thedrifter
05-11-07, 08:27 AM
Popeye and the USAF
By Matthew Dodd
May 11, 2007
As one of my favorite childhood heroes, Popeye the Sailor Man, was fond of saying, "I've's takens alls I can stand, and I can stands no more," so it is with me and the U.S. Air Force's recent behaviors of not "playing well with the other Services."
Before I vent my frustrations about what the Air Force has done to earn my wrath, let me include an excerpt from an article I wrote on Nov. 6, 2002 that pretty much summarizes my respect and gratitude for what the Air Force does in the defense of our great country:
"I firmly believe today's U.S. Air Force is the most advanced, most capable, and most combat-effective air force in the history of the world. It is a tremendous combat force-multiplier and we would be foolish and criminal to ever think we could execute effective combat operations without it."
I am a big believer in teamwork, and in being a team-player. Teamwork, in my opinion, is the embodiment of the old adage, "The whole is greater than the sum of its parts." With that adage as a foundation, a team-player is someone who recognizes that he/she is a part of something bigger than him/herself, and that, at times, it will be necessary to make sacrifices for the overall benefit of the team.
I have written about this team-player concept many times in my combat heroes series, where individuals have been recognized for their battlefield sacrifices, some of which were the 'ultimate sacrifice' for their fellow warriors and immediate units. I believe this team-player concept also applies to large organizations, such as our Defense Department. Sometimes, individual Services have to make sacrifices for the overall benefit of the Department. Unfortunately, sometimes, an individual Service may lose sight of the whole, and their self-centered actions inadvertently detract from their teammates' efforts. I believe the Air Force is losing sight of the rest of the team and needs to get back to being a team-player in our ongoing war against terrorism:
- As reported in the Jan. 26, 2007 CongressDailyPM article, "Air Force Chief Argues Against Diverting Funds To Army," Air Force Chief-of-Staff General Michael Moseley was vigorously resisting efforts to temporarily shift any of its budget to the Army and Marine Corps to support their extremely heavy combat deployment schedules in what has been a predominantly ground combat effort against radical extremists.
- They are the lone dissenting Service on consolidating medical support into a unified medical command which the other Services believe will lead to greater fiscal efficiencies and increased inter-Service interoperability (according to the Sep. 8 ************* article, "Unified Medical Command Gains Despite Air Force Opposition").
- The Air Force is aggressively seeking to become the executive agent for unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs), despite tremendous opposition from both the Army (which uses the most UAVs) and the Marine Corps. According to the Apr. 18, 2007 The Hill article, "Services chafe at Air Force's unmanned-aircraft proposal," some sources say that the Air Force went directly to Congress to push their agenda vice working through the normal Pentagon chain-of-command after their initial 2005 executive agency initiative was shot down by the Office of the Secretary of Defense, and by the Joint Requirements Oversight Council (JROC), which reviews programs of joint interest.
- They are resisting efforts to train airmen to do more ground support missions to free up more soldiers and Marines for ground combat assignments as explained in the April 2, 2007 Air Force Times article, "More 'Soldier' Airmen Likely Despite Air Force Objections."
- But, what pushed me 'over the edge' into my "Popeye moment" was an April 30, 2007 Honolulu Advertiser/Associated Press article, "Cash-Strapped Air Force Bases Cutting Frills." From my perspective as a retired Marine officer, it is no secret that the Air Force gets the largest percentage of the defense budget, and it is generally believed by all the Services that the Air Force has the best "quality-of-life" infrastructure to prove it. But, from my Marine culture of "being the most ready when the nation is least ready," and knowing from first-hand experiences that Marine Corps leadership has sacrificed infrastructure over the years to pay for and maintain combat readiness at all times, what I read was completely foreign to me, and it would have been almost comical if it did not have tremendous implications for our overall defense teamwork mentality:
"The fact is, our reality has changed," Col. J.J. Torres, who commands Hickam [Air Force Base (AFB)] and the 15th Airlift Wing, said in a base newspaper piece explaining the cuts. "The fiscal environment in which we operate has been constricted to the point that now (we) are making tough choices on what to keep doing, what to scale back, and what to eliminate entirely"…As of March 1, the base grounds maintenance contract was reduced to mowing and edging only once every two weeks. Youth programs are receiving less funding; the fee structure has been increased to compensate. Lodging rates have been increased 10 percent…Every 100 pounds of extra weight on a plane costs about $500,000 in fuel a year. So at Hickam, airmen stripped a KC-135 refueling plane of bunks, tool boxes and even 290 pounds in floor mats and runners to lighten the load. Some of the items - which weighed a total of about 5,000 pounds - will be returned to the plane, although possibly in lighter versions. "We took apart everything that wasn't bolted down and in some cases things that were bolted down," said Maj. Charles Anthony, a spokesman for the Hawai'i National Guard…But Torres said 'all is not doom and gloom.'"
