More SARC briefings soon.

[Jaded]

If you see any FHP that is zero's out (like 0.0), it's guaranteed that shenanigans like that occurred.

Fraud, waste and abuse complaint, ha. Our boss walked into our office (rattled) on Sep 30th of this year and said, "I need you to spend $11,000 in the next 4 hours." I can't make this shit up.

[brabus]

So how is the good dude, who knows what right looks like and knows something needs to change, but is afraid to do the right thing because he wants to keep his job for now different than the CYA tow-the-line, don't rock the boat self-serving jerk you can't stand? Pick the righteous fight and fight. Be empowered to do the right thing, like helping the NCO understand the time and place to correct a senior officer. Let the Sq/CC know how you think it is bullshit that he is cracking down on you for correct the out of line NCO or Chief. Courage involves more than risking your life. I don't understand how you can criticize the careerists and those who "don't rock the boat", and do the exact same thing yourself.

Easy to say looking down from your level. I have and continue to do the right thing (as do several officers around me), but have been shit on repeatedly in the past because some crybaby NCO went to daddy, because "that's how it's been, so fuck off Capt" (followed by push back based on rationale and common sense, followed by a "get in line or get out" response). Along those lines, for every NCO/SNCO that is a great troop and worth a shit, there are 10 that need to be kicked in the teeth. Doesn't matter if you're a Capt, they will tell you to fuck off (not in those words, but in their attitude/lack of action) and if you say something to the officer(s) in their chain of command you get dickless leadership who either won't do anything and also maybe add a kick to your left and right nut for trying to give orders to an enlisted member. It's not that CGOs/FGOs don't try, it's that they are shot down and stamped out at a rate much higher than you clearly know happens. I'm sure this did not happen nearly as bad when you were a Capt/Maj, and that's probably why you think I'm full of shit and "there's no way it's really like that."

The buck stops at the O-6+ (and some O-5s) who allow this shit to happen or need to be seen as "visibly doing something" when someone complains the officer was mean to them or keeps making unreasonable requests, such as "do your job please." My SQ/CC is great and I am allowed a good range to execute the officership and leadership any CGO should in the SQ. Unfortunately, that latitude is not given by many of his peers and only because he's a good dude and at the "fuck it, this is probably it" point in his career, he has zero problem going to bat for his people and shielding us from the other asshole O-5 who wants us burned at the stake for being officers outside of the flight line. If CGO/FGOs were given the same latitude across the base (not just in their own corner) to be the officer and leader they should, things would be much better.

[Toro]

"I don't care if you fly a 1.1 or a 1.3... you WILL log a 1.2!"

The whole "Fly what you can and log what you need," is bullshit. Unfortunately, I still see that going on. Stepping from the Ops Desk at the end of the year, Ops notes read, "LOG 1.2". That's a stretch for most of our sorties, but miraculously, most guys managed to do it.

The buffoonery will continue until we figure out a way to fix the allocation of flying hours.

Many years ago, we changed our SCL so that all sorties (including A/A) had tanks, and we were to fly max ASD. Any range sorties from Lakenheath were to go to the Scotland range at max endurance. Flying a 3.0 was about average. Fast forward a few months and somebody realized that we completely overshot our goal, so now we have to minimize ASD. Directive from the OG/CD is to fly the lowest ASD possible. NSTFS - one guy (who went on to be a Sq/CC), blew past the hot pits on a surge day, called #1 to tower, and called 10 out to Ops. When Ops asked his status, he responded with, "I'll tell you when I take off." He took off, pulled closed, landed, and logged the only 0.1 I have ever seen...all for the benefit of the FHP. Of course, he got his ass handed to him (by the same OG/CD who gave the directive).

Were we talking about the SARC briefings?

[Muscle2002]

But we need to be careful using copies of the nose art in ways that present an unprofessional image that unnecessarily glorifies sexuality.

Got it, those images present an unprofessional image. I also understand that glorifying sexuality is unprofessional. However, does it not concern you that the Air Force then ignores its Janus-like behavior when it glorifies sexuality in the vein of Pride Month which celebrates GLBT lifestyles?

[FallingOsh]

Got it, those images present an unprofessional image. I also understand that glorifying sexuality is unprofessional. However, does it not concern you that the Air Force then ignores its Janus-like behavior when it glorifies sexuality in the vein of Pride Month which celebrates GLBT lifestyles?

