What's wrong with the Air Force?

[magnetfreezer]

7 hours ago, Clark Griswold said:

Rhetorical and honest question, what are we using the skill as a military aviator for in determining AF leadership?

Is it proof of intelligence, strategic thought, knowledge of modern warfare, understanding of historical lessons, wisdom to apply these as required, etc...?  

Is it a filter or braking system / requirement to ensure that individuals have enough time and experience and a record to judge and predict future performance at now directing and leading the Air Force in operations?

I ask as I agree with the sentiment of disgust that many of the cadre of modern AF leaders have mediocre or little skill, knowledge or even interest in their tactical art but at some level, high tactical personal proficiency may not be required to be a great strategic or enterprise leader.

My analogy would be Nick Saban, whether you're an Alabama fan or not, he's a great coach, but he only played two years as defensive back at Kent State before then going on to becoming a great leader in his profession.  He demonstrated skill by playing at the college level and then moved to leadership.  Credentials established and he was given a chance to prove he could not only perform but lead.

Now I am not in anyway arguing for that kind of fast tracking for AF leadership but we have to step back and honestly ask as this person can fly his jet or lead this formation great but are those skills indicative themselves of a good leader of the AF?  

It is supposed to be a building process, Operational to Tactical to Strategic ability with demonstration of skill leading to the next level but that is not what we have.  

Unfortunately I think it is a combination of dedication to admin obsession and personal connections that are markers for leadership; there is no truly objective factor(s) as those are manipulated to some degree to give the desired result but I'm not cynical not one bit...

Good words, I think it is somewhat of a filter and check that they have the right mentality. In addition, to lead tactical aviators, you are making a lot of tactical decisions (FEASCAPs, changing regs, ranking for upgrades, backing up your crews when an incident happens). To have credibility in those decisions you need to either have the experience to understand what you are talking about or listen to subordinates who are the experts, since most can't seem to do the latter they need the former.

[pawnman]

7 hours ago, Clark Griswold said:

Rhetorical and honest question, what are we using the skill as a military aviator for in determining AF leadership?

Is it proof of intelligence, strategic thought, knowledge of modern warfare, understanding of historical lessons, wisdom to apply these as required, etc...?  

Is it a filter or braking system / requirement to ensure that individuals have enough time and experience and a record to judge and predict future performance at now directing and leading the Air Force in operations?

I ask as I agree with the sentiment of disgust that many of the cadre of modern AF leaders have mediocre or little skill, knowledge or even interest in their tactical art but at some level, high tactical personal proficiency may not be required to be a great strategic or enterprise leader.

My analogy would be Nick Saban, whether you're an Alabama fan or not, he's a great coach, but he only played two years as defensive back at Kent State before then going on to becoming a great leader in his profession.  He demonstrated skill by playing at the college level and then moved to leadership.  Credentials established and he was given a chance to prove he could not only perform but lead.

Now I am not in anyway arguing for that kind of fast tracking for AF leadership but we have to step back and honestly ask as this person can fly his jet or lead this formation great but are those skills indicative themselves of a good leader of the AF?  

It is supposed to be a building process, Operational to Tactical to Strategic ability with demonstration of skill leading to the next level but that is not what we have.  

Unfortunately I think it is a combination of dedication to admin obsession and personal connections that are markers for leadership; there is no truly objective factor(s) as those are manipulated to some degree to give the desired result but I'm not cynical not one bit...

There's a lot to be said for your leadership to understand the challenges, stresses, and limitations of your job.  How does a commander know who is the #1 IP if he doesn't have enough knowledge in the jet to tell good instruction from bad instruction?  How does a SQ/CC or OG/CC make sound decisions regarding things like waivers, or exercises, or sortie turn patterns if they haven't been subjected to any of them for over a decade?

[Champ Kind]

 How does a commander know who is the #1 IP

Because that doesn't matter. Third tier strat, at best.

[hatedont]

Lawmakers again push for more flexibility with military moves

https://www.militarytimes.com/articles/pcs-moves-flexibility-bill-reintroduced

This is a great start and all, but how about homesteading? 

Edited May 19, 2017 by hatedont

[Hacker]

7 hours ago, hatedont said:

VMA187 is right in the perspective of you don't need to be out their turning wrenches to be a great leader for your maintenance troops.

I was just relating that anecdote in response to his question about it.  That story happened when I was a 2Lt in 1995 -- I figured the rest of that out relatively well in the intervening 22 years leading to now, mostly thanks to CMSgt Arnao and SMSgt Bussell, who grabbed my young, dumb butterbar self by the collar and taught me how to lead maintainers.  Those are the leadership lessons I was referring to in my previous two posts in this thread.

