What's wrong with the Air Force?

[FLEA]

1 hour ago, LookieRookie said:

The crew members didn’t have adequate rest. It was not legal.

From what I've heard, they had 12 hours with 8 hours opportunity to sleep. That's totally legal. 

[FLEA]

6 minutes ago, FourFans130 said:

In my civil life, I operate a plane that will land itself in bad weather.  Why on earth is weather even a discussion topic in military aviation at this point?  It should be motherhood that in a briefing would sound like: "we'll autoland if needed, standard, next?"

I know.  I know.  I also fly basic female dog airplanes in the reserve... 

I'm just saying, Lemay would be very sad at the state of how our military leverages tech right now...rightly so...

Largely because we're still flying with avionics manufactured in the cold war probably. 

[StoleIt]

36 minutes ago, FourFans130 said:

In my civil life, I operate a plane that will land itself in bad weather.  Why on earth is weather even a discussion topic in military aviation at this point?  It should be motherhood that in a briefing would sound like: "we'll autoland if needed, standard, next?"

How many non-civ military only fields even have a CATIII approach? Andrews is the only one I can think of.

[ThreeHoler]

Ramstein. But you don’t always need a Cat III approach to autoland.


Sent from my iPhone using Baseops Network mobile app

[Stoker]

8 hours ago, FourFans130 said:

In my civil life, I operate a plane that will land itself in bad weather.  Why on earth is weather even a discussion topic in military aviation at this point?  It should be motherhood that in a briefing would sound like: "we'll autoland if needed, standard, next?"

I know.  I know.  I also fly basic female dog airplanes in the reserve... 

I'm just saying, Lemay would be very sad at the state of how our military leverages tech right now...rightly so...

This isn't exactly news, look up the air mail scandal for an early example of military aviation lagging behind civilian when it comes to flying in weather. 

[CaptainMorgan]

If dude was already an IP, he's probably good on PIC hours. And then, what, FEB a guy because he made a safety of flight call the CC didn't like, despite an otherwise unblemished flying record?
1. The board would laugh and reinstate the pilot immediately.
2. Everyone in his chain would get embarrassed and look like jackasses.
3. The CC would lose all trust and credibility with his instructor corps over such a pointless and petty decision to pull the qual.
4. It'd make a great story at an airline/guard unit interview about being committed to safety in a toxic flying culture. Active duty is notorious for that BS and I assure you being a yes-man PIC is NOT seen as an attractive quality on the outside.

I totally agree with the AWACS crews’ decisions. Your suggestion that he revert to being an FP is what could cause an FEB. I don’t know of anyone who has voluntarily regressed in qualification. The one or two that I know who were Commander Directed downgraded in quals were expected to requal to IP. Failure to upgrade can lead to an FEB.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[HeloDude]

6 hours ago, joe1234 said:

1. The board would laugh and reinstate the pilot immediately.

A board can’t reinstate, take away wings, etc.  The board merely makes recommendations and the MAJCOM CC (or delegated authority) has the call.  Off the top of my head I’m aware of two instances where the board recommended one action and the final authority did the opposite—in these two cases I’m referring to, one board recommended keep their wings and one didn’t.

I’m fortunately not an AMC guy, where I have heard stories of guys getting Q3’d for minor issues/things mostly beyond their control, but I have seen some serious buffoonery and just overall weak flying abilities not met with adequate consequences (ie some sort of Q3).  I’ve been a school house IP a couple times and have seen studs only receive a downgrade on an eval for something clearly outside the realm of Q1 criteria…this has more so been evident over the last few years vs 10-15 years ago.  
 

To the discussion above regarding the E-3 debacle a few months ago, I’m all for an AC saying the risk factors don’t justify the mission, but this should never be met with “whatever you say, it’s your call”/no repercussions, regardless of the situation.  If you’re an AC and you refuse to fly (first off, you’re probably better to QC your decision with some other/older experienced guys/gals if you can), then that decision should always be reviewed by leadership afterwards…and if you made a solid call, then I’m fairly confident any “decent” leadership will back you up and there’s no repercussions.  But if someone is canceling just because they don’t want to deal with some extra work or challenges (ie they might have to divert on a local training sortie) then those decisions need to be met with some conversations/possible adverse actions. I’ve been sitting ops sup and kindly tried to “understand” why guys didn’t want to go fly and I always said you have the final call but I’ll have to report it to the DO, etc…funny how if I started questioning why they didn’t want to fly (because I and others wouldn’t have canceled) most guys would decide to go.  

