PDA

View Full Version : Are Air Force Generals Capable of Leading?



thedrifter
12-20-07, 08:53 AM
12-17-2007

Are Air Force Generals Capable of Leading?
By Paul Connors

I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again, the Army Times Publishing Company often does a great job of military reporting that the average American will never see in mainstream media outlets. They report on topics and subjects that many civilians probably don’t know about and if asked, probably don’t care about. Perhaps that’s as it should be, but I’d prefer to hope that the average American might have just enough interest in military affairs to care about how we really treat our troops. Then again, on my most pessimistic days, I’d be willing to bet that the average taxpayer, without relatives in uniform, gives scant thought to the G.I.s deployed in harm’s way.

Now that we’ve qualified our readers, I think I will address the audience that I’m most familiar with: the men and women of the United States Air Force and its two reserve components. These men and women, who deploy and support all of the operations in Iraq and Afghanistan have had to deal with the same hardships as other deploying Americans. At the same time, they’ve also being saddled with aging equipment and leaders whose primary focus seems to be supporting the folks in the pea-soup green or desert tan flight suits. While some would argue that is as it should be because the war-fighters in the USAF have traditionally been the pilots and other aircrew members, the reality is totally different. Too many Air Force members, from security forces troops, transportation specialists and medical personnel have been assigned “in lieu of” duties supporting the Army in both Iraq and Afghanistan. And these folks do these jobs during a period of service-wide belt tightening that will leave the Air Force 53,000 people smaller than it was just five years ago.

Each of armed services has civilian and military leaders who theoretically look after the interests of that service when it comes to budget appropriations from Congress. Or at least one would hope they do. In the case of the Air Force, it’s been several years since I started to doubt that the service had leaders who really looked after the welfare of its members and their equipment. In my last article for DefenseWatch, THIS IS LEADERSHIP? published on September 24, 2007, I discussed the age of the aircraft fleet and the fact that senior uniformed leaders are only now pointing out the dire maintenance straits faced by the service’s fighter force. These same generals are the successors to leaders from the early and mid-1990s who silently acquiesced to the budget cuts and force drawdowns imposed on the military by the Clinton administration. These were the same force reductions that exceeded those recommended at the end of the first Bush administration. During this period, equipment re-capitalization was neglected and now, half a generation later, the F-15 A-D portion of the fighter force is nearly 25 years old. By 2012, the Air Force will be forced to retire nearly 300 fighter aircraft that have outlived their usefulness or are too costly to maintain. These aircraft, a mix of both F-15s and F-16s will not be replaced on a one-for-one basis with the F-22 Raptor and the F-35 Lightning II.

So what have Air Force leaders done in the years since 1991 to stem the tide of mass equipment shortfalls and retirements? Very little of substance. They didn’t speak up; they didn’t tell successive administrations or Congresses that they needed more money to buy replacement aircraft and parts. For most part, these Air Force generals and their service secretaries kept quiet and waited for the train wreck to arrive, while knowing in their hearts that a massive wreck would probably happen short of the station.

Where are the critical shortages in the Air Force? Where would you like to start? What does the service need? Just about everything.

Re-capitalization of the aircraft fleet has been neglected folks and to pay for it, the geniuses on the Air Staff have once again decided to pay for it by reducing the number of people in uniform. The problem with that is, the service’s bean counters have already revealed what those who care about the Air Force knew along and that is that you can’t fire enough people in blue to pay for new aircraft.

Here’s a short list of the aircraft needs facing the United States Air Force in the first decade of the 21st century:
Tankers – used to refuel fighters and cargo aircraft as they transit the globe.

Fighters – to replace the 1970s and 80s vintage F-15s and F-16s used by active duty, Air National Guard and Air Force Reserve units around the country and stationed overseas.

SAR Helicopters: the replacement program for the HH-60 PAVE HAWKS has been seriously delayed by a protest of award after the Air Force selected the HH-47 Chinook to replace the entire fleet of rescue helicopters now in use. Instead, Congress just re-directed $99 million for upgrades to existing airframes until another helicopter is selected for the CSAR-X program.

Cargo Aircraft – after years of insisting they had enough transports in service, the rapid deterioration of C-5 Galaxies resulted in the supplemental purchases of additional C-17A Globemaster III aircraft from Boeing. The wars in Afghanistan and Iraq have created huge logistical trains and the Air Force finally had to admit it couldn’t fulfill mission requirements with the aircraft on hand. Thankfully, there were those in Congress who either didn’t believe or trust the claims of the service’s leaders and they appropriated additional funding for more airframes. In the process, they probably saved the taxpayers money by NOT letting the Boeing production line end. To restart it after the fact would have cost the service and the nation an additional $10 billion just to reopen it.

The astute observer of American defense procurements over the last fifteen years would have successfully predicted what the Air Force now faces. One didn’t need a crystal ball; all they would have needed was a $10 calculator, a list of the Air Force’s inventory, the in-service dates for the airframes and a rough guess of acquisition plans for future years. It would have been fairly easy, even back then, to be able predict massive aircraft maintenance budget problems and equipment shortfalls. Sadly, those predictions, even if unmade, have come true.

