User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 8/2/2015 12:04:13 AM EDT
[#1]
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
No boom :( This. I can think of a few places to light up. I can think of Moscow and Bejing off the top of my head. I was thinking of another Capitol city that is even more dangerous to freedom........  Oh yeah which one.  Nairobi? |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/2/2015 1:15:45 AM EDT
[#2]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
After the F-15G is done clearing them out? Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Maybe the true delivery vehicle would be the SR-72? I doubt they would use an F-15 to delivery this thing. Wat Do you think an F-15 would be able to penetrate airspace covered by S-300 or S-400 missile systems? After the F-15G is done clearing them out? This airplane? 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/2/2015 1:37:02 AM EDT
[#3]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
That all you got? 
Could we at least get a good recipe? |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/2/2015 2:04:32 AM EDT
[#4]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Because since we're not developing new nuclear weapons we are stuck trying to modernize and keep effective old designs like the B61 Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Really now. Why would they be practicing this, I wonder. Because since we're not developing new nuclear weapons we are stuck trying to modernize and keep effective old designs like the B61 I would hope we've followed every arms treaty or proposed arms treaty to the letter  .Somehow I have doubts   |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/2/2015 2:41:24 AM EDT
[#5]
 Quote HistoryQuoted:
Really now.
Why would they be practicing this, I wonder. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/2/2015 2:43:03 AM EDT
[#6]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
What was that flare just before the bomb was released ? A flare |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/2/2015 2:48:04 AM EDT
[#7]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Do you think an F-15 would be able to penetrate airspace covered by S-300 or S-400 missile systems? Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Maybe the true delivery vehicle would be the SR-72? I doubt they would use an F-15 to delivery this thing. Wat Do you think an F-15 would be able to penetrate airspace covered by S-300 or S-400 missile systems? Do you think the SR-71 is still flying? ETA: Oh, SR-72. Since that's a make believe thing, sure, maybe it goes on there. But it's much more likely to be fitted on the F-35, the new strategic bomber under development, or any number of the recently operational and/or in development UAVs that are out there. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/2/2015 3:05:51 AM EDT
[#8]
I'll be impressed when they show an Apache dropping a B83.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/2/2015 3:20:35 AM EDT
[#9]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Really now.
Why would they be practicing this, I wonder. Jade Helm bro. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/2/2015 7:17:43 AM EDT
[#10]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Really now.
Why would they be practicing this, I wonder. because the air force has to pretend two things. 1. They care about the nuclear mission. 2. They need F35s to do it. both of these are complete lies, but thats irrelevant as long as the money flows. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/2/2015 9:15:30 AM EDT
[#11]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Where's the kaboom? There is supposed to be an earth shattering kaboom. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/2/2015 9:25:47 AM EDT
[#12]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
This thing fits on an F-35, if I'm not mistaken. I kinda wonder if they're not tweaking a few things. Perhaps making sure the Mod 11 flies like it's supposed to. The Air Force never got the funds to make the F-35 mission capable. It's only on paper. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/2/2015 9:28:48 AM EDT
[#13]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Where's the kaboom? There is supposed to be an earth shattering kaboom. They only contain Unicorn Farts and tittie sprinkles now. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/2/2015 9:30:28 AM EDT
[#14]
Here is a delivery methods we were taught about during the Cold War -- the Laydown and Loft method -- that does not get too much press.
https://youtu.be/DpJUo-Fylas |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/2/2015 9:33:47 AM EDT
[#15]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Damn, it's hard to comprehend that that little thing would flatten a city. E=mc^2 is a bitch. What's really amazing is that the device weighs 700 pounds but only about 15-20 grams is converted to pure energy. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/2/2015 9:38:17 AM EDT
[#16]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Oh yeah which one. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
No boom :( This. I can think of a few places to light up. I can think of Moscow and Bejing off the top of my head. I was thinking of another Capitol city that is even more dangerous to freedom........ Oh yeah which one. Tehran? |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/2/2015 9:40:35 AM EDT
[#17]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
It a "Line Badge", the AF's restricted area entry authorization badge. Always to be worn on your torso (not hanging from your belt) when you are an a restricted area. Failure to have your badge visible like that in a restricted area WILL result in an unpleasant encounter with AF Security Forces personnel. Said unpleasantness to include being proned-out on the pavement with one or more M-16s held by young airmen with itchy trigger fingers shoved against the back of your head. And if you are not just Airman Snuffy working with the crew who forgot to display his badge, you are open target for every crew chief, specialist and line chief who want to rough someone up until the cops show up to do a professional job of that. I've been places where a line chief used his vehicle to "render harmless" an intruder and he got an award for that. It's taken seriously. Then after you are roughly treated on the scene you will be hauled down to the base jail until you thoroughly pissed off commander comes to sign for you. At which point the really bad things begin to happen to you. posted by someone who got that treatment when the cops forgot we told them our alarm was going to go off when the maintenance team started working on it. NO FUN answering the door when 3 guys with M-16s all try to jam them into your face at the same time. Also no fun answering to the base commander why the alarm went off and he was stuck at the gate for 20 minutes when he was headed off base for tee time. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
why is it necessary for everyone to have a stupid ass dangling thing around their neck, is that the equivalent to the Army's reflective belt It a "Line Badge", the AF's restricted area entry authorization badge. Always to be worn on your torso (not hanging from your belt) when you are an a restricted area. Failure to have your badge visible like that in a restricted area WILL result in an unpleasant encounter with AF Security Forces personnel. Said unpleasantness to include being proned-out on the pavement with one or more M-16s held by young airmen with itchy trigger fingers shoved against the back of your head. And if you are not just Airman Snuffy working with the crew who forgot to display his badge, you are open target for every crew chief, specialist and line chief who want to rough someone up until the cops show up to do a professional job of that. I've been places where a line chief used his vehicle to "render harmless" an intruder and he got an award for that. It's taken seriously. Then after you are roughly treated on the scene you will be hauled down to the base jail until you thoroughly pissed off commander comes to sign for you. At which point the really bad things begin to happen to you. posted by someone who got that treatment when the cops forgot we told them our alarm was going to go off when the maintenance team started working on it. NO FUN answering the door when 3 guys with M-16s all try to jam them into your face at the same time. Also no fun answering to the base commander why the alarm went off and he was stuck at the gate for 20 minutes when he was headed off base for tee time. They didn't forget, its that they didn't care. Our regs are pretty specific and a phone call during an alarm activation at a nuclear or nuclear associated facility isn't gonna cut it. Full response, each and every time. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/2/2015 9:46:50 AM EDT
[#18]
Another Cold War vestige. Just fire Minuteman II ICBM's into the air to alert SAC to start bombing.
