Comments on: Divided AF Reacts to Schwartz Speech

By: Bob W

Bob W — Mon, 29 Sep 2008 13:28:44 +0000

Our AF is still a “work-in-progress.”

Indian Air Force, in war games, gives US a run
Foreign fighter jets performed well against F-16s in recent exercises.
By Scott Baldauf | Staff writer of The Christian Science Monitor
from the November 28, 2005 edition

NEW DELHI – Mingling over a few rounds of golf, dogfighting a bit over the jungles of West Bengal — this month’s Cope India 2005 war games were billed as a standard two-week exercise between Indian and American top guns.

But in website chat rooms devoted to the arcania of fighter aircraft, there was a buzz. Arre, wa! Oh, wow! Had the Indian Air Force beat the Americans?

Not exactly, according to observers and participants. The exercises had mixed teams of Indian and American pilots on both sides, which means that both the Americans and the Indians won, and lost. Yet, observers say that in a surprising number of encounters — particularly between the American F-16s and the Indian Sukhoi-30 MKIs — the Indian pilots came out the winners.

Full story at:

http://www.csmonitor.com/2005/1128/p01s04-wosc.html

By: Trexer33

Trexer33 — Sat, 27 Sep 2008 19:57:53 +0000

Having been in the same room as the CSAF and hearing him speak first hand, it is in my opinion that the Air Force is on its way up. It has seemed in recent years that the Air Force has lost focus on its fundamentals, for instance, replacing Airmen with projects yet to get off the ground. Gen Schwartz is focused on getting back to basics. Change is on its way. He is a loyal man who keeps his word and will do everything in his power to make us a better Air Force.

By: Cold Warrior

Cold Warrior — Fri, 26 Sep 2008 15:30:59 +0000

If the Air Force wants to stop the slide, the first thing we need to do is establish our own culture of leadership based on the mission. Stop looking at industry for the latest and greatest “leadership” fads that change like the winds every five years. That is in large part why the failures have occured.

No more MBOs, TQM, Six Sigma, etc. We are the Air Force, a military branch charged with defending our nation, not a corporation out to make money.

Do we want to develop individual leaders capabable of making informed good decisions or corporate drones only doing what is best for their career? The time is now to stand up and make the change!

By: JDS

JDS — Fri, 26 Sep 2008 11:47:54 +0000

I spent some time in a no-kidding “warrior culture” and, generally, no one I knew claimed to understand the USAF culture…usually describing it as “corporate”. If USAF needs transformation, good leadership will prevail and perhaps Gen Schwartz can deliver. If the “corporation” drags its feet, if his deputies don’t get with the program and support him, USAF is screwed…again.

USMC Retired

By: Alex.Vasiliu

Alex.Vasiliu — Fri, 26 Sep 2008 06:46:37 +0000

My background is electrical engineering.I have no experience in flying any kind of airplane so maybe I should not offer any comments.
In my book the AirForce is the most technically advanced branch of the armed forces .
It should be also the most advanced in handling their contract activities.
When some of the members of the organization end up in jail( Druyun ) or kill themselves it is time for corrective actions.I do not know what they should be .The time for action is now

By: Josh

Josh — Fri, 26 Sep 2008 04:47:39 +0000

Bullwhip....I agree it all started with McPeak. The AF has forgotten to change with the times. Wouldn't Billy Mitchell be ashamed. Yes, a new fighter would be nice, but the AF can't forget about everything else it is doing. I'm still not sure they have learned much though. According to Bryant Jordan, see "AFSOC would (almost) Kill for New Gunships", the AF wants to replace some of its AC-130s. I'm guessing the older ones they are moving Florida to New Mexico. Why spend what I'm sure will be millions to move an airplane you plan on sending to the bone yard in a few years. Seems the AF is looking for ways to spend money it doesn't have. I could be wrong though. They could be looking at replacing the 18 year old AC-130U and keeping the 40 year old AC-130H.

