Lack of Flight Discipline

[HeloDude]

My only caveat to the whole argument over what do do after the fact was that it should be handled at the lowest level possible...

Agreed. Sq CC can give anything from a harsh warning to a CC directed Q-3.

...and I don't see taking someone's wings for a SLOJ when there was no actual mishap.

To play devil's advocate on this one--nothing in the FEB reg discusses anything about whether or not a mishap occurred. I know these are Navy birds--but both AC's (IP's) lost their wings for this incident.

[LJDRVR]

How is it unsafe? Because there's no reason to do it and the chances of fucking it up ware way too high. How about eight dead humans, and a destroyed Boeing 707-300, Beechcraft 1900 (A King Air!!) and a 65 model Sabreliner? All because of guys trying to imitate Tex Johnson/Bob Hoover 1G barrel rolls. You and I aren't test/demo pilots. Besides, it cost Tex his reputation and job.

How is it unsafe? Really? When you're the only guy in the jet/squadron who's advocating a particular idea and everybody else is screaming "Hell no!", you might want to take a look at your SA and reconsider.

Edited December 14, 2011 by LJDRVR

[Batman]

We have an Air Force that due to a lack a senior leadership and fatigue from 10+ years at war has lost it's heading. Our Chiefs of Staff and CMS of the AF for the past decade (or longer) have focussed on uniforms, mottos, new PT, war memorials, purple ops, and post-active duty gigs instead of leading young men and women in the calling of killing people, breaking stuff with honor and integrity. The lobbyists inside the Beltway have been courting our acquisition system and budgets (along with GOs) at the same rate as Congress. Therefore, we've lost our edge. Advanced, out-of-control weapon systems and their skyrocketing costs have placed our Airman on the endangered species act while our leaders have forgotten about the wars we've been fighting.

Our leadership has created this culture of Rent A Force from a once very professional, elite and respected service. Common sense and delegated authority are no where to be found. It we trusted our Airman with more responsibilities and listened to their opinions more, we would have more integrity and accountability. I had a MSgt sick and unable to take his WAPS testing...he went to Sickcall. His O-6 approved his absence from testing based upon the 1st Sgt phone call with info. The base testing center would not accept the O-6 letter authorizing him to retest without paperwork from the MEDGRP proving that he went to Sickcall.

All our leadership knows that our Airman are not right...suicides, murder/suicides, DUIIs, drinking incidents, child shaking deaths, divorce rates going up...all indicators of 10+ years at war and high ops tempo. Official AF position is that these indicators are not related to deployments...but rather "relationships". OK, call it what you want. We have more suicide prevention courses, training and PSAs but nobody wants to address the cause of them...long-term wars and ops tempos--yes, they both cause "relationship" problems too.

Our Airman have the 1,000 yard stare going. Decreasing our ops tempo and strong leadership emphasizing a return to common sense and delegated responsiblity will help. Dover mortuary fiasco, Barnum & Bailey MC-12 antics and now the Lackland "dumpt" picture all indicate an Air Force that has lost its focus.

[HeloDude]

Dover mortuary fiasco, Barnum & Bailey MC-12 antics and now the Lackland "dumpt" picture all indicate an Air Force that has lost its focus.

Putting us in our blues every Monday will fix all of this...oh wait...

[Carpetbagger]

My only caveat to the whole argument over what do do after the fact was that it should be handled at the lowest level possible and I don't see taking someone's wings for a SLOJ when there was no actual mishap.

Agree with you on the safety part and the lowest level part... However...

Taking someone's wings for a SLOJ may be EXACTLY what prevents a mishap. A LOT of folks have lost their wings and jobs (civilian) for making "honest" mistakes (i.e. landing at the wrong airport) that in and of themselves were not a breach of the "public trust" that accompanies flight discipline. As was stated by others, there are a LOT of dead people out there who are dead because of the second, third, fourth, etc. breaches of flight discipline by particular individuals. Not taking the appropriate action (there is room for objectivity here) the FIRST time SLOJ and breaches of flight discipline occur is EXACTLY what gets the leadership and any other responsible parties fired after the funerals ceremonies and investigations are completed.

A lot of occupations have "one really stupid mistake" clauses that bring about the termination of employment. All of us that have signed on the dotted line to fly these machines should know exactly where we stand and what will and will not be tolerated. I had a former commander show us a video detailing in his words, a specific pilot's "last flight in a military aircraft" for a "seemingly innocent" breach of flight discipline that didn't hurt anyone or anything. It was this person's first, and by default as they no longer fly military aircraft, only offense. There was absolutely no question in anyone's mind who attended that briefing where the boss stood on flight discipline and professionalism in the cockpit.

Edited December 14, 2011 by Carpetbagger

[Guest]

One question...

WWROD?

[nsplayr]

Agree with you on the safety part and the lowest level part... However...