ERC - Emergency Rocket Communication System. These ICBM's would broadcast the Emergency Action Message "Go" codes to nuclear forces. Headquarters SAC was given approval by the Joint Chiefs of Staff to deactivate the 494L payloads beginning 1 Oct 1992. Don't worry, we replaced it with something more expensive. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/2/2015 9:47:45 AM EDT
[#19]
'Murica.
And even on the video, holy shit that bird is loud. Sounds like freedom and winning. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/2/2015 9:48:30 AM EDT
[#20]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
because the air force has to pretend two things. 1. They care about the nuclear mission. 2. They need F35s to do it. both of these are complete lies, but thats irrelevant as long as the money flows. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Really now.
Why would they be practicing this, I wonder. because the air force has to pretend two things. 1. They care about the nuclear mission. 2. They need F35s to do it. both of these are complete lies, but thats irrelevant as long as the money flows. 
Pretty sure the USAF cares a lot about their Nuclear mission. They're a big part of Americas Nuclear Triad, very large parts of the branch are dedicated to strategic weapons delivery. I think we're all familiar with USAF slip ups in the recent past but saying they "don't care" isn't accurate either. I don't know that we NEED F35's to deliver the weapons but having another stealth A/C with the ability to do so isn't a bad idea. Most of our current airframes are aged and it makes sense they want a new and viable alternative that also has a benefit of stealth technology to allow it better penetration on a contested environment. Now back to your regularly scheduled I Hate The Air Force Rant... |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/2/2015 9:56:05 AM EDT
[#21]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Pretty sure the USAF cares a lot about their Nuclear mission. They're a big part of Americas Nuclear Triad, very large parts of the branch are dedicated to strategic weapons delivery. I think we're all familiar with USAF slip ups in the recent past but saying they "don't care" isn't accurate either. I don't know that we NEED F35's to deliver the weapons but having another stealth A/C with the ability to do so isn't a bad idea. Most of our current airframes are aged and it makes sense they want a new and viable alternative that also has a benefit of stealth technology to allow it better penetration on a contested environment. Now back to your regularly scheduled I Hate The Air Force Rant... Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Really now.
Why would they be practicing this, I wonder. because the air force has to pretend two things. 1. They care about the nuclear mission. 2. They need F35s to do it. both of these are complete lies, but thats irrelevant as long as the money flows.
Pretty sure the USAF cares a lot about their Nuclear mission. They're a big part of Americas Nuclear Triad, very large parts of the branch are dedicated to strategic weapons delivery. I think we're all familiar with USAF slip ups in the recent past but saying they "don't care" isn't accurate either. I don't know that we NEED F35's to deliver the weapons but having another stealth A/C with the ability to do so isn't a bad idea. Most of our current airframes are aged and it makes sense they want a new and viable alternative that also has a benefit of stealth technology to allow it better penetration on a contested environment. Now back to your regularly scheduled I Hate The Air Force Rant... The AF cares about its nuclear mission to the point where the more it fucks up, the more fighter pilots get to be general. Name a missileer who served as Chief of Staff of the Air Force. Compare the facilities in the missile fields to the fighter squadron facilities. Everyone involved in the nuclear enterprise knows the AF doesn't give a fuck about the nuclear mission. Why don't we have 40 different ways to deliver a nuclear weapon? I mean, the more the merrier, right? Its only money. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/2/2015 9:59:12 AM EDT
[#22]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
That all you got?
Could we at least get a good recipe? Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
That all you got?
Could we at least get a good recipe? The Chinese have already stolen the plans, and bought the tooling at a salvage auction. They're in the process of buying up WWII air bases where the giant hangars for bombers still stand for the production factories manned by Vietnamese and North Korean slaves. The buildings are disguised as washing machine factories. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/2/2015 10:04:28 AM EDT
[#23]
Quote HistoryQuoted: How are we going to use this to fight climate change? Fucking climate change!!! Simple really, someone said "what round for a Suburban?" And some other guy was all "B61." Then GM got a boner and a new ad campaign. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/2/2015 10:09:46 AM EDT
[#24]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
The AF cares about its nuclear mission to the point where the more it fucks up, the more fighter pilots get to be general. Name a missileer who served as Chief of Staff of the Air Force. Compare the facilities in the missile fields to the fighter squadron facilities. Everyone involved in the nuclear enterprise knows the AF doesn't give a fuck about the nuclear mission. Why don't we have 40 different ways to deliver a nuclear weapon? I mean, the more the merrier, right? Its only money. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Really now.
Why would they be practicing this, I wonder. because the air force has to pretend two things. 1. They care about the nuclear mission. 2. They need F35s to do it. both of these are complete lies, but thats irrelevant as long as the money flows.
Pretty sure the USAF cares a lot about their Nuclear mission. They're a big part of Americas Nuclear Triad, very large parts of the branch are dedicated to strategic weapons delivery. I think we're all familiar with USAF slip ups in the recent past but saying they "don't care" isn't accurate either. I don't know that we NEED F35's to deliver the weapons but having another stealth A/C with the ability to do so isn't a bad idea. Most of our current airframes are aged and it makes sense they want a new and viable alternative that also has a benefit of stealth technology to allow it better penetration on a contested environment. Now back to your regularly scheduled I Hate The Air Force Rant... The AF cares about its nuclear mission to the point where the more it fucks up, the more fighter pilots get to be general. Name a missileer who served as Chief of Staff of the Air Force. Compare the facilities in the missile fields to the fighter squadron facilities. Everyone involved in the nuclear enterprise knows the AF doesn't give a fuck about the nuclear mission. Why don't we have 40 different ways to deliver a nuclear weapon? I mean, the more the merrier, right? Its only money. You and Eisenhour would have loved the huge staff working on the new guidance set, it was legion. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/2/2015 10:12:15 AM EDT
[#25]
The DoD just spent the past 15 years losing two wars.