No. That's hypocrisy and hypocrisy is approved.

[Day Man]

Got it, those images present an unprofessional image. I also understand that glorifying sexuality is unprofessional. However, does it not concern you that the Air Force then ignores its Janus-like behavior when it glorifies sexuality in the vein of Pride Month which celebrates GLBT lifestyles?

Great Goldeneye (and history probably) reference

[Liquid]

I had to look up the definition of Janus-like behavior. I'm personally am not a big fan of the decision to honor GLBT month, but nobody asked me. DoD and AF guidance, with specific POTUS direction has directed we do it.

http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2013/05/31/presidential-proclamation-lgbt-pride-month

Like it or not, it will happen. So professionally, I will comply with the lawful guidance. I probably won't attend the luncheon. Nobody will care.

There is a difference between celebrating a special observance that recognizes the GLBT lifestyle and glorifying the sex part of it. You know there is a difference between allowing the celebration of the GLBT lifestyle being accepted into the military, and allowing the graphic presentation of homosexual sex acts in the work place. Glorifying sexuality with half naked "Strawberry Bitches" nose art at the ops desk is not the same as a fabulous GLBT luncheon at the club. Comparing the two is not useful.

Edited November 6, 2013 by Liquid

[Muscle2002]

There is a difference between celebrating a special observance that recognizes the GLBT lifestyle and glorifying the sex part of it. You know there is a difference between allowing the celebration of the GLBT lifestyle being accepted into the military, and allowing the graphic presentation of homosexual sex acts in the work place. Glorifying sexuality with half naked "Strawberry Bitches" nose art at the ops desk is not the same as a fabulous GLBT luncheon at the club. Comparing the two is not useful.

My comment, if you recall, was to juxtapose the banishing of those things which "glorify sexuality" (your words) against the special observance of a lifestyle, whose difference stems solely from differences in sexuality.

Make no mistake, I'm not attempting some sleight of logic to equate nose art with gay pride--they're not the same. However, if one of the arguments against the plethora of things deemed unprofessional (eg nose art) is the improper glorification of sexuality, then the AF would be wise to understand that members are not oblivious to the seeming contradiction in official practice.

Edited November 6, 2013 by Muscle2002

[Liquid]

My comment, if you recall, was to juxtapose the banishing of those things which "glorify sexuality" (your words) against the special observance of a lifestyle, whose difference stems solely from differences in sexuality.

Make no mistake, I'm not attempting some sleight of logic to equate nose art with gay pride--their not the same. However, if one of the arguments against the plethora of things deemed unprofessional (eg nose art) is the improper glorification of sexuality, then the AF would be wise to understand that members are not oblivious to the contradiction.

Good point. Glorify may not be the best word. Maybe glamorize, emphasize, value, push, honor... Glorify may be too strong for the point. Not sure how to precisely say bring sex into the workplace unnecessarily. Although our society values sex in entertainment and business, it has no place in the workplace, particularly in the military. So to speak, that's what she said and 69 are perfect examples. They are stupid f*ing traditions that belong in a frat house, not in the Air Force. So is nose art that is unrelated to history and heritage, but placed somewhere solely for the point of bringing sex into a situation. Painting "Strawberry Bitch" on a C-17 for example. I agree there is a challenge sending a message that sex does not belong in the workplace, while officially observing GLBT month. Nobody said command or leadership was easy.

[HeloDude]

I had to look up the definition of Janus-like behavior. I'm personally am not a big fan of the decision to honor GLBT month, but nobody asked me. DoD and AF guidance, with specific POTUS direction has directed we do it.

http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2013/05/31/presidential-proclamation-lgbt-pride-month

Like it or not, it will happen. So professionally, I will comply with the lawful guidance. I probably won't attend the luncheon. Nobody will care.

There is a difference between celebrating a special observance that recognizes the GLBT lifestyle and glorifying the sex part of it. You know there is a difference between allowing the celebration of the GLBT lifestyle being accepted into the military, and allowing the graphic presentation of homosexual sex acts in the work place. Glorifying sexuality with half naked "Strawberry Bitches" nose art at the ops desk is not the same as a fabulous GLBT luncheon at the club. Comparing the two is not useful.

You're definitely a 'company' man! They say jump and you say how high...and then I'm sure try to jump even higher.

