Leaderboard

AdV, So, is it accurate to say that you think logging combat sorties and getting air medals will help RPA operator promotion rates? Or do you just think it will make them feel better about themselves and take their responsibilities more seriously? Or do you think it will improve their street cred among other operators? Or are you saying that RPA crossflows should be of a higher "quality"? Because I can tell you that: 1. Promotion boards know what you do, they know how important it is, and they know you don't get air medals. AIr medals and combat time have nothing to do with your promotion rates. 2. As has already been voiced multiple times in this thread and others, people that really care about doing their best on the job assigned to them care nothing for air medals or other trappings. It's called doing your job - no medal required for that. If you're saying that the AF as an institution does not afford RPAs the clout they are due, I guess I would ask what you're looking for because medals don't mean shit. 3. Anybody with half a brain knows what you guys bring to the fight. You have my respect and, I would assume, that of most others on this board. I don't care what you do as long as you do it to the best of your ability. That applies to all AFSCs. 4. It's tough to foster a wartime mentality when you are so far removed from the theater and your missions are often monotonous. I'm in the same boat. I'm flying E-3s from Camp Snoopy. Do I feel like I'm at war when I go fly? Am I getting shot at? No. But that doesn't matter because I care about being the best pilot I can be regardless of the airframe or the mission and I try to pass that mentality on to others. Jaded dudes are poison to young guys. Not saying you've gotta drink the kool-aid, obviously the AF is ######ed up in many ways, but just being professional about the job you are assigned is huge. A few guys with the right mentality can make a big difference. Protect your young'ins, teach them the right attitude early, and it will pay dividends down the road. You can't change a culture or mindset overnight, but it can be done. OK, off the soapbox. I hope you find what you are looking for. Just be careful what arguments you use to get there. Despite all of the spears thrown at you here, I can tell that you care about the future of your community and that is invaluable.

Though I wish that were the case,... we have armed guards and line badges to get near the aircraft. Getting near the crews? Not such a big deal. Yeah, yeah... that's not a great analogy. But we've got plenty of SF troops out there that might be required to take a bullet to keep the "asset" safe. Their life, while valuable, is considered ok to put at risk to preserve the asset. And try this litmus test: Go crash four F-22's in a week with four successful ejections. The following week, have four F-22 Captains killed in separate off-duty accidents. Which one will have Congress' attention?

Or maybe for once and all the Air Force will pull their heads out of their asses and draw a line like the Navy does. Line vs Restricted line. Computer geeks need Masters Degrees, so do engineers, meterologists yup. Pilots/Operators etc do not. Quit comparing the folks that need degrees for mission success to those that don't. And if there is a pilot/operator out there that goes ahead and gets a meaningless masters we shank him/her.

PT shirts untucked at the gym, unruly mustaches, lack of reflective belts after dusk - it was only a matter of time... Joking aside... Maybe our fighter pilots should be focusing more so on flying rather than dividing up their time between additional duties and a worthless online masters from Embry Ridiculous. Oh wait they can't if they want to stay in past major.

Did you develop this philosophy based on your own experiences prior to 9/11? I see them as the opposite, because that hypothesis certainly doesn't reflect the atmosphere of the ACC fighter world in those two 'eras'. I was raised in the ONW/OSW world, with Squadron/Group/Wing leadership who were all more or less DESERT STORM and ALLIED FORCE veterans. These were folks with a real combat mentality, and between 1995 and 2001 there was certainly NOT the same risk aversion and slavery to the PME machine (amongst the many ills that the AF is currently suffering) that there is now. Here's an example: the night before OIF started, my SQ/CC gave us all the standard motivational speech. At one point, he addressed how we might handle EPs while we were engaged in a CAS scenario: "If you leave troops that are actively engaged, you'd better fucking be on fire or need to bail out. Otherwise, I expect you to stay there and support those guys. Electrical failures...hydraulic failures...suck it up and do your job so those guys get home to see mama alive." These were leaders who had seen real no-shit warfare in ODS and OAF against actual threats which resulted in deaths and POWs from their squadron ranks. They expected their combat experience in OIF (and the previous year in Anaconda) to mirror somewhat those previous experiences where people had to face a real threat and show courage in the face of physical danger. Unfortunately, it is the post 9/11 era (really, the post Shock-and Awe era) which has brought risk aversion and other current poisons in to fashion. I'd even venture that it's the post Johnny-Jumper-as-CSAF-era that has done the most to usher in this current era of pussification. Jumper had a lot of very 'old school' views on how the AF should be run and thought/acted/believed like a young fighter pilot who'd been raised by grizzled Vietnam vets. Let's not forget that Jumper is the one who said, 'if we wanted you to have a Masters Degree, we'd send you to go get one on the AF's time and dime, otherwise spend your time becoming a better warfighter or with your family.' So, your theory is completely out-of-step with my experiences as a fighter dude over that time period.

High flight time on airframes is hardly limited to one or two MDS. They have all gotten the shit beat out of them the past 10 years.

I certainly in no way suggested that such experience be a barrier to participation in the conversation. Obviously it is not. What I did suggest (and I am surprised that my post could be so significantly misunderstood) is that someone who did have such experience in person against a significant air-to-air or surface-to-air threat would not have ever made the comparison that Blair has in the first place. QED, Blair's combat experience in the Gunship during the surge, in which there was no air-to-air or significant surface-to-air threat, and later experience in the years of un-contested flying in the permissive environments in both Iraq and Afghanistan, incorrectly colored his opinion on what the actual threat to a manned combat aviator is. As a side note, unfortunately there are a lot of folks in the USAF who think that the "combat sorties" that have been flown in the permissive environments of OEF and OIF are typical of all combat air operations, and have let that color their opinions about what capabilities are needed by the USAF to effectively accomplish our mission. Anyway, I seriously doubt that anyone who has ever had to threat react to a guided SAM (or other such no-kidding life threatening experience in a combat AOR) would ever, ever have suggested there be any sort of parity between that and anything a RPA operator faces at any point in his duties, including the drive to and from work every day. That being said...."optically-guided RPG"? DId I miss an intel brief on some fantastic new capability that makes an RPG into a guided missile, or are they still, as the name suggests, just "rockets"?

are you trolling or just an idiot? there's a reason they're sitting...

If you cannot fall to your death, you should not be able to get an Air Medal. Simple as that.

Of course! Rides for all my friends!!