Leaderboard

I read the forums often and seldom post. It's my impression that the purpose of this particular thread is to provide an outlet for people to vent. In proper brainstorming sessions all ideas are accepted and not deemed BS. That is for later. Seems this thread is similar - to blow of steam about an institution that I imagine we all love (in some fashion) and that we want to see succeed at its mission. I think frustration builds when a person feels like they are inhibited in contributing fully to its mission or if the focus of said institution seems to have drifted from what's truly important. First, I'll write what I think is right about the USAF - 1st rate training and equipment for its aircrew. I helped run many LFE's in AK and Nellis. I saw the noticable difference in the capabilities of our USAF vs. many of our Allies and sister services. Unfortunately our equipment has suffered in the last 10+ years. Also the professionalism of our CAF aircrew is bar none. As an airlifter and ATC IP (yes I was actually in ATC) by trade, I was an outsider looking in with the CAF. But damn, I was impressed. I think it is an attitude that is permiating to the MAF via the WIC (my observation). Also, I think our UPT is the best. I may be biased since I was an IP at Willy and Randolph. I saw products from other services and from a few Allies. Again the difference was telling. I don't know how UPT is now, but when I went through 25+ years ago, we all flew the T-38, had to be able to fly fingertip at the 3G, 90 degree bank standard. The program was 48 weeks and my class had a 50% wash-out rate. Standards were high. If you graduated you were good, if you got a fighter, you were great. I don't know how it is now with SUPT with the different tracks. I like to think the standards are just as high now as they were then. Regardless of yes or no, from what I experienced/observed throughout my career was that USAF aircrew are outstanding at what they do WHEN GIVEN THE OPPORTUNITY. Now for what's wrong with the USAF: The personel system. Many times it does not allow our aircrew to achieve their potential in their particular mission skill. It is the great inhibiter, whether it's a demand for an advanced degree, PME, 3-years at one place and then move, ALO tours, etc. The USAF has shown many an exceptional aviator the door because their career, "on paper", wasn't satisfactory or tried to send them down a career path that didn't allow them to do what they loved or for what they were trained. Also the USAF takes a cookie cutter approach to all career fields. I think we all know how important cyber security and space ops are becoming. IMO, there is no way the USAF can recruit the best and the brightest in these fields by expecting them to fit the USAF norms and put-up with all the Micky Mouse BS. They can do the same type of job in the civilian world with better pay and no nonsense. I think pilots can put up with it better. Yes, there are the airlines, but that is not the same as flying military jets. I was a spin-demo IP in the T-37. Loved it and doubt I could find a comparable job in the civilian world. Also, I'm worried about our emphasis on LO and RPA's (shouldn't go into much detail about either). The cost of the JSF is taking needed $$$ for other platforms, like a new AWACS, more F-22s, updated F-15s, block-60 F-16s, non-lethal SEAD platorms, more strat-airlift, and more tankers than programmed. RPA's are leaching skilled aviators from jobs where they need to remain and it's misguided to think that they will be of any use in a contested environment. We cannot afford the $$$ in our diminished budget to put $$$ and people into an airframe that can only operate uncontested. What good will they and the aircrew be when we are fighting a determined foe with an air-defense? I also think it will be a huge mistake to moth-ball the A-10 fleet. The A-10 community has a skill set at a level that is not easily gained. It would be a shame if that is lost. So, I'm worried about our ongoing airframe procurement strategy. I think it is misguided. Again, my opinion only, based on working many LFEs. One last thing on what's wrong - to me rank shouldn't have its privileges, it has its responsibilities. I've heard and seen too many instances of senior leaders making themselves the focus of what matters instead of things truly important. Examples: had an aquantaince that I ran into at the Deid back in '03 who worked DV issues at the CAOC who told me about all the O-7's and above who wanted rides on aircraft to different places in theater, but didn't want any cargo on the plane, a certain USAFE/CC who wanted the motor pool arranged by taller-tap, wanted leaves raked out of trees, missappropriated funds for personal preferences and when visiting Nellis, demanded that a running course on base be marked specifically for him with mile markers posted (I guess the jogging path at runner's world wasn't good enough), an ATC/O-9 who demanded all the mailboxes on Randolph AFB be painted beige (against the wishes of the USPS) and who was caught using the C-word in reference to a female who had just briefed him (he had to make a sexual harrasment video for us to watch for that), a 3 WG/CC who wanted all the street names and numbers changed because he couldn't figure out how to navigate around Elmendorf (even though everyone else managed over the years), a C-130 WG/CC (463 TAW) who ordered a training mission to Berumuda and then happened to put his family Space-A on the flight, two CSAFs who seemed to care more about changing the uniform than anything else, etc. etc. I have many more examples and imagine all of you have your BS stories about senior leadership privilege. Senior leadership focus should always be on the mission and those that do the mission. IMHO, everything else is fluff. I read a lot of good stuff on Base Ops. I appreciate the forum. Regards, RF.

Nope, also totally wrong. Just because the loadmaster doesn't know the corrective action doesn't mean I tell him to STFU when he reports that he sees smoke coming out of the engine. There are a lot of folks in the service who aren't in positions where they can impact the solution, yet have no difficulty identifying there is something wrong. It is leadership's job to un-fuck that goat; that's sorta, y'know, why they got put in that position in the first place.

The more I see what SEA posts, the more I am convinced that he actually is senior level military leadership.

Of course. She was a "victim."

Krygyzstan Women Romanian Women

Having guns in Germany is a pain in the ass. One of the reasons I left mine home when I pcs'd. Just too many hoops to jump through for something as simple as wanting a gun in the house for protection, never mind being subject to a legal system as a forigner. That's probably the biggest element that would keep me from living in another country after retirement. I loved Phuket, and I could definitely stretch retirement pay comfortably, but I'd also always be the outsider over there. Which is fine... Until shit goes wrong.

I don't know about that these days. Seems like a lot of crap comes out at the bottom of the T-1 barrel. This kind of crap is always justified using the "broken window theory" and "attention to detail." It's all a load of crap and just an easy distraction from fixing the real problems in the Air Force. Its the same reason our promotion system is messed up. The boards look for easy discriminators to identify guys to promote, i.e. master's degrees.

Thanks for quoting the entire text.....

Wall of text. Will. Not. Read.

Turkey has very strict requirements with regards to cargo (advanced notification requirements). Romania is all about Logistics. Not everything flows via air.

Get bent, assclown. Guys who leave the service have done their time and deserve to have their hand shaken for their service on the way out, not your finger wagged at them for not staying in.

And all the while Metzger is still riding her way up. UFB

Or is that 'Half Vast Minority'

If the A-10 had a FE onboard this wouldn't ever happen. FWIW, I'm a MAF evaluator and I despise EPs that Q-3 dudes for idiotic queep. If they pass the "would I let him fly my family around" test, they'll typically pass, along with any Q- debrief items.

Until pretty recently, the A3V KC-10 boom was a tremendous douchebag and was well known inside and outside our community for being a douche. This guy had been an evaluator for a long time, but he had a chip on his shoulder and no one checked him on it. Not saying your bud is the same type, but when "iPad charged to a certain percentage, rings, rags, scarves" become Q3 fodder it's natural to think in that direction. Q3s are for breaking bones, bending metal, and busting warnings and cautions, not for piddling stuff like that. Debrief item at best. If this guy had any sort of big picture we wouldn't be here talking about him. Besides, Q3s take up a shitload of time, who wants to go through that?

What caused you to read a magazine called "manlicker"?