Really??: Ten Thousand Feet and Ten Thousand Miles (A UAV Article)

[robav8r]

If the "man in the loop" is not in the same area of operations as the current campaign, threat, action, etc, there should be no discussion of combat recognition. Are their contributions valuable? Absolutely. But no more so than the guy who programs a tomahawk on an SSBN or CG/DDG. What about the aircrew that guides a SLAM or other precision weapon onto it's target? We have many, modern examples of warfighters employing precision weapon systems onto the battlefield making incredible contributions - but oustide the AOO or threat radius. But that should never rise to the same level as a military member putting himself/herself at risk from the very threat that necessitated the combat action in the first place.

 

[phrogdriver]

I think we need to isolate the USAF hate from the other stuff. The writer is indeed off his rocker as far as his ideas about risk. He isn't as far as recognition, though. It is a weird area. I'm tempted to say to just reward them the same way one would reward an exceptional logistician or supply specialist, e.g. regular achievement or commendation medals, etc. However, they are inflicting actual kinetic harm on the enemy. This issue of distance is going to come up more and more as technology changes. The specialties we now think of as "support," like unmanned systems and cyberwarfare, are going to make more impact on the strategic, operational, and sometimes tactical level than many of those that we now think of as trigger-pullers. While these fields may not require physical courage, much of the same skill and judgment is still required.

In the end, maybe this just reveals that awards and the associated attention-mongering have taken over, and we all need to look at that whole shebang from top to bottom, but I don't see that ever happening.

 

[helolumpy]

To be fair, the MAJ was writing in an AF specific journal. It's not like he was airing his grievance in the NY Times or 60 Minutes. As I said earlier, the USAF Predators, regardless of what you may think about UAVs and the USAF, have made a contribution to the current wars. Why shouldn't their operators be given some sort of recognition for their contribution? And why shouldn't this MAJ challenge USAF leadership to provide him and his fellow operators for their contributions to war effort?

I agree his community needs to promote their contribution and maybe try to get a little recognition, but trying to deminish the contribution of a bomber crew by equating his "risk" with theirs is the problem.

He is trying to qualify his communities contribution with those who are deployed and are in harms way for the mission, that is my problem with his argument. I'm sorry, a sign over you office door that says "You are entering CENTCOM AOR" is nowhere near the same as that sub driver he refers to, operating away from home with the potential of catastrophic failure or collision at sea. If his platform has a malfuntion, he hits CNTL, ALT, DELETE and then presses RESTART.

His issue is valid, it's his argument that most folks are getting tourqued off at.

Then when I read the comments section of his article, I fail to see the ad hominem attack he refers to that does not help further the discussion. He knew he was intentionally lighting a fuse because he was responding to comments almost immediatley.

 

[Pags]

I agree his community needs to promote their contribution and maybe try to get a little recognition, but trying to deminish the contribution of a bomber crew by equating his "risk" with theirs is the problem.

He is trying to qualify his communities contribution with those who are deployed and are in harms way for the mission, that is my problem with his argument. I'm sorry, a sign over you office door that says "You are entering CENTCOM AOR" is nowhere near the same as that sub driver he refers to, operating away from home with the potential of catastrophic failure or collision at sea. If his platform has a malfuntion, he hits CNTL, ALT, DELETE and then presses RESTART.

His issue is valid, it's his argument that most folks are getting tourqued off at.

Then when I read the comments section of his article, I fail to see the ad hominem attack he refers to that does not help further the discussion. He knew he was intentionally lighting a fuse because he was responding to comments almost immediatley.

I'm in now way supporting his risk arguments. That portion of his article is beyond retarded; how a PhD candidate could willingly publish such nonsense is beyond me.

I stand a much higher risk of bodily harm conducting non-combat ops like fans and fcfs than this guy does while flying combat ops. The only way he's going to get hurt at work is if there's an earthquake, he stubs his toe, or he spills his coffee.

 

[scoober78]

I think we need to isolate the USAF hate from the other stuff.

Some more words....

In the end, maybe this just reveals that awards and the associated attention-mongering have taken over, and we all need to look at that whole shebang from top to bottom, but I don't see that ever happening.