By: BULLWHIP 22

BULLWHIP 22 — Thu, 25 Sep 2008 23:01:46 +0000

Norty Schwartz is the best hope that we have for reforming the “broken” USAF. As a former fighter pilot, I am embarrassed that the “intellectual pygmies” who flew fighters and rose to leadership positions failed the organization and the country so miserably. This failure was a long time in the making starting in the McPeak era and remaining level in the Fogleman and Ryan era. Under the failed leadership of Roche, Jumper, Wynne and Moseley, the organization fell apart rapidly and has become the “Keystone Kops” that it is today. The fact that Norty never flew fighters is largely irrevalent. There is no correlation between the type of aircraft flown and the ability to lead a flying mission. We need to all support his efforts of we might be reabsorbed into the Army.

By: Emmett "Otis" Redding

Emmett "Otis" Redding — Thu, 25 Sep 2008 20:14:11 +0000

An interesting article; but…
The basic problem with my Air Force was our leadership drank its own cool aid and demanded more. Leadership degraded from walking the line to see what is going on to sitting behind the desk and worrying about paperwork.
I learned a long time ago you can always catch up or backdate paperwork. A person’s life or limb can not be back dated – your chance to save them comes but once, if you are lucky.
As for” Nordy” and his outlook – it is in line with what the Joint Staff is saying. Irregular warfare will be used against us (also US) for the next 15 years. IMHO it will be more like 30 years. To fight that fight your need dwelling ISR, transportation, and on call immediate strike support – a three or four minute delay is unacceptable. The life and limb issue from above.
My AF has to change for our enemy and his tactics have changed. My AF has to change because the technologies we use to fight with have changed. Reading your history is fine as long as you don’t become a slave to it like we have done all too often in the past.
P.S. I have served in SAC, PACAF, TAC, ATC, and MAC; been an instructor in 5 different aircraft; been a supply officer (LGM), and done a decade’s service in SOF. A bit different than the one dimensional officers you find today.

By: Biglar

Biglar — Thu, 25 Sep 2008 19:54:26 +0000

The fighter pilots hate the idea of anyone but them getting in on the glory. Just look at who they insist pilot the AF UAVs. Then look at who flies the Army’s UAVs. Just mention to an AF guy that (lowly) enlisted members can fly and they will go into convulsions…They fear any percieved threat to their dominance.

Now, if Gen. Schwartz can get the C-17 people to realise their job is to provide support to the customer, even if that customer is some lowly army unit.

By: Ed Edwards

Ed Edwards — Thu, 25 Sep 2008 17:50:21 +0000

I served in the AF for 26 years, 8 years as a SP. 4 Years at SAC Hq and the rest in Maintenance Squadrons. When we had SAC we had the deterrant factor to be ready to destroy targets and control the Air Space anywhere in the world. Now that the AF has done away with the Alert Force and SAC we are in need of a fighting force that has been trained in alert status. Let get back to the real AF and re-enstate our Alert Force and SAC.

By: Cold Warrior

Cold Warrior — Thu, 25 Sep 2008 13:35:21 +0000

I see the anti-Air Force dolts are back in full force. Anyone who desires the AF folded back into the dunderheaded Army needs to pull their collective heads out of their arses.

By: B Thompson

B Thompson — Thu, 25 Sep 2008 11:01:33 +0000

Saying proximity to the target did not make anyone in the Air Force any better than anyone else isn’t a slap to anyone, it is making sure even the AB at the gym knows his job is important and that it takes everyone to get the job done on a daily basis and that at some point everyone’s job is the most important. If the jet is out of fuel, the most important job isn’t the fuel truck driver or the crew chief, they are both important. There was a lot more to that speech than that little excerpt and it sounds like the author is biased…must love fighters. Gen Scwartz’ speech here and at the PAC was spot-on and honest.

By: B52D

B52D — Tue, 23 Sep 2008 23:21:06 +0000

Sounds like taking the guns out of the fighters. The people that thought that one up were real swift also. Just like getting rid of SAC, that took a real brain storm to do that.

By: mulehead

mulehead — Tue, 23 Sep 2008 22:44:03 +0000

What would Hap Arnold do?

