What's wrong with the Air Force?

[Don Frank]

1 hour ago, TnkrToad said:

BTW, the 8th AF lost more men over Europe than the Marines did in all of the Pacific. Somehow that never shows up in the Marines' propaganda efforts. What's really crazy is that the AF doesn't advertise how much airpower contributed to winning the Second World War, either. Of course, that would mean airmen would have to read history books.

Heaven forbid we let young Airmen feel pride for what we've done!

[brickhistory]

If only the leaders during WWII had known what to do and been perfect.

Never mind Douhet, Trenchard, et al.  Even H.G. Wells.

Nope, it was those selfish fighter guys.  Who despite having their toys didn't instantly deploy long-range escort from August, 1942 on-ward.  Nope, those long-range tanks should've instantly appeared.

Remind me who led the fighter escort on the Enola Gay mission?

And what was the leadership scheme for Big Blue from the end of WWII until well into Vietnam?

And the roster of perfectly suited aircraft we had for the wars in Korea and Vietnam?

USN submariners suffered, as a percentage, the greatest number of casualties during that war.

I guess even dead guys need to have d1ck-measuring contests...

 

 

*sorry-ish for being a d1ck in this post - working nights and am cranky.  The point is there is always two-sides to history.

[Muscle2002]

What's really crazy is that the AF doesn't advertise how much airpower contributed to winning the Second World War, either. Of course, that would mean airmen would have to read history books.
TT

I would argue that "we" do not do a great job of advertising our contributions even now.


Sent from my iPad using Baseops Network Forums

[TnkrToad]

12 minutes ago, brickhistory said:

If only the leaders during WWII had known what to do and been perfect.

Never mind Douhet, Trenchard, et al.  Even H.G. Wells.

Nope, it was those selfish fighter guys.  Who despite having their toys didn't instantly deploy long-range escort from August, 1942 on-ward.  Nope, those long-range tanks should've instantly appeared.

Remind me who led the fighter escort on the Enola Gay mission?

And what was the leadership scheme for Big Blue from the end of WWII until well into Vietnam?

And the roster of perfectly suited aircraft we had for the wars in Korea and Vietnam?

USN submariners suffered, as a percentage, the greatest number of casualties during that war.

I guess even dead guys need to have d1ck-measuring contests...

*sorry-ish for being a d1ck in this post - working nights and am cranky.  The point is there is always two-sides to history.

Dude, I get it about counterfactual history. Can only go so far when blaming AAC/AAF leadership for failing to recognize the need for long-range escort. Limited productive capacity early in the war and substantial technical issues with long-range fighter ideas were major problems. Even more so, the Army screwed its Air Corps WRT funding throughout the Interwar Period, which severely hobbled military aircraft development efforts.

My academic geekery is clearly showing through. Not trying to engage in penis measuring, but rather getting on my historical soapbox. Should've made that more clear. Read on, but only if you're interested in a historical diatribe:

I think a key part of AAF/AF history needs to be reconsidered, specifically the notions of a "Bomber Mafia" that forced the AAC/AAF to buy too many bombers & de-emphasize fighters. It's a bullcrap, "stab-in-the-back" argument fomented by (as it turns out, primarily fighter pilot) AAF generals to explain the decision not to pursue long-range fighter development (even though the Japanese had been using drop tanks since 1937). As an aside, Mike Worden's Rise of the Fighter Generals makes for interesting reading, but crappy history. I suspect that book has done much to screw up folks' historical understanding.

To your point about "What was the leadership scheme from the end of WWII until well into Vietnam?" Well, let's see the list of AAF Chiefs/CSAFs:

- Hap Arnold (1941-46) : hard to characterize; I'd call him a generalist. If anything, I'd say fighter pilot (the Wright aircraft he started his career flying certainly weren't bombers)

- Tooey Spaatz (1946-48): fighter pilot

- Hoyt Vandenberg (1948-53): fighter pilot

- Nate Twining (1953-57): fighter pilot

- Tommy White (1957-61): fighter pilot

- Curt LeMay (1961-65): fighter pilot-turned bomber pilot (BTW, LeMay had a shorter term as CSAF than anyone else on this list)

- J.P. McConnell (1965-69): fighter pilot

That covers Chiefs of the Air Staff/CSAF from the Second World War through 1969 (you mentioned through Vietnam). Fighter pilot dominance resumed in 1982, with Chuck Gabriel, 13 years after McConnell gave up the throne. Of course, Arnold's interwar predecessors were fighter bubbas, too. In sum, the USAF and its predecessors have been run by fighter pilots for all but about 16 of the last 100 years or so. But who's counting; wouldn't want to get in the way of a good historical narrative.