Edited May 19, 2017 by Hacker

[Guest]

10 minutes ago, hatedont said:

Lawmakers again push for more flexibility with military moves

https://www.militarytimes.com/articles/pcs-moves-flexibility-bill-reintroduced

This is great start and all, but how about homesteading? 

Probably a non-starter.  For every person at a good location who they retain through homesteading, they'll lose someone who is dying to escape from a shithole.

[hatedont]

45 minutes ago, ihtfp06 said:

Probably a non-starter.  For every person at a good location who they retain through homesteading, they'll lose someone who is dying to escape from a shithole.

After my commitment is up give me my base of preference no matter where I want to go for 4 years or a 1-2 year bonus. You can't take both. One or the other. Stop trying to hand out 365s at the end of a career or commitment which causes people to become more jaded. Base of preference for the old guys or a 1-2 year bonus and you might give guys something to look forward to in my opinion.

Edited May 19, 2017 by hatedont

[Clark Griswold]

1 hour ago, magnetfreezer said:

Good words, I think it is somewhat of a filter and check that they have the right mentality. In addition, to lead tactical aviators, you are making a lot of tactical decisions (FEASCAPs, changing regs, ranking for upgrades, backing up your crews when an incident happens). To have credibility in those decisions you need to either have the experience to understand what you are talking about or listen to subordinates who are the experts, since most can't seem to do the latter they need the former.

 

1 hour ago, pawnman said:

There's a lot to be said for your leadership to understand the challenges, stresses, and limitations of your job.  How does a commander know who is the #1 IP if he doesn't have enough knowledge in the jet to tell good instruction from bad instruction?  How does a SQ/CC or OG/CC make sound decisions regarding things like waivers, or exercises, or sortie turn patterns if they haven't been subjected to any of them for over a decade?

Valid points and my argument / point is one of a matter of degrees, I'm not sure if it (the level of personal operational skill determined to be necessary for an AF leader to have to be creditable) can be uniformly captured across all platforms be they manned/unmanned, aircraft, missiles, space, MX, logistics, intel, etc... but it's like the difference between art vs. pornography, you know when you see it. 

The AF is not structured this way but if I had my druthers we would define the purpose of a tour or billet more explicitly than we do now with a somewhat specific career goal expressed for the member and his / her leadership to work towards.  This assignment is to build operational skill and experience, this tour is to develop your operational leadership, etc...

[HU&W]

7 hours ago, hatedont said:

I don't see Bill Gates writing code for programs.

From the mid-70's to at least the mid-90's, Bill Gates brilliance in writing code spawned and then carried Microsoft.  As he developed from a tactical leader to a strategic leader, the time and energy he had put into coding became infinitely valuable to him.  It provided a bedrock of experience, enabling him to evaluate COAs developed by his underlings, and move the business forward.  He may not have proficiency in today's programming languages (I don't know, maybe he does) but he's a master at the language of his profession, at leading and guiding the code writers that he once was.

Barring a few crazy outliers, a person doesn't master the language of war without first having been a participant in combat, and not the 'everyone's a warrior' or 'I only had 3 beers a day at the died' kind.

[hatedont]

6 minutes ago, HU&W said:

He may not have proficiency in today's programming languages (I don't know, maybe he does) but he's a master at the language of his profession, at leading and guiding the code writers that he once was.

Bill Gates was no Steve Jobs. Steve had his fingers all in the kool aid. But after his death, Apple's innovation died. I would insert Steve into your example as a better example. And I refuse to buy an iPhone.

[HU&W]

7 minutes ago, hatedont said:

Bill Gates was no Steve Jobs. Steve had his fingers all in the kool aid. But after his death, Apple's innovation died. I would insert Steve into your example as a better example. And I refuse to buy an iPhone.

No, he wasn't.  Early on, Gates needed Jobs vision, and Jobs needed Gates proficiency.  Steve Jobs had a natural gift for connecting the dots, and for connecting Gates work to the average person's need.  After they split, the readily stole/acquired/supplanted/and even subsidized one another's work for decades.  Jobs is definitely a better model for visionary strategic leadership combined with tactical ignorance.

[hatedont]

5 minutes ago, HU&W said:

No, he wasn't.  Early on, Gates needed Jobs vision, and Jobs needed Gates proficiency.  Steve Jobs had a natural gift for connecting the dots, and for connecting Gates work to the average person's need.  After they split, the readily stole/acquired/supplanted/and even subsidized one another's work for decades.  Jobs is definitely a better model for visionary strategic leadership combined with tactical ignorance.

So true, Bill Gates is the one who actually saved Apple by funding them. Competition is a good thing.

[Guardian]

So we are arguing about bill gates and the apple guy on a Friday? YGBSM.


Sent from my iPhone using Baseops Network Forums

[pawnman]

5 hours ago, Champ Kind said:

Because that doesn't matter. Third tier strat, at best.