Dodd Comments: I guess making tough choices at Hickam AFB equates to mowing and edging grass only once every two weeks; increasing fees to support lower morale, welfare, and recreation (MWR) budgets; increasing lodging rates; and lightening the load on aircraft to reduce fuel costs. Somehow, all those efficiencies fail to register on my "doom and gloom" monitor.
At Ohio's Wright-Patterson AFB, similar "doom and gloom" tough choices are being forced upon commanders:
"One of the three fitness centers has closed at the base, where the budget shrank to $452 million this year, from $626 million. Towel service at the other two gyms has been canceled for an annual savings of $247,000…In perhaps a less visible move, the base now is mowing the grass in fields in less populated areas two to three times a year instead of nearly once a week…Wright-Patterson's decision to cut mess hall privileges [for retirees] was unpopular. "We had a lot of pushback from retirees," said base spokeswoman Libby VanHook. Military retirees now are allowed to eat at the mess hall only on holidays, and midnight meal service was canceled for everyone. The base has served about 31,000 fewer meals since the policy went into effect 11 months ago and saved $199,000. John Merryman, a retiree who works on the base as a civilian, said he understands the need to cut costs but misses eating at the mess hall, where he could get a good meal for $3 to $3.50."
Dodd Comments: I am glad to hear that leaders at Wright-Patterson have finally recognized that multiple fitness centers, towel services, weekly mowing, special retiree meal privileges, and midnight meal services are luxuries, and not necessities. What I do not understand is how the Air Force tolerated these luxuries, when, according to CongressDailyPM:
"Only 56 percent of Air Force units are fully mission-capable, or militarily "ready" to deploy, compared to 68 percent in 2004, [Air Force Chief Michael] Moseley said. "Unless significant changes are made to our budget, we're risking their ability to keep these units combat ready," he told the House [Defense Appropriations Subcommittee] panel."
The only changes needed for that kind of budget is to put their money into combat readiness.
The final example of Air Force leaders being forced to make "doom and gloom" tough choices is from Shaw AFB in Sumter, S.C. which:
"…has replaced 11 pickup trucks with smaller, lighter two-person vehicles with flatbeds. Limited to speeds of 25 mph, the trucks carry aircraft parts, patrol housing areas and perform other jobs. Fuel-cost savings are estimated at $5,000 a year."
Dodd Comments: To me, "fuel-cost savings" is a nice way of admitting "fuel-cost wasting" without divulging how many years and how many dollars have been spent on inefficient vehicles and driving practices.
The Air Force, possibly for the first time in its history, is facing many monetary challenges:
"The Air Force has asked for about $111 billion in fiscal 2008, up $6 billion from the current budget. However, funds for infrastructure - base construction and maintenance - would fall from about $6 billion to $5 billion…President Bush also has directed the Air Force - which consumes 60 percent of the energy used by the federal government - to reduce energy use by 3 percent a year for the next 10 years to save money…And then there is the rising cost of maintaining a fleet of aging aircraft and paying health care for aging personnel…"All of those costs are putting dramatic pressure on our Air Force," said Brig. Gen. S. Taco Gilbert, director of Air Force Smart Operations for the 21st Century, which is trying to improve productivity and energy efficiency…"There seems to be a perception among policymakers that the ground forces are carrying most of the burden in Iraq and therefore the Air Force and Navy need to give up money to help them," said Loren Thompson, defense analyst for the Lexington Institute. 'The Air Force is under a lot of stress"…"The kind of money the Air Force needs to make ends meet is measured in billions of dollars," said defense analyst Thompson. "So clipping the grass less frequently or painting the buildings every three years is not going to cut it." However, he said that as a symbol, it speaks volumes. 'It tells you how desperate the Air Force is that it would resort to these measures.'"
Dodd Comments: I have to admit that in these times, I have a much easier time associating "stress" and "pressure" to the Army and Marine Corps, and to the families of the multiple combat deployment soldiers and Marines (with their respective accompanying Air Force and Navy ground support personnel), than I do to the Air Force in general for having to become good stewards of taxpayer monies.
It is said that desperate times require desperate measures. If that adage is true, and the Air Force efforts described above are tantamount to desperate measures as Mr. Thompson says, I sure am glad these desperate times finally got the Air Force's attention.
Our country's rich history has shown that when we stand and fight as a team, no adversary can stop us. With the Air Force on my team, I have no worries. With the Air Force not on my team, I have no confidence. After Popeye muttered the phrase that opened this article, he would muster all his strength and courage and defeat his opponent. I hope my venting here will have the same effects on the Air Force.
