What's wrong with the Air Force?

[BB Stacker]

Bullshit.

A real shooting war would actually highlight our capabilities as an all around killing machine. We would shitcan queep and focus only on tactics. History has proven this decades ago as well as recent times.

When bullets are flying, nobody gives two shits about reflective belts. Ops tested.

And how many people would unnecessarily die before we highlighted those capabilities as an all around killing machine?

Look at that history you speak of...how many people died unnecessarily in 1942 or the last six months of 1950 because we weren't as prepared as we should've been when a real shooting war broke out? How many people died unnecessarily flying Rolling Thunder missions because we didn't fully shitcan stupid shit and focus only on tactics once we were in a real shooting war?

[Toro]

It's not about a focus on reflective belts or the silly PM system. It's about outdated weapons, worn out equipment, a broken command and control concept in the AOC , and inadequate training and manning. Are we a better or worse air force than the one that went to war in Gulf war 1 almost 25 years ago?

The only point I would say is valid is training. The AOC in its current form didn't exist in Gulf War - having worked there for three years (to include Odyssey Dawn) I can say we are light years beyond where we were 25 years ago. Manning might suck on a daily basis, but when the shit hits the fan we pull resources from wherever we can.

And how many people would unnecessarily die before we highlighted those capabilities as an all around killing machine?

Look at that history you speak of...how many people died unnecessarily in 1942 or the last six months of 1950 because we weren't as prepared as we should've been when a real shooting war broke out? How many people died unnecessarily flying Rolling Thunder missions because we didn't fully shitcan stupid shit and focus only on tactics once we were in a real shooting war?

Sorry - when I said "decades" I didn't mean a half century ago, I'm talking about the Air Force in its mostly current state. Look at how quickly and efficiently we spun up for the Gulf War, ODF, OIF. It was rapid and efficient and we didn't give two shits about queep until things started to settle down.

[Flaco]

No, but I would say that it was my during my first deployment where I started to lose faith in the USAF as a service. "Combat" did not miraculously fix our problems.

We are not in combat. Not to take anything away from the good work we have done over the last 10+ years, but it ain't combat.

When there's a real question of whether you or your wingman will come back from a sortie - that's combat. The reason for all the queep and lack of focus is because there are very few individuals left in the Air Force who have experienced that.

[Bender]

This is the exact reason that ADOs should not be allowed to do shit without the DO's oversight. S/He is, after all, the A-DO. The problem starts to emerge when you have "assholedouchebagfuckstains" that the DO doesn't mentor because he's too busy doing "important stuff" like flying and teaching academics no one NEEDS. There is the possibility that he is merely overwhelmed with his own responsibilities, doesn't realize that being a good DO takes a lot of energy and A LOT of time, simply has no fucking clue what he's doing, or is literally incapable of mentoring anyone because he literally has O-5's that are ADOs (some of which are definitely "assholedouchebagfuckstains").

And before you think that an O-5 ADO has any motivation to "mentor" other O-4 ADOs or an O-4 DO, I'm not sure I can agree with the way you think. There are exceptions to everything.

Did I mention that I think having O-3 DO's isn't a bright idea?

This reminds me of the conversation on flyers being CC's of other units on base. I don't remember if I liked it or not, but I'm starting to think not.

Bendy

Recieved via PM:

Bendy/Bender.

My goal next week is to expose whom you are. Should not be to difficult as on Monday I will send a mass e-mail to the 427th/489th at Beale. Your lack of discipline and professionalism is disgraceful. Bendy...thanks for the personal attack "he literally has O-5's that are ADOs (some of which are definitely "assholedouchebag######stains").

Although you posted this on a civilian webpage, its absolutely unprofessional. As I am to you an "assholedouchebag######stain"... I will do everything I can to assure you never continue to serve/fly with professional Airman at your deployed location.