Getting back to the point of the thread: it's ridiculous to me that we've invested so little time in examining our service history, that we've allowed mythical notions of early Air Force bomber pilot dominance persist for so long. Makes one wonder what else we remain woefully ignorant about.

TT

[RyanRC187]

8 hours ago, TnkrToad said:

 

BTW, the 8th AF lost more men over Europe than the Marines did in all of the Pacific. Somehow that never shows up in the Marines' propaganda efforts.

There is a reason we've been routinely named the best propaganda machine since Nazi Germany...

 

Semper Fly

[Chuck17]

On 1/31/2017 at 2:19 PM, red.rogue.one said:

"Go to bed old man..."

Chuck

[17D_guy]

Well, this just dropped - 

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2017/02/01/air-force-busts-retired-four-star-general-down-two-ranks-coerced-sex/97356020/

Edited February 2, 2017 by 17D_guy

[Scram]

four star with 30+ years and not a single air medal...

 

[ATIS]

For those who graduated from the Zoom....any truth to this? 

https://opslens.com/2017/01/17/usafa-training-pc-culture-obama-administration/

 

Cheers

ATIS

 

[Clark Griswold]

13 minutes ago, gearpig said:

Interesting article. I'm not a Zoomie, but I did do a tour with my kids a couple years ago. I had never been before. It was underwhelming for similar reasons. 

The author wrote a followup in the Washington Times recently. Looks like the old Alumni are very upset with what it has become.

https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2017/feb/3/us-air-force-academy-has-leadership-problem/

I watched the Inauguration parade, and the AF band and Honor Guard made the Academy look like 5 year olds in a Kindergarten lunch line. 

 

Don't worry... they're all green for CBTs... the main problem and I think there should be an LOR given to someone for not having reflective belts on those cadets.

Edited February 5, 2017 by Clark Griswold

[RTB]

While I don't have first hand knowledge of the what's happening today at USAFA, these articles basically describe the attitude and focus of the AF as a whole.  Our culture has gone from combat to corporate.  Front line folks still have the right focus, but that seems to be in spite of the overall culture, not a result of it.  Depressing to see.

[Clark Griswold]

13 minutes ago, RTB said:

While I don't have first hand knowledge of the what's happening today at USAFA, these articles basically describe the attitude and focus of the AF as a whole.  Our culture has gone from combat to corporate.  Front line folks still have the right focus, but that seems to be in spite of the overall culture, not a result of it.  Depressing to see.

Particularly well said...

[pawnman]

2 hours ago, ATIS said:

For those who graduated from the Zoom....any truth to this? 

https://opslens.com/2017/01/17/usafa-training-pc-culture-obama-administration/

 

Cheers

ATIS

 

The things this guy bitches about are all reasons I did NOT want to go to the Academy.

[Herk Driver]

The things this guy bitches about are all reasons I did NOT want to go to the Academy.

I would argue that the things this guy bitches about are all things that have started over the course of the last couple of Commandants of Cadets and Superintendents.

There is a lot of WHITLY and the place is going to hell thrown around by every class but I find the lack of discipline and decorum disturbing.


Sent from my iPhone using Baseops Network Forums

[pawnman]

2 hours ago, Herk Driver said:

I would argue that the things this guy bitches about are all things that have started over the course of the last couple of Commandants of Cadets and Superintendents.

There is a lot of WHITLY and the place is going to hell thrown around by every class but I find the lack of discipline and decorum disturbing.


Sent from my iPhone using Baseops Network Forums

I guess I wasn't clear.  The things he complains are now missing (such as "being recognized" and "not calling a former officer in civilian clothes sir") are the things that make me glad I didn't go to the Academy 20 years ago.

[Herk Driver]

I guess I wasn't clear.  The things he complains are now missing (such as "being recognized" and "not calling a former officer in civilian clothes sir") are the things that make me glad I didn't go to the Academy 20 years ago.

So, honest question...20 years ago you are sitting at your ROTC Det/ OTS class waiting on your instructor. You know that the PAS has been talking about having some Vietnam vets visit ( on this particular day) to talk with you about their experiences from back in the day. A guy who is probably 30 years your elder makes eye contact and asks a question about where to find the bathroom, the PAS' office ( you name it) would you not at least through in a 'Sir' in your response?


Sent from my iPhone using Baseops Network Forums

[pawnman]

1 hour ago, Herk Driver said:

So, honest question...20 years ago you are sitting at your ROTC Det/ OTS class waiting on your instructor. You know that the PAS has been talking about having some Vietnam vets visit ( on this particular day) to talk with you about their experiences from back in the day. A guy who is probably 30 years your elder makes eye contact and asks a question about where to find the bathroom, the PAS' office ( you name it) would you not at least through in a 'Sir' in your response?