Yes, and no. The rational part of me agrees...there are some fantastic people, flying fantastic hardware and doing incredible things in the Air Force. There, I said it.

With that in mind though, where you sit is where you stand. To me, it's no surprise that this drivel isn't coming from some Global Hawk driver at Pax. There is a culture of entitlement and arrogance that love 'em or hate 'em, is present in the Air Force and frankly, I think some of the self-centered nature of his argument is a direct result.

 

[RotorHead04]

I'm pretty sure the CIA has been operating helicopters for some time as well. By that notion you and I shouldn't get any recognition either. Guys in the CIA know they're not going to get a lot of recognition for their work. It comes with the territory.

But to those of us in the uniformed services there's always been the incentive/reward/recognition of some sort of fabric and brass reward for a job, whether combat or other, well done. Not only do these awards serve to highlight and recognize and individual, the truly examplary awards go on to lie in history as testimony to future generations of that individual's honor, bravery, sacrifice, or baddassery.

To be fair, the MAJ was writing in an AF specific journal. It's not like he was airing his grievance in the NY Times or 60 Minutes. As I said earlier, the USAF Predators, regardless of what you may think about UAVs and the USAF, have made a contribution to the current wars. Why shouldn't their operators be given some sort of recognition for their contribution? And why shouldn't this MAJ challenge USAF leadership to provide him and his fellow operators for their contributions to war effort?

It's not as though their efforts are some sort of admin support that you have to stretch to see the impacts for. these guys weren't doing log runs, making donuts in the DFAC, or making ppts for some staff somewhere. They were KILLING BAD GUYS.

Now I fully admit that they aren't in any real risk of combat injury, so I don't necessarily think they should get an air medal or even a combat V, because it's hard to argue "valor" from the safety of a box, but they should get some sort of recognition for their efforts. In WWI the Air Medal was created to make pilots feel better about themselves. Maybe they should get a "UAV Medal" with a hellfire device for killing johnny al-quaeda.

His "combat risk" vis-a-vis terrorism CONUS is a ridiculous reach and, like I said before, completely debases any decent point his article might have had. I might as well earn air medal points riding COMAIR because I'm at risk of a terrorist attack. He should have just stuck to his literal guns.

My grandfather fought in the South Pacific on LCI (G) rocket gunboats for a year and a half straight. Near the end of his tenure, he was the XO of the ship, and even the CO for a few months. He was at three of the major battles that every Navy guy studies in school. For his eightieth birthday, I pulled his service record so I could make him a shadow box. There was no warfare pin (didn't exist yet), no personal awards, and his highest decoration was a CAR. The man has no doubt in his mind that he made a difference and that his contribution mattered. He jut happens to hail from a generation that was far less entitlement-minded.

The problem isn't lack of recognition today IMHO -- it's too much recognition for insignificant contributions (i.e. just doing your job right for a whole tour) and a culture that needs a f**cking parade every time they tie their shoes right. Unfortunately, this is unlikely to change. It is so ingrained in our military that a Navy LT on an IA who never goes outside the wire gets the same medal at the end of his deployment as the SEAL who was on hundreds of combat patrols in the same AOR and got repeatedly blown up and shot at.

If you joined to get medals, you joined for the wrong reasons. Sense of satisfaction in a job well done, paired with promotion and retention should be the rewards you seek. Sadly, you'll probably have to get a lot of bullshit medals along the way to actually qualify ...

 

[HueyCobra8151]

I would agree that at the lower end medals are pretty inflated, especially in services that use awards as a direct factor in promotion. But the same servicemember who might get a Silver Star today probably would have gotten a Medal of Honor before.

 

[Pags]

My grandfather fought in the South Pacific on LCI (G) rocket gunboats for a year and a half straight. Near the end of his tenure, he was the XO of the ship, and even the CO for a few months. He was at three of the major battles that every Navy guy studies in school. For his eightieth birthday, I pulled his service record so I could make him a shadow box. There was no warfare pin (didn't exist yet), no personal awards, and his highest decoration was a CAR. The man has no doubt in his mind that he made a difference and that his contribution mattered. He jut happens to hail from a generation that was far less entitlement-minded.

