Taking back the AF

[Login Name]

i agree with the being an officer first but some of things you've said are completely ignorant. heaven forbid we give command jobs to somebody who's not a pilot. notice i say pilot b/c there'll never be a nav chief of staff and to my knowledge wg/cc. the af is an old boys network and being a pilot is the requirement to be king. look at the af senior leadership and how many aren't pilots...

so for the person that can't be a pilot there should be jobs for them in the af. i know a lot of people that have no desire to fly but love being in the af. they love their job and are good at it. so should we give their job to LSI or one of the other contractors simply b/c they don't wear wings? or how about taking away command positions from those people who never wanted to be a pilot just we can ensure a pilot who knows nothing about maintenance except how to read 781s can be a mxg or sq/cc? seems like a terrible idea to me and i'm glad the af has went away with it. not bc i'm mx and now have a shot at being a cc years from now but b/c we're having people that know the job be the commander.

oh, i'm a 2lt...for another 2 weeks...and i've had the same "command" positions as your buddy 1lt in the army...having 100 or so people in your flight is typical for mx. i'm still trying to figure out why you had mentioned that in your posting. was it b/c all the IPs in your friends unit are warrant officers? thats probably b/c officers dont fly too much in the army. you'll fly a lot until your capt then you're flying a desk for the most part. their aviators are warrant officers. so should the af have warrant officers so they can do allthe flying and the rated guys can fly desks? sounds like a bad idea to me.

i'm starting to ramble.

[USAF Pilot]

Amen Brother! To Chucks post.

We DO need warriors to become generals

(I'm rather new to this quoting process. It's still magic to me)

I haven't been around the AF for too long but it seems to me all the warriors are out fighting the war while the (what are we calling them now the shoe polishing kids?) are sitting at home padding their OPRs with volunteered for this and that, organized the xmas party for the wing, and was voted most popular by the overworked finance people for helping to implement DTS in x number of flying squadrons. Then when it comes time to move up us line kids don’t seem as exciting on paper (unless maybe you’re SOLLII, but then you’re not a line kid). They get promoted and send out emails asking why we haven't done our CBTs on South America yet.

The root cause is that there is next to NO focus on being technically proficient, or an expert! There is no one who has come to my squadron in the last 2 years saying "Fly me all the time, I want to learn as much as possible."

This seems to be a disturbing trend which appears to be true for the most part. When I walked in the door I did my darnedest to become mission ready as fast as possible despite the 'in processing system' which seemed to be set up to delay this process for as along as possible. Despite my best efforts it still took a month and a half. My understanding is that you are given 3 months to do this. Much to my dismay, I found out that most, as in at least half, of the new people coming in were actively trying to 'hide' or drag out becoming mission ready for as along as possible. WTF? Isn't there a war on? The same war that was on when they signed up? (Side Note: it did seem that a lot of these people were from the academy. I don't know if they were burned out or what...) I even sponsored a new incoming Lt that wouldn't return my phone calls for the longest time and when I finally got him on the phone...he hung up! Or how about the CP's who don't study on the road?

If these are the types of pilots, or rated guys, that are supposed to be running the AF, I have no problem with a MX guy, who brushes his teeth 3x's a day with AF blue mint, stepping up and leading the way.

I firmly believe that you must be a subject matter expert on your jet and the rules than govern it because you never know, as in the case with the medical worker that started this thread, when you will be tested.

As long as we're talking officership I'd like to add another gripe. B|tch up the chain. What waste of time and moral killer it is when people wine down to either a lower ranked officer or, worse yet, an enlisted person! What is that younger person supposed to do other then think that their leadership is a bunch of incompetent tards and that Capt Doe apparently has all the answers but hasn't been put in charge because 'the man' doesn't like'm?

I don't know if that made any since but if you see a problem take the initiative and try to fix it. If you can't do that a least ask questions until you understand why it is the way it is.

And finally

"I got screwed this last trip... 3 weeks at the Deid, no per-diem."

I think an AC might start to worry if suddenly his crew stopping whining. That would probably be followed by something bad like a mutiny. As I recall, it’s one of the original unabrdiged 11 commandants, "Thy Air Crew shalt b|tch about thine own perceived problems more then thoust shalt not”

Maybe CGO’s should run the show for a while?