LtCol xxxxxx xxxxxxx, xxxRS/ADO

Response PM:

LtCol xxxxxx,

I am sorry that you felt that comment was directed at you. It certainly was not, as we have never met. If you feel the need to seek me out for what you feel is a personal attack, I do not pretend to this I can disuade you.

The post was a follow on to having a Major as a DO and his difficult situation he placed in with having O-5 ADOs. I will not pretend that I believe that all O-5 ADOs are good people, although I will say that I know a large number of them that are very good people and an asset to the squadron.

I was not directly referring to Shadey, the sister squadron has Doesn't anyways, so it's not possible to know who I was reffering to if I was indeed referring to someone specific...which I was not. You are connecting dots (i.e. O-5, ADOs, "some of which") and translating that into "thanks for the personal attack". I humbly submit that you are stretching too far, again I have never met you...not even by reputation.

I'm sorry you feel the need to go out of your way like this, I will try to not let it influence my first impression when we do have the opportunity to meet.

Sorry for the confusion. I could definitly have decided to make it clear that the post does not represent my personal thoughts on any specific O-5 ADO.

Bendy

I guess the witch hunt is on. There are a handful of you who know me, not that it's ever been a secret. Please share with the good LtCol if you see fit.

Bendy

[HossHarris]

Cripple fight!

[xaarman]

Post the email Monday.

edit: if I can't trust you to post on the internet politely how can I trust you to fly a combat sortie?

Edited March 16, 2014 by xaarman

[Buddy Spike]

Recieved via PM:

Response PM:

I guess the witch hunt is on. There are a handful of you who know me, not that it's ever been a secret. Please share with the good LtCol if you see fit.

Bendy

The best way to prove you're not a "assholedouchebagfuckstains" is by threatening people on the internet.

Edited March 16, 2014 by Buddy Spike

[Champ Kind]

Well, that escalated quickly.

[WheelzUp]

Oh brother. Agreed....Cripple fight.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[backseatdriver]

We are not in combat. Not to take anything away from the good work we have done over the last 10+ years, but it ain't combat.

When there's a real question of whether you or your wingman will come back from a sortie - that's combat. The reason for all the queep and lack of focus is because there are very few individuals left in the Air Force who have experienced that.

Pretty sure the guys who have dodged bullets and missiles in the current conflicts, and ESPECIALLY those that returned without their wingmen, would tell you to go fuck yourself.

[Bender]

Well, that escalated quickly.

The matter has been professionally resolved (thank you for that). All just a misunderstanding...expect no email on Monday, you'll need to find your entertainment elsewhere.

That said, I would have +1'ed all the "Cripple Fight" comments if I wasn't out of upvotes. Nothing to see here...back to debating the combat nature of combat.

Bendy

[Flaco]

Pretty sure the guys who have dodged bullets and missiles in the current conflicts, and ESPECIALLY those that returned without their wingmen, would tell you to go ###### yourself.

Easy now, bro. I said I'm not taking anything away from those that have done good work in the shit, and especially those that have paid the price. But how many enemy-caused combat losses have we had in the last 10 years?

My point is that the intensity of combat for the Air Force in the aggregate has been relatively low in comparison to WWII, Korea, Nam, and Desert Storm. As a result, we've had plenty of time to become the queep machine that the Air Force is today.

We will continue to be lost in the wilderness until the next no-shit shooting match happens. It will cost lives as we shrug off the decades of risk-aversion and shit-can the queep-master weenies who have no place in a fighting force, but we will quickly regain our focus and morale.

[Jughead]

The matter has been professionally resolved

Jesus, how does an embarrassment (kindest word I could come up with) of that magnitude get "professionally resolved"? Did the offender offer to commit seppuku...?

[Duck]

There are no safe places anymore to vent about The Blue....

[BitteEinBit]

So, let me get this straight....a Lt Col sees a post on a civilian interweb forum, gets butt hurt because he thought someone was talking shit about him, so he tries to pull rank and makes threats to expose someone?? REALLY? That is professional?!? Makes sense. These are the kinds of "get-your-feelings-hurt" types we have in our military...such a sensitive Lt Col. (where in the fuck do we find these people??)