I'm in the military and I have to adhere to the polices, guidance, and regulations--got it. What I don't have to do is be a cheerleader for the parts that are nonsense. I'll pass on on the 'special month' lunches because like you said, it doesn't make me a better warfighter.

As Nsplayr correctly pointed out...the military is kind of like a dictatorship. That being said, I don't have to believe in all the propaganda and allow myself to be indoctrinated.

ETA: Liquid, you still haven't commented on this article...why not?

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2013/oct/31/pentagon-manual-white-christian-heterosexual-males/

Edited November 6, 2013 by HeloDude

[Liquid]

You're definitely a 'company' man! They say jump and you say how high...and then I'm sure try to jump even higher.

I'm in the military and I have to adhere to the polices, guidance, and regulations--got it. What I don't have to do is be a cheerleader for the parts that are nonsense. I'll pass on on the 'special month' lunches because like you said, it doesn't make me a better warfighter.

As Nsplayr correctly pointed out...the military is kind of like a dictatorship. That being said, I don't have to believe in all the propaganda and allow myself to be indoctrinated.

ETA: Liquid, you still haven't commented on this article...why not?

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2013/oct/31/pentagon-manual-white-christian-heterosexual-males/

F*ck off. Comment on it yourself. Edited November 6, 2013 by Liquid

[Seriously]

Got it, those images present an unprofessional image. I also understand that glorifying sexuality is unprofessional. However, does it not concern you that the Air Force then ignores its Janus-like behavior when it glorifies sexuality in the vein of Pride Month which celebrates GLBT lifestyles?

You didn't know LGBT was an ethnicity?

[HeloDude]

F*ck off. Comment on it yourself.

Noted...

This about sums up everything the guys have been saying in this thread. In reality, senior officers don't want to be challenged and don't want to be put in a situation where they have to potentially disagree with their bosses and what they are being told to do. It confirms what many of us have been seeing over the years.

[Liquid]

Noted...

This about sums up everything the guys have been saying in this thread. In reality, senior officers don't want to be challenged and don't want to be put in a situation where they have to potentially disagree with their bosses and what they are being told to do. It confirms what many of us have been seeing over the years.

Bullshit. Your second sentence is baseless and without context. I told you to off for saying am a company man, try to jump higher and implying I am a cheerleader. Don't confuse professional disagreement, challenges and talking to your bosses about serious leadership issues with the anonymous and frequently whiskey influenced garbage dialogue on this blog. I get the broad generalizations about senior leadership, even when they are lacking specific details and context. I'm fine with being insulted by people who know me. You don't. Stick to the argument.

[Seriously]

You made some good points Pawnman, I hear you. Stupid shit happens every day. Correct it the best way you can and move on. We need to close the gap between CSAF specific guidance and current efforts.

We were told today that Gen Welsh's "stop doing things that don't make sense" was meant more as a strategic directive rather than a down in the trenches approach to doing things.

Not even kidding.

[JarheadBoom]

This should not have happened. Either the squadron could have scheduled smarter to put the hours on pilots who needed the hours, or they should have landed with mission and training complete. If it was really wing cc direction to waste fuel no matter what, you should file an IG complain for Fraud Waste and Abuse. You can do it anonymously. Any money you don't spend on FHP can be repurposed to other O&M priorities. Wasting hours and all of the other resources you described is unacceptable. Do something about it. Or at least fix it so it doesn't happen again.

It's an AFRC WG and SQ; 90%-ish of our crewmembers have .civ jobs that have to be deconflicted with the Reserve job, so scheduling works a little differently than the AD model of "Guess what, you're flying a local tomorrow".

Of course it shouldn't have happened, but it did... for the better part of an entire FY. I'm betting that the same guidance comes again, later this FY.

"Fly the allotted flight time, no matter what. We worked HARD to get those hours for you, so you're going to use every one of them. No matter what."

Believe me, I'd love to do something about it. But E-6 vs. O-6 usually doesn't end well for the E-6...

[Jaded]

We were told today that Gen Welsh's "stop doing things that don't make sense" was meant more as a strategic directive rather than a down in the trenches approach to doing things.

Not even kidding.

I watched him speak about 2 months ago, and it was the people in the trenches he specifically addressed that to. Unbelievable.

