Leaderboard

I'd argue against the notion that the O-6s - O-8s are "powerless." I accept the previously posted anecdotes as truth, but I say you will always have a choice to do something and not merely be "powerless." It's a matter of how far you are willing to go for your cause and believes. The AF CGOs, for the longest time, were thought to be powerless and replaceable, yet they've successfully got into the Big Blue's OODA loop by exiting, turning down IDEs, and etc (yeah it took several years to get here)... I have to believe If the AF senior leaders/managers really wanted to see changes, they would have made it happen already, provided they are willing to put their careers on the line like the CGOs (imagine O-6s exodus en masse). The problem is everyone has aspiration to further their career, especially at the higher levels when so much more is at stake (and more risk adverse). Nobody wants to be known as that senior guy who quit/got fired based on principles (it would be hard for me as well). I'm not faulting them for their choices/decisions to not challenge the system, all I'm saying they do have a choice and are not as powerless as they seem to be. If the CGOs can take a stand then why can't the O-6s? If you are going to enjoy the DV perks & benefits that come w/ the rank, then you better accept the responsibilities that come with it as well. Additionally, the O-6s and O-8s do have a plethora of power and authorities to motivate Airmen/improve QoL/do good. But what have they done when given the opportunities? 1. Made local PT/uniform/leave/TDY/alcohol... policies more stringent than the AFI (just about every base/levels) 2. Pushed out excessive voluntary/involuntarily tasker/programs and task saturate the entire Wing (every Wing) 3. Reclama'd (against AFPC and MAJCOM for 2+ years) entire staff and group from all deployments and PCS w/ less than 4 yr TOS regardless of circumstances. (we call you Maj Gen "No"). MAJCOM CC only did something about it right after the 2-star retired and claimed ignorance. 4. Restricted an entire AFSC from cross-flowing into other AFSCs (again, Maj Gen "No") 5. Allowed lower-tiered toxic leaders and sexual misconducts to fester and deny any knowledge when challenged (AETC bases *tsk tsk*) 6. Allowed your E-9/E-8 goons to undercut officer authorities unchecked (AF-wide) The list goes on and on but the point is that these are the QoL issues that are w/in the O-6s - O-8s control, and when given the chance to do something about it, they usually keep it status quo or deny accountability. I can't tell you how many times I have heard O-6 commanders said that they are at the end of their career and have nothing to lose, only to fall inline w/ the rest of them and not rock the boat until retirement. So no, I don't believe O-6s - O-8s are "powerless."

If you can max the run, you aren't doing it right... lol Sent from my iPhone using Baseops Network Forums