The problem isn't lack of recognition today IMHO -- it's too much recognition for insignificant contributions (i.e. just doing your job right for a whole tour) and a culture that needs a f**cking parade every time they tie their shoes right. Unfortunately, this is unlikely to change. It is so ingrained in our military that a Navy LT on an IA who never goes outside the wire gets the same medal at the end of his deployment as the SEAL who was on hundreds of combat patrols in the same AOR and got repeatedly blown up and shot at.

If you joined to get medals, you joined for the wrong reasons. Sense of satisfaction in a job well done, paired with promotion and retention should be the rewards you seek. Sadly, you'll probably have to get a lot of bullshit medals along the way to actually qualify ...

If you think that the award system is broken, that's a different discussion then the medals for UAV drivers. But I will say that if you think people get too much recognition these days and that the way it was done back in the day was better, then maybe you should stop wearing your Naval Aviator wings, your EOT Award, and your SWTI patch. Your grandfather did without a warfare device, so what are the wings other than something to make you stand out from your non-aviator peers and make you feel good about having finished flight school? Wings were the first warfare device, so all these other johnny-come-latelies are just following our example.

People join for their myraid of reasons. If giving people a little colored piece of cloth is going to make them feel better about themselves, then why not? If you get satisfaction from a job well done, promotion, and retention; then good on you. Other people have different motivations that may not mirror yours. At the end of the day, giving your guys awards for their work is a good way to show that you appreciate them. Also, don't think that the boards that will govern your retention and promotion aren't looking at your awards. Lack of an EOT award CAN be a message to the board. Although your Grandfather didn't get any awards, that may be a failure of his leadership during the war. Maybe your Grandfather would have liked a medal for his service and all of his hard work as the CO of an LCI; applying the award policies of 70yrs ago to today isn't valid for so many reasons.

At the end of the day, the USAF Raptors have killed more bad guys then us as USN helo drivers or USAF F-22 drivers. I tend to think that their desire for some recognition is valid, it's unfortunate it was penned in such a terrible article that will probably only set back their cause.

 

[Treetop Flyer]

I don't think many people are claiming that they shouldn't get any awards. I think people are saying they don't deserve combat awards since they aren't in combat, and they don't deserve air medals because they aren't in the air.

 

[BusyBee604]

I don't think many people are claiming that they shouldn't get any awards. I think people are saying they don't deserve combat awards since they aren't in combat, and they don't deserve air medals because they aren't in the air.

Saw nail, hit head of same!
BzB

 

[Pags]

I don't think many people are claiming that they shouldn't get any awards. I think people are saying they don't deserve combat awards since they aren't in combat, and they don't deserve air medals because they aren't in the air.

I concur with this. If I didn't get air medals for flying log runs in the NAG, then these guys shouldn't get air medals for "flying" from a box thousands of miles away from the actual aircraft. And despite the MAJ's claims, they aren't at any real risk, so there's no way they should get a Combat V. Within the selection of our current awards, I think Lumpy was right; these guys should probably be getting bronze stars for exceptionally meritorious actions, but the current rules require IDP for BS eligibility. So maybe they should be getting MSMs, AFCs, or AFAs for their work, but they'd be single action.

Perhaps their leadership should lobby for the creation of a new device that could be worn on the medal to indicate that it was earned while directly supporting combat ops via UAV so that there'd be a way to distinguish their AFA from the single action AFA that was awarded to the guy who ran a great NATOPS (or whatever the AF calls it) program.

