What's wrong with the Air Force?

[dream big]

On 10/26/2022 at 7:48 AM, SocialD said:

AF:  Here is your issued Boonie hat.  You have to bring it because it's on the mandatory packing list.

 

Also AF (in country):  You can not wear that Boonie hat...here is the memo stating so.  

 

True story.  

 

DOD:  No PT gear in your deployed location, just duty uniforms or civies...don't even bring PT gear.

 

*Guard unit gets moved to new location in AOR to stand up AOG, things are going great...then AD shows up*

 

AD Chief:  why are your people in civies and not AF PT gear?  AFI blah blah blah says duty uniform or pt gear...no civies.

 

Also true story.  

Please tell me the guard leadership told said AD Zebra Douche to pound sand?

[tac airlifter]

On 10/26/2022 at 11:00 AM, ATIS said:

Early days of DRACO ('06-'07)...Type 2 for sure.  Saw that start to switch over ~2008.

ATIS

DRACO definitely had many type 2 commanders.  Great Americans; the plank holders built a mission focused culture, so well done.  You’d be crazy proud of how the younger teammates made it better.  

[HuggyU2]

26 minutes ago, tac airlifter said:

DRACO definitely had many type 2 commanders.  Great Americans; the plank holders built a mission focused culture, so well done.  You’d be crazy proud of how the younger teammates made it better.  

In complete contrast, the MC-12 program was a shit show. I'd pay a king's ransom to have that year of my life back. 

Edited October 28, 2022 by HuggyU2

[ClearedHot]

On 10/26/2022 at 10:00 AM, ATIS said:

Early days of DRACO ('06-'07)...Type 2 for sure.  Saw that start to switch over ~2008.

ATIS

Things changed when they declared themselves SEALs of the sky...

[viper154]

On 10/26/2022 at 11:00 AM, ATIS said:

Early days of DRACO ('06-'07)...Type 2 for sure.  Saw that start to switch over ~2008.

ATIS

Must have been nice. Draco has gone full opposite from that, and honestly most of AFSOC for that matter. 

[SocialD]

14 hours ago, dream big said:

Please tell me the guard leadership told said AD Zebra Douche to pound sand?

 

 

The response was pretty much, "get over it dude, we didn't bring any issued PT gear with us."  Now lets move on to real issues that are actually important, like half the force having the shits because the shitters are leaking into the water that is used to wash/cook our food...  

They also tried to take our rooftop "fanta drink 🥃" and cigar hide out.  MFers....just point the radar dishes the other way! 😂  I think it was Rainman that said war is only fun for the first year.  In our case, it was only fun for about 3 weeks...

[ClearedHot]

Down vote bro...lol?  Come on you know that shit was funny. 

BTW my community has had its share of people like that guy.

For the record, I have mad respect for the DRACO community.  Many of those plank holders are close friends.  I am well aware of the sacrifices they made and the quality of leadership that stood up that program.   Also, getting them in the WIC was one of the best things we ever did (I fought hard for it).  It is awesome to see the all the DRACOs spreading into leadership positions and having so much an impact in the community.

 

[nsplayr]

7 hours ago, viper154 said:

Must have been nice. Draco has gone full opposite from that, and honestly most of AFSOC for that matter. 

I’m surprised to hear that. I’m good friends with 2 of the 4 sitting ops squadron commanders and they are fantastic dudes. I guess YMMV and I’m not there anymore myself, so perhaps things change…

[viper154]

11 minutes ago, nsplayr said:

I’m surprised to hear that. I’m good friends with 2 of the 4 sitting ops squadron commanders and they are fantastic dudes. I guess YMMV and I’m not there anymore myself, so perhaps things change…

With some of the recent change of commands things are expected to and seem to be improving. 

[ClearedHot]

[Sua Sponte]

At this point, I think PA is intentionally doing that to confuse our adversaries.

[Swizzle]

2 hours ago, Sua Sponte said:

At this point, I think PA is intentionally doing that to confuse our adversaries.

Very gracious of you for the benefit of the doubt. 

[disgruntledemployee]

Maybe its a him/she/sher/theyz sorta identity thing.  Planes have feelings too.