I'll bite, but have to clarify a few things first. 1. Not an O-6 to O-8, haven't even pinned on O-5 yet. 2. Will embark on the sq/cc experience next summer. 3. Never been an exec, but spent the last two years close enough with enough GOs to speak from that experience. 4. Lastly, I stopped commenting here so much largely due to the many who refuse to engage in discourse in which there is an actual conversation. That and there's just not enough hours in the day. Opinion: There's too much TL/DR bullshit on this site. While brevity is the soul of wit, these problems won't be solved in 140 characters. To solve them, even to understand them, you have to engage your brain. That takes effort, god forbid. But... I still read this site everyday... Seriously! That said, retention of the right people-aviators-is one of many problems facing the officer corps in the USAF today. It's is a nasty problem that the USAF has no clue how to fix and that's going to deepen before it eases. This is evident in the hamfisted closing of loopholes fits and starts we've seen thus far. The USAF as the tech force throws money at problems (or punts), whereas the Army for example throws people at problems... There's more to it than money or easing the add'l duty burden or reinvigorating the squadrons. QOL plays a part, and part of that is morale - the feeling that your work matters, that you are accomplishing the mission. When you treat people like crap, overwork them, and give them no hope that things will change, morale plummets. That's what's happened. Read General Tunner's description of aircrew morale in China-India when he arrived there in his book 'Over the Hump' and you'll see. We have a morale problem manifesting as a retention problem. Period. (Though it is not universal, this is what is killing the squadrons...) Next let me clear up a common misconception... Colonels and low ranking GOs have far less power to affect change and make things better than you'd think. Not all colonels are equal, just as relationships (at least in public) between GOs shows that they are not all equal. (Reference: any staff, anywhere) While in some aspects their words are holy writ, in much of their daily duty they have very little power to make changes. Everyone gets a say, so consensus building logically takes time. You better get it cleared with your boss and your bosses boss and the the lawyer, etc. or else your neck is on the line... this manifests in bureaucratic delay and stagnation of decisions, at the worst case it shows up as risk aversion. Rarely are "go-do" orders so easily given, thus change is slow. This reality can be frustrating for the young. For the most part it's good that change is slow (ironically) because we have a lack of depth, experience, and real education out there at those ranks. Yes, people have been to the schools, but many retain little and few are genuine experts (not to mention the wide variety on quality of the school experience). We use variance of assignments to get people "experience" thereby producing an effect that broader and broader officers are seemingly always in charge, always getting their feet wet. General Officers are for the most part exactly that: generalists, by design. Some communities have taken this to the extreme, my own included, in making younger and younger officers as broad as possible - with the result being a lack of depth in the general population, but especially at the senior ranks, again with few exceptions (WOs - take a look at how many MAF GO WOs there are out there...). That reality is only further exasterbated by the fact that we don't expect pilots to just be pilots, nor do we reward, promote, or encourage expertise in that narrowest of measures. We evaluate and promote everything else, and what gets measured gets done. We've done this to ourselves, simply by allowing it to be accepted as the norm. You fix the morale problem with a focus on what matters - job performance and mission accomplishment. And I don't mean job performance like as in "Captain X, who is scheduler # 12 is really good, I think he's our CGOQ..." I mean take a look at who the best is in their primary job - start with the flyers and work your way from there. Stop with the "well all he did was fly missions, no volunteer hours or anything in self-improvement." That's how you reinvigorate the squadrons. MAF dudes - how many units out there have a "top hauler" or "top boom" award for the most missions/tonnage flown, hours flown, or gas passed in a month/qtr/year? My guess is few to none - I've never seen it. That speaks volumes when everyone knows who the Volunteer of the Qtr is for the wing because they have a parking spot at the commissary.... Now then, as for the bonus - I tell guys to follow their hearts, do what's right for the family. And I don't mean the USAF family. I've had a lot of success in my career, and struggled as much as I've done well. I earned a divorce out of it, and don't have kids. As an "old" major, about to be sq/cc, that makes me the oddball. I have a wonderful woman in my life now and that's made me reevaluate what and how I operate. But I don't wish the lousy parts on anyone. I nonetheless have no regrets, even though I'm facing a one-year remote amid a budding relationship. But my situation is not the norm, and I take that into account when advising my guys. If you come for career advice, you'll get it with the bark on - that's what you're owed for asking. And some people don't like hearing they're not the best or that they should pursue other endeavors. While I won't temper my fire, I've never scoffed anyone who wanted out or to take care of their family. I won't. My own experience made the difference, and I'm not sitting here chugging blue kool-aide. You must do what's right for you, regardless of if it aligns with big blue's plan.... This problem is bigger than the O-6 to O-8 crowd indicted in the post above... and none of us can change it alone. You'll never push over the wall, but if you try you can find loose bricks... Chuck

