What's wrong with the Air Force?

[Azimuth]

If the RC folks are difficult to set up incentive flights, the Nebraska KC-135 are great folks and would help in a heart beat.

I spent five years as a Personnelist before I became a Boom. As a support person you get sheltered in your world and it's easy to become oblivious of the real mission of the base you're at. Had I not been in a C-130 squadron, and had been given incentive flights, flown organic airlift, It probably wouldn't of sparked my passion for flying.

[BitteEinBit]

We as an organization have failed if we have airmen stationed at an overseas fighter base don't know there are fighters located there. No wonder we don't get any support from the "support" functions on base. They all must really think the base is there because of them...because everyone is "tip of the spear...fight tonight" in today's Air Force. We feel left out if we are just considered "support.". If Amn Snuffy doesn't know how their job fits in to the mission of that base or the overall mission of the Air Force then they have failed and the Air Force has failed them. I guess what I think is just basic common knowledge about the Air Force isn't common knowledge at all. I guess I am part of the problem too because I don't make any attempts to educate people on these things either...but then again, I didn't think I had to tell a graduate of BMT assigned to an operational base that information. Bad on me for being blind. Good on all of you folks like 17D and Dayman who are actively trying to change that.

If the finance guy at Ramstein can understand why Lt Schmuckatelli from the 37th AS needs a bag of cash at 3am on a Saturday morning because he is going on an Africa mission to bring back stowaways (too soon?) then Airman Bagadonuts won't complain so much when they have to come in on a Saturday to do their job. .they just know that they came in to support a real-world mission. But that isn't how we train our personnel to think....we lead them to believe that they are part of a "0900 to 1100 and 1300-1500 four times a week" kind of organization who has to race to see who can make it out the front gate before retreat is played...and it is just too inconvenient to work on weekends and holidays..

Sad...very sad.

Edit: Because I can never type a post without grammarlogical errors....

Edited August 4, 2014 by BitteEinBit

[Fuzz]

I try to do this as often as possible, its amazing the looks I get when I tell non-ops people what the day to day like for us. Not to brag about how hard we have it but to make them see the why I need may pay fixed because I got told 12 hours ago I was leaving on a two week stage etc. For the non-ops guys please make a call to your local ops squadron; there's always a Lt. that can spare an hour or two.

Edited August 4, 2014 by Fuzz

[17D_guy]

Thanks gents, didn't know if I could just call and see about a static. I'm trying to get it rolled into FTAC here so all the Amn can roll through once they get to the base, not just my nerds.

Another thing that has started happening more and more recently is referencing the base and squadron DOC statement missions. I don't know if the CS has a DOC statement mission, I assume it does. Enabling X A/C to deploy in Y hours or something like that?

Don't know what a DOC statement is. From your last sentence I'd say we don't have one. That would be very difficult for us to develop and we have so many other controlling agencies (DISA, CyberCOM, 24th AF, shudder AFSPC) our mission focus is very difficult to maintain sometimes.

I'll ask around though.

Edited August 4, 2014 by 17D_guy

[Slander]

Don't know what a DOC statement is. From your last sentence I'd say we don't have one. That would be very difficult for us to develop and we have so many other controlling agencies (DISA, CyberCOM, 24th AF, shudder AFSPC) our mission focus is very difficult to maintain sometimes.

"DOC" = Designed Operational Capability

You may not have one, I don't know, that's why I asked. Your wing almost certainly does, it's the SIPR side mission statement of what your base is expected by the COCOMs for war making. If you don't...maybe you should get one. It might help your lack of mission focus.

[Stitch]

What kills me about MX playing stats games is that those stats should help highlight things like under-manning and acquisitions problems. Guess it's better to hide the problems and kick the can down the road.

Fact. However, the on-the-ramp lower ranking wrench benders will give 100% to provide quality maintenance and fix the jet and get it back on status. Those guys just want fix the jet right the first time and not dick around doing "good enough" to meet some magical 8 hour fix rate established back in the 1980s where we tons of people and jets. Give em' the parts and time they need and it'll get done right the first time. It'll hurt but once problem areas are highlighted then steps can be taken to correct them. It's at the AMU (do we still have those?) supervision level where the stats and finger pointing game gets played.

[uhhello]

Fact. However, the on-the-ramp lower ranking wrench benders will give 100% to provide quality maintenance and fix the jet and get it back on status. Those guys just want fix the jet right the first time and not dick around doing "good enough" to meet some magical 8 hour fix rate established back in the 1980s where we tons of people and jets. Give em' the parts and time they need and it'll get done right the first time. It'll hurt but once problem areas are highlighted then steps can be taken to correct them. It's at the AMU (do we still have those?) supervision level where the stats and finger pointing game gets played.

It's so stupid simple. One only needs to look at deployment rates to see what happens when stats take a back burner. I know we get a parts boost but it's infuriating to see a well oiled machine of ops working with mx and vice versa resort back to the stupid fuck fuck numbers games at home.

[Skitzo]

Why did we separate OPS and MX in the first place? Seems like the operators want to hack the mish and the maintainers want to turn the jets.

All the fighting and bullshit that exists is self induced. I've spent more than my fair share of time on the phone arguing with more than a couple MOOs as to why the 2407 is a MX 2407 and not OPS.

All this time spent arguing over who is to blame instead of fixing a larger problem be it the process, personnel or other.

Edited August 5, 2014 by Skitzo

[Dupe]

I left a wing a year ago where, from the WG/CC on down, nobody cared about deviations. Therefore, there was no arguing over MX dev versus Ops dev. It was a really amazing thing....

The stat we cared about was through-put.

Edited August 5, 2014 by Dupe

[JarheadBoom]

I'm getting back into the jet after 7 months of downtime, so I wasn't quite up-to-speed on the latest administrivia involved with getting airborne out of WRI.