[HuggyU2]

Revisiting the AF Mortuary Affairs emblem debacle of a few years ago...

It appears they didn't go with the draft that had the F-16 silhouettes replacing the Flankers.  They simply got rid of all airplanes on the emblem. 

[Scooter14]

Revisiting the AF Mortuary Affairs emblem debacle of a few years ago...
It appears they didn't go with the draft that had the F-16 silhouettes replacing the Flankers.  They simply got rid of all airplanes on the emblem. 

I might be wrong, but I don’t think you’re supposed to have a specific aircraft type on any sort of organizational insignia.

I don’t know why, maybe if your unit goes into conversion or starts flying a different airplane… I don’t know but, I do remember that as being a thing.

Maybe the patch Nazis at the heritage center called them out on their F-16s after the aviation community called them out on their SU 27s?


Sent from my iPhone using Baseops Network Forums

[filthy_liar]

On 10/26/2022 at 2:07 PM, StoleIt said:

E-9 Stories?

My opinion, which is going to be surprise surprise highly unpopular - is that we should not have E-9s or E-8s in the Air Force.  In the AF officers do the fighting.  Sure, there are some exceptions but by and large the officers (aircrew) are what the exord is providing to meet the wartime requirement.  

So we need support to meet the demands of the aircrew, just like infantry needs support.  But the difference is, in the AF, the infantry is all officers (exceptions noted).  So unlike the Army, we don't need high ranking enlisted to support the requirement (aircrew).  In the Army and Marines, you have a boatload of enlisted in the fight.  Actually fighting.  So it makes sense that you have high ranking enlisted guiding those troops.  Not so in the AF.  I flew in combat and called in a few airstrikes on the ground in the AF while supporting Armies, and I never once, in any of those situations, needed an E-8/9 who had not only not done what I did and the Armies were doing, but didn't even understand it.

I think this is why we have the Leadership in the Deid thread.  AF officers just accept that we are just like every other branch and need some senior Es to look like the other services.  In my experience that has gone horribly wrong.  On the ground side if you ever wanted to ID someone who was not in the fight and therefore more concerned about reflective belts and other nonsense, you just pointed to an E8/9.  Same was true in garrison.  My anecdotal experience.  I've had an awful lot of non aircrew officers disagree with me on this and maintain that MSgt/CMSgts are gold. 

[FLEA]

30 minutes ago, filthy_liar said:

My opinion, which is going to be surprise surprise highly unpopular - is that we should not have E-9s or E-8s in the Air Force.  In the AF officers do the fighting.  Sure, there are some exceptions but by and large the officers (aircrew) are what the exord is providing to meet the wartime requirement.  

So we need support to meet the demands of the aircrew, just like infantry needs support.  But the difference is, in the AF, the infantry is all officers (exceptions noted).  So unlike the Army, we don't need high ranking enlisted to support the requirement (aircrew).  In the Army and Marines, you have a boatload of enlisted in the fight.  Actually fighting.  So it makes sense that you have high ranking enlisted guiding those troops.  Not so in the AF.  I flew in combat and called in a few airstrikes on the ground in the AF while supporting Armies, and I never once, in any of those situations, needed an E-8/9 who had not only not done what I did and the Armies were doing, but didn't even understand it.

I think this is why we have the Leadership in the Deid thread.  AF officers just accept that we are just like every other branch and need some senior Es to look like the other services.  In my experience that has gone horribly wrong.  On the ground side if you ever wanted to ID someone who was not in the fight and therefore more concerned about reflective belts and other nonsense, you just pointed to an E8/9.  Same was true in garrison.  My anecdotal experience.  I've had an awful lot of non aircrew officers disagree with me on this and maintain that MSgt/CMSgts are gold. 

I spoke at an ROTC career night recently. I got dropped jaws from the cadre when I told the cadets that I would never recommend a 2Lt "just trust" their SNCO's. I know SOOOOOO many Lt's that got burned because they "trusted the SNCO's." That advice is given under the pretense that you are going to put a Lt in an organization that is baseline successful and not dysfunctional. I know a 1Lt 13M who was given a flight command in a flight that was in a separate facility from the rest of the squadron and completely lacked discipline and decorum. Her flight chief convinced her it was "ok, that it "wasn't a training environment anymore" and things didn't have to be "exact." Not how her commander felt when they failed a surprise SAV for multiple safety related violations. She was fired and issued discipline for dereliction. No one cared that her E-8 or whatever mentored her to do that. 