You see anybody caring? Any changes? Any "Wow! What the fuck just happened and how do we fix it?" Nope. Just getting ready for the airwar over beijing and the invasion of North Korea. FUCKING RETARDS. DMV in uniform. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/2/2015 10:12:58 AM EDT
[#26]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
The AF cares about its nuclear mission to the point where the more it fucks up, the more fighter pilots get to be general. Name a missileer who served as Chief of Staff of the Air Force. Compare the facilities in the missile fields to the fighter squadron facilities. Everyone involved in the nuclear enterprise knows the AF doesn't give a fuck about the nuclear mission. Why don't we have 40 different ways to deliver a nuclear weapon? I mean, the more the merrier, right? Its only money. Its well known AF promotions are all fucked and bound to become worse but I fail to see the relation. The fighter pilot mafia won't let officers in my AFSC promote past certain point either. It is what it is. I've never met an Officer that didn't care about the nuclear mission and the higher us I met including a LtGen from the Mighty 8th was deadly serious about it. I worked nukes for years at 2 different installations, our facilities tended to be nice. Yea the FS folks get more money, no shocker there. Fighter Pilots have a little prima donna thing going on, again that is what it is. We were never "shorted" because of that and we always had the money and equipment needed to fulfill the mission. If I could bitch about anything, it'd be my training. Nuke Cops ought to be going through Infantry School and other ground combat courses instead our current bullshit. Instead of addressing that real issue we throw manning at the problem. The AF does take the mission serious; they give us the money, the manning, and the AFI's that tell us how to shit and what it better look like when we're done. The only people that have leeway in the nuke game is USAF SF, MUNS and MXS doesn't have shit. They have a TO and they follow it exactly or its game over and their Commander will get all Rapey on them. If anyone is failing its my career field a we'll take anyone, give some so-so training, and shove them into a WSA or missile field. Big AF may be enablers of the problem but they aren't the problem. Lemay wrote the book on the AF Nuke mission, why we won't use his blueprint again is the part I'm fucking stumped about. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/2/2015 10:22:40 AM EDT
[#27]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Do you think an F-15 would be able to penetrate airspace covered by S-300 or S-400 missile systems? Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Maybe the true delivery vehicle would be the SR-72? I doubt they would use an F-15 to delivery this thing. Wat Do you think an F-15 would be able to penetrate airspace covered by S-300 or S-400 missile systems? Yes, as they have with ease in the past. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/2/2015 10:55:02 AM EDT
[#28]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Its well known AF promotions are all fucked and bound to become worse but I fail to see the relation. The fighter pilot mafia won't let officers in my AFSC promote past certain point either. It is what it is. I've never met an Officer that didn't care about the nuclear mission and the higher us I met including a LtGen from the Mighty 8th was deadly serious about it. I worked nukes for years at 2 different installations, our facilities tended to be nice. Yea the FS folks get more money, no shocker there. Fighter Pilots have a little prima donna thing going on, again that is what it is. We were never "shorted" because of that and we always had the money and equipment needed to fulfill the mission. If I could bitch about anything, it'd be my training. Nuke Cops ought to be going through Infantry School and other ground combat courses instead our current bullshit. Instead of addressing that real issue we throw manning at the problem. The AF does take the mission serious; they give us the money, the manning, and the AFI's that tell us how to shit and what it better look like when we're done. The only people that have leeway in the nuke game is USAF SF, MUNS and MXS doesn't have shit. They have a TO and they follow it exactly or its game over and their Commander will get all Rapey on them. If anyone is failing its my career field a we'll take anyone, give some so-so training, and shove them into a WSA or missile field. Big AF may be enablers of the problem but they aren't the problem. Lemay wrote the book on the AF Nuke mission, why we won't use his blueprint again is the part I'm fucking stumped about. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
The AF cares about its nuclear mission to the point where the more it fucks up, the more fighter pilots get to be general. Name a missileer who served as Chief of Staff of the Air Force. Compare the facilities in the missile fields to the fighter squadron facilities. Everyone involved in the nuclear enterprise knows the AF doesn't give a fuck about the nuclear mission. Why don't we have 40 different ways to deliver a nuclear weapon? I mean, the more the merrier, right? Its only money. Its well known AF promotions are all fucked and bound to become worse but I fail to see the relation. The fighter pilot mafia won't let officers in my AFSC promote past certain point either. It is what it is. I've never met an Officer that didn't care about the nuclear mission and the higher us I met including a LtGen from the Mighty 8th was deadly serious about it. I worked nukes for years at 2 different installations, our facilities tended to be nice. Yea the FS folks get more money, no shocker there. Fighter Pilots have a little prima donna thing going on, again that is what it is. We were never "shorted" because of that and we always had the money and equipment needed to fulfill the mission. If I could bitch about anything, it'd be my training. Nuke Cops ought to be going through Infantry School and other ground combat courses instead our current bullshit. Instead of addressing that real issue we throw manning at the problem. The AF does take the mission serious; they give us the money, the manning, and the AFI's that tell us how to shit and what it better look like when we're done. The only people that have leeway in the nuke game is USAF SF, MUNS and MXS doesn't have shit. They have a TO and they follow it exactly or its game over and their Commander will get all Rapey on them. If anyone is failing its my career field a we'll take anyone, give some so-so training, and shove them into a WSA or missile field. Big AF may be enablers of the problem but they aren't the problem. Lemay wrote the book on the AF Nuke mission, why we won't use his blueprint again is the part I'm fucking stumped about. Sylvan has already gone into it a bit, so I'll state it as simply as possible to avoid misunderstanding: organizationally, the AF does not care about the nuke mission and would embrace its failure if it were possible/permissible. The AF personally who service the nuke mission directly care deeply about the mission and perform their duties with dedication. There's an important distinction between the two facets |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/2/2015 11:24:33 AM EDT
[#29]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Yes, as they have with ease in the past. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Maybe the true delivery vehicle would be the SR-72? I doubt they would use an F-15 to delivery this thing. Wat Do you think an F-15 would be able to penetrate airspace covered by S-300 or S-400 missile systems? Yes, as they have with ease in the past. Dem networks tho. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/2/2015 11:28:30 AM EDT
