nsplayr Posted February 13 Posted February 13 https://www.af.mil/News/Article-Display/Article/3674442/air-force-space-force-announce-sweeping-changes-to-maintain-superiority-amid-gr/ Worth its own thread to discuss. I see lots of new words and new places to park generals but 🤷♂️ IDK how this is all gonna work out when the rubber hits the road.
BashiChuni Posted February 13 Posted February 13 i don't like it. where is the reference to our greatest strength? diversity! 1
Herkdrvr Posted February 13 Posted February 13 1 hour ago, nsplayr said: IDK how this is all gonna work out when the rubber hits the road. Neither do the Bobs. They'll leave the AF just as perplexed as they are today. Then, they'll join various defense contractors as board members/advisors to continue not solving said problems. 1
08Dawg Posted February 14 Posted February 14 I see even more finger pointing and “oh that’s not our job, that’s xyz’s job”
ClearedHot Posted February 14 Posted February 14 On 2/12/2024 at 7:10 PM, nsplayr said: https://www.af.mil/News/Article-Display/Article/3674442/air-force-space-force-announce-sweeping-changes-to-maintain-superiority-amid-gr/ Worth its own thread to discuss. I see lots of new words and new places to park generals but 🤷♂️ IDK how this is all gonna work out when the rubber hits the road. I said it in the other thread, what is old is new...just slap a Slife label on the side of it. 1
DirkDiggler Posted February 14 Posted February 14 Seems kinda Army-esque, at least with regards to how the proposed garrison/base commander and combat wing commander is being proposed. Ditto with reorg of MAJCOMs. In other news the move to A Staffs/groupless wings seems to be going swimmingly at my location/s. So far from what I can tell the A Staffs' primary purpose is to annoy the shit out of the line units with RFIs that they could answer themselves if they put 2 minutes of effort into it. Who knows, maybe it'll get better.
brabus Posted February 15 Posted February 15 (edited) The actual staff can’t even “A-staff”well, but I’m sure the wing level will nail it. Edited February 15 by brabus 1
SocialD Posted February 15 Posted February 15 1 minute ago, brabus said: The actual staff can’t even “A-staff”well, but I’m sure the wing level will nail it. Even when I was a Lt Col, I couldn't tell you which A staff really mattered to me, or what they did. I'm sure making lead wings, with A-Staffs made up part time Lt Col's will be great lol. What's even worse, on some bases where they're charging headlong into this lead wing shit, they're pulling AGRs out of the flying squadron to fill these roles. If this was such an important thing for the AF, they'd provide the positions to go along with this new plan. Pulling AGR's from the squadron just hurts the flying mission and is robbing Peter to pay Paul. A buddies squadron is already short because they're on a joint base and have had full timers pulled for BS wing gigs. Now add this in and they make life miserable for the full timers left in the squadron. I wonder why they can't keep full timers lol. 1
DirkDiggler Posted February 16 Posted February 16 On 2/15/2024 at 7:29 AM, brabus said: The actual staff can’t even “A-staff”well, but I’m sure the wing level will nail it. Ha! Maybe so. I get that new things/changes sometimes take a while to implement and function correctly but right now getting the same RFIs 3-4 times a day from the same part of the A-staff cause they're not talking to each other and whatever O-5 happens to have a burr up his ass about said RFI making the most important thing in the world is kinda frustrating. I AFSOC fucked up by not having the A-3 be an O-6; probably wouldn't have been able to find another O-6 to come to CVS anyway.
dream big Posted February 17 Posted February 17 On 2/16/2024 at 9:50 AM, DirkDiggler said: Ha! Maybe so. I get that new things/changes sometimes take a while to implement and function correctly but right now getting the same RFIs 3-4 times a day from the same part of the A-staff cause they're not talking to each other and whatever O-5 happens to have a burr up his ass about said RFI making the most important thing in the world is kinda frustrating. I AFSOC fucked up by not having the A-3 be an O-6; probably wouldn't have been able to find another O-6 to come to CVS anyway. To be fair, I’ve never been at an organization where the majority of the HHQ staff wasn’t a hinderance to the mission (aka the RFI machine) as opposed to being supportive. It gets worse the higher up you go. Still not sure what the Joint Staff does besides answer RFIs to OSD. Staffs support the upstream commander, not downstream commanders unless they are bros. 1
HeyEng Posted February 27 Posted February 27 This is a good video of the upcoming changes coming to the AF. The two commentators are former military and their discussion regarding the reintroduction of “no-notice” inspections is interesting as well.