I hear what you're saying and depending on the circumstances/unit/personalities involved it may come to taking the dude's wings to prevent further antics and to set the tone. However, in general, I'm not a fan of the "zero mistake Air Force" we're living in today where, had someone gotten a DUI after our Christmas Party, the SQ/CC would have been fired, even though he's deployed and had literally nothing to do with the party whatsoever other than saying "sounds good, be safe." Anyways, the good-ole "it depends" answer I think is often the best one, you're a leader because you're supposed to have judgement so hard and fast rules that absolutely never change under any circumstances should be few and far between IMHO.

[Chida]

If I owned a fleet of C-12's and I became aware that one of my pilots did a barrel roll in one of my C-12's, I would fire him. Just sayin'...

[Cap-10]

Violating the T.O. intentionally is never a good thing.

Having said that, the thing that bothers me is the lack of leadership in handling the situation after the fact. IMHO, an Air Force wide FCIF is rediculous!

Whatever happened to handling things at the lowest level? A former SQ/CC that I would follow to Tehran with a cold gun and BDU-33's once said "An NCO bandaid to the chin stops the bleeding better than a FW/CC tourniquet to the windpipe!"....let the SQ/CC's actually LEAD their squadrons.

To quote Gen Olds: "...but make sure they know the buck stops with you, that you'll shoulder the blame when things go wrong. Correct without revenge or anger"

Let the SQ/CC hammer their nuts, dish out he punishement (whatever it may be) and press!

Cap-10

[Carpetbagger]

However, in general, I'm not a fan of the "zero mistake Air Force" we're living in today where, had someone gotten a DUI after our Christmas Party, the SQ/CC would have been fired... Anyways, the good-ole "it depends" answer I think is often the best one, you're a leader because you're supposed to have judgement so hard and fast rules that absolutely never change under any circumstances should be few and far between IMHO.

Agreed. Well said.

Violating the T.O. intentionally is never a good thing.

Having said that, the thing that bothers me is the lack of leadership in handling the situation after the fact. IMHO, an Air Force wide FCIF is ridiculous!

To quote Gen Olds: "...but make sure they know the buck stops with you, that you'll shoulder the blame when things go wrong. Correct without revenge or anger"

Agree. It is the "intentional" part that should be hammered. Stupid mistakes happen, and accidents happen, but stupid accidents are often a result of poor leadership and accountability. Most folks don't aileron roll a non-aerobatic aircraft unintentionally. Spatial D is one thing, "hey, ya'll watch this" is another situation entirely. BLUF, it comes down to asking the right questions:

Poor leadership and accountability = what if I get caught, what will this do to my career, etc...

Good leadership and accountability = does this help the mission, does this save lives, does this set a good example of professionalism, etc...

I had an instructor one time tell me a story from his Vietnam days. The story involved a non-standard, combat situation and the conversation went like this:

Pilot: "Open up the NATOPS manual to page xx, and sit on it."

CP: "What?"

Pilot: "Look, we are in a bad spot here, and what I'm about to do isn't in the manual, but if this doesn't work out, I at least want the crash investigators to know that we referenced the book the best we could, and your seat cushion will probably be the only thing that survives the crash..."

Instructor to me: "Sometimes things happen that aren't in the book, and that is when you have to leverage your experience and judgement to get the job done, save lives, and bring your crew home."

Dumb, dangerous, or different. We've all be in situations where we have to push it up, think outside the box, and take some additional risks to save lives and get the mission done - and not everything is in the Dash-1 or NATOPS. That is why we've been entrusted with the job and rely on good judgement and experience to bridge the gaps. Taking those same risks when NOTHING is on the line but "showing off" is unacceptable.

Edited December 14, 2011 by Carpetbagger

[spaceman]

One question...

WWROD?

You mean the guy that flew his intelligence officer into combat, by himself, as a prank?

I kid; you mean Col/Gen Olds, not Lt/Cpt Olds

[addict]

If the whole pilot community is getting rumors of pilots doing wacky manuevers in the AOR (here on baseops) then a widely spread rumor-control message shouldn't offend you. If our peers are attempting this when they go on hiatus from our squadrons, then the cultural problem is targeted at where these pilots also came from before their AOR stint.

[Guest]

You mean the guy that flew his intelligence officer into combat, by himself, as a prank?

I kid; you mean Col/Gen Olds, not Lt/Cpt Olds

They're the same man. I mean Robin Olds.

[spaceman]

They're the same man. I mean Robin Olds.

I know what you mean... My point was even he did a bit of hot-dogging early in his career. But that was back then not now, which has been pretty much covered in this thread I guess!

[Seriously]

I know what you mean... My point was even he did a bit of hot-dogging early in his career. But that was back then not now, which has been pretty much covered in this thread I guess!

Back then has NOTHING to do whether or not his actions were appropriate. It definitely has something to do with the punishment he received. Had they treated him then like they would treat him now, he would have never become the greatest leader the Air Force has yet to see.