[#30]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Sylvan has already gone into it a bit, so I'll state it as simply as possible to avoid misunderstanding: organizationally, the AF does not care about the nuke mission and would embrace its failure if it were possible/permissible. The AF personally who service the nuke mission directly care deeply about the mission and perform their duties with dedication. There's an important distinction between the two facets Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
The AF cares about its nuclear mission to the point where the more it fucks up, the more fighter pilots get to be general. Name a missileer who served as Chief of Staff of the Air Force. Compare the facilities in the missile fields to the fighter squadron facilities. Everyone involved in the nuclear enterprise knows the AF doesn't give a fuck about the nuclear mission. Why don't we have 40 different ways to deliver a nuclear weapon? I mean, the more the merrier, right? Its only money. Its well known AF promotions are all fucked and bound to become worse but I fail to see the relation. The fighter pilot mafia won't let officers in my AFSC promote past certain point either. It is what it is. I've never met an Officer that didn't care about the nuclear mission and the higher us I met including a LtGen from the Mighty 8th was deadly serious about it. I worked nukes for years at 2 different installations, our facilities tended to be nice. Yea the FS folks get more money, no shocker there. Fighter Pilots have a little prima donna thing going on, again that is what it is. We were never "shorted" because of that and we always had the money and equipment needed to fulfill the mission. If I could bitch about anything, it'd be my training. Nuke Cops ought to be going through Infantry School and other ground combat courses instead our current bullshit. Instead of addressing that real issue we throw manning at the problem. The AF does take the mission serious; they give us the money, the manning, and the AFI's that tell us how to shit and what it better look like when we're done. The only people that have leeway in the nuke game is USAF SF, MUNS and MXS doesn't have shit. They have a TO and they follow it exactly or its game over and their Commander will get all Rapey on them. If anyone is failing its my career field a we'll take anyone, give some so-so training, and shove them into a WSA or missile field. Big AF may be enablers of the problem but they aren't the problem. Lemay wrote the book on the AF Nuke mission, why we won't use his blueprint again is the part I'm fucking stumped about. Sylvan has already gone into it a bit, so I'll state it as simply as possible to avoid misunderstanding: organizationally, the AF does not care about the nuke mission and would embrace its failure if it were possible/permissible. The AF personally who service the nuke mission directly care deeply about the mission and perform their duties with dedication. There's an important distinction between the two facets I know at the Air Force Academy, you'd have no idea that the Air Force does anything but fighter jets from looking at things. Even the chapel is stylized like an airplane. Fighter jets are parked in the middle of the school buildings. It's very easy to see what the organization itself is devoted to, even if there are individual members who know that the real mission is a hole in the ground up north or running errands at Whiteman. The whole of the Air Force, its best and brightest, are indoctrinated into believing they are meant to fly fighters from early on. And if they're not flying fighters, they've failed at being Air Force. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/2/2015 11:32:03 AM EDT
[#31]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Yes, as they have with ease in the past. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Maybe the true delivery vehicle would be the SR-72? I doubt they would use an F-15 to delivery this thing. Wat Do you think an F-15 would be able to penetrate airspace covered by S-300 or S-400 missile systems? Yes, as they have with ease in the past. Not without outside help. There is a reason we have tried for so long to keep Iran from getting SA-20s. Not much more to say in this forum, but the SA-20 and -10 variants are bad ass. Needless to say, the best defense against a S/A missile as capable as that, is a good offense. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/2/2015 11:59:40 AM EDT
[#32]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Lemay wrote the book on the AF Nuke mission, why we won't use his blueprint again is the part I'm fucking stumped about. because the AF leadership doesn't care. Its not a mystery. AF is about airplanes, not airpower. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/2/2015 12:03:40 PM EDT
[#33]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
The whole of the Air Force, its best and brightest, are indoctrinated into believing they are meant to fly fighters from early on. And if they're not flying fighters, they've failed at being Air Force. You'd be surprised at what the cadets at the Academy want to do these days. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/2/2015 12:13:11 PM EDT
[#34]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
because the AF leadership doesn't care. Its not a mystery. AF is about airplanes, not airpower. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Lemay wrote the book on the AF Nuke mission, why we won't use his blueprint again is the part I'm fucking stumped about. because the AF leadership doesn't care. Its not a mystery. AF is about airplanes, not airpower. I've never had conversations on the topic outside of MAJCOM leadership so I can't really attest to how much "they" care. I know MAJCOM doesn't fucking play, Nuke Base leadership will roast a mofo that doesn't do their business IAW regs/checklists. Nukes certainly don't have the sexiness of fighter jets, I'll concede that. I do have a hard time believing they don't care though as every time a slip up takes place, it gets plastered on the national news and Wing leadership gets canned. With your POV in mind, would it be fair to say the Wing leaders are being whipping boys for a greater problem? |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/2/2015 12:16:10 PM EDT
[#35]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I've never had conversations on the topic outside of MAJCOM leadership so I can't really attest to how much "they" care. I know MAJCOM doesn't fucking play, Nuke Base leadership will roast a mofo that doesn't do their business IAW regs/checklists. Nukes certainly don't have the sexiness of fighter jets, I'll concede that. I do have a hard time believing they don't care though as every time a slip up takes place, it gets plastered on the national news and Wing leadership gets canned. With your POV in mind, would it be fair to say the Wing leaders are being whipping boys for a greater problem? Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Lemay wrote the book on the AF Nuke mission, why we won't use his blueprint again is the part I'm fucking stumped about. because the AF leadership doesn't care. Its not a mystery. AF is about airplanes, not airpower. I've never had conversations on the topic outside of MAJCOM leadership so I can't really attest to how much "they" care. I know MAJCOM doesn't fucking play, Nuke Base leadership will roast a mofo that doesn't do their business IAW regs/checklists. Nukes certainly don't have the sexiness of fighter jets, I'll concede that. I do have a hard time believing they don't care though as every time a slip up takes place, it gets plastered on the national news and Wing leadership gets canned. With your POV in mind, would it be fair to say the Wing leaders are being whipping boys for a greater problem? Does it seem like a problem to you that there is zero tolerance for failure in your line of work, with massive punishments for failure, and it's not a career path? |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/2/2015 12:16:41 PM EDT