Danger41 Posted February 28 Posted February 28 As unbelievable as it sounds, I'm a fan of bringing the no notice inspection back. The prep for inspection crap is so stupid and the amount of organizations that think they can prep just for the scheduled test and let everything rot until then is insane. 3
tac airlifter Posted February 28 Posted February 28 5 hours ago, Danger41 said: As unbelievable as it sounds, I'm a fan of bringing the no notice inspection back. The prep for inspection crap is so stupid and the amount of organizations that think they can prep just for the scheduled test and let everything rot until then is insane. I agree with you in theory. The best inspection would be auditing a normal deployment or even a blowout to validate squadrons have legitimate processes ensuring trained airman are equipped and mobilized with alacrity towards a specified task. Bonus points if inspectors highlighted support agencies causing mission friction and could provide wing and Hq commanders suggestions on changing the present paradigm where deploying squadrons jump through hoops to accommodate arcane requirements by non-deploying support agencies. however, this will never happen. It is unfortunately not in our culture; our culture is preserving stateside bureaucracy who view overseas missions as a distraction to home station status quo. This has remained true regardless of who the commander is because it's entrenched culture within the organization. It's sad looking at YouTube videos like the one above postulating our forces are not ready for the big one. Of course they aren't, when have they ever been? Every war has required a waiver to some current process in order to allow operators to meet the task. Think about that for a minute. How many new ideas have you seen that made sense and could've helped the mission but could not happen without some multi agency multi year waiver, and the gatekeeper at every increment is some non-deploying homo who needs to be convinced the requirement is real. How totally fucked up is that? It is an indictment of every level above the line unit, which is one more clue in the puzzle of how we can kick so much ass yet never seem to win. Given this reality, I am not a fan of no notice inspections because I do not trust the system to do them intelligently. They will be done in the dumbest way at the worst time focusing on all the wrong things. And fantastic squadron commanders who are prioritizing lethality will get fired because they've been pioneering new TTPs instead of plodding through MICT. it's not all depressing, I do have a proposed solution, but it's better over 🥃 . You should swing by sometime! 4 2
brabus Posted February 28 Posted February 28 Nailed it. But given the choice, I’d still rather do fucked up no-notices than fucked up “prep bullshit for 6-9 months” inspections (then let it all wither for 2-3 years and repeat). Either way you’re fucked, but at least you didn’t waste 6-9 mo of your life pulling 12 hr queep days on MICT, etc. 2 1
ClearedHot Posted February 28 Posted February 28 6 hours ago, Danger41 said: As unbelievable as it sounds, I'm a fan of bringing the no notice inspection back. The prep for inspection crap is so stupid and the amount of organizations that think they can prep just for the scheduled test and let everything rot until then is insane. Bring back the no-notice as an actual test of readiness. Don't fire people or end careers for honest mistakes. Use the the results to provide resources to fix gaps. 5 1
TreeA10 Posted February 28 Posted February 28 8 hours ago, tac airlifter said: I agree with you in theory. The best inspection would be auditing a normal deployment or even a blowout to validate squadrons have legitimate processes ensuring trained airman are equipped and mobilized with alacrity towards a specified task. Bonus points if inspectors highlighted support agencies causing mission friction and could provide wing and Hq commanders suggestions on changing the present paradigm where deploying squadrons jump through hoops to accommodate arcane requirements by non-deploying support agencies. however, this will never happen. It is unfortunately not in our culture; our culture is preserving stateside bureaucracy who view overseas missions as a distraction to home station status quo. This has remained true regardless of who the commander is because it's entrenched culture within the organization. It's sad looking at YouTube videos like the one above postulating our forces are not ready for the big one. Of course they aren't, when have they ever been? Every war has required a waiver to some current process in order to allow operators to meet the task. Think about that for a minute. How many new ideas have you seen that made sense and could've helped the mission but could not happen without some multi agency multi year waiver, and the gatekeeper at every increment is some non-deploying homo who needs to be convinced the requirement is real. How totally fucked up is that? It is an indictment of every level above the line unit, which is one more clue in the puzzle of how we can kick so much ass yet never seem to win. Given this reality, I am not a fan of no notice inspections because I do not trust the system to do them intelligently. They will be done in the dumbest way at the worst time focusing on all the wrong things. And fantastic squadron commanders who are prioritizing lethality will get fired because they've been pioneering new TTPs instead of plodding through MICT. it's not all depressing, I do have a proposed solution, but it's better over 🥃 . You should swing by sometime! Mid-90s and Iraq does some pump fake maneuver to the border. I'm at Shaw working in Stan/Eval and we get tagged to generate and deploy 2 F-16 and 1 A-10 squadron. The Wing had an upcoming mobility ORI event so we call Langley and ask them to come observe to get the ORI counter complete. They say "No" because it wouldn't meet their grading criteria. WTF? A real world event doesn't match the grading criteria? How inflexibly stupid is that and WTF are you grading? 1 2 4
Doc Posted February 29 Posted February 29 Had an ORI not long after Gulf War, Round 1. Had to prove to the REMFs that we could do what we just did. 🤣🤦♂️
contraildash Posted March 1 Posted March 1 12 hours ago, Doc said: Had an ORI not long after Gulf War, Round 1. Had to prove to the REMFs that we could do what we just did. 🤣🤦♂️ Still a thing. My unit had several alert deployments in the span of two years. Despite these going very well, wing leadership still wanted to conduct a wing exercise to see how good we were at doing the thing we had already been doing....of course it was a shit show, poorly planned by the wing, and execution was a scripted joke. We had another real world alert not long after.... On 2/28/2024 at 9:07 AM, ClearedHot said: Bring back the no-notice as an actual test of readiness. Don't fire people or end careers for honest mistakes. Use the the results to provide resources to fix gaps. exactly this 👆
uhhello Posted March 1 Posted March 1 The 'exercises' are an evaluation of processes and paperwork that NEVER get executed when actual real world deployments are executed. NEVER. It's just a giant circle jerk of outside agencies who hinder the process. 1
abmwaldo Posted March 1 Posted March 1 On 2/28/2024 at 1:58 PM, TreeA10 said: Mid-90s and Iraq does some pump fake maneuver to the border. I'm at Shaw working in Stan/Eval and we get tagged to generate and deploy 2 F-16 and 1 A-10 squadron. The Wing had an upcoming mobility ORI event so we call Langley and ask them to come observe to get the ORI counter complete. They say "No" because it wouldn't meet their grading criteria. WTF? A real world event doesn't match the grading criteria? How inflexibly stupid is that and WTF are you grading? That mentality is alive and well in NORAD...
ToHoldShort Posted March 2 Posted March 2 No combat ready unit ever passed an inspection and no inspection ready unit ever passed combat
Danger41 Posted March 2 Posted March 2 Didn’t the 1st SOW get credit for their ORI when they went and did earthquake relief support in Haiti back in 2010/2011?
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now