[tac airlifter]

1 hour ago, joe1234 said:

 

Not surprising...most active duty pilots live in constant fear for their careers, and thus are easily intimidated. Which I always thought was kinda sad. Oh well.. sucks to suck.

That has certainly not been my experience or observation in AFSOC.  Is that a mobility thing?

[SocialD]

I've cancelled a few times when wx was technically legal to fly, both as the Flight Lead and the OPS SUP said go, and as the OPS SUP when the Flight leads were willing to go.  There have been plenty of times where it's much more prudent to not fly that day.  Realize you may have to do some explaining, but I've never once been threatened with loss of quals.  Even if I had, it wouldn't have changed my mind, especially for a daily CT line....lol make me a wingman only (twoop!).  If you said you'd have to "report it to the DO," I'd say sure thing, let's walk down there right now....hell, get the SQ/CC and OG if you want, I don't really care.  Once you've been a FL/AC/OPS SUP for a while, you start to learn what really matters and what doesn't.  I'm all for going out and getting some good experience/lessons learned, but there are plenty of times where, even if the weather is technically legal, the gain does not outweigh the loss/potential risk.  It gets even easier when you have the option to cancel and go fly that mission in a sim.

[HeloDude]

8 hours ago, joe1234 said:

Not surprising...most active duty pilots live in constant fear for their careers, and thus are easily intimidated. Which I always thought was kinda sad. Oh well.. sucks to suck.

How dare someone have to explain their decision why they can’t do their job when others (trained exactly the same way) can.  Accountability is so tough these days…kind of sad.  Sucks to suck  I guess.

 

[HeloDude]

2 hours ago, SocialD said:

I've cancelled a few times when wx was technically legal to fly, both as the Flight Lead and the OPS SUP said go, and as the OPS SUP when the Flight leads were willing to go.  There have been plenty of times where it's much more prudent to not fly that day.  Realize you may have to do some explaining, but I've never once been threatened with loss of quals.  Even if I had, it wouldn't have changed my mind, especially for a daily CT line....lol make me a wingman only (twoop!).  If you said you'd have to "report it to the DO," I'd say sure thing, let's walk down there right now....hell, get the SQ/CC and OG if you want, I don't really care.  Once you've been a FL/AC/OPS SUP for a while, you start to learn what really matters and what doesn't.  I'm all for going out and getting some good experience/lessons learned, but there are plenty of times where, even if the weather is technically legal, the gain does not outweigh the loss/potential risk.  It gets even easier when you have the option to cancel and go fly that mission in a sim.

Sounds like you weren’t canceling when the vast majority others would have flown.  If you’re confident in explaining your decision to the bosses, then most likely they’ll back up your decision.  It’s those who won’t…and we all know who those people are.

[disgruntledemployee]

Danger41 says this was deployed.  SEFE dude is sandbagging, in his opinion.  And based on the story shared, I agree; Wx above legal mins and solid alternate.  All the facts and excuses aside, I would remove the crew, that was assigned to perform a tasked mission in support of combat operations, and call in the Bravo crew.  I would then put that sandbagging crew on duty desk for the next umpteen days to weeks.  We need crews that can perform ATO, ORM'd missions.  That crew would likely have a sitdown with themselves and express some feelings to each other.  Also, the other crews picking up the slack would eventually know.  Would they side with the AC or tell them to sack up and do their job?  I've seen similar and problem crews got the jist.  I've also seen a SEFE do stupid downgrades and been told that they keep that shit up, they won't be doing the job anymore.

That is all, out.

[Danger41]

Interesting takes and just saw all this. The most interesting part to me is the implication that asking guys to do their job is some active duty shit that the guard wouldn’t tolerate and it’s all about airline PIC time. Uhh…I’ve been in a TFI unit (fighter) and ANG dudes are absolutely not like that. I’ve seen those dudes fly in weather that AD guys would cancel 99/100 times. And canceling an airline flight because you don’t feel like it with no extenuating circumstances besides your gut when you’re legal to go? Good luck with that.

[Standby]

1 hour ago, Danger41 said:

Interesting takes and just saw all this. The most interesting part to me is the implication that asking guys to do their job is some active duty shit that the guard wouldn’t tolerate and it’s all about airline PIC time. Uhh…I’ve been in a TFI unit (fighter) and ANG dudes are absolutely not like that. I’ve seen those dudes fly in weather that AD guys would cancel 99/100 times. And canceling an airline flight because you don’t feel like it with no extenuating circumstances besides your gut when you’re legal to go? Good luck with that.

