phrogpilot73
Well-Known Member
Ahhh, then it's time to beat the drum - Squeeze, go on a FAC tour. It was the best tour of my career. Seriously.
-
Please take a moment and update your account profile. If you have an updated account profile with basic information on why you are on Air Warriors it will help other people respond to your posts. How do you update your profile you ask?
Go here:
Edit Account Details and Profile
Your chances are....(penalty box for those who can't help asking about their chances)
- Thread starter chelu55
- Start date
The AF and their AFIs (Air Force Instructions) definitely make me appreciate the fact that I'm actually in the Navy despite the fact that I've spent the majority of my career serving on AF bases. The AF seems to operate on the principle that everything has to be written down in an AFI to eliviate people having to think on their own or use common sense. There's an AFI that tells me I have to wear AF issued aviator glasses to fly in the back of a T-43 (B-737), and I had better have a back up pair on me -- if ATC calls any traffic, it's not like we're going to see it in the back of the jet anyway, so it shouldn't matter what glasses I'm wearing. This is no joke, but it's actually written in an AFI that thou shall carry thou flight jacket to go flying between certain dates (late fall to early spring). To me, this is just common sense. If you're cold, wear your jacket. I don't need an AFI to tell me to wear my jacket when I'm cold. Just my observation, but an AF squadron CO or CC in AF lingo is pretty much the equivalent of a Navy Dept Head. An AF CO and XO don't have near the leeway in decision making to run their squadrons as they see fit. Everything has to be approved by the first O-6 in the chain known as the OG. I get along with most of the AF dudes I work with, and I always enjoy laughing at them and all of their buffoonery.
I know its been said but I just saw this, and wow.
Nose, that cracked me up. I wasn't expecting the last sentence.
As for the rest of your post, I don't know for sure, but there's probably a strong element of truth to many aspects of it. I do think we have become overly risk averse, and on many occassions we seem to insist on running low level decisions up to an O-6 before we can act on them. But, we're an organization that has 2 Captains flying a $2B bomber. Or a single captain leading 3 other captains in a 4-ship of F-22's worth $1B. I know the Navy has big, expensive equipment too; I'm not saying you don't. We also have the bulk of the nukes, which surely comes with it's own baggage. Is this what has caused everyone to stereotype the differences as "USAF regs tell you what you CAN do, Navy regs tell you what you CAN'T do"? I don't know.
Although carrier ops demand that level of autonomy that you could argue we don't have, I just don't have enough experience to know for sure. My guess is that autonomy you've had in your past history contributes to this culture. And, judging from the comments on AW, this culture may be changing, much to y'alls chagrin. Is it due to modern communications that allow everyone to stay in touch, and reduce autonomy? Or is it the Big Dollar equipment making more folks even more accountable?
As for our organization, I think we do many things more efficiently, due to the "rigidness" we are accused of. For example, for my entire career, I've always noticed that the Navy just doesn't seem to flow their pilot training classes well. I know plenty of guys that were/are SNA's, and just suddenly stop flying for long periods of time. They don't know when they'll get Winged, due to the uncertainties. I have buds that got Winged, went to the F-14 RAG, and surfed and paraglided for 9 months because the RAG wasn't ready to start their training. This just doesn't happen in the USAF. When you show up to UPT, you know that date you'll graduate a year out. After a short break, you show up to the FTU (e.g. "RAG"), and hit the ground running. There's very little dead time. This example is pretty minor, and it's just an observation, but it's a function of the differences in the cultures. Not good, not bad,... just different. Each service seems happy with their method.
I just thought of this. If any of you ever flew the T-38 or F-5, maybe you can relate. A few years ago, I got a couple of BFM hops in a TA-4J at VT-7. I arrived at KNMM in my T-38 which I trained advanced jet students with. And now, here I was, in the Navy's jet used to train advanced jet students. Both the T-38 and A-4 could roll at 720 degrees per second, pull decent G, do basic "jet stuff", and help create a winged Jet Aviator/Pilot. But I couldn't believe how different the A-4 and the T-38 were from each other. Both are great jets, but,... wow! what a difference! A completely different design approach. Mr Northrop and Ed Heinemann obviously never met! Over the years, I've always thought this was a great analogy as to how different the USAF and USN were: both flying jets for the defense of our Nation, and accomplishing that goal with such different methods, and with such a different culture.