By: Guy

Guy — Tue, 23 Sep 2008 22:03:45 +0000

I have been a civilian manager for the Air Force for 18 years. I am in a position where I have had the opportunity to meet every CSAF since McPeak. I have watched the parade of military officers over the years–what the do with their power while in the job and after their career is over. Many choose to sell their influence after they leave office, as many GOs do. Some work for aerospace contractors, others try to sell $50M jumbotrons to the Thunderbirds–using the very people they helped promote behind them.

It is refreshing to hear what our new CSAF is saying. I am hoping that the core values find their way back into the Air Force culture. It is about putting integrity first and “doing the right thing” — not “doing the right thing FOR ME”. The Air Force is a part of a larger team.

The next step–our new leader has talked a lot. Let’s see what he does. If senior officers committed offenses, will he actually discipline them? Will the Air Force actually have the confidence to police its own, or will we have to wait for outside agencies to constantly point out the obviouse to us? None of the last three scandals came to light because of any AF IG activity (is there an AF IG anymore–where are they hiding?). The GAO pointed out our lack of procurement skill on the Tanker thing and the Navy help us out to figure out just how many people cannot read. The ol’ DoD IG — you name it the investigated it, and the $50M Thunderbird electronic jumbotron to prevent spectators from becoming bored during aerial demonstrations.

Over the last four years, the AF IG received COUNTLESS complaints regarding General Foglesong, the USAFE commander. They must have had four people in the office that just worked on the stuff he generated–from the use of millions in GWOT funding for base beautification, to wasting hundreds of thousands to keep up his F-16 qualifications. This command was a sad, pathetic joke. There is a war to be supported–and his bases were completely focused on base appearance (to the point of having to send a daily update of unit improvements to base appearance). Despite what must have been over 100 AF IG complaints, nothing was done. The Air Force leadership (then) did nothing. The last leadership set we had said nothing / did nothing during the last three scandals—and of the scandals were all pointed out to us by outside agencies.

So hear we are, at a crossroads. Will it be business as usual, or will the Air Force return to its core values—and put its own house in order?

By: SForce#85

SForce#85 — Tue, 23 Sep 2008 20:00:11 +0000

Amen! Tony Conner, without Air Supremecy there would be no ground war. In-case some of you have forgotten you must have control of the battle space to win and some branches of the service require toys that cost more then others to control thier portion of that space. Lets just be thankful that we came up with the F-22 and F-35 before someone else did.

By: Pavehawk208

Pavehawk208 — Tue, 23 Sep 2008 19:56:19 +0000

As a retired first sergeant, it is refreshing to see a CoS who is not concerned so much about the zipper-suited wonder gods and their lofty wants and unnecessary bravado. I like the fact that Gen Schwartz is requiring the wear of the blue uniform again, we aren’t the Army and we shouldn’t like them. Additionally, he [Schwatz] sees the need to try and restore integrity to the EPR system and finally a CoS that will listen to the CMSAF. Welcome back to earth flyboys, it’s about time you tasted a little bile with along with the rest of us.

By: Pavehawk208

Pavehawk208 — Tue, 23 Sep 2008 19:49:27 +0000

Mr. Sorber, please leave the personal attacks and unnecessary insults at home. This is not the place for childish behavior.

By: Tazman421

Tazman421 — Tue, 23 Sep 2008 17:40:09 +0000

The AF went wrong when we did away with AFR’s and went to AFI’s. Too loose interpertations…get back to the days of SAC, TAC and MAC!

By: ronnie pond

ronnie pond — Tue, 23 Sep 2008 16:05:42 +0000

I Still think that a pilot that goes up in his aircraft to fight. Puts his life on the line every minute of every day. And I think that a Air man (Officer or Enlisted or Civilian).That flys a drone While sitting in a closed,Protected room.way back in the rear Is not a pilot. Now he might be a Technician. but not a pilot.If that was the case all these Flight Simulation Gamers that Fly And Fight their wars in the sky every day on their computers could become pilots and get their pilot licences on line and take passengers up and probable get their passengers and them selfs killed.But you watch the Air Force will go ahead and classify them as pilots.and probable give them air medals,silver stars,congressinal medals of honor (or should that be humor???),and after 1000 flight time in a simulator they get their star above their pilots wings.Now that is some thing to shot for. If thats the case why not fight wars on the computer screen and then no body gets killed???.