Leadership at the 'Deid

[Disco_Nav963]

1 hour ago, SurelySerious said:

AFGSC is trying to imitate. Thanks for picking out the best qualities to try out AF GS comm. 

AFGSC is trying to develop the initial leadership cadre for the B-21 by cross-pollinating bomber dudes. What the MAF does would be like taking a dude out of ICBMs, sending him to the B-1 for 4-6 years, and then putting him in command of a B-52 squadron. There are many things wrong with AFGSC... This isn't one of them.

(Also, people bitched for years about how there were no career broadening options for bomber dudes besides ALFA tours if you didn't want to go to WIC and didn't want to or couldn't go to TPS. Now there's Vista. Count our blessings.)

[ThreeHoler]

AMC's command track program is crossflow, which is switching from airlift to tanker, or tanker to airlift.  Your CGO of the year types are typically the ones selected for that, and winning that type of award has little to do with tactical credibility in the MAF,  On the flip side, the tanker patches have the credibility, but the MAF has never valued them as command material.  Because of a fairly heinous deployment legacy, the tanker WIC spent a decade having more class slots than applicants. 
As a generalization, tanker patches don't have records that compete with the crossflow guys.  You can spend an entire 10 year commitment never meeting a patch wearing commander.  But more than likely, your commander, and his commander, will be airlift guys.  And obviously, the path to command is flying a different MAF airframe.  So early on, you realize the critical path toward senior leadership is min running toward IP, becoming an exec, and off to another airplane.  Follow that with school and staff, and then find yourself in command of a squadron where the senior Captains have way more experience than the guys leading them.
   
 
 

Yup. And the guys who have depth in their airframe as well as some good breadth get passed over. Shitshow.

[Lord Ratner]

That just seems so weird to a career CAF guy.  Can't fathom having a guy leading a Sq/Gp/Wg who didn't have huge credibility in the jet.  The only exceptions I saw during my time were during transitions to new jets like the F-22 when there were no experienced F-22 O-5s/6s.
What is the rationale in the MAF for doing this broadening thing?  I've heard so many bad stories about it I'm surprised the MAF keeps doing it.

I could write an entire paper on how the mobility Air Forces delegitimize flying skill. But the bottom line is this: for the most part, you don't have to be good to accomplish our mission.

Because you can be quite bad at the actual skill of flying and still get the mobility mission done, guys are able to focus their early careers on superfluous shit, while maintaining only a baseline competency in the jet. Since this strategy optimizes your chances for promotion, especially within Mobility, these people end up in positions of power. And since they weren't competent in the jet, they perpetuate the idea that skill in the jet is not as important as the skill of paperwork, and being an exec, and other non flying related tasks. Since the reality is that you can be bad in the jet and get the mobility mission done, this mindset is able survive.

What commander who got where they are by being terrible in the aircraft is going to promote a squadron culture of being skilled in the aircraft? Because people are generally proponents of the way they got to their position in life, these weak pilots deemphasize skill, sometimes actively.

[sqwatch]

Because you can be quite bad at the actual skill of flying and still get the mobility mission done, guys are able to focus their early careers on superfluous shit, while maintaining only a baseline competency in the jet.

Poetic with bluntness and accuracy.

[Smokin]

13 hours ago, RTB said:

That just seems so weird to a career CAF guy.  Can't fathom having a guy leading a Sq/Gp/Wg who didn't have huge credibility in the jet.  The only exceptions I saw during my time were during transitions to new jets like the F-22 when there were no experienced F-22 O-5s/6s.

What is the rationale in the MAF for doing this broadening thing?  I've heard so many bad stories about it I'm surprised the MAF keeps doing it.

Unfortunately, not only can I imagine it in the CAF but I've experienced it without the transitions you've mentioned.  You get a squadron leadership that came from the pentagon or similar assignment and you're likely looking at a guy who's been out of the jet for 3 out of his last 4 years.  Combine that with the decreased flying hours over the last ten years and the average fighter SQ/CC has substantially less flight time (experience) than SQ/CCs had 6-9 years ago.  SQ/CCs should be the most experienced dudes and leading the first flight in a war.  Now the O-3 patch is taking that role with <800 hrs under his belt.

[Guest]

What exactly does a tanker patch do?

[dream big]

12 hours ago, Lord Ratner said:

Because you can be quite bad at the actual skill of flying and still get the mobility mission done,   

I don’t think this is the case with C-130s; maybe in today’s permissive environment. However, when you’re talking about flying a low level ingress to an airdrop with radar threats you can’t be a tard and get the mission done.  