Edited January 26, 2023 by FLEA

[filthy_liar]

Yea, you brought up a lot of good points there. My ex was personnel/services.  Her perspective on senior NCOs is 180 from mine.  Unlike me she was dropped into some kind of an enormous flight as a 2lLt.  And her first sq command as a major was at Kunsan where they dealt with all kinds of crap that I didn't have to deal with when I sat in the seat.  But even then after the earloads of here's what happened today, it was always "My chief advised me to do this." And when I got in the seat I figured - this isn't that hard, here's what we're going to do.  I didn't need a chief or a SMSgt.  Didn't need any sergeant.

In case I don't log in tomorrow, I've been murdered by ProSuper.

[FLEA]

26 minutes ago, filthy_liar said:

Yea, you brought up a lot of good points there. My ex was personnel/services.  Her perspective on senior NCOs is 180 from mine.  Unlike me she was dropped into some kind of an enormous flight as a 2lLt.  And her first sq command as a major was at Kunsan where they dealt with all kinds of crap that I didn't have to deal with when I sat in the seat.  But even then after the earloads of here's what happened today, it was always "My chief advised me to do this." And when I got in the seat I figured - this isn't that hard, here's what we're going to do.  I didn't need a chief or a SMSgt.  Didn't need any sergeant.

In case I don't log in tomorrow, I've been murdered by ProSuper.

I'm confused was Prosuper your wife or your chief?

[filthy_liar]

He's the SNCO that will be the accused if I am murdered tomorrow.  I talked a lot of shit about SNCOs.  

[nsplayr]

Maybe you’ve just interacted with a lot of bad ones 🤷‍♂️

I’ve seen a few great ones, a lot of good ones, and some bad ones. Not unlike officers. YMMV.

I, like you, have never needed a SNCO to advise me on much as an aircrew member unless they are part of the crew (FE/Boom/Load/Sensor/etc.), but that changes quite a bit when/if you take Command or are otherwise in charge of a large group of enlisted airmen. In those cases I 100% want a great SNCO by my side.

My biggest WTF in this general area was the need for a First Shirt in an ops squadron that was  96.9% officers. Our only enlisted were CSS and ARMS. The shirt literally did nothing relevant AFAIK and any issues I had as an LT or Capt needed to be taken to my flt/cc, the DO or CC to be solved, not the random one-off MSgt with a triangle on his sleeve…

[filthy_liar]

13 minutes ago, nsplayr said:

I’ve seen a few great ones, a lot of good ones, and some bad ones. Not unlike officers. YMMV.

Fair one.  My moves did vary, but I acknowledge that in some circumstances E8s and 9s might be valuable.  But I'm under duress. The ProSuper thing.  He actually might kill me.  And that's another thing about SNCOs,,,

 

[dream big]

3 hours ago, filthy_liar said:

My opinion, which is going to be surprise surprise highly unpopular - is that we should not have E-9s or E-8s in the Air Force.  In the AF officers do the fighting.  Sure, there are some exceptions but by and large the officers (aircrew) are what the exord is providing to meet the wartime requirement.  

So we need support to meet the demands of the aircrew, just like infantry needs support.  But the difference is, in the AF, the infantry is all officers (exceptions noted).  So unlike the Army, we don't need high ranking enlisted to support the requirement (aircrew).  In the Army and Marines, you have a boatload of enlisted in the fight.  Actually fighting.  So it makes sense that you have high ranking enlisted guiding those troops.  Not so in the AF.  I flew in combat and called in a few airstrikes on the ground in the AF while supporting Armies, and I never once, in any of those situations, needed an E-8/9 who had not only not done what I did and the Armies were doing, but didn't even understand it.