[hispeed7721]

So, let me get this straight....a Lt Col sees a post on a civilian interweb forum, gets butt hurt because he thought someone was talking shit about him, so he tries to pull rank and makes threats to expose someone?? REALLY? That is professional?!? Makes sense. These are the kinds of "get-your-feelings-hurt" types we have in our military...such a sensitive Lt Col. (where in the ###### do we find these people??)

If you/we do it, it's unprofessional and out of line. If they do the same thing, it's leadership.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[BitteEinBit]

We just have a sensitive force these days....

I wonder how that "mass e-mail" would have gone over. I've seen a Jr FGO try to embarrass a new LT with a mass e-mail for a mistake the LT made...it did not end well for the Major.

If the Lt Col was even remotely offended or thought the comments were directed at him, he should probably take a look in the mirror. Most professionals I know would have blown those comments off...especially coming from a civilian interweb site nonetheless. The real leader would have taken the mentorship path instead of pulling rank and making threats. If you have to pull rank to get your point across, you are not a leader...you're just higher ranking than the person you're talking to, and by today's standards it doesn't mean much.

[BB Stacker]

I got in trouble back in school because I wrote a blog at the time, and included a post describing AFPC in a derogatory manner (we were a couple weeks out from commissioning and no one had received EAD orders yet). Fast forward a couple of days and I had multiple O-6s calling for my head due to, in the words of my spineless Det/CC, my "unprofessional profanity laden tirade."

This all got brought to light because someone from a randolph.af.mil domain searched the phrase "AFPC sucks" and that blog post happened to be within the top couple of hits. So yes, AFPC has someone who sits around googling the phrase "AFPC sucks" to smoke out people bitching about their incompetence.

[Homestar]

A quick Google search discovered 76,400 hits for "AFPC sucks" including a blog called fatties-suck.livejournal.com...

[tunes]

man, i was really looking forward to F5'ing my webmail tomorrow....

[Azimuth]

So, let me get this straight....a Lt Col sees a post on a civilian interweb forum, gets butt hurt because he thought someone was talking shit about him, so he tries to pull rank and makes threats to expose someone?? REALLY? That is professional?!? Makes sense. These are the kinds of "get-your-feelings-hurt" types we have in our military...such a sensitive Lt Col. (where in the fuck do we find these people??)

I had some E-9 (who thankfully retired) Gunship SO on Air Staff personally call me over what I said on a USAF Humor Group on Facebook, chew me out for 20-minutes and end the conversation with "I'll be out there", then send PDF snapshots of my comments to my Chief and Sq/CC. In his email he quoted how I violated the week old AFI 1-1 section of "Social Media."

Edited March 17, 2014 by Azimuth

[MD]

So, let me get this straight....a Lt Col sees a post on a civilian interweb forum, gets butt hurt because he thought someone was talking shit about him, so he tries to pull rank and makes threats to expose someone?? REALLY? That is professional?!? Makes sense. These are the kinds of "get-your-feelings-hurt" types we have in our military...such a sensitive Lt Col. (where in the fuck do we find these people??)

If some nebulous, non-specific comment on a message board (douchebag, etc) is something that someone reads and immediately takes personally and assumes it applies to them, then there is a better-than-fair chance that the comment was somehow spot-on, and they realized it. Otherwise, what normal sane person would immediately take something so personally? Unless they are just incredibly thin-skinned and anything/everything triggers some victim status in them.

To me, his candyass "I'm going to expose who you are!" response proved, beyond a shadow of a doubt, that said LtCol is indeed a douchebag O-5 ADO. Just took something like this to expose him from the woodpile.

Feel free to mass email whoever you like from your desk at whichever RS there at BAB.