Very good thoughtful post and I'm not meaning to sh1t on it. But... "You better get it cleared with your boss and your bosses boss and the lawyer, etc. or else your neck is on the line..." is actually the heart of the matter. Many of you still playing and even some of us blue-haired Camel-smoking commissary commandos, cared deeply about getting the job done. So much so that Big Blue took advantage of that mind-set to advance its non-mission important mission. "Do more with less," and other things that have led to the current state of the Air Force, where the Chief of freakin' Staff FINALLY realized he and his cohort destroyed the squadron, the heart of the service. And how did they accomplish that? By being those self-same O-6s to O-8s, even the Lt Gen you referenced above, and saying "Yes" without any sort of rebuttal. Any sort of "But boss, did you think of this if you take this action?" could have done wonders if there were a spine present. The fact that commanders aren't really that until, what, at the CCMD level is entirely each commander's fault for not saying "No," or saying "If you want that, you will lose this" or some such. Or going placidly along with the usurpation of his/her prerogatives by a higher boss without pushing back. If your name is on the door, you should be willing to take the fall for identifying to the emperor that his ass is hanging in the wind. Instead, it, largely, became a system of what you wrote and I highlighted above. If it's fly to Regensburg because we think destroying the ball-bearing factory will shorten the war, then by all means a "shut up and color" attitude is warranted. A brisk "yes, sir!" when told to have everyone redo CBTs so the unit looks good on an inspection, not so much... When it's all over, you will hang up the uniform. And should you decide to shave after that, the only one that will care how you did or if you actively fought for your people, even if you lost and/or got fired for a good fight, is you looking back in the mirror. I imagine you will do well as a sq/cc and I really do wish you well. I believe you most likely will try your best to look after your people while trying to accomplish your mission. Are you willing to fall on your sword for something? If so, what? I'm not looking for a public answer nor offering therapy. Just that I believe it takes that X 1,000 for Big Blue to start to course correct. Otherwise, we continue on the "Yes, sir" no matter what the lunacy trajectory I get it. I'm not hypocritical. Most folks here, and even in the wider Big Blue, want to do well and make the boss happy. It's in our DNA. Evolution can be a b1tch though if the mutation turns out badly... I'd argue that we lost the race to the mammals and it will take another extinction-level event for the jet to pull up. Like it always does. But the poor schmucks who have to pay the price while that lesson is re-learned aren't gonna be thrilled. Nor will their next of kin. Jameson's on a Wednesday? Yes, please...

I tried that line on my wife back when I was forty and she told me I was not wired for 220... Going on married year 37 now and not broke.

My gut instinct is to make it a working group to solve issues. Some academics at first then let loose on actual problem solving in the modern world. Immagine if WIC taught outdated doctrine and tactics then said "great, go be a tactical leader." Throw a real problem and get a real solution or at least a possible COA. I did ACSC via correspondence, so I'm only going off what I know of course content and studies from others, but it sounds like there is very little correlation between subject matter taught and real world application. I'll back that up with some of the turds I saw return to the real world after a year at school and then staff, jumping into a CAF leadership role, they were actually "less" prepared to face real issues than others who had stayed in the real world. School has become a container to check on the way to higher command. Personally, I'm not so sure we shouldn't canx ACSC altogether vs it's current form. AWC, I'm not sure what it is like/taught. I have no plan to do it in correspondence so I'll never know. Sent from my iPhone using Baseops Network Forums

It's my goal to reach Lt Col on the strength of ACSC in correspondence, and never do another PME again.

I'm sure the blue talking point will be somewhere along the line of, "We need good dudes in every community." This is true, but if he was such a good dude, there is a skeleton there somewhere not many know about, thats usually how it works.

Panchbarnes shack. The system rewards risk aversion, so what would benefit the O-6 to O-8 to actually make those very simple yet game changing decisions you highlighted. Simply telling the E-9 that he is still a Sergeant would be a start but they would get their feelings hurt and then a bunch of E-9s wouldn't have anything to do all day and probably commit suicide... Sent from my iPhone using Baseops Network Forums

WTF? How is it that this can happen? It's is beyond mild frustration and is impacting orders, PCS, retirements...Nothing better that putting all our eggs in one crappy basket! MilPDS Maintenance, 20 Oct/0600-28 Oct/0001 CDT (SECOND EXTENSION) 26 Oct/1922 CDT: The MilPDS maintenance scheduled for completion on Thursday, 27 Oct 16 has been extended to 0001 CDT (0501Z) on Friday, 28 Oct. Please remember, if you have not been identified by your component lead as a tester, please do not attempt to login to MilPDS until the validation period is over. Personnel will be notified when validation is complete and the application is ready for use. 24 Oct/1537 CDT: The MilPDS maintenance period has been extended to Thursday, 27 Oct, 0600 CDT. DESCRIPTION/IMPACT: MilPDS maintenance is scheduled to begin Thursday, 20 Oct, 0600 CDT (1100Z) and run through Thursday, 27 Oct, 0600 CDT (1100Z). MilPDS and its associated applications below will be unavailable/degraded during this maintenance period. MilPDS and its associated applications will also be unavailable starting Monday, 31 Oct, 1600 CDT through Tuesday, 1 Nov, 0200 CDT. UNAVAILABLE: Virtual Military Personnel Flight (vMPF) Personnel Records Display Application (PRDA) Virtual Personnel Service Center - Role Based Access (vPSC-RBA) Base Level Service Delivery Model (BLSDM) Airman Development Plan (ADP) Discoverer Service Oriented Architecture (SOA) DEGRADED: Air Force Fitness Management System II (AFFMS II) myPers website and console MilPDS print products will be queued and will automatically reflow once USERS AFFECTED: MilPDS and associated application users worldwide CURRENT STATUS: MilPDS and associated applications will be unavailable or degraded during this maintenance period. TROUBLE TICKET NUMBER: N/A A1 Service Desk, Maintenance Control TRACKING NUMBER: 2016-045-001 DSN: 665-5004 COM: 210-565-5004 AFPOA.DPOP.MC@us.af.mil Released by: amf