I think this is why we have the Leadership in the Deid thread.  AF officers just accept that we are just like every other branch and need some senior Es to look like the other services.  In my experience that has gone horribly wrong.  On the ground side if you ever wanted to ID someone who was not in the fight and therefore more concerned about reflective belts and other nonsense, you just pointed to an E8/9.  Same was true in garrison.  My anecdotal experience.  I've had an awful lot of non aircrew officers disagree with me on this and maintain that MSgt/CMSgts are gold. 

I get your point but a good E-8 or E-9 can be worth their weight in gold if: the unit has a lot of enlisted personnel which most units above the squadron level and above do, the associated officer is not a giant pussy and utilizes them correctly, and the E-8 or E-9 is a good dude/gal that mentors and looks after the young people and doesn’t care about mustache length and ball caps.

[Bigred]

3 hours ago, filthy_liar said:

My opinion, which is going to be surprise surprise highly unpopular - is that we should not have E-9s or E-8s in the Air Force.  In the AF officers do the fighting.  Sure, there are some exceptions but by and large the officers (aircrew) are what the exord is providing to meet the wartime requirement.  

So we need support to meet the demands of the aircrew, just like infantry needs support.  But the difference is, in the AF, the infantry is all officers (exceptions noted).  So unlike the Army, we don't need high ranking enlisted to support the requirement (aircrew).  In the Army and Marines, you have a boatload of enlisted in the fight.  Actually fighting.  So it makes sense that you have high ranking enlisted guiding those troops.  Not so in the AF.  I flew in combat and called in a few airstrikes on the ground in the AF while supporting Armies, and I never once, in any of those situations, needed an E-8/9 who had not only not done what I did and the Armies were doing, but didn't even understand it.

I think this is why we have the Leadership in the Deid thread.  AF officers just accept that we are just like every other branch and need some senior Es to look like the other services.  In my experience that has gone horribly wrong.  On the ground side if you ever wanted to ID someone who was not in the fight and therefore more concerned about reflective belts and other nonsense, you just pointed to an E8/9.  Same was true in garrison.  My anecdotal experience.  I've had an awful lot of non aircrew officers disagree with me on this and maintain that MSgt/CMSgts are gold. 

I’m taking a swag and will assume you’ve been in ops squadrons most of your career?

In my whopping 3.5 years in the Air Force, I’ve gathered that ops squadrons tend to have minimal to virtually zero enlisted. There’s not much need for an E-8/9 when there may only be 4-5 E’s running around.

Contrast that with mx, force support, SF, and you have a ton of enlisted to few officers. The E-8/9 needs to be there 

Having run a maintenance department where I had ~200 enlisted working for me, a good SNCO was a godsend. E-8/9s definitely have a place. 

Edited January 26, 2023 by Bigred

[FLEA]

1 minute ago, Bigred said:

I’m taking a swag and will assume you’ve been in ops squadrons most of your career?

In my whopping 3.5 years in the Air Force, I’ve gathered that ops squadrons tend to have minimal to virtually zero enlisted. There’s not much need for an E-8/9 when there may only be 4-5 E’s running around.

Contrast that with mx, force support, SF, and you have a ton of enlisted to few officers. The E-8/9 needs to be there 

Having run a maintenance department where I had ~200 enlisted working for me, a good SNCO was a godsend. E-8/9s definitely have a place. 

Not all ops squadrons. AWACS squadrons for instance will be nearly half enlisted. MQ-9s are just shy of half. 

The big difference though is quality. Enlisted aircrew FOUGHT hard to get there because they disliked working on a flight line in 120 degree heat and love telling ladies at the local club that they're practically like pilots when they show their flight suit photos. So they usually work hard to not fuck it up although you still get your occasional special cases. 

This was something I needed a non flying officer to mentor me on when I went to an org and had a handful of non-flyers. Gave them way too much leash and often regretted it. 

To clarify my earlier remarks, telling ROTC cadets to not trust their SNCOs, ended the discussion by telling them to not blindly trust their SNCOs. Definitely get their advice and inputs but you know who else is charged with mentoring CGOs in official guidance? The squadron commander. When things don't pass the smell test, flight commanders shouldn't feel a pressure to not approach the squadron commander for inputs because they should "ask their SNCOs." Definitely ask them first, but as we say in aircrew, "trust but verify."