Jump to content

What's wrong with the Air Force?


Catbox

Recommended Posts

I think it's great to give NCOs a pay raise but why only NCOs?    

Also, when has it ever been good to take non taxable income away from your people?   Especially if they are the same people hopping into aircraft and flying for a living.  Or maybe it's a CCT, PJ or JTAC that do jobs that put you in harms way.    

How many finance troops think they might die when they go to work?  

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Biff_T said:

How many finance troops think they might die when they go to work?  

Those obvious dangerous/combat jobs are certainly included, but there are lots that aren't so tip of the spear.

Quote

Enlisted airmen whose special duty pay will be affected include:

  • Basic military training instructors
  • Human intelligence debriefers
  • Combat controllers
  • Pararescuemen
  • Tactical air control party operators
  • Command chief master sergeants
  • Special reconnaissance operators
  • First sergeants
  • Defense attaché office liaisons
  • Airmen in the nuclear enterprise
  • Air Force Office of Special Investigations agents
  • Air traffic control supervisors
  • Enlisted pilots
  • Enlisted weapons directors
  • Parachute instructors and those with the test parachute program
  • Flight attendants
  • Mission system specialists
  • Loadmasters
  • Contracting airmen
  • Air Force Honor Guardsmen
  • Phoenix Raven security forces defenders
  • Airmen who work with forward area refueling points
  • Flying crew chiefs
  • Defense couriers
  • Airmen who work at certain commands or government agencies
  • Airmen who work with certain federal panels
  • Public affairs airmen assigned to recruiting squadrons
  • Air transportation airmen
  • Airmen who work on classified Air Force projects

 

 

Edited by nunya
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, nunya said:

Those obvious dangerous/combat jobs are certainly included, but there are lots that aren't so tip of the spear.

 

Regardless, if they have to take money from airmen they're f-ing something up big time.  

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Biff_T said:

Regardless, if they have to take money from airmen they're f-ing something up big time.  

Can't afford all those F-35s AND the personnel budget.

Guess which one brings in more money to congressional districts? 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, Biff_T said:

Regardless, if they have to take money from airmen they're f-ing something up big time.  

I’m just really stoked to explain to my 9 year old niece how to learn to stop worrying and love the draft. “It wasn’t us, we really had no idea how this would affect us.”

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 9/3/2022 at 10:24 AM, pawnman said:

 

21 hours ago, pawnman said:

Can't afford all those F-35s AND the personnel budget.

Guess which one brings in more money to congressional districts? 

"They're cutting our pay/manning/etc. so they can afford more F-35s!!!" has always been a common refrain.  However, I always felt it was challenging to draw a real clear line between "more F-35s" and "personnel getting shafted," due to the inherent complexity of DoD budgeting

That article however has this gem from Air Force Vice Chief of Staff Gen. David Allvin:

Allvin acknowledged that officials do “lose touch” with the needs of everyday airmen in the process of crafting future budgets.

“We carve out little bits of money here and there to afford that next F-35, or to be able to do that development and testing here. But that doesn’t resonate very well,” he said. “We all have work to do to understand the impact on recruiting and retention.”

Ultimately, Boeing, Lockheed, Northrop, et al, all have highly paid lobbyists on Capitol Hill, looking out for those companies, working to keep the money flowing.  There is something like 325k people on active duty in the Air Force.  Who is their lobbyist?  Who is looking out for them on Capitol Hill, to ensure they get a fair piece of the budgetary pie?  The answer is no one.  Absolutely no one of consequence is going to stand up on Capitol Hill and argue for less funding to F-35s and more to personnel.  Folks complaining about cuts to things like Special Duty Assignment Pay need to recognize these facts, and act accordingly.

On 9/8/2022 at 10:13 PM, di1630 said:

My estimate….You can cut 30% of the people with zero mission detriment.
Most of the people complaining are lucky they aren’t rotating tires at Walmart.

Some truth to this.  The old Charlie Beckwith quote “I’d rather go down the river with seven studs than with a hundred shitheads” comes to mind.  There are a lot of studs, and a whole lot of shitheads.  Would be great to better support and grow the studs, and weed-out the shitheads, but the entire personnel system isn't really structured to do this.  Probably more accurate to say the existing personnel system is designed to coddle the shitheads, and hope enough of the studs stay in to keep the wheels from coming off.