[Login Name]

Originally posted by USAF Pilot:

Maybe CGO’s should run the show for a while?

no way, b/c then we get people like this...if you havent seen this email, give it time. it's a Lt at fe warren talking about the evils of alcohol...

"Nothing personal against all you drinkers out there, but alcohol use is logically unjustifiable. I’m “falling on my sword” on this one but I can’t remain silent any longer. No one can deny that alcohol causes suffering. What everyone needs to acknowledge is that the “good times” don’t nearly make up for that suffering. The costs outweigh the benefits. More human suffering comes out of a bottle than a gun. That’s a fact. If you don’t believe me, go to a group therapy session and see how many people are there because their dad shot someone versus how many are there because their dad was an alcoholic. Ask around a prison how many people are there because of alcohol. Ask the same question at a hospital emergency room or an abortion clinic. How many “date rapes” have happened under the influence? How many people have died in car accidents? How many crimes, including shootings, have involved alcohol? And I’m just talking about in our community. These are unnecessary casualties that fly in the face of Operational Risk Management.

They say you should “drink responsibly” so as to maintain self-control (I assume). But the biggest problem with alcohol consumption is that it degrades one’s ability to maintain self-control. It clouds judgment. To “drink responsibly” is literally an oxymoron that only serves as a legal disclaimer to protect alcohol producers from inevitable lawsuits. To quote a recent movie:

“Alcohol is a social lubricant. It makes men brave and women loose.” (Just Like Heaven, 2005)

That’s a recipe for date rape. This is the very scenario in a mandatory training video presented by the Air Force on Sexual Assault Awareness. The perpetrator’s modus operondi was to get his victim drunk first. After I watched that video with my co-workers, I asked the group, “Can anyone tell me what good comes from alcohol use that could possibly offset this much bad?” Everyone shook their heads and muttered “No.” We keep trying to address the symptoms of alcohol related problems but never the root cause: THE ALCOHOL.

I know some people say, “I don’t hurt anyone else.” But alcohol always hurts the user in one way or another. Just ask my friend whose dad died of alcohol poisoning. Or maybe they say, “It’s my choice.” But too often the choices of people under the influence of alcohol become consequences for others. Just ask the family of Airman First Class Brandy Lyn Fehr if the drunk driver that killed their daughter had the right to make that choice.

So, my plea to you is this: Kick the alcohol habit before it kicks you! You don’t need it in your life. I’ve lived my entire life without a drop of alcohol and I still have fun at social events. And I’ve never done anything I regretted the next day because I voluntarily handed my self-control over to a chemical the night before. You see, you can give away personal control but you can’t give away personal responsibility. So why not maintain control over the decisions and actions for which you alone will be held accountable? Finally, if you think you can’t live without a beer, think how you’ll be able to live with yourself if you kill someone driving home from your favorite brew pub. Is it really worth it? Operational Risk Management says no. Why walk close to the edge of the cliff? Just avoid it all together."

[USAF Pilot]

Wow two posts from me in one day!

By the way, did you write in the quote, "Originally posted by USAF Pilot" or did that happen because of some button you pressed?

Anyway, is your point that because alcohol, when abused by some people, is so bad that no one should be allowed to use it?

If so, does that mean that anything that causes suffering or harm to people is bad and such should not be allowed? How about doughnuts and fatty snack food? Since heart disease is the leading cause of death in women (in the U.S.), does that mean that they shouldn't be allowed to eat such things as to facilitate the onset of heart disease?

It's tough to know how much you can control people's lives. Is one person's life worth the price to pay so that the rest of the country can booze up? Would you be willing to give it all up so I can party it up? Or how about we take out an entire family? Or maybe take out an entire town like good Grand Forks pop 50,000?

check out

https://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/6089353/

[Guest scottaxelson]

Login Name

The flames that go with that email are almost better than the original email itself. Especially the one from Megan Ray.

[Guest thebronze]

Whoever wrote that alcohol email is a fukking tosser!

What a !

[Flare]

If anyone knows the name of the Lt who wrote that e-mail.....please PM me and let me know it......I'd like to talk to him!

