Temp Reading Making it Up the Chain - And it's Not Good

My last blog post concerned the Reduction in Force (RIF) and the Voluntary Separation Pay (VSP) program that has recently concluded, and the outrage that has been generated among much of the Air Force rated force. More than 50 negative comments were posted to the story released on the official Air Force website. A Facebook group was created concerning the VSP Program. Letters of complaint have been to sent to Congressman, there is talk of legal action, and according to participants at a well known online Air Force pilot watering hole, some leadership is starting to see the looming manning crisis that is coming and committing to take action.

Apparently General Welsh, USAFE Commander, sent the following mass email out recently:

To USAFE Fighter Pilots


I need your help. During a recent 4-star meeting, we talked about what appears to be a pending fighter pilot shortage. The AF's rated personnel management folks are projecting a 300 fighter pilot shortfall in FY13 that could grow to over 1000 by FY21. They also told us that the fighter community's bonus "take rate" is 10% lower than the rest of the rated community. Obviously, many of you are leaving, or thinking about leaving, the Air Force for other opportunities. If you've already made the decision to do so, then please accept my sincere thanks for your service and best wishes for every success in the future...it's an honor to have served beside you. My concern is not that you've made the choice to pursue a new path, but that we don't really understand why you made the choice.

You may have heard the story about a Captain fighter pilot who wrote a letter to the Commander of Tactical Air Command a couple of years after the end of the Vietnam War. The letter started "Dear Boss, Well, I quit" and went on to list the frustrations that he and his peers were experiencing. I just read a more recent version, written in 2009. It's attached to this note. If you believe the author, some things may not have changed much in 30 years.

Our Air Force is in a dynamic state of change and its leaders need to know why some of their most talented, highly trained people are leaving. As we transition to a 5th Generation fighter force, we simply can't afford to lose front line fighter pilots at our current rate.

I understand that it's a busy time to be in the Air Force. The fighter community is faced with an increasing ops tempo, fewer fighters, less flying, more non-flying jobs and an unclear career sight picture. My gut feeling is that this combination contributes to good people leaving, but I doubt these are the only factors. I suspect some of the issues raised in the Dear Boss letter are also in play. But, most importantly, I don't know for sure. And I don't believe AF leaders can make smart fighter pilot force management decisions until we do.

Interestingly, we also have a fighter WSO shortage which will persist for the next few years. But the longer term trends for that career field are positive. That's clearly not the case with fighter pilots and I want to know as much as possible about what's causing retention to move in the wrong direction.

So, I have a favor to ask. I'd like to hear your thoughts on what is driving fighter pilot retention down. You can send them directly to my CAG at [removed]. They'll strip names off the inputs, then pass them to me, unedited. I'm looking for the ground truth as you see it, not the filtered, watered-down "this is what the boss wants to hear" truth. Once I've seen it all, I'll give you some feedback...including what I plan to do with the info.

Let me close by saying "Thank You" to you and your families for all of your hard work and sacrifice. You, and so many other great Airmen in so many career fields, are the reason we're the world's greatest Air Force. But no matter how good we are, we need to get better. When your job is to fight and win your Nation's wars, you can never be good enough. I will do everything in my power to make USAFE more combat capable; that includes trying to keep our best fighter pilots on Active Duty. If you think "best fighter pilot" refers to you, please let me know what you think. If you don't, this note isn't for you.

R/Boomer

In my experience, pilots are counting the days until they can get out of the Air Force. I've even heard half-hearted dreams of escaping to South America. Many feel they are in a job with long hours located where there is no hope of getting married or having any meaningful social life. They look at long commitments after pilot training and are scared they will end up single, unfulfilled, and old. If they're already married, they want more time with their families. They're tired of the ops tempo. They're not concerned about flying for the airlines, they just want out. They're tired of the politics, the quality of leadership, silly promotion requirements and hours spent crafting performance reports that are all but useless and time consuming. They're done with brass escaping accountability, double speak, and different spanks for different ranks. They're tired of not being able to believe the words that come out of the mouths of their leaders. They're tired of support being cut, and non-flying tasks being put in their laps after a long shift of flying. They look at the end of the tunnel and are not convinced they will be taken care of, if they continue to serve. Many anticipate a stop loss, because they know what leadership apparently does not, that the Air Force will be hemorrhaging rated combat experienced talent in the very near future. Most agree that the Air Force should have seen it coming.

They know they have signed the dotted line, and will serve out what they agreed to. But what they are making clear to any who will listen, is they will not be around longer than required.

Accurate Temperature Readings

I love how the Air Force is harnessing the internet and its liberal blog policy to provide leadership with a more accurate reading of what is going on in the service. The recent Reduction in Force (RIF) initiative, and the Voluntary Separation Pay (VSP) program it spawned, has provided a rare glimpse into the opinions held by many airmen. Especially the rated aviators who most directly wield America's airpower.

