Skitzo

I have used the Chaplain, MFLC, and military one source over my 20+ years. I have also known folks who have recovered from clinical depression who after a year of being stable successfully resumed flying. Thanks to the OP for bringing this up! Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

What is the context? Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Me laughing at Hezbollah getting their stuff blown off with explosives in pagers while reading this on an iPhone produced in China. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Corporate / MAJCOM policy to craft SIIs was at the time to scan OG SEB minutes for common items across all MDS plus Special Tactics. SIIs were approved by the A3…BGEN. I’ve also enjoyed the convos in this derail. As explained earlier I had debriefed the issue prior. I’ll explain. Annual MSN eval with patch from the squadron I was attached to. He was wearing a ring and also deviated 500 feet during a “mission event,” from desired altitude. During debrief I made the exact point someone made earlier, on both the altitude and the ring. Stating that he was the one everyone was looking to and everyone follows / watches / listens to what a patch says / does. He quibbled a little bit about the altitude discrepancy stating that he deviated with awareness, I then told him I could buy that if he would have at least verbalized that to his crew. But if it were a demo/do for a young ac he would have terminated and set back up for a proper demo. Pressing 500 feet below and well outside of Q- tolerances in front of his crew was not what I wanted him to do. Combat fine, lives on the line fine do it. But during a training ride / eval why??? Not being a heartless a-hole contrary to other evidence I gave him a downgrade on that event. That Eval with a patch and my daily rides with the squadron led to my informal email to squadron leadership. Looking back on it maybe the SII would have been the correct way to go but I’d also had been sniped by squadron commanders for being too heavy handed and not allowing them to fix things at the lowest level—issuing something from my office directly to a GO for approval is the opposite of what all the commanders I’ve worked with have ever desired. So like I said, that led to the email which stated “If we see X, Y and Z during our inspection then it’s probably going to be more than a Q-“ Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

This Also, maybe fear is the wrong word? Whatever adjective that would drive a change in action / training prior to the inspection that would focus the unit on getting back to basics that might have fallen off in the last 18 months. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

What context of intent are you inferring? I feel like you think the point of my post was to flex all over the little guy to show how much riz the MAJCOM has fr fr no cap. I think you are missing the point of my original post. When ASEVs were lumped into overall IG inspections it became included into the overall mindset of emphasis on “detecting unidentified non compliance” versus measuring compliance in the Stan/Eval programs. With standalone ASEVS I was in squadrons where there were prep sessions (MQT testing internal to the squadron, OGV SAVs, and N/N evals independent of the ASEV). I once saw a guy removed from IP upgrade or was it AC for failing the practice test required by the squadron commander. That was my original point and the point of my anecdote. ||BREAK BREAK|| As far as the MAJCOM role to help subordinate units — certainly there is a time and place for that. But the MAJCOM can’t just unilaterally SAV a unit unless asked. And in my experience we more than helped units that did ask for help with no penalty to the unit being SAVed. As far as other efforts I more than certainly subscribed to the motto “a call from the unit isn’t it a nuisance it is the reason your job [expletive] exists.” There is a tension between a MAJCOM’s purpose to OT&E and A3V’s role to also provide oversight of subordinate OGVs / CCVs. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I don’t know. Don’t ignore the Vol3 blatantly in front of a MAJCOM evaluator? Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

A.1 - The transformation of the ASEV process into the larger IG inspection process that dilutes focus and has made Stan/Eval inspections friendly instead of feared. True story as a Team Chief for an A3V inspection I issued a WARNO to the squadron commanders noting a lack of discipline wrt professional equipment - lack of gloves and wearing rings despite V3 guidance prohibiting it and a lack of aircrew having equipment to secure their EFBs during critical phases of flight. I noticed this during my pro sorties and verbally debriefed it many times. When we got to our inspection site I flew a N/N with the squadron patch who was wearing a ring and whom I politely asked to remove his ring before he started the engine. I did this for the rest of the crew but I did not witness anyone else doing so. After we landed I Q2d him because he was the person everyone looked to, violated V3 standards after I warned his commander. Before you flame me for issuing a Q2 for rings, I debriefed it multiple times in sorties and gave verbal corrections and notified commanders directly in advance. For everyone who flies regularly with rings safely everyday as an airline pilot cool I get it. Had a 679 to change the regs to allow silicone rings in coord. It wasn’t a silicone ring btw. When the MAJCOM speaks to commanders and people don’t listen it is a problem. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Take your next event seriously. Never sell out your bros or sisters. Help others when you are excelling and appreciate help when you are struggling. Enjoy the ride… Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

https://taskandpurpose.com/news/air-force-eglin-fired/?fbclid=IwZXh0bgNhZW0CMTEAAR2v40IkU7eG3apikxTZ28ZXIPUzDsxuFxaW0xxdaqXBX3uukYqfLjiw74c_aem_yBKV7xzsJrM1361I-pHWUQ 3 days from CoC Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