What is equally sad is that they could have been prevented, just as they can be prevented for the future. To do this however, the United States Air Force will need real leaders, not managers in uniform with stars on their epaulets. The service needs officers with the moral courage to stand up and when necessary speak out. The service needs general officers who will risk everything, including their careers, to do what is right for their service and the nation it helps to protect.

Until someone with the moral courage necessary to really lead the United States Air Force is appointed to the position of Chief of Staff, then we will continue to be saddled with dilettantes who think accomplishing something is designing a new (and more expensive) no-iron “Airman’s Battle Uniform.”

If the day comes when we get a leader of the caliber of Jimmy Doolittle or Carl Spaatz or Curtis Lemay again, I’ll start to hope. Until then, I’ll worry about our Air Force. Likewise, so should the men and women in blue and the taxpayers who pay the bills.

Ellie

Isrowei
12-20-07, 09:12 AM
Is this seriously an Air Force guy complaining about their budget (or lack thereof)?

Good God... they have multiple times the size and spending power of the Marine Corps.

Pathetic. Tell them to turn off their A/C once a month and see how far that gets.

CHOPPER7199
12-20-07, 10:25 AM
Makes ya wonder how much is spent on there skunk works projects.

Nimrod1193
12-20-07, 02:14 PM
When I was in the Air Force (1983-1988), my impression was that the generals running the show were primarily interested in the latest whiz-bang fighter technology and changing the uniforms every few years. It would appear that has not changed.

FistFu68
12-20-07, 05:23 PM
:evilgrin: IF THEY WERE TOO TELL YOU THE TRUTH,THEY'ED END UP LIKE GEN.PACE :evilgrin:

greensideout
12-20-07, 05:47 PM
Is this seriously an Air Force guy complaining about their budget (or lack thereof)?

Good God... they have multiple times the size and spending power of the Marine Corps.

Pathetic. Tell them to turn off their A/C once a month and see how far that gets.


When I was in, we were told that the entire Marine Corps budget was less then the Special Services budget of the Air Force. When you think about it though, they have more toys and gadgets to buy.

mrbsox
12-20-07, 06:55 PM
I will address the audience that I’m most familiar with: the men and women of the United States Air Force and its two reserve components. These men and women, who deploy and support all of the operations in Iraq and Afghanistan have had to deal with the same hardships as other deploying Americans. At the same time, they’ve also being saddled with aging equipment and leaders whose primary focus seems to be supporting the folks in the pea-soup green or desert tan flight suits.

A few years back, about 2003, we had an E7 reservist in the office, just got back from deployment. he *****ed and moaned about the conditions he had to live in until their 'hotel' was built. Had to stay in TRAILERS until their quarters were ready :devious:

my veteran SEAL boss and i would just laugh, until we found out that he was deplaoyed to;



..


..


Fkn SOUTH CAROLINA !!

Then we were just ****ed.

Zulu 36
12-20-07, 08:12 PM
Having spent 14-years in the Air National Guard, it was my experience that if the USAF was a commercial firm, it would be out of business like Enron and half of the general officers in prison for insider trading or other stupid stuff.

The AF has a massive budget compared to the Corps, but really, they do have a much larger infrastructure.

The AF considers pilots and aircrew to be The Gods, aircraft maintainers to be Assistant Gods, and everyone else to be floor mats. Except the 701s (admin pukes) who put themselves in for every medal they can get away with.

Until recently, firing a rifle in basic training was optional for most trainees (future security police and a few others were required to shoot). Rifle shooting was a joke anyway, consisting of only something like ten shots after some training on the M16. Now it is mandatory for all, but I don't think the extent of shooting training has changed. Of course, security police, and some others, went to their schools and did more shooting.

When my Guard unit deployed for Desert Shield/Storm, our transport from Germany had a guy on it from the security police unit we were joining (he'd been at Ramstein for some medical treatment). He did nothing but whine and snivel about "living in tents." I figured it was no big deal, I had lived rougher as a Marine at 29 Stumps in the summer. Better than a plain hole in the ground.

Although we were a Guard unit, we took our combat training seriously and spent a lot of field time in tents - old shelter-halves, GP Mediums, and the like. High living was being in old WWII-era wooden barracks with no A/C, and lucky to have heat in the winter. Hot water was a bonus any time of year.

We get in-country and the tents this clown was crying about were Temper tents with A/C and heat units attached, and hard floors. Christ on a crutch. It was much better than the WWII barracks. The active AF pukes thought we were nuts when we thought those Temper tents were great. Their complaining got really old, really fast though.

Big Jim
12-20-07, 09:11 PM
Is this seriously an Air Force guy complaining about their budget (or lack thereof)?

Good God... they have multiple times the size and spending power of the Marine Corps.

Pathetic. Tell them to turn off their A/C once a month and see how far that gets.


I agree, Lt.!!! One time, I went to Shaikh Isa Air Base to deliver some small arms during Desert Shield/ Storm on the Air Force side of Bahrain, these fvcken idiots had individual air conditioners in each tent in their tent city!!! I couldn't believe it!! They even built themselves a real building for a chow hall!!! Who ever made THESE decisions had to have been an Air Force General somewhere! So, my vote would be "NO," Air Force Generals aren't able to effectively lead and command!!!