[gimmeaplane]

I like the idea of the WO (always made sense to me). But, talking about staff officers, do we reallly have it wrong? When it comes to the staff jobs...let the experts do what they're experts at. Maintenance dudes probably know how to maintenance shit better than anybody else (and on down the line for Intel, Acq, personnel, passing out gym towels). Some cross-training experience should exist, and we do that. All those "experts" at the tops of the support career fields ultimately report to an operator (WG/CC, MAJCOM, etc.) who keeps the focus on the mission. That is generally what we do (operators at top do reality check).

MY POINT: Problems with leadership aren't what AFSC of airmen we promote, it's WHO we're promoting. Just cuz a dude has wings doesn't mean he's not a freak, geek, tool, and/or ass-kissing careerist. The future OG needs to take a look around the room and pick out who gets his boxes checked and a rock-star OPR. And it better not be the weinner who's at his door every week.

[Toasty]

Originally posted by gimmeaplane:

I like the idea of the WO (always made sense to me). But, talking about staff officers, do we reallly have it wrong? When it comes to the staff jobs...let the experts do what they're experts at.

I know my butterbars are still shiny and new, so disregard this post if I'm totally off-base. I think the point is the whole "force development" concept. It puts proven leaders into new areas, not only to develop the leader, but give new insights into different fields. However, I'd imagine you wouldn't see that happen too much from the non-rated INTO rated fields.

Point in case: My former PAS was an F-16 guy, and on his second assignment as a Colonel, was put in charge of information ops in OIF. He didn't know the first damned thing about IO- but they weren't interested in his expertise, they just wanted his leadership experience.

Then again, I have no idea if there are any proven statistics that say putting rated leaders into non-rated command positions increases mission effectiveness.

[HerkDerka]

Originally posted by RedDog:

You obviously have not been here since the new hub-n-spoke, so I think you are a little out of the loop on what goes in and out and you making it in will not make a damn bit of difference if your buddy has to go in after.

I'm not sure what you're talking about. If it came up within the last month or two then I don't know what kind of ops change they've input. Regardless, you never mentioned anything about a major shift in cargo movement so do us both a favor and consider that before getting pissed.

You are probably the one accepting the spiral up to get the mission done...right?

Again, you never mentioned this specifically in your previous post. It's one thing to bend the rules and hack a mission. It's something completely else to blindly accept something as stupid as a spiral-up. Miscommunication from your original post. If I can't talk a controller into an alternate routing, you can bet the farm my butt is going out to holding until they can give me something better.

If you have been here in the last 2 months then I disagree with your theory of gettin the job done

I've been on recon yet again but I'll be out soon enough. Again, if there is some recent major shift here PM me and tell me the details.

and feel bad for the crew you are flying with accepting some of these clearances.

Let's not go there just yet.

Tell me is it wise to have a plane come in and land even though they are not offloading anything and C2 says they are not onloading anything due to them being full already going to the next stop

Absolutely not. Did you request an overfly?

So tell me HerkDerka...do I have it wrong?

In regards to my post, definitely. Your original post included nothing about the hub and spoke system or some of the more ridiculous clearances you've now mentioned. So I took your post at face value. And too add on, my post wasn't meant to be a preach in anyway.

C2 can definitely suck at times. But the main thing to remember is to use judgement and experience to make the controller or AMD exec work for you. Maybe not as much with the latter

This isn't the place to get too deep of a tactical discussion, but basically knowing why the controllers are giving you a retarded clearance and knowing what (based on their assumptions of your aircraft) info you can give them to better your situation.

Hope this cleared up some confusion.

HD

[ 16. May 2006, 03:31: Message edited by: HerkDerka ]

[Guest JArcher00]

I guess we are on the same page mabye just a different version of the same book. I guess my main gripe is the system is getting worse as the days go by. I see some crews declining clearances and then joe blow behind them accepts it with out a hesitation. Granted if the mission requires a little more risk by all means that is part of the game. I will risk more taking a bunch of guys with critical injuries out of a place than a bunch of AAFES potatoe chips that need to be re-stocked. We are voicing our concerns but it seem the overwellming reponse with them saying it is that "it is just airlift" Yes we did request an overfly in that instance and clarified it 3 times to make sure they understood the stituation. Next time we will hold until Frag time then request it again. It did not help we were +45 at the time but after landing and requesting another PL we ended up -20. It is almost comical. At the present time I am working of "getting a tour" of the CAOC with a few other crews and hopefully run into some of the decision makers and mabye hear from the horse mabye there is some good reason for the bafoonery but the communication is not being past done and it is causing the turmooil.