Edited March 17, 2014 by MD

[Liquid]

Easy now, bro. I said I'm not taking anything away from those that have done good work in the shit, and especially those that have paid the price. But how many enemy-caused combat losses have we had in the last 10 years?

My point is that the intensity of combat for the Air Force in the aggregate has been relatively low in comparison to WWII, Korea, Nam, and Desert Storm. As a result, we've had plenty of time to become the queep machine that the Air Force is today.

We will continue to be lost in the wilderness until the next no-shit shooting match happens. It will cost lives as we shrug off the decades of risk-aversion and shit-can the queep-master weenies who have no place in a fighting force, but we will quickly regain our focus and morale.

You actually are taking away from those who have served in combat during the past 12+ years. Sharpen your message because it sounds like you think we haven't taken any combat losses in the past ten years. I think you mean fighters shot down. Combat intensity may be low for C models but it has been quite for virtually every other combat unit. How about you focus on the next "no-shit shooting match" with realistic training and high end equipment while many of us continue to perform the vital airpower missions our leaders ask us to perform in the defense of our nation. Your community may be lost in the wilderness but many aren't. Edited March 17, 2014 by Liquid

[Flaco]

You actually are taking away from those who have served in combat during the past 12+ years. Sharpen your message because it sounds like you think we haven't taken any combat losses in the past ten years. I think you mean fighters shot down. Combat intensity may be low for C models but it has been quite for virtually every other combat unit. How about you focus on the next "no-shit shooting match" with realistic training and high end equipment while many of us continue to perform the vital airpower missions our leaders ask us to perform in the defense of our nation. Your community may be lost in the wilderness but many aren't.

I agree with you that the AF mission in GWOT is vital and not without risk. I've been on a few sporty ones myself both in Iraq and Afghanistan, but always in the mighty Viper and not in the C model as you assume. Did you see a photo of me in Cosmo or something?

Combat loss = directly attributable to the enemy (shot down, crashed while engaging enemy)

Number of manned aircraft combat losses in GWOT 2001-2008 = 3 (1 x A-10, 1 x F-16, 1 x MH-53). Not sure how many we've lost '09-present but I'm pretty sure there's a couple more.

Source: https://www.airforcemag.com/MagazineArchive/Pages/2009/January%202009/0109world.aspx

Number of manned aircraft combat losses in Vietnam 1964-1973 = 2,251

Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aircraft_losses_of_the_Vietnam_War

Would you really look a Thud or Jolly Green driver from 'Nam in the eye and tell him your missions during GWOT were "intense"? I wouldn't.

Combat, real combat, hardens a fighting force and makes it very focused on just one thing: killing the enemy. We are not, despite your objections to the contrary, engaged in this type of combat, nor are we focused on killing the enemy.

The Air Force is focused on SAPR, diversity, inclusion, CBTs, SOS, masters degrees, VSP, BRAC, and sequestration. Seriously, go to www.af.mil and you'll see what we're focused on. It's going to take real vision and leadership to regain our fighting focus. Gen. Welsh may be able to swing the pendulum a bit, but he's one of the few that get it and he's having to fight his own people to get it done.

I'm incredibly proud to be in the Air Force. But if we're not careful the next war may catch us with our pants down.

[Red Fox]

Good post Flaco.

Liquid, what we are doing today can't compare in intensity to flying in RP6 or the first several days of Desert Storm (i.e. Stroke Flight). That is not a criticism nor does it minimize what our current aircrew are doing and have done in the current conflict.

I don't remember experiencing anything but a focus on the mission while flying C-130s in theater during Desert Sheild/Storm. My Dad, who flew Thuds out of Korat, and other vets I flew with often, never mentioned to me any silliness such as sock checks during their time in Vietnam.

I flew C-17's into Afghanistan and Iraq from 2002-2004. The threat couldn't have been that great (relatively speaking), otherwise we wouldn't have been allowed to go. The terrain combined with poor WX and/or crew fatigue was the biggest threat for us.

Regards, RF