[HeloDude]

It comes down to what most of the other guys are saying: That we don't know where the line is, because at any point, that line can change. We're being told that gender, sexuality, and ethnicity don't matter...yet we have special months 'celebrating' (whatever word people want to use) all these differences that supposedly don't matter anymore. I'm being told that things that don't make us a better warfighter don't belong at work, yet we do things all the time that don't make us a better warfighter. And when we mention these silly issues on here that don't make any sense, for the most part we hear 'well, man up, and change things yourself'...if that's the case, why even have commander call and request feedback from the lower levels?

It also comes down to the hypocrisy of all these issues. It comes down to the fact that a picture of a woman in a bikini on a work desk is 'glorifying sex, sexually offensive, whatever' but yet af.mil sites having girls in bikinis is totally acceptable, because, well, that's the AF doing it, so it's ok. I'm told that if I say one thing and do something different around the enlisted troops that I am a bad leader (which I would agree), but yet the AF (ran by senior officers) does it all the time...again, what's up with the pictures on the af.mil site? And for the record, I could care less about any pictures as I don't keep any personal pictures at work--never have, never will. But when Big Blue is making such a big deal about something, then they should check their own backyard first.

If I would at least have someone with some high rank say to me 'Yea, it's hypocrisy, but that's just the way it is'...then I'll at least somewhat accept that answer because it's an honest one. But when you won't call out the hypocrisy yourself, then I call that being a 'company' man--not sure what else to call it. I'm not saying that you are setting the policies that conflict with one another, but at the same time you don't seem to have an issue with any of it...at least not on here anyway. And when there is a legitimate story that once again highlights the AF's hypocrisy (that I linked), we don't get a long answer from you to why 'this is the way things are right now and the ways things need to be' like you have done with all the sexual offensive examples, but rather we hear crickets.

90% of us on here may just totally 'not get it' when it comes to the way things are actually done and why they are done...but I do know this--perception is reality and it does affect things at the lower level.

If you still think I'm completely wrong then we'll just have to agree to disagree.

[nsplayr]

Any money you don't spend on FHP can be repurposed to other O&M priorities. Wasting hours and all of the other resources you described is unacceptable. Do something about it. Or at least fix it so it doesn't happen again.

I haven't experienced a jackbooted flying hours program in my corner of AFSOC like some other guys are referencing but something along the same lines was the 1 SOW directive to "not ferry extra fuel." So, while that sounds fine, that translated into, "don't put that you landed early for 'training complete' on your Form 40" because that meant you carried extra gas on that sortie and if you knew that training would be complete early, you should have taken off with less gas.

What does that all mean for the line O-3 handed the keys for an airplane...don't freaking land early because the O-6 reads all the Form 40s and will shit on your SQ/CC if you carried extra gas.

All of this was extra hilarious in my community because the total, max-weight fuel onload for a U-28 is probably in the range of what a herc will piss away just leaking on the ramp but I digress...good intentions I'm sure form the Wing, which somehow got translated to "you must fly out your fragged hours regardless of the status of your training" down at the level of execution.

So while I can't complain too much since we get tons of hours and typically have put them to good use training our young aircrew, there are ways common sense is still being squashed from on high that don't leave a lot of room for disagreement from a CGO perspective.

Edited November 6, 2013 by nsplayr

[FlyinGrunt]

We were told today that Gen Welsh's "stop doing things that don't make sense" was meant more as a strategic directive rather than a down in the trenches approach to doing things.

Not even kidding.

You know, I'd consider taking a major chance with my career on that one. That message was inevitably leadership by email, correct? And Gen Welsh is on the global, right?

I'd forward it to him, and just ask respectfully, "Sir, is this message we received keeping with your intent? We'd like to make sure we're taking the proper initiative."

I know that he receives 11 billion emails. I know there's a snowball's chance in hell he reads it. Therefore there's only a snowball's chance in hell that the fecal storm would actually happen, and inevitably get traced back to me with predictable results. But you never know. "Stop doing things that don't make sense" from the CSAF himself is a pretty good sword to fall on.

[Hacker]

Glorifying sexuality with half naked "Strawberry Bitches" nose art

"Half naked"? Glorifying sexuality? Seriously?

What's next -- PT shorts and short-sleeve shirts banned on base because they're too revealing?

We were told today that Gen Welsh's "stop doing things that don't make sense" was meant more as a strategic directive rather than a down in the trenches approach to doing things.

Not even kidding.