Ellie
By Matthew Dodd
May 11, 2007
As one of my favorite childhood heroes, Popeye the Sailor Man, was fond of saying, "I've's takens alls I can stand, and I can stands no more," so it is with me and the U.S. Air Force's recent behaviors of not "playing well with the other Services."
Before I vent my frustrations about what the Air Force has done to earn my wrath, let me include an excerpt from an article I wrote on Nov. 6, 2002 that pretty much summarizes my respect and gratitude for what the Air Force does in the defense of our great country:
"I firmly believe today's U.S. Air Force is the most advanced, most capable, and most combat-effective air force in the history of the world. It is a tremendous combat force-multiplier and we would be foolish and criminal to ever think we could execute effective combat operations without it."
I am a big believer in teamwork, and in being a team-player. Teamwork, in my opinion, is the embodiment of the old adage, "The whole is greater than the sum of its parts." With that adage as a foundation, a team-player is someone who recognizes that he/she is a part of something bigger than him/herself, and that, at times, it will be necessary to make sacrifices for the overall benefit of the team.
I have written about this team-player concept many times in my combat heroes series, where individuals have been recognized for their battlefield sacrifices, some of which were the 'ultimate sacrifice' for their fellow warriors and immediate units. I believe this team-player concept also applies to large organizations, such as our Defense Department. Sometimes, individual Services have to make sacrifices for the overall benefit of the Department. Unfortunately, sometimes, an individual Service may lose sight of the whole, and their self-centered actions inadvertently detract from their teammates' efforts. I believe the Air Force is losing sight of the rest of the team and needs to get back to being a team-player in our ongoing war against terrorism:
- As reported in the Jan. 26, 2007 CongressDailyPM article, "Air Force Chief Argues Against Diverting Funds To Army," Air Force Chief-of-Staff General Michael Moseley was vigorously resisting efforts to temporarily shift any of its budget to the Army and Marine Corps to support their extremely heavy combat deployment schedules in what has been a predominantly ground combat effort against radical extremists.
- They are the lone dissenting Service on consolidating medical support into a unified medical command which the other Services believe will lead to greater fiscal efficiencies and increased inter-Service interoperability (according to the Sep. 8 ************* article, "Unified Medical Command Gains Despite Air Force Opposition").
- The Air Force is aggressively seeking to become the executive agent for unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs), despite tremendous opposition from both the Army (which uses the most UAVs) and the Marine Corps. According to the Apr. 18, 2007 The Hill article, "Services chafe at Air Force's unmanned-aircraft proposal," some sources say that the Air Force went directly to Congress to push their agenda vice working through the normal Pentagon chain-of-command after their initial 2005 executive agency initiative was shot down by the Office of the Secretary of Defense, and by the Joint Requirements Oversight Council (JROC), which reviews programs of joint interest.
- They are resisting efforts to train airmen to do more ground support missions to free up more soldiers and Marines for ground combat assignments as explained in the April 2, 2007 Air Force Times article, "More 'Soldier' Airmen Likely Despite Air Force Objections."
- But, what pushed me 'over the edge' into my "Popeye moment" was an April 30, 2007 Honolulu Advertiser/Associated Press article, "Cash-Strapped Air Force Bases Cutting Frills." From my perspective as a retired Marine officer, it is no secret that the Air Force gets the largest percentage of the defense budget, and it is generally believed by all the Services that the Air Force has the best "quality-of-life" infrastructure to prove it. But, from my Marine culture of "being the most ready when the nation is least ready," and knowing from first-hand experiences that Marine Corps leadership has sacrificed infrastructure over the years to pay for and maintain combat readiness at all times, what I read was completely foreign to me, and it would have been almost comical if it did not have tremendous implications for our overall defense teamwork mentality:
"The fact is, our reality has changed," Col. J.J. Torres, who commands Hickam [Air Force Base (AFB)] and the 15th Airlift Wing, said in a base newspaper piece explaining the cuts. "The fiscal environment in which we operate has been constricted to the point that now (we) are making tough choices on what to keep doing, what to scale back, and what to eliminate entirely"…As of March 1, the base grounds maintenance contract was reduced to mowing and edging only once every two weeks. Youth programs are receiving less funding; the fee structure has been increased to compensate. Lodging rates have been increased 10 percent…Every 100 pounds of extra weight on a plane costs about $500,000 in fuel a year. So at Hickam, airmen stripped a KC-135 refueling plane of bunks, tool boxes and even 290 pounds in floor mats and runners to lighten the load. Some of the items - which weighed a total of about 5,000 pounds - will be returned to the plane, although possibly in lighter versions. "We took apart everything that wasn't bolted down and in some cases things that were bolted down," said Maj. Charles Anthony, a spokesman for the Hawai'i National Guard…But Torres said 'all is not doom and gloom.'"