Indeed. Difference between "going along with" vs "recognizing reality." Plenty of things wrong w/ the AF today--rolling an MC-12 won't fix any of them, not even a little.

Perhaps you worded that wrong, but it makes you sound like someone who is a complete douche.

Nope. Said it how I meant it. Sorry you can't take the criticism.

[CJ-6A]

CJ-6A....imagine for a moment that you are the Sq/CC of these guys. (let's assume for the moment that what's currently being discussed is fact....because for all we know, it's rumor at best). Anyway...what action, if any, would you take? Would you Q-3 them? Would you feel compelled to let your Wg/CC know? Or would you give them a stern talking-to and put them on tomorrow's schedule?

I'll tell you what I wouldn't do... and I wouldn't let these guys' guts be spilt in front of everyone at the highest level. Especially, if the dudes in question were good guys with a great combat record. If they screwed up, I'd find out what the perspective was and deal with it internally. My point... don't blow it out of proportion, invest in good people... have their back, discipline and move on.

[soultrain]

I'll tell you what I wouldn't do... and I wouldn't let these guys' guts be spilt in front of everyone at the highest level. Especially, if the dudes in question were good guys with a great combat record. If they screwed up, I'd find out what the perspective was and deal with it internally. My point... don't blow it out of proportion, invest in good people... have their back, discipline and move on.

Copy...non-answer. I didn't ask what you wouldn't do...what would you do? Let's assume these were "good dudes", and this was a singular lapse of judgement. No harm, no foul? When you say "have their back, discipline, and move on"...what exactly do you mean by discipline? Q-3?

[contraildash]

Stop feeding the troll.

I second this. This thread has become asinine.

[Guest Buc]

I'll tell you what I wouldn't do... and I wouldn't let these guys' guts be spilt in front of everyone at the highest level. Especially, if the dudes in question were good guys with a great combat record. If they screwed up, I'd find out what the perspective was and deal with it internally. My point... don't blow it out of proportion, invest in good people... have their back, discipline and move on.

Everybody here is going off the assumption that their leadership chain had a say in the matter. From what I have heard, the incident was discovered by somebody outside of their direct chain and went VFR direct to a different leadership chain. It rocketed to levels well outside of the control of anybody directly involved, so the whole "Pull them into the DO's office" is absolutely moot.

[Napoleon_Tanerite]

I think you guys are focusing in too much on the MC-12 incident. You're all exactly right-- one barrel roll does not warrant an Air Force wide FCIF; however, it was most likely the "last straw" in a series of problems across several MAJCOMs, hence the AF wide FCIF. I'm sure the C-17 mishap and the T-38 flyover from last year played into it, as well as numerous other incidents that were less "high vis" but presented the appearance of a trend.

[Bergman]

...he would have never become the greatest leader the Air Force has yet to see.

Don't you think that's just a bit of hyperbole?

[xaarman]

. Besides, it cost Tex his reputation and job.

Completely unrelated, but it did neither. Skip to 1:16 for the fall out.

Edited December 16, 2011 by xaarman

[Guest CAVEMAN]

Everybody here is going off the assumption that their leadership chain had a say in the matter. From what I have heard, the incident was discovered by somebody outside of their direct chain and went VFR direct to a different leadership chain. It rocketed to levels well outside of the control of anybody directly involved, so the whole "Pull them into the DO's office" is absolutely moot.

Yeap; sounds about right but you know what good leadership should have done, they should have had their direct chain handle it without stepping on their freaking toes. Why should MAJCOM level leadership be getting involved in handing out punishment for sh!t like this? The whole thing is ed

[CJ-6A]

Completely unrelated, but it did neither. Skip to 1:16 for the fall out.

"No hazard what so ever" ... "Absoluetly non-hazardous" ... What was that noise? ....Sounded like a few heads exploding on this forum.

"We know that, you know that... Just don't do it anymore" - that sounds like the appropriate response.

[Prozac]

"No hazard what so ever" ... "Absoluetly non-hazardous" ... What was that noise? ....Sounded like a few heads exploding on this forum.

"We know that, you know that... Just don't do it anymore" - that sounds like the appropriate response.

Dude WTF? What's your background? Fighter? Heavy? I suppose you think there's no danger in taking a C-17 to 90 degrees of bank either. Guys are starting to break shit because they are choosing to do stupid things with Uncle Sam's airplanes. If this were an isolated incident, a swift kick in the nuts from the DO might be appropriate punishment. The fear is that this is just the latest in a string of incidents that reflects a systemic issue with aircrew attitudes. Leadership is right to be concerned. Maybe, just maybe, they'll snap out of their fascination with reflective belts and mottos and re-focus on the job we're supposed to be doing.

(edit: spelling)

Edited December 17, 2011 by Prozac