APACS request/Country/Theater Clearance may not be required since your trip part of a cruise. Foreign Clearance Guide specifies for sure. Didn't need it for a Jamaica, Grand Cayman, Mexico cruise back in July. Sent from my iPhone using Baseops Network Forums

C-130 WIC stood up in 1996 under the Combat Aerial Delivery School in Little Rock. Absorbed by AMWC around 1999. FWIW, Otey was MAC/AMC as well, and the LRF WG/CC before Smokey. Sent from my iPad using Baseops Network Forums

Dad never finished the story, which is that you lose 50% of the value (of your income) on each trade-in.

DLF 38 FAIP drop F-22 F-15E A-10 F-16

I run twice a year and whenever someone bigger is chasing me... which isn't often. Sent from my iPhone using Baseops Network Forums

I think the real question is not why people don't want to go to school, but rather why do people not want to command. Having worked directly for Sq, Gp and Wg Commanders it's amazing how little power they actually have over their own people. Give the right Commanders back their power and watch the good guys want to stick around because they think they can make a difference. As long as people see their Commanders wasted time and effort, few will want to be in Command, except for those using it as a stepping stone to another level. Sent from my iPhone using Baseops Network Forums

How much of "school" is actually helpful and relevant, and how much is simply a matter of sending folks to government run courses so that the government run courses have a reason to exist (i.e. the self-licking ice cream cone model)?

I'm sure once upon a time many many years ago, school was relevant to command, but I know a few cc's who never did in-res who were terrific. The stuff you need can be learned through real world immersion. If school worked, we wouldn't be seeing the constant complaints of poor leadership.....err, I mean management and we wouldn't be losing so many natural leaders to guard/res. PME in its current form is a symptom of our broken system. Sent from my iPhone using Baseops Network Forums

You are in pilot training, they have pubs there for you. Nothing above the abs if you are serious, jogging mixed with sprints, your G tolerance will go down as you work on it due to beating up the muscles. Stay hydrated, sleep good, save the coffee and cigs until you get good at AGSM and breathing. There is the summary.

Thanks for chiming in Chuck. The "O-6 to O-8" comment was in regards to Duck's previous post about them not getting it and making any significant change under their watch. The point was it would be nice to get a peek behind the curtain a little more often from those in that demographic (or close to them, in your case), given that the AF's overall answer to the talent exodus is full-on Baghdad Bob... "nothing to see here, folks, all is well". I agree with you that they're powerless to do anything, assuming they even wanted to. We've destroyed the ability for most commanders from making any decisions on their own- everything, no matter how small, must be vetted by their boss, all the way up. Even the most promising CSAF in a generation was unable/unwilling to make significant change beyond quasi-eliminating Blues Monday. It would be hilarious if it weren't so sad. Institutional inertia is crippling this service. And then they wonder why their "HPOs" are 7-day opting out of IDE and nobody wants to be a Sq/CC anymore- it's just not that appealing. While a "(insert mission here) of the quarter" would be nice, not sure that would change many minds- but it's a start. Separate promotion boards for 11xs, more money, elimination of bullshit 180/365s and additional duties, less SJW engineering, and an overall improvement in "work rules" might, though.

Probably the later 80's I saw him at a mid-sized airshow in the SE USA.

What were they thinking? T-1s are no place to prepare new pilots for a large airplane or the CRM that goes with it.

1. C-130's arn't heavies. 2. You could always have gone AD if you wanted a pointy nose that badly.