@M2 I wish, but no, the OP on the Amn/NCO/SNCO FB page clearly makes a way better / more salient argument than I did. But maybe this poster is a lurker here? Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Call this my official transition to old guy / get off of my lawn but can anyone explain the logic behind non obvious duty identifier patches? ATC I get, Ammo, yup that checks. LRS, okay. SVS - I understand that one too. But today I saw UNLTD — Unlimited Warrant Contracting Officer. Some folks are wearing their AFSCs and not obvious ones like a 2T2 but CE AFSCs - 3E3 - Structures. If I have to google the patch it does not identify your duty. Turning to some obvious ones but unnecessary…You can wear PILOT, NAV, EWO or ABM on your left sleeve if the wings don’t give you away?? Anyone else? Probably just me. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

.

How did I know this was going to be the Heat is On before I clicked it? Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Same also you got the hook after 15 mins IIRC. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

When base operators were a thing 1110 Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Need to get awareness out there for this. The link is a dashboard for almost every conceivable assignment location linked to EFMP needs along with a two year running trend of need to approval or disapproval for EFMP clearance for PCS. While it is only information and trends can change it certainly can provide powerful information to members on the VML to submit bids. I just lost an assignment to Stuttgart and never would have put in for it given our families needs. I probably would have said don’t send me to Germany because they will deny me. https://daffamilyvector.us.af.mil/MemberSite/ProviderTrends Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Somewhere a GFR is crapping his or her pants. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Gen Palenske is a great guy and a great commander. I started following the 36 Wing Facebook account because he is just so witty.

Point of order, this picture should be in the “What’s Right With the AF” thread. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

They definitely followed this tactic in the Korean War but yes — I believe China to be avoiding as well. They also have a completely different concept of time than we do, although Xi did assign some dates of significance 2049 etc. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

No, they haven’t but that doesn’t stop them from trying when the alternative powers are not friendly. I think things would have been much different had the UK and USA had not been on good terms post WWII. During the Civil War, England recognized the Confederacy’s “Belligerent Status,” stopping short of recognizing the sovereignty of the Confederacy. The Confederacy had envoys on British Naval vessels, Ala the Trent Affair. At risk were lucrative trade deals etc, but you could also argue that fomenting conflict between the two sides by respecting a belligerent status and remaining neutral was sacrosanct endorsement that either the South could win or a stalemate could emerge. Otherwise they would have supported the North. Neutrality equates to not caring about a return to the Status Quo - Ante. Applying a realist view to this, smart on the part of England because a divided America would have reduced the overall power balance by shifting it two nations instead of one. Thus increasing or safeguarding its status as the leading world power at the time ala Pax Brittanaca. Also we are not an empire. IMHO. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

What is the alternative? Do we leave the Pacific except for remaining in Guam? What position does that put our allies in the Pacific in vis a vis an ever growing China? If we leave the Pacific we will resign our status as a Global Super Power that has sustained the current International Order and acknowledge a bipolar or multipolar world. Is it in our nations best interest to do so? In Ukraine, do we give up and allow Russia to take it? If we did nothing at the start isn’t that akin to Neville Chamberlain and Hitler? I’d argue each nation with interests has its own agency in the matter and is acting in accordance with what it believes to be its own best interests. John Mearsheimer 101. It’s a zero sum game — it’s all about power and security. Both domestically and internationally. You could make an argument that we are already at a low level of or run up to Word War currently with Ukraine and Russia, Israel and Hamas, Iran and Israel and the Houthis. The only powder keg that hasn’t kicked off yet is in the Pacific. But, it could easily. Imagine a scenario like the P-3 colliding with a PLA aircraft in today’s geopolitical landscape. I think the best case scenario is a rapid realization that we have deliberately set up our military to be sized for a war in one theater and deterring in another. We did that because we were still the leading superpower. We are facing a challenge that calls into question our ability to win with our current force structure given the problems around the world. Whether our politicians are marching us steadily towards wider conflict isn’t as important as whether or not our politicians are equipping us to win that conflict and if we will have the political will to see that conflict through. If we are successful we delay or defeat the pattern of Great Powers not remaining Great Powers. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Leonard Cohen was more of a poet than a singer but when he did grace the stage the results were outstanding. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I cannot see base commanders being O-5s in the USAF. That would eliminate FSS/MSG O-6 billets. But I guess it could work somehow. I had a US Army Infantry Company as my Security Forces at CADJ. I definitely agree with your sentiment—they were squared away (at least the team I got) and any/all issues were handled swiftly. What we will need is to develop our officers to take that on. Flight Command will need to be a no kidding command with a big change to how discipline is run. It’s going to be an interesting couple of years! Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk