ARIs 'R' Us Posted September 10, 2014 Posted September 10, 2014 (edited) We're not zipper suited sun gods. Our only movable name tags are on blues. My name tag/wings are on Velcro...I must be special. Posted from the NEW Baseops.net App! That's easy to have fun with. Borrow a few name tags before you leave home. Step 2: visit every building on base in flight suit but keep changing name tags. Make sure your SQ/CC is represented too. Pro-tip: don't do it at a base when you are the only guy there from your squadron. Plausible deniability gets lost that way. I remember the day at SOS where they made a last second change to the schedule that resulted in our flight being the only flight in FDU/ABUs in Polifka. Several processes were implemented immediately to prevent such an atrocity from ever occurring again. Posted from the NEW Baseops.net App! Edit to add: I don't read good. Edited September 10, 2014 by ARIs 'R' Us
17D_guy Posted September 10, 2014 Posted September 10, 2014 My name tag/wings are on Velcro...I must be special. Can confirm.
AnimalMother Posted October 16, 2014 Posted October 16, 2014 "Guys, the Chief of Staff won't be around much longer, get your master's degrees done. You don't want to be caught off guard when they change it back." Just a FYI stake in the ground from my sq/cc at our commanders call the other day--in case anyone is looking for a benchmark at how well the CoS' changes are being received down here at the sq level. Anyone else seeing similar?
SurelySerious Posted October 16, 2014 Posted October 16, 2014 "Guys, the Chief of Staff won't be around much longer, get your master's degrees done. You don't want to be caught off guard when they change it back." Just a FYI stake in the ground from my sq/cc at our commanders call the other day--in case anyone is looking for a benchmark at how well the CoS' changes are being received down here at the sq level. Anyone else seeing similar? Effing bureaucracy. Maybe Welsh is too nice (apart from his tour being nearly complete). Sometimes, you might need a person both revered and feared.
StoleIt Posted October 16, 2014 Posted October 16, 2014 Effing bureaucracy. Maybe Welsh is too nice (apart from his tour being nearly complete). Sometimes, you might need a person both revered and feared. A good read. This caught my eye: If you are always on the hunt for complacency, argues Mattis, you will reward risk-takers, and people who thrive in uncertainty. "Take the mavericks in your service," he tells new officers, "the ones that wear rumpled uniforms and look like a bag of mud but whose ideas are so offsetting that they actually upset the people in the bureaucracy. One of your primary jobs is to take the risk and protect these people, because if they are not nurtured in your service, the enemy will bring their contrary ideas to you." 2
Azimuth Posted October 16, 2014 Posted October 16, 2014 Was told today that to do a Coronet to Hawaii, per AMC, crews will have to check out guns, arm while flying, A-Bag, and ground chem mask. This is for all TACC tasked missions that aren't CONUS, unless otherwise specified in the IFM remarks. I'm so done with this shit.
StoleIt Posted October 16, 2014 Posted October 16, 2014 Was told today that to do a Coronet to Hawaii, per AMC, crews will have to check out guns, arm while flying, A-Bag, and ground chem mask. This is for all TACC tasked missions that aren't CONUS, unless otherwise specified in the IFM remarks. I'm so done with this shit. They expecting to divert you mid-mission to Africa or something?
Azimuth Posted October 16, 2014 Posted October 16, 2014 They expecting to divert you mid-mission to Africa or something? No, apparently the stowaway on the Herk at Ramsteim scared some folks at AMC.
SurelySerious Posted October 16, 2014 Posted October 16, 2014 No, apparently the stowaway on the Herk at Ramsteim scared some folks at AMC. How do pistols help if there's a stowaway in the wheel well? That location seems to take care of aliens on its own.
Azimuth Posted October 16, 2014 Posted October 16, 2014 How do pistols help if there's a stowaway in the wheel well? That location seems to take care of aliens on its own. That's common sense, which isn't apart of AMC. 1
ThreeHoler Posted October 16, 2014 Posted October 16, 2014 Was told today that to do a Coronet to Hawaii, per AMC, crews will have to check out guns, arm while flying, A-Bag, and ground chem mask. This is for all TACC tasked missions that aren't CONUS, unless otherwise specified in the IFM remarks. I'm so done with this shit. Welcome to four months ago.
Azimuth Posted October 16, 2014 Posted October 16, 2014 Welcome to four months ago. Four months ago I was in AETC.
08Dawg Posted October 16, 2014 Posted October 16, 2014 "Guys, the Chief of Staff won't be around much longer, get your master's degrees done. You don't want to be caught off guard when they change it back." Just a FYI stake in the ground from my sq/cc at our commanders call the other day--in case anyone is looking for a benchmark at how well the CoS' changes are being received down here at the sq level. Anyone else seeing similar? I don't know a single dude/dudette who has stopped working on their masters. Word we got was basically "do it now, you'll have no time as an O4/O5"
10percenttruth Posted October 16, 2014 Posted October 16, 2014 "Guys, the Chief of Staff won't be around much longer, get your master's degrees done. You don't want to be caught off guard when they change it back." Just a FYI stake in the ground from my sq/cc at our commanders call the other day--in case anyone is looking for a benchmark at how well the CoS' changes are being received down here at the sq level. Anyone else seeing similar? It's not a matter of people not taking the Chiefs guidance seriously. It's a matter of people not trusting the system not to change in a very short amount of time and screw them in the long run by following old guidance. 3
hindsight2020 Posted October 16, 2014 Posted October 16, 2014 It's not a matter of people not taking the Chiefs guidance seriously. It's a matter of people not trusting the system not to change in a very short amount of time and screw them in the long run by following old guidance. ...and a distinction without difference.