Dodd Comments: I guess making tough choices at Hickam AFB equates to mowing and edging grass only once every two weeks; increasing fees to support lower morale, welfare, and recreation (MWR) budgets; increasing lodging rates; and lightening the load on aircraft to reduce fuel costs. Somehow, all those efficiencies fail to register on my "doom and gloom" monitor.
At Ohio's Wright-Patterson AFB, similar "doom and gloom" tough choices are being forced upon commanders:
"One of the three fitness centers has closed at the base, where the budget shrank to $452 million this year, from $626 million. Towel service at the other two gyms has been canceled for an annual savings of $247,000…In perhaps a less visible move, the base now is mowing the grass in fields in less populated areas two to three times a year instead of nearly once a week…Wright-Patterson's decision to cut mess hall privileges [for retirees] was unpopular. "We had a lot of pushback from retirees," said base spokeswoman Libby VanHook. Military retirees now are allowed to eat at the mess hall only on holidays, and midnight meal service was canceled for everyone. The base has served about 31,000 fewer meals since the policy went into effect 11 months ago and saved $199,000. John Merryman, a retiree who works on the base as a civilian, said he understands the need to cut costs but misses eating at the mess hall, where he could get a good meal for $3 to $3.50."
Dodd Comments: I am glad to hear that leaders at Wright-Patterson have finally recognized that multiple fitness centers, towel services, weekly mowing, special retiree meal privileges, and midnight meal services are luxuries, and not necessities. What I do not understand is how the Air Force tolerated these luxuries, when, according to CongressDailyPM:
"Only 56 percent of Air Force units are fully mission-capable, or militarily "ready" to deploy, compared to 68 percent in 2004, [Air Force Chief Michael] Moseley said. "Unless significant changes are made to our budget, we're risking their ability to keep these units combat ready," he told the House [Defense Appropriations Subcommittee] panel."
The only changes needed for that kind of budget is to put their money into combat readiness.
The final example of Air Force leaders being forced to make "doom and gloom" tough choices is from Shaw AFB in Sumter, S.C. which:
"…has replaced 11 pickup trucks with smaller, lighter two-person vehicles with flatbeds. Limited to speeds of 25 mph, the trucks carry aircraft parts, patrol housing areas and perform other jobs. Fuel-cost savings are estimated at $5,000 a year."
Dodd Comments: To me, "fuel-cost savings" is a nice way of admitting "fuel-cost wasting" without divulging how many years and how many dollars have been spent on inefficient vehicles and driving practices.
The Air Force, possibly for the first time in its history, is facing many monetary challenges:
"The Air Force has asked for about $111 billion in fiscal 2008, up $6 billion from the current budget. However, funds for infrastructure - base construction and maintenance - would fall from about $6 billion to $5 billion…President Bush also has directed the Air Force - which consumes 60 percent of the energy used by the federal government - to reduce energy use by 3 percent a year for the next 10 years to save money…And then there is the rising cost of maintaining a fleet of aging aircraft and paying health care for aging personnel…"All of those costs are putting dramatic pressure on our Air Force," said Brig. Gen. S. Taco Gilbert, director of Air Force Smart Operations for the 21st Century, which is trying to improve productivity and energy efficiency…"There seems to be a perception among policymakers that the ground forces are carrying most of the burden in Iraq and therefore the Air Force and Navy need to give up money to help them," said Loren Thompson, defense analyst for the Lexington Institute. 'The Air Force is under a lot of stress"…"The kind of money the Air Force needs to make ends meet is measured in billions of dollars," said defense analyst Thompson. "So clipping the grass less frequently or painting the buildings every three years is not going to cut it." However, he said that as a symbol, it speaks volumes. 'It tells you how desperate the Air Force is that it would resort to these measures.'"
Dodd Comments: I have to admit that in these times, I have a much easier time associating "stress" and "pressure" to the Army and Marine Corps, and to the families of the multiple combat deployment soldiers and Marines (with their respective accompanying Air Force and Navy ground support personnel), than I do to the Air Force in general for having to become good stewards of taxpayer monies.
It is said that desperate times require desperate measures. If that adage is true, and the Air Force efforts described above are tantamount to desperate measures as Mr. Thompson says, I sure am glad these desperate times finally got the Air Force's attention.
Our country's rich history has shown that when we stand and fight as a team, no adversary can stop us. With the Air Force on my team, I have no worries. With the Air Force not on my team, I have no confidence. After Popeye muttered the phrase that opened this article, he would muster all his strength and courage and defeat his opponent. I hope my venting here will have the same effects on the Air Force.
Ellie