CSAR to AFSOC? What do the customers think?

[ClearedHot]

MV-22 is NOT a CV-22, not even close.

[Guest]

MV-22 is NOT a CV-22, not even close.

The Wikipedia does not provide much info. Would you mind providing a quick rundown of the differences?

[SurelySerious]

7 hours ago, ihtfp06 said:

The Wikipedia does not provide much info. Would you mind providing a quick rundown of the differences?

It sounds like he’s referring to the electronic systems differences, which may have a more appropriate forum elsewhere. 

[congressman]

On ‎10‎/‎13‎/‎2017 at 12:03 PM, matmacwc said:

You need to leave DC for a week or two.......

 

On ‎10‎/‎13‎/‎2017 at 12:56 PM, BashiChuni said:

And bring a few of your hot interns....

Roger that and yup

[stract]

Like busdriver said, if the move to AFSOC is going to make sense, it needs to be all-in instead of halvsies like last time.  I too have sat alert for SOF missions, in multiple theaters.  And I was in Pakistan in 06 when we got a call on the satphone to take off our AFSOC patches...

[Bigred]

Thread revival.

Did this transfer of authority happen?

[McJay Pilot]

Nope... the rumors have once again died. They should start again in around 36 months or so though based on past trends.

[uhhello]

PJs are gone

[DirkDiggler]

Out of last AF Corona, CSAF says it’s the right move but “nows not the right time”.  No future timeline for integration given that I’m aware of.

[Danger41]

I don’t think CSAR should go to AFSOC simply for the fact that if they came over, I can see CJSOAC’s and other SOF entities hijacking them to do more of an assault role and not protect their rescue role.

[stract]

47 minutes ago, Danger41 said:

I don’t think CSAR should go to AFSOC simply for the fact that if they came over, I can see CJSOAC’s and other SOF entities hijacking them to do more of an assault role and not protect their rescue role.

We were in AFSOC before.  Sort of.  The reason we left was because of the CSAR-X shit hook debacle, essentially Gen Brown tried to hijack us and drive the selection to the shit hook.  COMACC saw the writing on the wall and yanked us back to ACC.

But, the 55 SOS existed in AFSOC ok.

[MooseClub]

2 hours ago, Danger41 said:

I don’t think CSAR should go to AFSOC simply for the fact that if they came over, I can see CJSOAC’s and other SOF entities hijacking them to do more of an assault role and not protect their rescue role.

^bingo

exactly what would happen.

[Bigred]

8 hours ago, Danger41 said:

I don’t think CSAR should go to AFSOC simply for the fact that if they came over, I can see CJSOAC’s and other SOF entities hijacking them to do more of an assault role and not protect their rescue role.

I doubt it. SOCOM still has a doctrinal requirement to provide PR for their people. Also, those dudes are super picky on who they ride on downrange, to the point of being prima donnas about it.

[Breckey]

PR for their people, not everybody else in the AOR.

[busdriver]

9 hours ago, stract said:

We were in AFSOC before.  Sort of.  The reason we left was because of the CSAR-X shit hook debacle, essentially Gen Brown tried to hijack us and drive the selection to the shit hook.  COMACC saw the writing on the wall and yanked us back to ACC.

Sort of.  Moseley wanted Rescue back in ACC from the get go.  I'm not sure what straw was, but he was looking for a reason the moment he became the Chief.

I also haven't heard any actual first hand info about Brown influencing the selection, just heard the rumors.

[McJay Pilot]

22 minutes ago, Breckey said:

PR for their people, not everybody else in the AOR.

Wow... low opinion of AFSOC huh? 

[busdriver]

29 minutes ago, McJay Pilot said:

Wow... low opinion of AFSOC huh? 

It's doctrine.  Each component is responsible for their own PR requirements.

[Bigred]

2 hours ago, McJay Pilot said:

Wow... low opinion of AFSOC huh? 

 

2 hours ago, busdriver said:

It's doctrine.  Each component is responsible for their own PR requirements.

 

Which is why I still get a kick out of how big of a shit show the whole Erbil thing ended up being. There were some people supremely pissed off that the Navy was successful in eating out of someone else's ricebowl.

Edited November 18, 2018 by Bigred

[Best-22]

22 minutes ago, Bigred said:

 

 

Which is why I still get a kick out of how big of a shit show the whole Erbil thing ended up being. There were some people supremely pissed off that the Navy was successful in eating out of someone else's ricebowl.

What happened at Erbil? Are you talking about the MC-12 thing? 

[Bigred]

42 minutes ago, Best-22 said:

What happened at Erbil? Are you talking about the MC-12 thing? 

Yes. There were some significant C2 issues due in part to the doctrinal requirements for who provides PR to who.

[Breckey]

It also went back to who had launch and execute authority for that ALR. Being the Navy, they saw a shot, there was no danger, so they took it. The end result was that Jack was saved. Everything after that is a dick measuring contest.

[slackline]

PR for their people, not everybody else in the AOR.

Talk to anyone in AFSOC, they have no issues picking anyone up. I'm talking anyone intelligent from O-3s to O-6s who say they will drop what they're doing to go pick up Jack. Talk with anyone at staff and they get offended by the idea that they wouldn't make the pick up.

Designated forces could just as easily cover the role as dedicated. CH nailed it when he talked about Stockholm Syndrome. If we're talking about what is best for the mission/USAF IPs, then Rescue belongs in AFSOC. Does it mean we lose some CRH? Yup, but it is an underpowered, undersized, too slow platform anyway. Don't be territorial.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[BashiChuni]

10 hours ago, Breckey said:

It also went back to who had launch and execute authority for that ALR. Being the Navy, they saw a shot, there was no danger, so they took it. The end result was that Jack was saved. Everything after that is a dick measuring contest.

to be clear jack was "saved" because he landed on the good side of the river. nothing more or less. certainly not because the navy took their "shot"

 

12 minutes ago, slackline said:

Talk to anyone in AFSOC, they have no issues picking anyone up. I'm talking anyone intelligent from O-3s to O-6s who say they will drop what they're doing to go pick up Jack. Talk with anyone at staff and they get offended by the idea that they wouldn't make the pick up.

 

^^^this

[norskman]

46 minutes ago, slackline said:

Talk to anyone in AFSOC, they have no issues picking anyone up. I'm talking anyone intelligent from O-3s to O-6s who say they will drop what they're doing to go pick up Jack. Talk with anyone at staff and they get offended by the idea that they wouldn't make the pick up.

Designated forces could just as easily cover the role as dedicated. CH nailed it when he talked about Stockholm Syndrome. If we're talking about what is best for the mission/USAF IPs, then Rescue belongs in AFSOC. Does it mean we lose some CRH? Yup, but it is an underpowered, undersized, too slow platform anyway. Don't be territorial.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Nailed it.

 

this post needs to be printed and posted at the step desk at every HH-60G squadron.... 

I just laugh when dudes talk about expanding mission sets with the W. I don't think a lot of -60 drivers actually realize that we are actually initially losing  capabilities with the first block..... blah blah oh yeah, Stockholm Syndrome.

Edited November 19, 2018 by norskman

[Bigred]

4 hours ago, BashiChuni said:

to be clear jack was "saved" because he landed on the good side of the river. nothing more or less. certainly not because the navy took their "shot"

 

Man, you should've heard some of the arguments of my Navy bros on this very thing. The dudes shouting "First actual CSAR since Vietnam" couldn't really explain why/how it was so dangerous when some dude in an ice cream truck parked on the side of the road was live streaming the pickup on Youtube.