[#36]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Sylvan has already gone into it a bit, so I'll state it as simply as possible to avoid misunderstanding: organizationally, the AF does not care about the nuke mission and would embrace its failure if it were possible/permissible. The AF personally who service the nuke mission directly care deeply about the mission and perform their duties with dedication. There's an important distinction between the two facets Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
The AF cares about its nuclear mission to the point where the more it fucks up, the more fighter pilots get to be general. Name a missileer who served as Chief of Staff of the Air Force. Compare the facilities in the missile fields to the fighter squadron facilities. Everyone involved in the nuclear enterprise knows the AF doesn't give a fuck about the nuclear mission. Why don't we have 40 different ways to deliver a nuclear weapon? I mean, the more the merrier, right? Its only money. Its well known AF promotions are all fucked and bound to become worse but I fail to see the relation. The fighter pilot mafia won't let officers in my AFSC promote past certain point either. It is what it is. I've never met an Officer that didn't care about the nuclear mission and the higher us I met including a LtGen from the Mighty 8th was deadly serious about it. I worked nukes for years at 2 different installations, our facilities tended to be nice. Yea the FS folks get more money, no shocker there. Fighter Pilots have a little prima donna thing going on, again that is what it is. We were never "shorted" because of that and we always had the money and equipment needed to fulfill the mission. If I could bitch about anything, it'd be my training. Nuke Cops ought to be going through Infantry School and other ground combat courses instead our current bullshit. Instead of addressing that real issue we throw manning at the problem. The AF does take the mission serious; they give us the money, the manning, and the AFI's that tell us how to shit and what it better look like when we're done. The only people that have leeway in the nuke game is USAF SF, MUNS and MXS doesn't have shit. They have a TO and they follow it exactly or its game over and their Commander will get all Rapey on them. If anyone is failing its my career field a we'll take anyone, give some so-so training, and shove them into a WSA or missile field. Big AF may be enablers of the problem but they aren't the problem. Lemay wrote the book on the AF Nuke mission, why we won't use his blueprint again is the part I'm fucking stumped about. Sylvan has already gone into it a bit, so I'll state it as simply as possible to avoid misunderstanding: organizationally, the AF does not care about the nuke mission and would embrace its failure if it were possible/permissible. The AF personally who service the nuke mission directly care deeply about the mission and perform their duties with dedication. There's an important distinction between the two facets What would be an acceptable manner to embrace the issue in your opinion? I know tons of folks got canned, new inspections put in place, and a new MAJCOM stood up among other changes. I know a lot of PME now has nuke stuff in it as well so it seems like its being addressed form the top down. I'm at a loss as to how leadership doesn't care, they don't shut up about it.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/2/2015 12:25:03 PM EDT
[#37]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Does it seem like a problem to you that there is zero tolerance for failure in your line of work, with massive punishments for failure, and it's not a career path? Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Lemay wrote the book on the AF Nuke mission, why we won't use his blueprint again is the part I'm fucking stumped about. because the AF leadership doesn't care. Its not a mystery. AF is about airplanes, not airpower. I've never had conversations on the topic outside of MAJCOM leadership so I can't really attest to how much "they" care. I know MAJCOM doesn't fucking play, Nuke Base leadership will roast a mofo that doesn't do their business IAW regs/checklists. Nukes certainly don't have the sexiness of fighter jets, I'll concede that. I do have a hard time believing they don't care though as every time a slip up takes place, it gets plastered on the national news and Wing leadership gets canned. With your POV in mind, would it be fair to say the Wing leaders are being whipping boys for a greater problem? Does it seem like a problem to you that there is zero tolerance for failure in your line of work, with massive punishments for failure, and it's not a career path? I hate to answer a question with a question as it comes off smart-assy.... But would you want me or my team to fail in our mission to secure a nuclear weapon because someone wasn't handling their shit like an adult? A failure to do my job means a nuke gets stolen or captured. In my opinion some stuff requires zero tolerance, this seems like it ought to be one of them. I get what you're hinting at but I really don't know another way to address the issue. The work is generally cold, miserable, unglamorous, and at times lonely as fuck but its monumentally important, nuke security is as "vital to national security" as it gets 99% of the time. Personally I feel unfucking the career field from the top down and the bottom up would address most issues, after that looking at heavy handed policies would be something I could entertain. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/2/2015 12:25:39 PM EDT
[#38]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I've never had conversations on the topic outside of MAJCOM leadership so I can't really attest to how much "they" care. I know MAJCOM doesn't fucking play, Nuke Base leadership will roast a mofo that doesn't do their business IAW regs/checklists. Nukes certainly don't have the sexiness of fighter jets, I'll concede that. I do have a hard time believing they don't care though as every time a slip up takes place, it gets plastered on the national news and Wing leadership gets canned. With your POV in mind, would it be fair to say the Wing leaders are being whipping boys for a greater problem? Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Lemay wrote the book on the AF Nuke mission, why we won't use his blueprint again is the part I'm fucking stumped about. because the AF leadership doesn't care. Its not a mystery. AF is about airplanes, not airpower. I've never had conversations on the topic outside of MAJCOM leadership so I can't really attest to how much "they" care. I know MAJCOM doesn't fucking play, Nuke Base leadership will roast a mofo that doesn't do their business IAW regs/checklists. Nukes certainly don't have the sexiness of fighter jets, I'll concede that. I do have a hard time believing they don't care though as every time a slip up takes place, it gets plastered on the national news and Wing leadership gets canned. With your POV in mind, would it be fair to say the Wing leaders are being whipping boys for a greater problem? My question is, do they care about the mission because they care, or because they don't want to get caught without a chair when the music stops, thus scuttling their careers? From my very limited perspective, the AF doesn't give a squishy shit about true security. They want the ILLUSION of security. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/2/2015 12:29:59 PM EDT
[#39]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
What would be an acceptable manner to embrace the issue in your opinion? I know tons of folks got canned, new inspections put in place, and a new MAJCOM stood up among other changes. I know a lot of PME now has nuke stuff in it as well so it seems like its being addressed form the top down. I'm at a loss as to how leadership doesn't care, they don't shut up about it.