[HerkDerka]

Originally posted by RedDog:

I guess my main gripe is the system is getting worse as the days go by.

Definitely. Part of it is the non-combatizing of the entire AOR and part of it is people in leadership positions who have some of the worst tunnel-vision ever. I shit you not I have sat and listened to an OG (Viper guy) make the following comment regarding Herks "That's bullshit, no aircraft climbs under 2,000 FPM."

I see some crews declining clearances and then joe blow behind them accepts it with out a hesitation.

Seen it myself and never could figure it out.

Granted if the mission requires a little more risk by all means that is part of the game. I will risk more taking a bunch of guys with critical injuries out of a place than a bunch of AAFES potatoe chips that need to be re-stocked.

Right on. That's more of what I was alluding to in my first post.

HD

[Guest TheBurt]

Where to start? Ok, Mx, why have an aviator in charge? Simple, it keeps mx focused on the mission of supplying aircraft to the flying squadron, instead of existing to crank out Mx metrics. Its kind of like why finance or personnel exist for their own sake (no flyer in charge) do you want to career broaden in finance?, get it?

Along the same lines, HD mentioned that an all out war would be the only thing that would change things in the Air Force, and I believe he is right.

Does being a good officer mean being: politically correct, promoting core values, standing up for womens rights, promoting gays in the military, decrying sexual harassment, being caring, having good metrics, following the proper career path, becoming well rounded, not saying fvck, pulling yourself out of teaching air war college to come get some command time at Al Salem? NO, but in the peace time Air Force you have careerist's and no I'm not talking down to Razorback, he has the right idea. I'm talking about most shoe clerk, non operational officers in the US Air Force. If they wanted to "lead" men into combat they would have joined the Marines/Army, no, they want to have a career, it's a self perpetuating machine, Joe finance guy has a "Masters" he took SOS in correspondence, seminar and in residence, all of a sudden it's not about what you do, it's about what you look like on paper. They call us "zipper suits", we are the enemy, we are the reason they cannot aspire to become CSAF or whatever, "Those damn zipper suits get anything they want", "we are the backbone of the Air Force" etc.......... that mentality then filters to the winged aviators, now you have Joe flyer concentrating on his thesis instead of on becoming a technically proficient flyer, and no I'm not saying not to get a masters etc, but become an expert in your fvcking flying job first.

Or does a good officer mean: lead by example, fly the most sorties, being the technical expert, pulling the crew together after your sixth to ninth landing in the box, treating the crew to a half gallon of Jack, Beam, white liquor you have expertly hidden, etc., playing hard and working hard etc.......

We had a saying in the Highway Patrol, "A man won't fvck, he won't fight." probably harsh for some SNAP ears and you may not even get it.

We got to see the Sexual Harrasment video at drill, what a hoot!! I loved the General telling us that we were not to snicker, I loved the Air Force's implied message, Airman hottie can give off all kind of sexual inuendoes, dress like a slut, get plastered like a Stripper at the Pink Pony (or The Tanga for you old Herk guys), but don't you dare fvck her, the "scenario was totally from her perspective" kind of like the Duke lacrosse story, man guilty no matter the circumstances, her word against his. Wow, that is what is wrong with the Air Force, it has turned into High School church camp.

edited for spelling

[ 16. May 2006, 18:27: Message edited by: TheBurt ]

[Guest thebronze]

playing hard and working hard etc.......

This has been banned in the AF.

Didn't you get the policy letter?

Yeah, that video was truly disturbing (and not the way that the AF intended it to be disturbing).