On my second flight, we had a MX issue requiring an avionics box R&R. I called Command Post to let them know about it and give them an ETIC; they responded with "When were you Dash-1 preflight complete?". During start and the extended taxi, I heard at least three other jets on the ramp call in with problems, call blocked out, or call airborne; the initial response from CP was "When were you Dash-1 preflight complete?" each time. They're playing the stupid fucking numbers game again, big-time.

edit: format

Edited August 5, 2014 by JarheadBoom

[17D_guy]

Why did we separate OPS and MX in the first place? Seems like the operators want to hack the mish and the maintainers want to turn the jets.

Hasn't MX moved into and out of OPS in the past decade? Seems like every 7 years they move.

[stract]

no, closest it came was back in the 07-08 timeframe, but got shut off at the 11th hour. Ops and MX haven't been together in at least 11 years.

[Azimuth]

Why did we separate OPS and MX in the first place? Seems like the operators want to hack the mish and the maintainers want to turn the jets.

All the fighting and bullshit that exists is self induced. I've spent more than my fair share of time on the phone arguing with more than a couple MOOs as to why the 2407 is a MX 2407 and not OPS.

All this time spent arguing over who is to blame instead of fixing a larger problem be it the process, personnel or other.

Because the MX Officers got pissy and whined there were little command progression for them (the MX Officer in a flying Sq worked for the flying Sq/CC).

[Skitzo]

Because the MX Officers got pissy and whined there were little command progression for them (the MX Officer in a flying Sq worked for the flying Sq/CC).

How long is the training to become a MX officer? Why can't the rated just do it? Why can't I go to a course, get spun up on AMU manning, processes, MICAP, etc?

[Dupe]

How long is the training to become a MX officer? Why can't the rated just do it? Why can't I go to a course, get spun up on AMU manning, processes, MICAP, etc?

The problems I see are that there just aren't enough rated officers to go around and that officership in the MX world us more than a full-time job.

[Napoleon_Tanerite]

How long is the training to become a MX officer? Why can't the rated just do it? Why can't I go to a course, get spun up on AMU manning, processes, MICAP, etc?

You DON'T want that job, no way. Far more than an "additional duty"

[pawnman]

How long is the training to become a MX officer? Why can't the rated just do it? Why can't I go to a course, get spun up on AMU manning, processes, MICAP, etc?

That's what the Navy does. Your O-3 shop chiefs, in addition to "training", "stan/eval", "mobility", are placed in charge of a MX shop.

[Breckey]

How long is the training to become a MX officer? Why can't the rated just do it? Why can't I go to a course, get spun up on AMU manning, processes, MICAP, etc?

With all of the complaining about additional duties, I think having a full time one would be even less appealing.

[Toasty]

I'm getting back into the jet after 7 months of downtime, so I wasn't quite up-to-speed on the latest administrivia involved with getting airborne out of WRI.

On my second flight, we had a MX issue requiring an avionics box R&R. I called Command Post to let them know about it and give them an ETIC; they responded with "When were you Dash-1 preflight complete?". During start and the extended taxi, I heard at least three other jets on the ramp call in with problems, call blocked out, or call airborne; the initial response from CP was "When were you Dash-1 preflight complete?" each time. They're playing the stupid fucking numbers game again, big-time.

edit: format

Wait, *command post* is asking those questions? "Unable."

If it's a problem to the point of affecting choices or creating workload in the air, I'd talk the SQ/CC for some top-cover to knock that shit off.

[ThreeHoler]

I would hesitate to complain about the McGoo CP asking that...since it's much better than it used to be with "partial crew show"; "full crew show"; "close up"; "block out"; etc. The only metric that matters for Ops "on-time" is -1 preflight complete x minutes prior to takeoff.

I'll take the single time (-1 preflight) over all the previous times any day.

That said, I tend to wind up with a lot of "crew directed MX" delay codes because I don't give a shit about fighting stupid battles. I pick them.

[busdriver]

MX actually under OPS or not isn't really an issue. The issue is communication. If MX is under OPS, the comm is forced, but it can still exist if separate. In other words as the OPS guy I explain to MX why I'm doing what I'm doing, and what my priorities are, he responds with how my schedule may impact follow on lines and if I stick to my schedule I may in fact be fucking myself. If I say I'm willing to take that risk, then I've accepted if they can't deliver aircraft for those follow on lines it's on me.

Chasing metrics is counter productive, it doesn't show the importance of one set of sorties over another and it doesn't allow ops and mx to make real time calls about where to put the weight of effort. Metrics are useful to track trends but not as a measure of merit.

[FUSEPLUG]

Metrics are useful to track trends but not as a measure of merit.

I don't know what crazy organization you work for, but this is the USAF we are talking about. Know your audience!

[17D_guy]

Well Cyber AFSC is splitting again, but they dropped a CFETP for us now. Figure that one out. We're also being directed to start getting certifications though funding and planning for that will be accomplished "in the future."

Do you Ops guys have CFETPs or do you track your training a different way.

[baileynme]

Never heard of those, can you include a brief description?

Posted from the NEW Baseops.net App!

[Dupe]

Do you Ops guys have CFETPs or do you track your training a different way.

I had never heard of a CFETP until I became the lone rated dude in an acquisitions organization. It's definitely a non-rated thing. Instead, the rated world has MAJCOM-approved upgrades for each crew position.

CFETP = Career Field Education & Training Plan. Basically, it's a guide to what training at what time is appropriate for each AFSC. It's authored by the functionals for each AFSC at SAF. It replaces that speech from an iron-major that each rated Lt gets when landing in an ops squadron. For the non-rated folks, numbers in each org is smaller, so that type of feedback is formally published.

Edited August 7, 2014 by Dupe