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
The AF cares about its nuclear mission to the point where the more it fucks up, the more fighter pilots get to be general. Name a missileer who served as Chief of Staff of the Air Force. Compare the facilities in the missile fields to the fighter squadron facilities. Everyone involved in the nuclear enterprise knows the AF doesn't give a fuck about the nuclear mission. Why don't we have 40 different ways to deliver a nuclear weapon? I mean, the more the merrier, right? Its only money. Its well known AF promotions are all fucked and bound to become worse but I fail to see the relation. The fighter pilot mafia won't let officers in my AFSC promote past certain point either. It is what it is. I've never met an Officer that didn't care about the nuclear mission and the higher us I met including a LtGen from the Mighty 8th was deadly serious about it. I worked nukes for years at 2 different installations, our facilities tended to be nice. Yea the FS folks get more money, no shocker there. Fighter Pilots have a little prima donna thing going on, again that is what it is. We were never "shorted" because of that and we always had the money and equipment needed to fulfill the mission. If I could bitch about anything, it'd be my training. Nuke Cops ought to be going through Infantry School and other ground combat courses instead our current bullshit. Instead of addressing that real issue we throw manning at the problem. The AF does take the mission serious; they give us the money, the manning, and the AFI's that tell us how to shit and what it better look like when we're done. The only people that have leeway in the nuke game is USAF SF, MUNS and MXS doesn't have shit. They have a TO and they follow it exactly or its game over and their Commander will get all Rapey on them. If anyone is failing its my career field a we'll take anyone, give some so-so training, and shove them into a WSA or missile field. Big AF may be enablers of the problem but they aren't the problem. Lemay wrote the book on the AF Nuke mission, why we won't use his blueprint again is the part I'm fucking stumped about. Sylvan has already gone into it a bit, so I'll state it as simply as possible to avoid misunderstanding: organizationally, the AF does not care about the nuke mission and would embrace its failure if it were possible/permissible. The AF personally who service the nuke mission directly care deeply about the mission and perform their duties with dedication. There's an important distinction between the two facets What would be an acceptable manner to embrace the issue in your opinion? I know tons of folks got canned, new inspections put in place, and a new MAJCOM stood up among other changes. I know a lot of PME now has nuke stuff in it as well so it seems like its being addressed form the top down. I'm at a loss as to how leadership doesn't care, they don't shut up about it.
For starters, do a tour in missiles before you can even ask to see an aircraft. Missiles can't remain a place where careers go to stagnate, nor can it be a repository for those who can't fly. It needs to be an indispensable career stepping stone and opportunity for ultimate advancement. That's simplistic, sure, but it's a beginning in the process, with the top and bottom looking to meet in the middle and establish an environment of common ground with regard to the nation's real national defense doctrine. A kind of skin in the game and a place to excel in the absence of flying club membership. The overall culture is a large animal to be eaten one piece at a time, but culture and one's investment in it has to be addressed in the front end. Breeding the problem out is a start. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/2/2015 12:34:15 PM EDT
[#40]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
My question is, do they care about the mission because they care, or because they don't want to get caught without a chair when the music stops, thus scuttling their careers? From my very limited perspective, the AF doesn't give a squishy shit about true security. They want the ILLUSION of security. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Lemay wrote the book on the AF Nuke mission, why we won't use his blueprint again is the part I'm fucking stumped about. because the AF leadership doesn't care. Its not a mystery. AF is about airplanes, not airpower. I've never had conversations on the topic outside of MAJCOM leadership so I can't really attest to how much "they" care. I know MAJCOM doesn't fucking play, Nuke Base leadership will roast a mofo that doesn't do their business IAW regs/checklists. Nukes certainly don't have the sexiness of fighter jets, I'll concede that. I do have a hard time believing they don't care though as every time a slip up takes place, it gets plastered on the national news and Wing leadership gets canned. With your POV in mind, would it be fair to say the Wing leaders are being whipping boys for a greater problem? My question is, do they care about the mission because they care, or because they don't want to get caught without a chair when the music stops, thus scuttling their careers? From my very limited perspective, the AF doesn't give a squishy shit about true security. They want the ILLUSION of security. Deterrence is the preferred nomenclature, not illusion. Limited experience, indeed. I can't answer your question, I'm not an Officer. I FEEL like they do, the never ending lip service from Senior leaders and now its inclusion into PME leads me to think that they're serious. My own experiences at Minot taught me MAJCOM leaders are as serious as it gets.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/2/2015 12:35:43 PM EDT
[#41]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
For starters, do a tour in missiles before you can even ask to see an aircraft. Missiles can't remain a place where careers go to stagnate, nor can it be a repository for those who can't fly. It needs to be an indispensable career stepping stone and opportunity for ultimate advancement. That's simplistic, sure, but it's a beginning in the process, with the top and bottom looking to meet in the middle and establish an environment of common ground with regard to the nation's real national defense doctrine. A kind of skin in the game and a place to excel in the absence of flying club membership. The overall culture is a large animal to be eaten one piece at a time, but culture and one's investment in it has to be addressed in the front end. Breeding the problem out is a start. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Sylvan has already gone into it a bit, so I'll state it as simply as possible to avoid misunderstanding: organizationally, the AF does not care about the nuke mission and would embrace its failure if it were possible/permissible. The AF personally who service the nuke mission directly care deeply about the mission and perform their duties with dedication. There's an important distinction between the two facets What would be an acceptable manner to embrace the issue in your opinion? I know tons of folks got canned, new inspections put in place, and a new MAJCOM stood up among other changes. I know a lot of PME now has nuke stuff in it as well so it seems like its being addressed form the top down. I'm at a loss as to how leadership doesn't care, they don't shut up about it.
For starters, do a tour in missiles before you can even ask to see an aircraft. Missiles can't remain a place where careers go to stagnate, nor can it be a repository for those who can't fly. It needs to be an indispensable career stepping stone and opportunity for ultimate advancement. That's simplistic, sure, but it's a beginning in the process, with the top and bottom looking to meet in the middle and establish an environment of common ground with regard to the nation's real national defense doctrine. A kind of skin in the game and a place to excel in the absence of flying club membership. The overall culture is a large animal to be eaten one piece at a time, but culture and one's investment in it has to be addressed in the front end. Breeding the problem out is a start. What about just folding the AF back into the Army? |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/2/2015 12:38:31 PM EDT
[#42]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I hate to answer a question with a question as it comes off smart-assy.... But would you want me or my team to fail in our mission to secure a nuclear weapon because someone wasn't handling their shit like an adult? A failure to do my job means a nuke gets stolen or captured. In my opinion some stuff requires zero tolerance, this seems like it ought to be one of them. I get what you're hinting at but I really don't know another way to address the issue. The work is generally cold, miserable, unglamorous, and at times lonely as fuck but its monumentally important, nuke security is as "vital to national security" as it gets 99% of the time. Personally I feel unfucking the career field from the top down and the bottom up would address most issues, after that looking at heavy handed policies would be something I could entertain. I don't mind at all, in fact that really laid it out there. You guys have a tough, shitty job, that's absolutely VITAL to the Air Force and the nation, and the service treats you like a bunch of second or third-stringers. That's a problem. Both for the kind of people it will attract to the Security Forces job, and offers easy avenues of corruption by foreign agents. Nuke guys, both military and civilian, should be treated like astronauts. That they're not is telling. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/2/2015 12:40:01 PM EDT
[#43]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
What about just folding the AF back into the Army? Well, then you'd have strategic assets being used for the needs of the Army. Oh wait...
