documented in readiness, checkride completed/documented in stan/eval, etc? Again, I'd bet he's, so no productivity (in terms of sorties flown by the sq) is lost, and has cost the AFA nothing to have you do the secondary job.

By putting the extra tasks like DTS on the line vs in finance, the AF can eliminate several finance airmen, and spend that money elsewhere. The work those airmen did are now being done by other airmen who would've otherwise been employed.

So the same amount of work is getting done by the flyers, plus they've picked up some tasks done by finance, so they ARE more productive, at least in paper when looking at personnel costs against mission execution.

Sure, it sucks for the individual, because their workdays get longer (for no extra pay since we're salaried) and more frustrating. Also, there are intangibles that get missed, like informal training, self- or guided- study to improve tactics or system knowledge, etc. But that stuff doesn't translate on paper in terms of productivity. Though it has gotten some attention, with CSS's slowly coming back, and contractor help on those secondary office jobs in the flying sq.

If nothing else, remember that the military only cares about effectiveness, and does not care about efficiency (or about individual frustrations).
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, jazzdude said:

 


It sucks for the individual, but welcome to the realities of working under a constrained budget (especially for an organization that does not care to be efficient).

Think of it terms of costs paid by the Air Force.

Sure, you *feel* less productive in your primary job. But does your squadron fly fewer sorties/missions because of individuals having to do DTS or fight with MPF? I'd guess no, so from the AF perspective, you're just as productive, so "nothing" is lost. You're a sunk cost as a flyer, AF can't really get rid of you without a potential direct impact on operations like getting rid of a finance airmen. Not saying the AF hasn't or won't cut flyers though, there's still that magic crew ratio that can be manipulated to show there's an excess of flyers.

Same for your secondary job. Do sorties still get scheduled if your a scheduler, pre-deployment tasks documented in readiness, checkride completed/documented in stan/eval, etc? Again, I'd bet he's, so no productivity (in terms of sorties flown by the sq) is lost, and has cost the AFA nothing to have you do the secondary job.

By putting the extra tasks like DTS on the line vs in finance, the AF can eliminate several finance airmen, and spend that money elsewhere. The work those airmen did are now being done by other airmen who would've otherwise been employed.

So the same amount of work is getting done by the flyers, plus they've picked up some tasks done by finance, so they ARE more productive, at least in paper when looking at personnel costs against mission execution.

Sure, it sucks for the individual, because their workdays get longer (for no extra pay since we're salaried) and more frustrating. Also, there are intangibles that get missed, like informal training, self- or guided- study to improve tactics or system knowledge, etc. But that stuff doesn't translate on paper in terms of productivity. Though it has gotten some attention, with CSS's slowly coming back, and contractor help on those secondary office jobs in the flying sq.

If nothing else, remember that the military only cares about effectiveness, and does not care about efficiency (or about individual frustrations).

 

No bro, we fly way less sorties than ten years ago. Production has been lost. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
No bro, we fly way less sorties than ten years ago. Production has been lost. 
But does big AF see a loss in productivity? In other words, are we losing combat sorties directly due to pilots having to do additional queep?

Or did flying hours get pushed down because of other AF priorities? Remember, training is overhead-it's necessary, but "not productive." Just like having extra finance airmen to handle travel vouchers is overhead, doing the vouchers is necessary, but isn't productive to the mission.

Complaining about productivity will get no traction for change, until combat sorties aren't being generated at a significant rate. That's not to say there aren't problems that desperately needs to be fixed.

The challenge is working on essentially a fixed budget while still executing the mission. Want to modernize and buy new toys? The AF has to find that money-it's essentially a zero sum game for the budget, and there generally is no relaxation of mission requirements while the AF tries to modernize. So trades get made between manpower, O&M, and new/old equipment in order to buy new stuff. Generally can't divest aircraft and their associated logistics and manpower tail easily, so the cuts generally get put on support personnel (like finance), or overall reductions (like manipulating crew ratios to keep "acceptable" levels of manning). Unfortunately, that means piling up duties on those who remain in order to buy new stuff.

However, the AF can't kick the can down the road forever though; cuts in training usually mean poorer performance in the future (especially when it results in lower quality instructors in the future, which perpetuates the problem), and "too many" additional duties (which can be hard to quantify) create disincentives for people to stay in. This shows itself in potentially higher mishap rates and poor retention, and ultimately creates a hollow force at risk of mission failures.
  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, jazzdude said:

But does big AF see a loss in productivity? In other words, are we losing combat sorties directly due to pilots having to do additional queep?