"That' doesn't matter"...until it's time to pick your flight lead for night one, or deciding who is leading your Red Flag push, or otherwise executing your most challenging sorties.

 

It's not about the strat...it's about being able to recognize that performance in others.

[Champ Kind]

1 hour ago, pawnman said:

"That' doesn't matter"...until it's time to pick your flight lead for night one, or deciding who is leading your Red Flag push, or otherwise executing your most challenging sorties.

 

It's not about the strat...it's about being able to recognize that performance in others.

I was being sarcastic and whole-heartedly agree with you.

I don't think that type of expertise is recognized or rewarded in the current state of affairs.

[17D_guy]

11 hours ago, Guardian said:

So we are arguing about bill gates and the apple guy on a Friday? YGBSM.


Sent from my iPhone using Baseops Network Forums

My kind of place.

[dream big]

16 hours ago, Champ Kind said:

Because that doesn't matter. Third tier strat, at best.

The only strats/awards I've gotten are pilot/IP.  Those mean more to me than any CGO strat/award fruitified by volunteering at the CGOC bullets.  

[hatedont]

44 minutes ago, dream big said:

The only strats/awards I've gotten are pilot/IP.  Those mean more to me than any CGO strat/award fruitified by volunteering at the CGOC bullets.  

I wouldn't stipulate only volunteering gets you CGO strats and awards. You are misleading some of the younger guys here. I've seen people who do not volunteer but have received those awards and strats as SOFs. You are are making decisions on the behalf of the OG/CC as a SOF.

Does volunteering at a soup kitchen sound better on a package? Or landing all the aircraft in the pattern and clearing the runway for the arrival of an IFE aircraft with the OG/CC on board? 

Edited May 20, 2017 by hatedont

[magnetfreezer]

Or landing all the aircraft in the pattern and clearing the runway for the arrival of an IFE aircraft with the OG/CC on board? 

Don't disagree on the volunteering, and I don't know if the tower chief could possibly have handled that situation at a base (such as AMC or Navy) without a SOF.

[Guest]

The only strats/awards I've gotten are pilot/IP.  Those mean more to me than any CGO strat/award fruitified by volunteering at the CGOC bullets.  

What type of strat you get has nothing to do with actual performance in that particular area and everything to do with what tier of stratification you end up getting. I once got 11/269 IPs in my OG. Was I actually the #11 IP? No phucking way! Stratification within your rank is first tier, CGO/FGO/year group/duty position are all inferior strats. #1/50 Capts is better than #1/100 CGOs (unless you're getting this as a Lt) and better than #1/100 IPs


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Duck]

Stratification within your rank is first tier, CGO/FGO/year group/duty position are all inferior strats. #1/50 Capts is better than #1/100 CGOs (unless you're getting this as a Lt) and better than #1/100 IPs

Not to get into this argument again, but not all SRs agree with that. My base doesn't even give out strats based on rank (#1 Capt, Maj, etc) but only CGO, FGO, job strats (ADO, Flt/CC) and finally IP strats.


Sent from my iPhone using Baseops Network Forums

[GKinnear]

7 hours ago, ihtfp06 said:

Stratification within your rank is first tier, CGO/FGO/year group/duty position are all inferior strats. #1/50 Capts is better than #1/100 CGOs (unless you're getting this as a Lt) and better than #1/100 IPs

1 hour ago, Duck said:

Not to get into this argument again, but not all SRs agree with that. My base doesn't even give out strats based on rank (#1 Capt, Maj, etc) but only CGO, FGO, job strats (ADO, Flt/CC) and finally IP strats.
 

 

You're both right and wrong...it depends.

I've seen Sq/OG/Wg strats of all flavors that were far removed from reality and had given the officer in question a incorrect sense of accomplishment.

The other side of the coin is the #1 CGO (out of several hundred) was a Group Weapon Officer, who also locked up the #1 IP strat at the OG, and held them both for quite awhile.

You could argue that both #1's going to the same person is unfair, or that it accurately reflected his shred out when compared to his peers.

IMO, the problem with the strat process, in the AF as a whole, is a lack of transparency. I'm not saying its nefarious as Commander's schedules are busy and they might not always have the ability to speak to officers on why Capt Snuffy got X and you got Y strats. If you have questions, make the effort to make an appointment and ask the boss. Strive for the honest feedback and put yourself in his shoes and do an honest comparison against your peers. Ask questions from that point of view. Find out what factors (both subjective and objective) are important to your boss, your boss's boss, etc and how you improve. 

 

 

[Air V]

Which strat does Delta care about?

[BFM this]

34 minutes ago, Air V said:

Which strat does Delta care about?

My #1/25 pick for DD214

[dream big]

1 hour ago, Air V said:

Which strat does Delta care about?

Funny enough they look at OPRs for interviews...although I'm pretty sure it's to make sure there are no negative indicators