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/2/2015 12:40:35 PM EDT
[#44]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
For starters, do a tour in missiles before you can even ask to see an aircraft. Missiles can't remain a place where careers go to stagnate, nor can it be a repository for those who can't fly. It needs to be an indispensable career stepping stone and opportunity for ultimate advancement. That's simplistic, sure, but it's a beginning in the process, with the top and bottom looking to meet in the middle and establish an environment of common ground with regard to the nation's real national defense doctrine. A kind of skin in the game and a place to excel in the absence of flying club membership. The overall culture is a large animal to be eaten one piece at a time, but culture and one's investment in it has to be addressed in the front end. Breeding the problem out is a start. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
The AF cares about its nuclear mission to the point where the more it fucks up, the more fighter pilots get to be general. Name a missileer who served as Chief of Staff of the Air Force. Compare the facilities in the missile fields to the fighter squadron facilities. Everyone involved in the nuclear enterprise knows the AF doesn't give a fuck about the nuclear mission. Why don't we have 40 different ways to deliver a nuclear weapon? I mean, the more the merrier, right? Its only money. Its well known AF promotions are all fucked and bound to become worse but I fail to see the relation. The fighter pilot mafia won't let officers in my AFSC promote past certain point either. It is what it is. I've never met an Officer that didn't care about the nuclear mission and the higher us I met including a LtGen from the Mighty 8th was deadly serious about it. I worked nukes for years at 2 different installations, our facilities tended to be nice. Yea the FS folks get more money, no shocker there. Fighter Pilots have a little prima donna thing going on, again that is what it is. We were never "shorted" because of that and we always had the money and equipment needed to fulfill the mission. If I could bitch about anything, it'd be my training. Nuke Cops ought to be going through Infantry School and other ground combat courses instead our current bullshit. Instead of addressing that real issue we throw manning at the problem. The AF does take the mission serious; they give us the money, the manning, and the AFI's that tell us how to shit and what it better look like when we're done. The only people that have leeway in the nuke game is USAF SF, MUNS and MXS doesn't have shit. They have a TO and they follow it exactly or its game over and their Commander will get all Rapey on them. If anyone is failing its my career field a we'll take anyone, give some so-so training, and shove them into a WSA or missile field. Big AF may be enablers of the problem but they aren't the problem. Lemay wrote the book on the AF Nuke mission, why we won't use his blueprint again is the part I'm fucking stumped about. Sylvan has already gone into it a bit, so I'll state it as simply as possible to avoid misunderstanding: organizationally, the AF does not care about the nuke mission and would embrace its failure if it were possible/permissible. The AF personally who service the nuke mission directly care deeply about the mission and perform their duties with dedication. There's an important distinction between the two facets What would be an acceptable manner to embrace the issue in your opinion? I know tons of folks got canned, new inspections put in place, and a new MAJCOM stood up among other changes. I know a lot of PME now has nuke stuff in it as well so it seems like its being addressed form the top down. I'm at a loss as to how leadership doesn't care, they don't shut up about it.
For starters, do a tour in missiles before you can even ask to see an aircraft. Missiles can't remain a place where careers go to stagnate, nor can it be a repository for those who can't fly. It needs to be an indispensable career stepping stone and opportunity for ultimate advancement. That's simplistic, sure, but it's a beginning in the process, with the top and bottom looking to meet in the middle and establish an environment of common ground with regard to the nation's real national defense doctrine. A kind of skin in the game and a place to excel in the absence of flying club membership. The overall culture is a large animal to be eaten one piece at a time, but culture and one's investment in it has to be addressed in the front end. Breeding the problem out is a start. I got done reading your reply and the first thing I thought was "that'll be a tough sell". |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/2/2015 12:44:38 PM EDT
[#45]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
They've got a super bunker buster bomb that can probably take out any Iranian subterranean target. Probably done to make a point after the talks, showing what will happen if Iran fails to keep their end of the deal. And to a lesser degree, try to calm down Israel, showing that we have a "plan" if Iran misbehaves. Other way around. Dear Leader is on Iran's side. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/2/2015 12:47:07 PM EDT
[#46]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I hate to answer a question with a question as it comes off smart-assy.... But would you want me or my team to fail in our mission to secure a nuclear weapon because someone wasn't handling their shit like an adult? A failure to do my job means a nuke gets stolen or captured. In my opinion some stuff requires zero tolerance, this seems like it ought to be one of them. I get what you're hinting at but I really don't know another way to address the issue. The work is generally cold, miserable, unglamorous, and at times lonely as fuck but its monumentally important, nuke security is as "vital to national security" as it gets 99% of the time. Personally I feel unfucking the career field from the top down and the bottom up would address most issues, after that looking at heavy handed policies would be something I could entertain. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Lemay wrote the book on the AF Nuke mission, why we won't use his blueprint again is the part I'm fucking stumped about. because the AF leadership doesn't care. Its not a mystery. AF is about airplanes, not airpower. I've never had conversations on the topic outside of MAJCOM leadership so I can't really attest to how much "they" care. I know MAJCOM doesn't fucking play, Nuke Base leadership will roast a mofo that doesn't do their business IAW regs/checklists. Nukes certainly don't have the sexiness of fighter jets, I'll concede that. I do have a hard time believing they don't care though as every time a slip up takes place, it gets plastered on the national news and Wing leadership gets canned. With your POV in mind, would it be fair to say the Wing leaders are being whipping boys for a greater problem? Does it seem like a problem to you that there is zero tolerance for failure in your line of work, with massive punishments for failure, and it's not a career path? I hate to answer a question with a question as it comes off smart-assy.... But would you want me or my team to fail in our mission to secure a nuclear weapon because someone wasn't handling their shit like an adult? A failure to do my job means a nuke gets stolen or captured. In my opinion some stuff requires zero tolerance, this seems like it ought to be one of them. I get what you're hinting at but I really don't know another way to address the issue. The work is generally cold, miserable, unglamorous, and at times lonely as fuck but its monumentally important, nuke security is as "vital to national security" as it gets 99% of the time. Personally I feel unfucking the career field from the top down and the bottom up would address most issues, after that looking at heavy handed policies would be something I could entertain. Gilly addressed this in succinct fashion. Zero tolerance breeds and illusion of success. It institutionalizes procedures designed to make the numbers look correct on paper so the leadership can say it doesn't have a problem, but this incapacitates said leadership in the face of real issues, as they don't know (and don't want to know) that there's a