Sent from my iPhone using Baseops Network Forums

I sure would, but I've been to the Academy as a tourist.  Civilians wandering the grounds there was much more common than it was at Maxwell.  I don't throw a "sir" into every conversation with a civilian in my off-duty life.  

Like I said, it's why I'm glad I didn't go.  If others really love the military structure and enjoy being shit on during freshmen year, then by all means, sign up for the Academy.  I went to OTS, which was a miserable enough 12 weeks.  I can't imagine trying to do the things I did at OTS while also maintaining a decent GPA.  Maybe I'm just a bad officer though.

[Herk Driver]

I sure would, but I've been to the Academy as a tourist.  Civilians wandering the grounds there was much more common than it was at Maxwell.  I don't throw a "sir" into every conversation with a civilian in my off-duty life.  

Like I said, it's why I'm glad I didn't go.  If others really love the military structure and enjoy being shit on during freshmen year, then by all means, sign up for the Academy.  I went to OTS, which was a miserable enough 12 weeks.  I can't imagine trying to do the things I did at OTS while also maintaining a decent GPA.  Maybe I'm just a bad officer though.

Civilians don't wander the terrazzo anymore, post 9-11 (unless something has changed). Civilians absolutely don't wander the dorms, which is where this "encounter" took place.

Also, cadets know when it is a reunion weekend so they aren't caught off guard by the "random civilian" roaming the hallways.


Sent from my iPhone using Baseops Network Forums

[ViperMan]

1 hour ago, Herk Driver said:

Civilians don't wander the terrazzo anymore, post 9-11 (unless something has changed). Civilians absolutely don't wander the dorms, which is where this "encounter" took place.

Also, cadets know when it is a reunion weekend so they aren't caught off guard by the "random civilian" roaming the hallways.


Sent from my iPhone using Baseops Network Forums

Nor did they pre-9/11...

[MooseAg03]

Further proof the shoe clerks think they run the Air Force - why does military clothing not sell rank for flight suits anymore? I went there today and they only have 1st and 2nd Lt rank, absolutely no Major or Lt Col and not even a spot on the shelf for it. They told me to order it on the exchange website, but you can't even get it there. I tried to go to alterations and they would only give me one set of take-offs because they have so many people asking for it. I guess I'll just start flying in ABUs since there's no problem finding all of the ranks for that uniform. Doesn't this f*cking service exist to fly airplanes? Then why the f*ck can I not get rank for my f*cking flight suits?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Right Seat Driver]

9 minutes ago, MooseAg03 said:

Further proof the shoe clerks think they run the Air Force - why does military clothing not sell rank for flight suits anymore? I went there today and they only have 1st and 2nd Lt rank, absolutely no Major or Lt Col and not even a spot on the shelf for it. They told me to order it on the exchange website, but you can't even get it there. I tried to go to alterations and they would only give me one set of take-offs because they have so many people asking for it. I guess I'll just start flying in ABUs since there's no problem finding all of the ranks for that uniform. Doesn't this f*cking service exist to fly airplanes? Then why the f*ck can I not get rank for my f*cking flight suits?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

The word I got from AAFES is the contractor that made the flight suit/BDU rank went TU, and AAFES is looking for a new contractor now.

I had to order my rank from Vanguard.  It is a lot more expensive than the AAFES brand.  O-4 Vanguard runs $3.55 versus the AAFES $0.95.  Good luck.

[MooseAg03]

Yeah, ordering everything I need from Vanguard is costing $50+. Clothing sales didn't have shoulder boards or metal rank. But you sure can find everything you need if you're an 0-6.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Naviguesser]

10 hours ago, MooseAg03 said:

But your exec sure can find everything you need if you're an 0-6.

FIFY

[matmacwc]

On 7/18/2016 at 4:39 PM, matmacwc said:

What is wrong? This....

https://www.wltx.com/mb/news/crime/shaw-air-force-colonel-charged-with-child-pornography/275993006

 

not even sure this is the right place to post, Shaw bubbas, words?

https://www.google.com/amp/www.foxnews.com/us/2017/03/17/air-force-colonel-sentenced-for-child-porn-mishandling-classified-documents.amp.html

Allow me to quote myself, still what is wrong.

 

[Duck]

Can't really blame him for the classified docs (Hillary defense) but man what a terrible story.


Sent from my iPhone using Baseops Network Forums