So, his story used as an example in his Commander's Call about the airman at Transpo who stopped filling out the Form 1800s isn't what he really meant? Or, more correctly, this is how mid-level AF leadership interpreted what he said?

Edited November 6, 2013 by Hacker

[GreasySideUp]

I think my PT gear shows more leg than that.

[pawnman]

Give me a break. You keep a list of reasons why you left, and add things that have happened since you left to rationalize your separation? Good thing you got out before it all got ruined. At least you get to continue bitching about things that don't affect you.

Camera Shy came down because it was not appropriate on current aircraft. Preserving and honoring history and heritage are different than putting dated traditions (sexy, half naked women in suggestive poses) on today's aircraft or buildings. This nose art was not original and it was not destroyed, it was moved. I don't think it will ever be ok to paint Camera Shy or Memphis Bell on a modern AF aircraft and I am ok with that. Times and accepted traditions change. Our museums and our heritage should/should include WWII nose art. But we need to be careful using copies of the nose art in ways that present an unprofessional image that unnecessarily glorifies sexuality. Lining the halls of an ops squadron or the Pentagon with 25 prints of sexy nose art send more than a "we love our heritage" message. It sends a "look at all these naked ladies" message that is unprofessional, unacceptable and unwise. We should protect the museum history and not get too upset about seeing the nose art. But we need to be careful and smart about how we use it to glorify and encourage sexuality in the work place.

So how is the good dude, who knows what right looks like and knows something needs to change, but is afraid to do the right thing because he wants to keep his job for now different than the CYA tow-the-line, don't rock the boat self-serving jerk you can't stand? Pick the righteous fight and fight. Be empowered to do the right thing, like helping the NCO understand the time and place to correct a senior officer. Let the Sq/CC know how you think it is bullshit that he is cracking down on you for correct the out of line NCO or Chief. Courage involves more than risking your life. I don't understand how you can criticize the careerists and those who "don't rock the boat", and do the exact same thing yourself.

You made some good points Pawnman, I hear you. Stupid shit happens every day. Correct it the best way you can and move on. We need to close the gap between CSAF specific guidance and current efforts.

This should not have happened. Either the squadron could have scheduled smarter to put the hours on pilots who needed the hours, or they should have landed with mission and training complete. If it was really wing cc direction to waste fuel no matter what, you should file an IG complain for Fraud Waste and Abuse. You can do it anonymously. Any money you don't spend on FHP can be repurposed to other O&M priorities. Wasting hours and all of the other resources you described is unacceptable. Do something about it. Or at least fix it so it doesn't happen again.

In our case, it was MAJCOM guidance. All part of the political theater for sequestration. Senior leadership was terrified of having hours left after begging congress for hours post-sequestration. When there are only so many jets and so many crews, the end result if that every crew has to max-perform the flight time.

[BitteEinBit]

There is a difference between celebrating a special observance that recognizes the GLBT lifestyle and glorifying the sex part of it. You know there is a difference between allowing the celebration of the GLBT lifestyle being accepted into the military.

I've actually been waiting for someone to say it just like that. Please explain to me what a GLBT lifestyle is all about without mentioning sex (the act or even gender). What is this "Lifestyle" we are recognizing and can we recognize it without stereotyping a group of people? Does one have to conform to said "lifestyle" in order to be gay, lesbian, bi, or transsexual? I'm curious about the verbiage WRT the "lifestyle"...all this time I'm being told homosexuals are no different than you and I...but now there seems to be a lifestyle out there that we are supposed to be recognizing? Is there something special that makes them different that I don't know about?

Still, no one can explain to me what we are recognizing with "Pride" month...probably because everyone knows it is wrong direction given the current SAPR climate. What exactly defines the GLBT culture?

Liquid, I'm not calling you out on this personally, you've already made it clear that you do not support "Pride" month. I ask the question (again) because now someone is saying we are recognizing a "lifestyle." I was unaware of any special "lifestyle" a gay person lives that is significantly different than my lifestyle...with the exception of the sexual act which I'm not allowed to mention. So, excluding the sexual preference or nature of what makes a homosexual a homosexual, what is this lifestyle we speak of?

[waveshaper]

Sexual Assault Summit. I can see the USAF trying some of these techniques and I also would expect more exercises/experiments to be conducted.

http://www.military.com/daily-news/2013/11/06/the-militarys-struggles-against-sex-assault.html?comp=7000023317828&rank=1