problem. By default, they cannot act. We all know the first priority of work. For nukes, it's still security with accountability, which is great. However, the same emphasis is placed on all levels of performance and their measures, as if to prove that nothing could possibly be wrong, ever. It's cool to tell your bosses how you run the tightest ship in the industry, show them numbers, describe processes and puff your chest out in your eliteness. You do that at the expense of real preparedness. The whole apparatus becomes a slave to the service of abstract justifications to outsiders, with the price being paid by the guys on the ground. Since they can't fail, they find ways to succeed without abandoning the actual mission in favor of the superfluous requirements of management. How is this done? Well, just like is has been since the beginning of time: motherfuckers script processes and training, pencil whip documentation and flat out lie in order to create the time and space they need to to their jobs, with management wallowing in the cognitive dissonance of "if I don't know, I don't have to lie"... and the paper matrix shows uniform success. Of course, this doesn't not mean success in the strictest sense, which is what zero tolerance pretends to mean. The actual product is a dance along the razor's edge between success and failure, with the perils of the situation going unseen and unaddressed. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/2/2015 12:48:01 PM EDT
[#47]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
What about just folding the AF back into the Army? Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Sylvan has already gone into it a bit, so I'll state it as simply as possible to avoid misunderstanding: organizationally, the AF does not care about the nuke mission and would embrace its failure if it were possible/permissible. The AF personally who service the nuke mission directly care deeply about the mission and perform their duties with dedication. There's an important distinction between the two facets What would be an acceptable manner to embrace the issue in your opinion? I know tons of folks got canned, new inspections put in place, and a new MAJCOM stood up among other changes. I know a lot of PME now has nuke stuff in it as well so it seems like its being addressed form the top down. I'm at a loss as to how leadership doesn't care, they don't shut up about it.
For starters, do a tour in missiles before you can even ask to see an aircraft. Missiles can't remain a place where careers go to stagnate, nor can it be a repository for those who can't fly. It needs to be an indispensable career stepping stone and opportunity for ultimate advancement. That's simplistic, sure, but it's a beginning in the process, with the top and bottom looking to meet in the middle and establish an environment of common ground with regard to the nation's real national defense doctrine. A kind of skin in the game and a place to excel in the absence of flying club membership. The overall culture is a large animal to be eaten one piece at a time, but culture and one's investment in it has to be addressed in the front end. Breeding the problem out is a start. What about just folding the AF back into the Army? I don't want them.
But yeah, there's a real argument to be made there. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/2/2015 12:51:20 PM EDT
[#48]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I don't mind at all, in fact that really laid it out there. You guys have a tough, shitty job, that's absolutely VITAL to the Air Force and the nation, and the service treats you like a bunch of second or third-stringers. That's a problem. Both for the kind of people it will attract to the Security Forces job, and offers easy avenues of corruption by foreign agents. Nuke guys, both military and civilian, should be treated like astronauts. That they're not is telling. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
I hate to answer a question with a question as it comes off smart-assy.... But would you want me or my team to fail in our mission to secure a nuclear weapon because someone wasn't handling their shit like an adult? A failure to do my job means a nuke gets stolen or captured. In my opinion some stuff requires zero tolerance, this seems like it ought to be one of them. I get what you're hinting at but I really don't know another way to address the issue. The work is generally cold, miserable, unglamorous, and at times lonely as fuck but its monumentally important, nuke security is as "vital to national security" as it gets 99% of the time. Personally I feel unfucking the career field from the top down and the bottom up would address most issues, after that looking at heavy handed policies would be something I could entertain. I don't mind at all, in fact that really laid it out there. You guys have a tough, shitty job, that's absolutely VITAL to the Air Force and the nation, and the service treats you like a bunch of second or third-stringers. That's a problem. Both for the kind of people it will attract to the Security Forces job, and offers easy avenues of corruption by foreign agents. Nuke guys, both military and civilian, should be treated like astronauts. That they're not is telling. Well luckily I have a fix for that, "hiring standards". Stop using the god damn career field as a dumping ground for every fucking schmuck that comes along. Higher quality candidates, higher quality training for everyone, and some sort of "out" would resolve most of our problems in the nuke field. My biggest beef is guys get locked away for a decade in the northern tier, that should never happen. Big AF recently asked for nuke volunteers and offered a 4 year controlled tour. Stuff like that is making me thing they're starting to get it and they care. As far as addressing the MUNS side of things, those guys are usually squared away, I have no clue what the issue with following the TO is. Laziness or complacency perhaps. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/2/2015 12:51:24 PM EDT
[#49]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I got done reading your reply and the first thing I thought was "that'll be a tough sell". Yeah, I don't even know.... |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/2/2015 1:02:47 PM EDT
[#50]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Gilly addressed this in succinct fashion. Zero tolerance breeds and illusion of success. It institutionalizes procedures designed to make the numbers look correct on paper so the leadership can say it doesn't have a problem, but this incapacitates said leadership in the face of real issues, as they don't know (and don't want to know) that there's a problem. By default, they cannot act. We all know the first priority of work. For nukes, it's still security with accountability, which is great. However, the same emphasis is placed on all levels of performance and their measures, as if to prove that nothing could possibly be wrong, ever. It's cool to tell your bosses how you run the tightest ship in the industry, show them numbers, describe processes and puff your chest out in your eliteness. You do that at the expense of real preparedness. The whole apparatus becomes a slave to the service of abstract justifications to outsiders, with the price being paid by the guys on the ground. Since they can't fail, they find ways to succeed without abandoning the actual mission in favor of the superfluous requirements of management. How is this done? Well, just like is has been since the beginning of time: motherfuckers script processes and training, pencil whip documentation and flat out lie in order to create the time and space they need to to their jobs, with management wallowing in the cognitive dissonance of "if I don't know, I don't have to lie"... and the paper matrix shows uniform success. Of course, this doesn't not mean success in the strictest sense, which is what zero tolerance pretends to mean. The actual product is a dance along the razor's edge between success and failure, with the perils of the situation going unseen and unaddressed. I feel mentored. I see some inherent risk with what you describe though and Big Blue don't play that game. |
|
|
Win a FREE Membership!
Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!
You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.