Or did flying hours get pushed down because of other AF priorities? Remember, training is overhead-it's necessary, but "not productive." Just like having extra finance airmen to handle travel vouchers is overhead, doing the vouchers is necessary, but isn't productive to the mission.

Complaining about productivity will get no traction for change, until combat sorties aren't being generated at a significant rate. That's not to say there aren't problems that desperately needs to be fixed.

The challenge is working on essentially a fixed budget while still executing the mission. Want to modernize and buy new toys? The AF has to find that money-it's essentially a zero sum game for the budget, and there generally is no relaxation of mission requirements while the AF tries to modernize. So trades get made between manpower, O&M, and new/old equipment in order to buy new stuff. Generally can't divest aircraft and their associated logistics and manpower tail easily, so the cuts generally get put on support personnel (like finance), or overall reductions (like manipulating crew ratios to keep "acceptable" levels of manning). Unfortunately, that means piling up duties on those who remain in order to buy new stuff.

However, the AF can't kick the can down the road forever though; cuts in training usually mean poorer performance in the future (especially when it results in lower quality instructors in the future, which perpetuates the problem), and "too many" additional duties (which can be hard to quantify) create disincentives for people to stay in. This shows itself in potentially higher mishap rates and poor retention, and ultimately creates a hollow force at risk of mission failures.

The AF does have a loss in productivity, they just don’t realize it. You’re arguing as if I’ve posted this article as the root cause of all AF problems; no, it’s just a contributing factor. And you kind of answered yourself there at the end...people are voting with their feet. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
The AF does have a loss in productivity, they just don’t realize it. You’re arguing as if I’ve posted this article as the root cause of all AF problems; no, it’s just a contributing factor. And you kind of answered yourself there at the end...people are voting with their feet. 
I'd argue that we try too hard to be productive and fill our days with some sort of duties that is the problem

Unscheduled time can be great, leads to conversations in the office that either help build comraderie, or passes on knowledge/learning opportunities. It also free up time to plan and evaluate what you're doing and how you're doing it (like the article mentioned, need deliberate thought on how to organize and communicate). There's also time to learn on your own, whether it's studying the dash 1, tactics, or just learning something new in general that could bring in new ideas or ways of thinking into the unit. The excess manning also for people to take leave, go to training, deploy, or accounts for people being DNIF/sick. Hell, unscheduled time gives you time during the work day to knock out PME.

This slack time is typically evident in support organizations having down time for "training". In ops, we hate to push back on mission, even at our own detriment, and ridicule the clinic/MPF for being closed once a week so they can have the slack time they need to do whatever they need/want. This attitude is great for our wartime/deployed mission, but becomes a grind when it's carried over to garrison/training mission. The pace isn't sustainable indefinitely (i.e. you can't surge forever).

The problem is, if management/A1 looks at it and sees someone's got 8 hours in a day to work, they start filling that day up in the name of productivity, and eliminating all the slack time in the day. 15-30 min to do DTS every couple weeks (or even every day) looks fine on paper if there's currently only 7 hours of scheduled productive work a day. (Yes, I realize flying the line could drive the length of the day up above that. I know I've had much longer, but I also know I've had days where the only thing I did that day was organizing the office lunch push and cut out early).

The hard part is defining how much slack time people should have in their workday. It's a trade between the benefits of that slack time, and the realities of budgets and end strength caps.
Link to post
Share on other sites
29 minutes ago, jazzdude said:

I'd argue that we try too hard to be productive and fill our days with some sort of duties that is the problem

Unscheduled time can be great, leads to conversations in the office that either help build comraderie, or passes on knowledge/learning opportunities. It also free up time to plan and evaluate what you're doing and how you're doing it (like the article mentioned, need deliberate thought on how to organize and communicate). There's also time to learn on your own, whether it's studying the dash 1, tactics, or just learning something new in general that could bring in new ideas or ways of thinking into the unit. The excess manning also for people to take leave, go to training, deploy, or accounts for people being DNIF/sick. Hell, unscheduled time gives you time during the work day to knock out PME.

This slack time is typically evident in support organizations having down time for "training". In ops, we hate to push back on mission, even at our own detriment, and ridicule the clinic/MPF for being closed once a week so they can have the slack time they need to do whatever they need/want. This attitude is great for our wartime/deployed mission, but becomes a grind when it's carried over to garrison/training mission. The pace isn't sustainable indefinitely (i.e. you can't surge forever).