AnimalMother Posted October 17, 2014 Posted October 17, 2014 So essentially the AF is so systemically dysfunctional, that not even an inspirational and respected leader--placed at the very top--can affect the service in a lasting and meaningful way? Sounds about right I guess. 2
matmacwc Posted October 17, 2014 Posted October 17, 2014 (edited) A good read. This caught my eye: If you are always on the hunt for complacency, argues Mattis, you will reward risk-takers, and people who thrive in uncertainty. "Take the mavericks in your service," he tells new officers, "the ones that wear rumpled uniforms and look like a bag of mud but whose ideas are so offsetting that they actually upset the people in the bureaucracy. One of your primary jobs is to take the risk and protect these people, because if they are not nurtured in your service, the enemy will bring their contrary ideas to you." And then we ignore them, becuase 85 on a PT test and getting PME done at the last minute shows current leadership they don't have what it takes. Too bad they were busy flying as an IP 4 times a week and making sure the schedule was good and his LTs had good OPRs. Edited October 17, 2014 by matmacwc
Clark Griswold Posted October 17, 2014 Posted October 17, 2014 (edited) The first question the AF asks its potential leaders is not whether or not you did a good job but did anything go wrong on your watch? Even if your performance was at best mediocre but nothing went wrong (probably because said "leader" was so paranoid and conservative that hardly a wheel turned unless that pro-sortie just had to be flown to kill those beans) then you move up. If your approach by hiding behind a reflexive no to anything that entails any risk allowed you to move up, why would you change it when you move up and the stakes get higher to move up to the next level? Edited October 17, 2014 by Clark Griswold
guineapigfury Posted October 17, 2014 Posted October 17, 2014 So essentially the AF is so systemically dysfunctional, that not even an inspirational and respected leader--placed at the very top--can affect the service in a lasting and meaningful way? Sounds about right I guess. It sounds right because it is. I've never met the CSAF, but he seems like a solid bro who's trying to get shit done. I have met and worked with a couple hundred CGOs, NCOs, and Airmen. For the most part they're good people doing amazing stuff. So if the problem isn't the top or bottom, then it must be somewhere in between.
Longhorn15 Posted October 17, 2014 Posted October 17, 2014 the guys who are Sq/CCs now are the ones who were burned by decision to unmask AAD last time. Therefore they have no trust and actually think they're helping you not get painted into the same corner they did. I don't agree with them, but as with any advice, consider the source. Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
AnimalMother Posted October 17, 2014 Posted October 17, 2014 the guys who are Sq/CCs now are the ones who were burned by decision to unmask AAD last time. Therefore they have no trust and actually think they're helping you not get painted into the same corner they did. I don't agree with them, but as with any advice, consider the source. Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk That's probably the crux of it. Little to no trust remains within the system and so guys are forced to play defensively.
Liftr Posted October 22, 2014 Posted October 22, 2014 In my US Airways indoc class, out of 7 military dudes, 5 were DGs from CGO level PME. If you want to get hired by an airline, make sure to check that container. There seems to be so much wrong with this post. 1. Why are pilots making DG at SOS? 2. Why would any airline care? 3. Why are DG types bailing out? 4. Why doesn't the AF care? 5. Finally, I'm very confident the pilot interview board members were not DG at SOS!
Tonka Posted October 22, 2014 Posted October 22, 2014 There seems to be so much wrong with this post. 1. Why are pilots making DG at SOS? 2. Why would any airline care? 3. Why are DG types bailing out? 4. Why doesn't the AF care? 5. Finally, I'm very confident the pilot interview board members were not DG at SOS! ...not sure if serious?
Liftr Posted October 22, 2014 Posted October 22, 2014 ...not sure if serious? I'm not the greatest communicator, I guess. Probably because I never went to a PME school. All multiple choice via mail... The point I was trying to make is that being DG at SOS is not very important to Airline recruiters. Conversely, the AF should be concerned why some of their top performers are leaving. Maybe I missed some sarcasm in Vetter's original post?
ThreeHoler Posted October 22, 2014 Posted October 22, 2014 I'm not the greatest communicator, I guess. Probably because I never went to a PME school. All multiple choice via mail... The point I was trying to make is that being DG at SOS is not very important to Airline recruiters. Conversely, the AF should be concerned why some of their top performers are leaving. Maybe I missed some sarcasm in Vetter's original post? SOS DG != top performer. Sometimes, yes, but not always.
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now