  • Like 1
  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Blue said:

Ultimately, Boeing, Lockheed, Northrop, et al, all have highly paid lobbyists on Capitol Hill, looking out for those companies, working to keep the money flowing.  There is something like 325k people on active duty in the Air Force.  Who is their lobbyist?  Who is looking out for them on Capitol Hill, to ensure they get a fair piece of the budgetary pie?  The answer is no one.  Absolutely no one of consequence is going to stand up on Capitol Hill and argue for less funding to F-35s and more to personnel.  Folks complaining about cuts to things like Special Duty Assignment Pay need to recognize these facts, and act accordingly.

Service Secretaries and Chiefs should be advocating for their personnel. Buuuuuut, those people also want a high paying job from one of them fancy defense contractors when their stint is over...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Some truth to this.  The old Charlie Beckwith quote “I’d rather go down the river with seven studs than with a hundred shitheads” comes to mind.  There are a lot of studs, and a whole lot of shitheads.  Would be great to better support and grow the studs, and weed-out the shitheads, but the entire personnel system isn't really structured to do this.  Probably more accurate to say the existing personnel system is designed to coddle the shitheads, and hope enough of the studs stay in to keep the wheels from coming off.

Trust me…I volunteer my time on the support side of base to make sure they actually support ops. I walk into offices daily and wonder why we pay 5 people to do the job that one ops capt could do. I actually told the base commander he should cut 30%….he laughed.

It’s pretty much welfare disguised as govt employment
  • Like 3
  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Reminds me of my favorite quote from Starship Troopers -

So what is this so called “Federal Service”? Parasitism, pure & simple. A functionless organ, utterly obsolete, living on the taxpayers. A decidedly expensive way for inferior people, who otherwise would be unemployed, to live at public expense for a term of years, and give themselves airs for the rest of their lives.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Air Force colonel who called suicide a ‘chickensh-t way to go’ has been nominated to become a 1-star

The Air Force has given nothing but lip service to removing toxic leaders.  Nothing but fake interest in the well being of Airmen.  Funny how they quickly rolled out testimony from others who said he is a great guy and not toxic.  His statement revealed his true character and I am glad I am no longer in a service that promotes sycophants like this clown.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

31 minutes ago, ClearedHot said:

Air Force colonel who called suicide a ‘chickensh-t way to go’ has been nominated to become a 1-star

The Air Force has given nothing but lip service to removing toxic leaders.  Nothing but fake interest in the well being of Airmen.  Funny how they quickly rolled out testimony from others who said he is a great guy and not toxic.  His statement revealed his true character and I am glad I am no longer in a service that promotes sycophants like this clown.

I'm going to start poking Congress about this one. It's unacceptable. By the way, last week was suicide prevention awareness week. 

 

Edited by FLEA
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, ClearedHot said:

Air Force colonel who called suicide a ‘chickensh-t way to go’ has been nominated to become a 1-star

The Air Force has given nothing but lip service to removing toxic leaders.  Nothing but fake interest in the well being of Airmen.  Funny how they quickly rolled out testimony from others who said he is a great guy and not toxic.  His statement revealed his true character and I am glad I am no longer in a service that promotes sycophants like this clown.

Nothing surprises me anymore.  
 

https://www.airforcetimes.com/news/your-air-force/2019/06/01/afsoc-one-star-falsely-claimed-flight-hours-disrespected-subordinates-ig-found/

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That was from 3 years ago. Also, the circumstances of that one are very weird with somebody with an axe to grind. I had two very good friends that had been her execs and worked in her directorate and had nothing but good things to say.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, CaptainMorgan said:


Navs behaving badly.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

She needed those navigator hours for the airlines!! 
 

Back to SDP cuts, it sucks for the Airmen, but it’s simply supply and demand.  Many of those career fields are overmanned so retention is not a concern at the HAF level.  I will say, they are overmanned at the A1C-SSgt level, at least on the loadmaster side we are struggling to retain experienced crew dogs…but I don’t expect the Air Force to reach that level of analysis. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, dream big said:

She needed those navigator hours for the airlines!! 
 

Back to SDP cuts, it sucks for the Airmen, but it’s simply supply and demand.  Many of those career fields are overmanned so retention is not a concern at the HAF level.  I will say, they are overmanned at the A1C-SSgt level, at least on the loadmaster side we are struggling to retain experienced crew dogs…but I don’t expect the Air Force to reach that level of analysis. 