As I was researching this post, I came across the Aerial Achievement Medal which seems like it has already been given to UAV operators. Per Wikipedia:

The Aerial Achievement Medal is a decoration of the United States Air Force which was first created in 1988. The decoration is intended to recognize the contributions of aircrew members who would, otherwise, not be qualified for the award of the Air Medal.
The decoration is awarded in the name of the Secretary of the Air Force and is presented to members of theUnited States military or civilian personnel, while serving in a capacity with the U.S. Air Force, who distinguish themselves by sustained meritorious achievement while participating in aerial flight. The achievements must be accomplished with distinction above and beyond that normally expected of professional airmen.[1]
Operators of Unmanned aerial vehicles may receive the award. One was given in 1997 for successfully flying a disabled UAV back to its base.[2] According to a report based on Air Force statistics, from January 2009 to mid-2010 3497 medals were granted to operators, while 1408 more were given to pilots.[3]
The Aerial Achievement Medal may be approved by local commanders, however the missions for which the decoration is authorized must be approved by a Major Air Force Command.
Minimum requirements for an Aerial Achievement Medal are 20 flights of at least 2 hours with one flight per theaterper day. For the basic Aerial Achievement medal, 14 flights may be used. However, if this is the case then 26 flights must be used for the first Oak Leaf Cluster
Enlisted personnel receive three (3) promotion points per award.

In my mind, this is what these guys should be getting in lieu of Air Medals. And for particularly meritorious engagements with enemy forces, they should get MSMs, AFC, AFAs.

 

[Uncle Fester]

There's nothing wrong with a guy feeling the plane he drives is undervalued, or that his mission is important but under-recognized. I'm sure there were dudes arguing about this in a tent in France in 1916.

Where this guy goes wildly wrong is trying to tell the whole Air Force how poorly him and his fellow Robot Jox are being treated in a prim little pseudo-academic article instead of telling an F-22 guy to go fuck himself over beers in the Club. That's where bullshit like this used to be "settled".

 

[Treetop Flyer]

"According to a report based on Air Force statistics, from January 2009 to mid-2010 3497 medals were granted to operators, while 1408 more were given to pilots.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aerial_Achievement_Medal#cite_note-2[3]
The Aerial Achievement Medal may be approved by local commanders, however the missions for which the decoration is authorized must be approved by a Major Air Force Command.
Minimum requirements for an Aerial Achievement Medal are 20 flights of at least 2 hours with one flight per theaterper day. For the basic Aerial Achievement medal, 14 flights may be used. However, if this is the case then 26 flights must be used for the first Oak Leaf Cluster
Enlisted personnel receive three (3)promotion pointsper award."


It makes sense to me to create and give out an award like this for doing something "above and beyond", but giving out medals for people showing up to work is silly to me. Air medals given for a certain number of sorties at least demonstrate that a person has repeatedly flown in harms way. Why not give medals for a certain number of gripes a maintainer fixes, or a certain number of travel claims a clerk files?

 

[insanebikerboy]

Angry is what that paper makes me.

 

[RotorHead04]

If you think that the award system is broken, that's a different discussion then the medals for UAV drivers.

I believe they are related. An overzealous recognition system has caused a have-nots to go all Oliver Twist.

But I will say that if you think people get too much recognition these days and that the way it was done back in the day was better, then maybe you should stop wearing your Naval Aviator wings, your EOT Award, and your SWTI patch. Your grandfather did without a warfare device, so what are the wings other than something to make you stand out from your non-aviator peers and make you feel good about having finished flight school? Wings were the first warfare device, so all these other johnny-come-latelies are just following our example.

Whoa, whoa, whoa ... Didn't say we should have no recognition, just said we had too much. Take off my wings ... that's plain crazy talk. How else will the rest of the world know that I'm a member of the master race!?!?!? You can have my EOT. And the patch if it makes you feel better. If I trade those two items in, can I rewind USN warfare devices to pre-1970? :-P

Also, don't think that the boards that will govern your retention and promotion aren't looking at your awards. Lack of an EOT award CAN be a message to the board.

Hence the final sentence of my previous post ... Despite my displeasure for where we are it, it is now so deeply ingrained in our culture that any first attempts to change it could drastically effect the careers of the first victims.

Although your Grandfather didn't get any awards, that may be a failure of his leadership during the war. Maybe your Grandfather would have liked a medal for his service and all of his hard work as the CO of an LCI; applying the award policies of 70yrs ago to today isn't valid for so many reasons.

I'm not advocating WWII practice. The story was to illustrate how far the pendulum has swung in the opposite direction.