Let me caveat: my entire career has been flying jets in the training command (AETC) or flying the U-2. I've never done a staff job, and my outlook is that of career Line Pilot, not that of a well-rounded officer with Joint Staff credit. Plus, being in the U-2 program for so long probably slants my view. The U-2 program, I'm told, is very "un-Air Force like". Maybe that's why it attracts so many Naval and Marine aviators.
Pretty good summary, Huggy. I'll reinforce your comment that there is an aspect of USAF culture that makes many officers in leadership positions "check with mom and dad" before making any decisions of significance. It's actually the part of USAF culture that makes my blood boil the most -- that few Squadron CCs, Group CCs, and the like will do ANYTHING without running it by their boss first.
It really seems that most tactical and operational level leaders in the field make decisions by virtue of not wanting to get fired or have their boss yell at them.
I think that is at the core of a lot of the way that the AF seems to think that the AFI has to SAY IT in order to do it. You're right, Huggy, that is a very SAC/nuke way of thinking of things, and it is a way that has only amplified in the time I've been on active duty. It definitely seems worse today than it did even on my previous fighter flying tour 4 years ago.
It really seems that most tactical and operational level leaders in the field make decisions by virtue of not wanting to get fired or have their boss yell at them.
I think that is at the core of a lot of the way that the AF seems to think that the AFI has to SAY IT in order to do it. You're right, Huggy, that is a very SAC/nuke way of thinking of things, and it is a way that has only amplified in the time I've been on active duty. It definitely seems worse today than it did even on my previous fighter flying tour 4 years ago.
The Navy has a name for it. Command by negation. This means a commander is allowed to do whatever he thinks is necessary to accomplish the mission unless higher directs him not to do certain things. It's a concept that starts at the Battle Group Commander and works it way sown to the guy in the cockpit.
You know, I'm in the middle of finals too. So this was a moment of levity to see this kid get ripped to shreds. And from this apparent "research," I'd say you outta go air force... and don't become an english major.
AJB37
Well-Known Member
So you've decided that you want to be Maverick huh...
Good luck
phrogpilot73
Well-Known Member
Good post, it's interesting to see what life is like on the AF side from an AF guy... And while we may bust your balls (c'mon, you wear scarves), we do have some respect for you.
However, the statement above indicates why the perception is the AF is run like a corporation vice the way the military is run. 2 Captains fly a lot of money, 1 Captain leads 3 other Captains in a lot of money. Speaking of the "bottom line" just like in the Corporate world. Conversely, in the Marine Corps - 1 Infantry Captain commands a company of approximately 150 men. No monetary value needed.
I read an intersting article a while back about "Brass Creep" in all the services. In WWII, the enlisted to officer ratio was 10:1. Now it's quite the opposite. The Marine Corps is the closest with 8.5:1, followed by the Navy with 5.5:1, then the Army with 5.1:1, and the AF brings up the rear with 4.0:1. So, it's understandable (especially when comparing the service I was in to the AF) that decisions must be made higher up the chain, simply because of the large number of officers in the service. Realisitically, I understand that there are more billets for the high-ranking brass for other services, so that's why the USMC is so much different than the others.
I do agree with your statement that the services are changing because of the current information age, and how much can/will be shared with higher headquarters. I think that it's only going to get worse...
Have fun then. But first, check out BaseOps.net. You'll find same sort of "resistance and hostility" there if you post same sort of comments and questions. If you want to pursue a career as a military aviator, you need to have a thicker skin. NOBODY gets handled with kid gloves here (or there). We have a "Stupid Question" thread ongoing so maybe you should try asking question there, but if you persist in trying to run with the big dogs, expect to be treated like one. As a result, you'll be best prepared for the Ready Room when you get there.
I've been a member of BaseOps.net for several years now, and I actually find them a bit harsher to "newbs" there. Especially ones that call their accomplished members "buddy."
From the limited amount I've seen of the AFSOC guys, they seem to be in a similar boat, especially the helo guys. Far more flexible to get the job done and far more laid back/"un-Air Force like" because everyone else shits all over them for being helo guys.
Personally, I like the Air Force, because where else can a reasonably attractive Major/LTCOL quantum physicist and computer programmer also be a SOC team leader fighting aliens from around the galaxy. But maybe I'm naive about the whole thing...