While those that get pushed don’t have to be “great” in the jet; the one thing this community has done well is weeding out those who suck, maybe other AMC communities have a different experience. 

[BashiChuni]

1 hour ago, ihtfp06 said:

What exactly does a tanker patch do?

I’ve always wondered the same thing. 

[HossHarris]

Turning left, finding weather ....

you know, tanker stuff .... only better. 

[Azimuth]

18 minutes ago, dream big said:

I don’t think this is the case with C-130s; maybe in today’s permissive environment. However, when you’re talking about flying a low level ingress to an airdrop with radar threats you can’t be a tard and get the mission done.  

While those that get pushed don’t have to be “great” in the jet; the one thing this community has done well is weeding out those who suck, maybe other AMC communities have a different experience. 

By “weeding out the suck” you mean send to different communities in the MAF, yeah, the C-130 community is just as “guilty” as any other community of doing that.

Reference:

https://www.kansas.com/news/business/aviation/article171734662.html

[Lord Ratner]

I don’t think this is the case with C-130s; maybe in today’s permissive environment. However, when you’re talking about flying a low level ingress to an airdrop with radar threats you can’t be a tard and get the mission done.  

While those that get pushed don’t have to be “great” in the jet; the one thing this community has done well is weeding out those who suck, maybe other AMC communities have a different experience. 

This would support my argument in two ways. First, there's nothing that says C-130s can't be like Fighters, where since skill is required to support the mission, there's a higher incidence of skilled pilots in Leadership positions. However, because of the existence of the Phoenix reach program and a general desire to swap commanders into different airframes, bad pilots from other heavies that have distinguished themselves through paperwork are still able to take over C-130 squadrons as commanders, bypassing the requirement to be good at flying C-130 missions.

 

Last I heard there were more C-17 pilots taking over C-130 squadrons than the reverse, so even though C-130 pilots may require more skill to accomplish their mission, the net effect of the system, thanks to Phoenix reach, would be the same.

 

[dream big]

1 hour ago, Azimuth said:

By “weeding out the suck” you mean send to different communities in the MAF, yeah, the C-130 community is just as “guilty” as any other community of doing that.

Reference:

https://www.kansas.com/news/business/aviation/article171734662.html

Hahaha, oh god, never met a more dangerous pilot.  Fair enough, you got me there.  Never said it was right to pawn off problem children to other communities, but not so sure what else to do with them. I wish they would just stop promoting mediocrity like in your example. 

[BADFNZ]

8 hours ago, Azimuth said:

By “weeding out the suck” you mean send to different communities in the MAF, yeah, the C-130 community is just as “guilty” as any other community of doing that.

Reference:

https://www.kansas.com/news/business/aviation/article171734662.html

This is at least the 3rd time you've mentioned the Herk community cross-flowing our shit to the Tanker.  Did some former Herk dude/dudette take your CGOC presidency position?

[SurelySerious]

On 10/18/2017 at 5:21 AM, Disco_Nav963 said:

AFGSC is trying to develop the initial leadership cadre for the B-21 by cross-pollinating bomber dudes. What the MAF does would be like taking a dude out of ICBMs, sending him to the B-1 for 4-6 years, and then putting him in command of a B-52 squadron. There are many things wrong with AFGSC... This isn't one of them.

(Also, people bitched for years about how there were no career broadening options for bomber dudes besides ALFA tours if you didn't want to go to WIC and didn't want to or couldn't go to TPS. Now there's Vista. Count our blessings.)

I was more referring to plugging in wing commanders who have only ever flown the senior officer qual in your jet. So far Vista has just given us an ADO or two, so can't say it's caused any issues. 

[Danger41]

19 hours ago, ihtfp06 said:

What exactly does a tanker patch do?

From what I've seen, they come up with the tanker plan for the package, who gets what and when, who gets what when a tanker falls out, how to keep everything on timeline and prevent gaps in coverage due to fuel issues, and integrating with the weather shop to find clouds IOT place the tracks.

[di1630]

From what I've seen, they come up with the tanker plan for the package, who gets what and when, who gets what when a tanker falls out, how to keep everything on timeline and prevent gaps in coverage due to fuel issues, and integrating with the weather shop to find clouds IOT place the tracks.

As much as I'd love to insert a tanker joke, this sounds like they simply get the experience needed to be an expert in their role and teach others, which is what originally the WIC program was....take a good IP, give them a stellar education to take back and teach others to continue teaching others.

