pawnman

If the USAF keeps sapping morale like this, they'll be lucky if any of us stick around to be FGOs or SNCOs.

Or, alternatively, Diamond Douchebags...That's pretty much what I intend every time I type it.

We were having this discussion today, after our SQ/CC told us about this new policy. The first thoughts were "Damn, the DDs really DO run everything, they've got the squadron and group leadership doing their bidding". Then someone said something that is logical, but still gives me hope...Now that leadership is actually being forced to take time out of their day to enforce these policies, maybe the policies will change. It's easy for leadership to just sign off on policies that don't really affect them. Start actually inconveniencing them, and see if they don't start taking a stand and using their positions to make changes. At least, one can hope. I'm not exactly holding my breath, but I think the DDs may have finally bitten off more than they can chew.

2. Where this will become an issue is during your twice-a-year PT tests, since they are now done by the HAWC and will require you to be in official PT uniform. Hopefully the civilians administering the test have more sense than the NCOs at the Deid when it comes to enforcing the "tuck" rule...I'd hate to be stopped in the middle of my run because my shirt is coming untucked.

We must not be deployed to the same base. People have been, and continue to be, yelled at for having their shirts untucked while working out. Often in the middle of working out...you ask me, there's a safety issue when you're interupting a dude who is benching 300 pounds in mid-lift to make him tuck in his shirt. Seen it happen. I'm perfectly willing to tuck in my shirt if I'm not working out...but the thing is already damned uncomfortable as PT gear, do we really need to make it MORE uncomfortable to work out? Isn't this diametrically opposed to the "fit-to-fight" mentality we're trying to instill? I maintain that the ops side of the house is not where the common sense is lacking.

I know that in B-1 world, ops and MX are constantly at odds...basically, when a jet is FMC, the easiest way to keep it FMC is not to fly it. For a while now we've had a weird system where 6 jets are tasked for a given week, and even "FMC" jets are not on the schedule as spares. But, I think the message is getting through...our flying hours at home station have been cut dramatically "to improve fleet health". Hopefully MX takes the opportunity to actually fix the jets. Caveat: Not bagging at all on the dudes turning wrenches on the line...they work their asses off to get sorties launched, even training sorties, and I appreciate every minute they put into it. Their leadership, however...let's just say I've played cancellation chicken more than once where they've told us we'll have a green jet in several hours, hoping we'll run out of crew rest before they run out of excuses.

The point is, what is gained by the policy change? Do we think that the Taliban will somehow win because my shirt is untucked while lifting weights? Doubtful. I can certainly see enforcing dress and appearance regulations...but we have one that covers the entire USAF and seems to be working pretty well. Do we really need a uniform reg specific to each deployed location, let alone a uniform reg that is thicker than the parent reg? Are we in any way, shape, or form improving morale, combat capability, or sustainability? I submit that we are doing the opposite. No one gets out of the USAF at 4, 6, or 10 years because they hate the job they're doing. They get out because they've had enough of these pointless rules and regulations. Sure, the civilian sector will require me to tuck in my shirt while at the office...but I'll never run into a middle-manager while running on the track who demands I tuck my (100% cotton) t-shirt into my (mesh) running shorts.

Just flew with the [unnamed O-5] out here at the Deid...and he's as upset about this as anyone else. Because he knows there's no stopping it, and he knows that squadron commanders are goddamn busy actually, you know, fighting the WAR...he suspects that when squadron commanders can't find the time in their schedules between running their squadrons and going to Wing meetings out here that he will be tasked, along with the rest of the Wing staff, to provide bodies for these "RAMS" and "checkpoints". And he really, really doesn't want to be "that guy" who is turning people away from teh chow hall for not having a reflective belt...but what can you do when the policy is put out by a one-star? Edited per Disco's suggestion.

And you'll still be accused of not wearing an actual belt. My SQ/CC has drunk the kool-aid. We got an email today directing us that, if we "forget" our reflective belts, turn around and get them. Don't make any intermediate stops to the chow hall, BX, or DEL, go back to your room and get your reflective belt. Time was, squadron leadership provided topcover. This is the reason why the diamond douchebags can walk all over the CGOs...because they have the backing of the senior leadership. I would like to throw out, to any of you who still have sane commanders, that "random" means "statistically equal chance"...so if your leadership doesn't check anyone, everyone has the same statistical chance of being checked (0%)...technically, random.

I hope you mean the OPR bullet for Discus when he gets the policy revoked, not the OPR bullet for some JAG Col when Discus is court-martialed for talking to the press.

2.

Well, when was the last time you went to an organized PT event? Mine was about two years ago, at EWO school.

Go Marines...while we're all complaining about it, they're actively pursuing solutions to the problem.

We had a gal out here who had a morale patch that was just a little piece of reflective belt. Got REMF'd by some full-bird at the chow hall. Later, same full-bird caught her wearing it again at the Muff..."Well, I guess it's OK in here, but take it off before you leave". She said the best part was, her and another operator were trading war stories about dropping bombs, and she could see this Col (JAG-type) motioining at her while we was telling his best REMF war-story. She told us she was going to have a bunch made up and sent to us when she got home...we're still waiting.

The Aussies did...that's why they left.

You mean like how, during their last SAV, one of the items that emerged was "BPC was built for people with 24/7 ops and crew rest cycles, you should be putting all aircrew in there even if they aren't at AUAB for 6 months"? Still haven't seen any movement on that one...although you could see Gen Wilson's wheels turning when he was told there were over 2000 rooms, and fewer than 50 flyers in BPC.

How amateur looking is that sign? Jesus, at least move the second "No" to the next line. It's like they've never seen a sign before. On the other hand, it's ripe for a Sharpie in its current format.

Joined, put it on my FB wall...most of my squadron is on FB, hopefully some of them will join as well.

It's difficult to take the power back when your own squadron leadership is on the side of the shoe-clerks, crushing you everytime some airman runs to the EFSS/CC with a hurt feelings report. While I agree that much of the behavior needs to be addressed by CGOs, we need some form of top cover if we're going to do it right, even if that top cover is simply the SQ/CC looking the other way when he gets one of those phone calls. As for the reflective belts, I've been thinking you could try the hot potato approach. Wander in with a group of guys and a single reflective belt. Just pass it off to whoever is being asked to show their reflective belt at the time. I've had success with this approach at the DEL when someone forgot their belt...I bought my beers, went outside and handed off the belt, other guy bought his beers. Also, I haven't seen anyone accosted for not wearing a reflective belt at the BPC chow hall yet...and we also don't have these giant signs I'm reading about. Probably because the BPC chow hall is where all the senior leadership eats...as little respect as the E ranks seem to have for CGOs anymore, apparently a star will still intimidate them.

And oddly enough, the Army guys are having the most success bucking the policies. Maybe it's something to do with the Army's strict adherance to the chain of command...several of the dudes in my squadron are prior Army, and they told me that as an E-2, you didn't even talk back to an E-3. Compare that the the USAF's current attitude, which seems to be a two-striper can call out a captain with no respect or customs and courtesies.

Maybe that works for you C-17 guys..."10 board, 150...9 board, 20".

I'd take a polite, but firm tone with this DD's commander..."Sir, MSgt xxx was out of line for reasons X, Y, and Z. I'm sure that you will make every effort to take appropriate action". However, I'd definitely follow (or even precede) that email with a head's up to your chain of command.

If you really want an accurate simulation, be sure to give yourself short vectors onto final as well.

Frankly, I think our OG/CC would probably have your back on that one.

I didn't get the impression that he works for Navigraph...in any case, he's probably SOL without a .mil account if that's true.