[Guest TheBurt]

Oh I almost forgot, why HD is right. To be an Army/Marine officer/leader involves quite a bit of risk (so does being a TACP officer, PJ, fighter pilot, Herk crew etc.) but for most of the Air Force it's a nice safe cushy career, let us start taking casualties like the Army and Marines, they'll be a lot less shoe clerks willing to leave the CONUS. A Marine/Army Lt walking the streets of Fallujah, mountains of Afghanistan, has to walk the walk 24/7 he has to have real courage, if his men don't see it, they won't follow his ass, that is leadership. In WWII the careerist officers were either killed or couldn't hack it, tons of stories of 26 year old Col.s , guys with balls stepped up as combat leaders. Again why did most of us join the Air Force, because we idolized fighter pilots, bomber pilots etc. we wanted to get a chance to fly a plane with US markings into combat, I dare say that is why most of us joined, we also idolized infantry men, tank commanders etc., but I'm telling you most shoe clerk types wanted the nice career, benefits, travel, management skills, etc (that's what the TV commercials promote). When the shit really hits the fan (like WWII) we will be forced into concentrating on fighting and all the political correctness and BS trivia that characterizes life in a peacetime military will vanish.

[Guest KoolKat]

Good job, Burt. Very well said. Very well said.

BENDY

[Guest thebronze]

When the shit really hits the fan (like WWII) we will be forced into concentrating on fighting and all the political correctness and BS trivia that characterizes life in a peacetime military will vanish.

Only for so long, then the Disco-Belt-Nazi's (DBN's) will come back out to assert their authoritah.

See: OEF/OIF

[M2]

Originally posted by ENJJPT IP:

If anyone knows the name of the Lt who wrote that e-mail.....please PM me and let me know it......I'd like to talk to him!

Don't worry, by the end of this week everyone in the USAF (and some of us who aren't) will have a copy of the original email. It is going around faster than the goofy uniform pics from the Pentagon...

Cheers! M2

[HerkDerka]

In case this, and the Balad SOF weren't enough incentive...don't ever send anything over email that you don't want in the open.

HD

[ 16. May 2006, 21:42: Message edited by: HerkDerka ]

[Hacker]

Originally posted by HerkDerka:

In case this, and the Balad SOF weren't enough incentive...don't ever send anything over email that you don't want in the open.

For those of us stuck in AETC, what was the SOF's email?

[Guest Rainman A-10]

Originally posted by Hacker:

For those of us stuck in AETC, what was the SOF's email?

I think they are talking about a LGPOS SOF in the tower at Balad. He shit on some C-130 guys in an email. It stirred the herbivors out of their cud chewing trance when his email got out to them. He then proceeded to apologize like a .

Funny.

[Chuck17]

True!

Chuck

[M2]

Originally posted by ENJJPT IP:

If anyone knows the name of the Lt who wrote that e-mail.....please PM me and let me know it......I'd like to talk to him!

Plus, don't waste your time on the goof that wrote the response (which wasn't that bad, he is just a tea-totaller). What you want to find out is what the female lieutenant who wrote the following looks like!

Okay, it’s Friday and a beautiful sunny day in Germany. All I can think about is how freakin wasted and ridiculous me and the girls are going to be tonight out on the town (watch out K-Town)! And guess what, I’m cool, I stay in school, get all my work done AND get plastered! Alcohol has been a motivator for me! Get drunk = have lots of cool friends. Get drunk = have amazing monkey sex. Get drunk = write the most amazing psychology papers ever written. Get drunk = get naked or watch other people (not to mention names) jump around in waterfalls in Majorca! How is this the life that Mr. **** (okay- is that seriously his name?) does not want?!!! Well, Mr. ****, I have news for you. If you keep yapping about your seriously distorted view of alcohol prohibition, then you will never have cool friends, have insane monkey sex, write collegiate papers that wow the masses, or get naked in Majorca! I’m going to go out on a limb on this one, but from what I’ve read, you will get stuck with a nasty, hairy woman from Bible Study, play golf with men 50+ years-old, and have horridly retched kids that will drink alcohol and ruin your life anyways. So why don’t you jump on the bandwagon and drink a beer or 3!

I am sure she was never in CAP!

Cheers! M2

[ 18. May 2006, 11:36: Message edited by: Toro ]

[Hacker]

Is that one of the responses in the e-mail chain?

How do I recruit her for my squadron?

[Guest nolanrthompson]

Actually I DO know her...

She's about 5'6"

Blonde hair-the short kind that is all spikey

Blue eyes

About 120 and all curves-the nice kind!

Will do everything stated above...including the monkey sex, however I was never fortunate enough to verify that first hand.