 

If the USAF could afford it everyone should get the education a patch gets at WIC but it can't so they "should" pick the best person for the job to take and give back.

 

That's why even a smart proficient pilot who is a D-bag should never be a patch...and also, one of the best IP's that I ever flew with was a WIC washout. Go figure.

 

 

 

[MCO]

18 hours ago, Azimuth said:

By “weeding out the suck” you mean send to different communities in the MAF, yeah, the C-130 community is just as “guilty” as any other community of doing that.

Reference:

https://www.kansas.com/news/business/aviation/article171734662.html

Well played.

[TnkrToad]

5 hours ago, Danger41 said:

From what I've seen, they come up with the tanker plan for the package, who gets what and when, who gets what when a tanker falls out, how to keep everything on timeline and prevent gaps in coverage due to fuel issues, and integrating with the weather shop to find clouds IOT place the tracks.

I'll add:

- Plan massive tanker plans for OEF, OIF, etc., in the CAOC, while other tanker patches in WOCs build Night 1 packages for their crews and/or lead Night 1 missions.

- Deploy to CAOC (too often) . . . and talk really slowly to CAF/other users who come up with grandiose/unexecutable plans refueling-wise

- Plan large, refueling-intensive exercises, act as tanker SMEs in white cells, and/or lead exercise execution

- Command ARWs (100 ARW/CC at Mildenhall: two in a row are tanker patches) . . . although this is the exception thus far

- Advocate for maintaining standards/work to build & maintain critical skills, in the midst of an opstempo and leadership model that militate against developing expertise

- Build AR tracks where users request them

NKAWTG's assessment is accurate; those who volunteered for the WIC in the early 2000s in effect volunteered for huge arse pain. Aside from those who were clearly on the HPO track, those who graduated got the dual bonus of alternately deploying as aircrew or staff, followed by a deployment to the CAOC as a tanker planner, followed by another aircrew/deployed staff requirement . . . ad nauseum. Making oneself more eligible for deployments was hardly a selling point for the WIC early on.

I'd say we're past that stage at this point; enough tanker patches to spread the wealth a bit more, and folks have a better idea what they bring to the fight.

TT

[BashiChuni]

8 hours ago, TnkrToad said:

I'll add:

 

- Build AR tracks where users request them

 

TT

I stand in awe of how hard that must be!

[Sprkt69]

8 hours ago, TnkrToad said:

I'll add:

- Plan massive tanker plans for OEF, OIF, etc., in the CAOC, while other tanker patches in WOCs build Night 1 packages for their crews and/or lead Night 1 missions.

- Deploy to CAOC (too often) . . . and talk really slowly to CAF/other users who come up with grandiose/unexecutable plans refueling-wise

- Plan large, refueling-intensive exercises, act as tanker SMEs in white cells, and/or lead exercise execution

- Command ARWs (100 ARW/CC at Mildenhall: two in a row are tanker patches) . . . although this is the exception thus far

- Advocate for maintaining standards/work to build & maintain critical skills, in the midst of an opstempo and leadership model that militate against developing expertise

- Build AR tracks where users request them

NKAWTG's assessment is accurate; those who volunteered for the WIC in the early 2000s in effect volunteered for huge arse pain. Aside from those who were clearly on the HPO track, those who graduated got the dual bonus of alternately deploying as aircrew or staff, followed by a deployment to the CAOC as a tanker planner, followed by another aircrew/deployed staff requirement . . . ad nauseum. Making oneself more eligible for deployments was hardly a selling point for the WIC early on.

I'd say we're past that stage at this point; enough tanker patches to spread the wealth a bit more, and folks have a better idea what they bring to the fight.

TT

Is a tanker patch that does all that kind of like a Bigfoot sighting? 

[TnkrToad]

I stand in awe of how hard that must be!

I was apparently too subtle...it was a swipe against those who quipped about tanker dudes building tracks in the middle of the weather.

[Day Man]

10 hours ago, TnkrToad said:

I'd say we're past that stage at this point; enough tanker patches to spread the wealth a bit more, and folks have a better idea what they bring to the fight.

Besides gas?  

[HossHarris]

27 minutes ago, Day Man said:

Besides gas?  

Well....

near the fight. 

[3PAARO]

On ‎10‎/‎19‎/‎2017 at 5:26 PM, MCO said:

Well played.

There's a story here that many on this forum are oblivious to....

[Spinner]

13 hours ago, 3PAARO said:

There's a story here that many on this forum are oblivious to....

There are many stories regarding said individual, and most will make you cringe.