 

A lot are overmanned on paper. Friend of mine was told by the "Chiefs group" that you need to forget about the airplane. He's like "but that's my job" they wanted to move him to a minimal flying billet to increase chances for promotion. So who takes up that slack? The on paper overmanned dudes. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Danger41 said:

That was from 3 years ago. Also, the circumstances of that one are very weird with somebody with an axe to grind. I had two very good friends that had been her execs and worked in her directorate and had nothing but good things to say.

Sorry brother but I 1000% disagree.  One of the most careerist people I have ever met.

As an O-6 she made the Grp/CC list but no one bid her, not a single bid for a command in the entire Air Force...the  community knew she was toxic so they purposely didn't bid her.  At that point she had weaseled her way to be Dempsey's Speech writer.  One of the three stars in the SOCOM chain showed me the email from Dempsey ordering USAF/SOCOM/AFSOC to bid her to a position.

The circumstances of the toxic claims at ABQ may be around someone with an axe to grind, but the claim about falsifying flight records for pay was substantiated.  Hard to fire someone who was just on the cover of AF Magazine with her wife just as Don't ask Don't tell ends.

  • Upvote 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 hours ago, ClearedHot said:

Sorry brother but I 1000% disagree.  One of the most careerist people I have ever met.

As an O-6 she made the Grp/CC list but no one bid her, not a single bid for a command in the entire Air Force...the  community knew she was toxic so they purposely didn't bid her.  At that point she had weaseled her way to be Dempsey's Speech writer.  One of the three stars in the SOCOM chain showed me the email from Dempsey ordering USAF/SOCOM/AFSOC to bid her to a position.

The circumstances of the toxic claims at ABQ may be around someone with an axe to grind, but the claim about falsifying flight records for pay was substantiated.  Hard to fire someone who was just on the cover of AF Magazine with her wife just as Don't ask Don't tell ends.

She flew on the Huey with us at Fairchild in 2016.   Prior to flying with us, our HARMs troop discovered she did not have a current form 8.   I was the CCV chief and had to let her know she couldn't log flight hours on the Huey.  Prior to that, she had been logging flight hours in the MC at ABQ and nobody noticed.  She was flying without a current form 8 and logging primary hours (in the MC at ABQ) as the SOW/CC.  Before somebody says she can fly on whatever she wants as the CC, she can't log hours unless she has a current form 8 (in any platform).  

I think the SOW/CC should know a little better.  

I flew with the previous SOW/CC during that same time period.  He had a current form 8 in the MC.  He logged flight hours and I let him land on the top of a mountain.  Good times.  

Edited by Biff_T
My bad coach
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Biff_T said:

She flew on the Huey with us at Fairchild in 2016.   Prior to flying with us, our HARMs troop discovered she did not have a current form 8.   I was the CCV chief and had to let her know she couldn't log flight hours on the Huey.  Prior to that, she had been logging flight hours in the MC at ABQ and nobody noticed.  She was flying without a current form 8 and logging primary hours (in the MC at ABQ) as the OG/CC. 

shocked_face_2.jpg

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Biff_T said:

She flew on the Huey with us at Fairchild in 2016.   Prior to flying with us, our HARMs troop discovered she did not have a current form 8.   I was the CCV chief and had to let her know she couldn't log flight hours on the Huey.  Prior to that, she had been logging flight hours in the MC at ABQ and nobody noticed.  She was flying without a current form 8 and logging primary hours (in the MC at ABQ) as the OG/CC.  Before somebody says she can fly on whatever she wants as the OG/CC, she can't log hours unless she has a current form 8 (in any platform).  

I think the OG/CC should know a little better.  

I flew with the 58 SOW/CC during that same time period.  He had a current form 8 in the MC.  He logged flight hours and I let him land on the top of a mountain.  Good times.  

The Altus CV did that around 2013-2014. He had a meeting with the AETC/CC and abruptly retired. Now he's a dipshit that flies for FedEx.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Sua Sponte said:

The Altus CV did that around 2013-2014. He had a meeting with the AETC/CC and abruptly retired. Now he's a dipshit that flies for FedEx.

 

 

Sounds like things worked out pretty well for him lol.  

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...