Leaderboard

If AMC is having so many problems with crews doing stupid things, the command should take a look at itself. I think there are some deep seeded problems there. There are issues with initial qualification and upgrade training. People are being upgraded to AC and IP before they are ready and for the wrong reasons. There is a lot of emphasis on non-flying related things as we all know. When I was in the command, it was not unheard of for a crewmember to open up his PME books (yes, we had books once) while in an orbit in the AOR. Leadership went through the roof when they heard about it, but couldn't seem to make the connection that their subordinates were reacting to the priorities that leadership had clearly set. AMC is reaping what it has sown WRT to emphasis on what we call queep. It continues to react with leadership by FCIF. Emphasis on REACT. The command has got to become more proactive. Instead of focusing on punishing people for their poor decision making skills, it needs to understand that it has lost focus on providing people with the tools needed to make GOOD decisions.

Yet the Alamo remains open!

It'll probably start with a call to ban hi-cap gas tanks. No one needs twenty gallons of gas, tanks should be no more than five gallons!

Liquid, thanks for the response; that's the kind of outlook I think we're all interested to see, especially since it isn't one that any of us have. I hope you choose to keep participating here, despite all of the points you mention as why someone in your position wouldn't want to. Just something for you to take away, though; two statements you made really stuck out for me: The first point, regarding risk, is IMHO part of the core cancer infecting USAF leadership. The perception of me and my fellow line personnel is that leaders are more concerned with avoiding risk than they are with really leading. That they are more concerned with protecting their careers than they are with actually accomplishing the mission, and thus their leadership and decisionmaking strategy is based on ensuring they don't do something that pisses their bosses off (but unfortunately doesn't appear have a primary basis in our real core duty of advancing combat airpower). I found it telling that it was the very first reason you mentioned for senior level leadership not wanting to informally interact with the ranks. Naturally, this term "careerist" is thrown around as a pejorative toward those folks who value risk avoidance and career protection more than they do actual warrior leadership, and I find it interesting that you would caveat the term with your second statement, as if your (their) GO-level career deserved more protection from risk than anyone else's, and such decisionmaking patterns were valid because they were being a "realist" instead of a "careerist". So, why is it that our GO-level leaders aren't the FIRST ones in line to play that "moral courage" card, and make the right decisions for the mission and their people and throw their career cautions to the winds? IMHO these are the people who need to be using that logic process more than ANYONE else in the chain of command...and yet by most appearances, they are the ones who use it least. I primarily see Captains and Majors and Lt Cols making morally courageous decisions that are "right" for mission and people -- and they are the ones who I primarily see have their careers/futures in the military destroyed, or take their talents elsewhere when they have the opportunity to leave because their ideas/decisions/leadership do not translate into career advancement in the current USAF. How is it that the service that was born on the backs of rogues who vehemently supported airpower to the spite of Army leadership has turned into the one where anyone who even thinks outside the container -- much less acts outside it -- is marginalized, ostracized, or even outright punished for not following the career-progression-formula of risk aversion and compliance-is-more-important-than-achievement? Again, I don't know you, have never worked for you, and have no idea about your leadership style or decisionmaking history. As I've said, I don't agree with all of your points (and some I significantly disagree with, reference my "gimme a fucking break" comment in my earlier post). I will say, however, that you talk a pretty damn good game here with some of the things that you've posted with respect to your outlook and motivations as a senior leader.

Does no one else see what's happening? The entire gov't shutdown is a ruse to distract us from the real threat of...SKYNET https://news.cnet.com...-self-assemble/

Yes. Flyovers at Arlington are no small deal.

It's black. It looks scary. We must pass common sense legislation that rids the streets of these killing machines.

Here's what I think is lacking, and I accept the possible spears. We all agree with what he's saying. We all agree that the problem is somewhere between the CSAF and us. The "leadership" in the middle, somewhere along the line, is just silently ignoring what he says and going on their merry way with compliance-at-all-costs culture. What is the CSAF doing to force THOSE leaders from squashing the initiative he seeks to foster? I think it's time for a reign of terror, in a perversely awesome sense. I know he's busy. But random visits, unannounced, everywhere, all the time is the answer. Down in the trenches, talking to maintainers at DM at 0300, or pilots getting back from TDY at HRT, or that FS at Mountain Home whose CC has apparently lost its mind . . . or hell, ANYONE at Cannon. Solicit honest feedback, with no entourage in tow, and no warning to the chain of command. Then follow up. When a stupid policy letter like banning #69 is issued, or Jim Slife opens his mouth about Art 15s for rolling your flightsuit sleeves, or an AMC senior leader pulls one of their famous political crucifixions of an aircraft commander . . . call THEM on the carpet at 0700 in service dress. Put the fear of God into the O-5s and O-6s. Start specifying that some regs CANNOT be made further restrictive, and that to do so is to risk being fired by the CSAF himself. I'm hopeful. But what I think is necessary is to make the careerists in the middle be scared to death for their careers if they do not push decision-making back to the appropriate level and stop thinking all rules are created equal and unbreakable. Curtis LeMay meets the Common Sense fairy.

So...whose side is Limnadia on?

Well, the public doesn't have a very long attention span. Once we started talking about defunding Obamacare and going to Syria, most of them probably thought sequestration was over.