The problem is, if management/A1 looks at it and sees someone's got 8 hours in a day to work, they start filling that day up in the name of productivity, and eliminating all the slack time in the day. 15-30 min to do DTS every couple weeks (or even every day) looks fine on paper if there's currently only 7 hours of scheduled productive work a day. (Yes, I realize flying the line could drive the length of the day up above that. I know I've had much longer, but I also know I've had days where the only thing I did that day was organizing the office lunch push and cut out early).

The hard part is defining how much slack time people should have in their workday. It's a trade between the benefits of that slack time, and the realities of budgets and end strength caps.

I’m not talking about filling days with office productivity. This is the fucking Air Force, the pilots should be training to kill the enemy. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
I’m not talking about filling days with office productivity. This is the ing Air Force, the pilots should be training to kill the enemy. 
Training unfortunately isn't free, and it takes a lot of support to get that jet up in the air and keep it flying, much of which a pilot flying the line never sees. And everyone is doing more with less (while getting paid less than pilots, except for some in the med group). So the question becomes "what is good enough?"

We've cut people to pay for jets, and then never really got those people back, or pushed them into operational AFSCs without backfilling support AFSCs (and putting the burden on ops to provide their own support). And remember, CSAF is/has been a pilot, so they are the one who made that trade, not someone from support.

Congress has said we can't divest A-10, which drives an additional cost which has to be paid for (engineering to extend the life of the jet, pilots and maintainers, the logistic tail of parts and suppliers for an old jet). Not going to stop the AF from buying F-35s to replace the A-10, so that money is going to come from elsewhere in the AF budget. That turns into delayed upgrades for other airframes, reduced flying hour programs, etc.

With fixed manpower and essentially fixed budgets, trades have to be made to meet requirements. It's an fact of life for the big AF. And unfortunately, this turns into a debate on what is good enough (training, equipment, airframes, weapons/munitions, etc) to meet strategic/operational/tactical objectives. And productivity becomes a measurable data point in that decision making, even though it may not be the best number to quantify what goes on in a flying squadron.
  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/9/2021 at 11:19 PM, Duck said:

How in the world did she even make E-9??? Never mind, I know why, forget I asked.


Sent from my iPhone using Baseops Network mobile app

Much like the O community, there are a lot of dirtbags that make it to the top towards Senior and Chief (if you have ever deployed, then you know).  They look good on paper because they’ve stepped over their peers who are hacking the mission.  Then they become SELs who have zero credibility in whatever technical mission and compensate by going after mustaches and short lengths instead of helping run the squadron.  

  • Upvote 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, ClearedHot said:

IMG_7110.JPG.87c78379cbbefec8e13350c47d65be93.JPG

That person deserves to wear blues everyday until they leave the AF. 

Edited by SurelySerious
  • Like 6
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 3/18/2021 at 7:18 PM, SurelySerious said:

That person deserves to wear blues everyday until they leave the AF. 

You think they see that as punishment?  Think of the pride they will have!

Link to post
Share on other sites

We use to have to wear Charlies on every Friday when Amos, a Hornet dude, was the Commandant. That was disappointing. 

The only way to get out of it was to have your name on the flight schedule for "flight or maintenance related duties" so I made sure that all the pilots were on for a 0730 FOD walk, the lesser of the two evils. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
IMG_7110.JPG.87c78379cbbefec8e13350c47d65be93.JPG

It’s almost amusing watching the cyclical nature of the Air Force. Blues Monday’s in the mid 0’s became a game of flying or having “appointment” to miss work. At my staff job, we took to changing into our PT gear after lunch, to get ready to workout. Welsh killing that nonsense was fantastic...


Sent from my iPhone using Baseops Network mobile app
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 3/18/2021 at 5:48 PM, ClearedHot said:

IMG_7110.JPG.87c78379cbbefec8e13350c47d65be93.JPG

 

Glad every Agency Superintendent agreed...but what did the Agency OIC's say? WTF were the Chief of IG (generally a pilot), Chief of Safety (pilot SQ/CC in waiting), Chief of Command Post (pilot), and the DS (a disgruntled pilot who hates their job) doing when this was rolled out?

Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, StoleIt said:

 

Glad every Agency Superintendent agreed...but what did the Agency OIC's say? WTF were the Chief of IG (generally a pilot), Chief of Safety (pilot SQ/CC in waiting), Chief of Command Post (pilot), and the DS (a disgruntled pilot who hates their job) doing when this was rolled out?

I definitely would have told my people to work from home on the first Monday of the month when I was in the IG office.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.




×
×
  • Create New...