I sat the position you sat in. For some reason, I needed to have a come to Jesus moment with a bunch of young ACs and CPs. They didn’t understand that being tired wasn’t a reason to not step. I asked them if the ground force and the helicopter guys that were literally AWAKE for almost 3 days straight, hopped up on an insane amount of dex, and coming back from every flight with LOTS of bullet holes in their aircraft would be OK without the air support they were authorized…and very much needed. Lots of light bulbs came on. Absolutely one of the most disappointing points in my career…listening to some SNAPs complain about getting to do a no-shitter mission with lives literally counting on their pilotage and having to “motivate” them to just get it done. 

Edited November 7, 2021 by Standby

[ThreeHoler]

I once added 50 random points to the tanker ORM sheet because it was impossible to score over a moderate. We had been jacked around the clock for two weeks so the scheduler could “optimize # of missions so everyone got the same # of air medals” (circadian rhythm be damned).

The “ADO” lost his shit. I calmly told him I had every intent to fly but that we were so far in the sleep red that we needed risk awareness and acceptance at the Sq/CC level.

We flew. And the sq stopped scheduling that way the next day, putting most everyone back onto consistent (for sleep patterns) lines.


Sent from my iPhone using Baseops Network mobile app

[Sua Sponte]

https://taskandpurpose.com/news/air-force-col-donovan-tinker-relieved/

[Guardian]

Why the delay?

[FLEA]

2 hours ago, Guardian said:

Why the delay?

I don't think the investigation completed until late last week. In the conclussions the investigation substantiated two instances tied to toxic command climate and undermining a culture of flight safety.

Some interesting rumors though that Wg/CC might be next for not acting aggressively enough to fix the mess. (Perhaps that's what you meant) 

Edited November 10, 2021 by FLEA

[bfargin]

So now we're mad that senior leaders went through a process to determine cause or not? I'm happy to hear that it sounds like he got a fair hearing/process. Yeah I know he appeared to blame crews for inappropriate scheduling, but I'd rather see a slight delay than a knee jerk immediate firing without seeing the whole picture. And before anyone gives me grief, know that usually a quick no-thought reaction produces the best long term results.💩

Edited November 10, 2021 by bfargin

[Bode]

Why the delay?

To investigate? Maybe? Actually do something the right way?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[guineapigfury]

1 hour ago, Bode said:

To investigate? Maybe? Actually do something the right way?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

This is the correct answer.  I was the investigating officer for a CDI for something MUCH less of a big deal than this and it took me about 3 weeks to get the investigating training, do the investigating, transcribe the interviews, write up the report, submit it to legal for review, wait for that review, then finally turn it in.  Whoever gets the report is going to want time to review and make a decision.  If this case did a CDI, they'd have about 10 times as many witnesses as I interviewed.  Assuming the higher-ups wanted to wait for a report, especially if there are conflicting reports of what was said, this timeline seems within normal bounds. 

[FLEA]

1 hour ago, bfargin said:

So now we're mad that senior leaders went through a process to determine cause or not? I'm happy to hear that it sounds like he got a fair hearing/process. Yeah I know he appeared to blame crews for inappropriate scheduling, but I'd rather see a slight delay than a knee jerk immediate firing without seeing the whole picture. And before anyone gives me grief, know that usually a quick no-thought reaction produces the best long term results.💩

No, it probably has more to do with the Wing Commanders comments that inferred his subordinates didn't even understand what a toxic command climate was. He defended the Gp/CC pretty heavily early on. In reality, he probably should have just kept his mouth shut and said "I'm going to have an investigation look into this and we'll see what comes of it." Instead he perpetuated this idea that there is a "good ol boys club" that defends the senior echelons  of  leadership and doesn't hold them accountable by downplaying their transgressions. 

Edited November 10, 2021 by FLEA

[HeloDude]

11 hours ago, FLEA said:

No, it probably has more to do with the Wing Commanders comments that inferred his subordinates didn't even understand what a toxic command climate was. He defended the Gp/CC pretty heavily early on. In reality, he probably should have just kept his mouth shut and said "I'm going to have an investigation look into this and we'll see what comes of it." Instead he perpetuated this idea that there is a "good ol boys club" that defends the senior echelons  of  leadership and doesn't hold them accountable by downplaying their transgressions. 

Exactly—so when is he getting the boot?  If he sticks around then I don’t believe much will change.  He’s sorry his bosses are upset, not because he believes what he and his team did was wrong.

[Blue]

 

 

[kaputt]

 

Who knew?