Check out the comments section from this official Air Force webpage: http://www.af.mil/news/story.asp?id=123252616

For more background information the following thread on Air Force "force shaping", from a website that is a well known cyber watering hole for Air Force aviators, is priceless: http://www.flyingsquadron.com/forums/index.php?/topic/4377-force-shaping-vsp/

According to the thread above, an email sent to Air Force commanders indicates that the Secretary of the Air Force was "overwhelmed" by the number of people who wanted out of the service, and particularly the number of rated individuals. It seems the temperature reading hasn't been all that accurate at the top, and it's good to see the internet is providing it for Air Force leadership.

Where There is Smoke, There is Fire

Tom Ricks has a recent post about the observations of a Vietnam veteran, Dan Hughes, who was faculty at the Air Force's Air War College (AWC) for eighteen years. AWC is one of several "academic" programs run by the Air University (AU) arm of the Air Education and Training Command (AETC). I'll sum Mr. Hughes' picture up as I understand it. AWC is an expensive joke that caters to students who are also a joke.

Mr. Ricks has also posted a response to Mr. Hughes from another AU faculty member.

I have never attended AWC and I never will. As readers of my blog know, I have a "master's degree" from AU's online Air Command and Staff College (ACSC) and I have blogged about my previous experiences with this program and with AU and AETC. In fact, the blog you are now reading is a direct result of my experiences with Air University.

When people ask if I have a master's degree, I say no. I checked a box. It's not the same thing.

What I have read of Mr. Hughes' critique resonates greatly with me. I have seen the products of AWC and I have served in AETC, had significant dealings with the instructors, faculty, and dean of the ACSC online program, and I have engaged several AU processes concerning academic freedom.

Readers should listen closely and take seriously the observations of Mr. Hughes, as one would listen to a surgeon who has diagnosed a cancer.

A cancer that is routed deeply in a command that has been called, Advancing Enron Through Careerism (AETC).

Good Leadership vs Great Leadership

Great leaders embrace accountability in all that they do, and are willing to accept criticism from within or outside their organization. Holding leaders to a high standard of performance and ethics is a credit to the Air Force.

- Secretary of Defense Robert Gates, United States Air Force Academy, 4 March 2011

What's the difference between a good military leader and a great military leader? Secretary Gates nailed it above. He absolutely nailed it.

As I used to tell students in my previous assignment, a great commander is the commander you can forcefully disagree with on matters important to him or her, and who will not destroy you as a result. It takes a measure of security and confidence to be such a leader, and it seems to me those characteristics are only observed in competent individuals who have a healthy dose of perspective.

I recently got back in touch with a man I consider to be the best squadron commander of my career. He's retired these days, but he is the epitome of the great commander in my mind. He worked long hours, cared about his people, was unwavering in his commitment to the mission, went out of his way to work magic to provide any comfort to his folks that he possibly could without sacrificing the mission, and had a wonderful personality and amiable character. Those qualities define a very good commander. He was more than that, however, he was a great leader like the kind Secretary Gates discussed at his alma mater. While deployed, he disagreed with a decision I had made concerning my crew. The issue at hand was one that was important to us both, an issue that invoked the passions, a hot button item. He didn't change the decision I had made for my aircrew, but he invited me to reconsider it before my next deployment. There were people above him who wanted my head for the decision I had made, and while this commander disagreed with my course of action, he provided me the breathing room to fight him on a matter he was invested in. He provided me the space to disagree with him, and didn't punish me for doing so. He was a truly great commander. I'll leave it to the reader's imagination whether or not he ultimately agreed that I had made the right decision, but I can honestly say it doesn't matter if he did or not.

A great leader is somebody who doesn't agree with you, who doesn't agree with your approach, who thinks you are a quixotic officer tilting at windmills and picking battles that are better left not fought....yet who who does not punish you for having a different viewpoint. In the dangerous and complex world we live in, we need to recognize the value of different views.

Fortunately, I have recently witnessed another display of great leadership from several commanders in my current organization--the same organization that produced the great squadron commander I discuss above. I remain convinced that military organizations most closely involved in actual combat produce superior leadership, just as I remain convinced that organizations removed from actual warfare tend to produce inferior leadership.

I'm happy to say that the fabricated and dishonest Letter of Reprimand (LOR) I received in my previous assignment no longer exists thanks to great leadership. This fact changes nothing for my career. Its value to me, however, is immense.

Loyalty vs Integrity

Tom Ricks has a great post on his blog concerning leadership expectations of loyalty and expectations of integrity. As usual, he gets some fantastic comments on his post. It's an important discussion.

I thought it was particularly interesting that it didn't take long for somebody to comment on corporate America.

Disconnect Between America and its Military?

As the Washington Post reported, our Chairman of the Joint Chiefs, spoke a month ago at the National Defense University and observed that there is a disconnect between our military and the American public. Admiral Mike Mullen said they don't know us, and we don't know them. He pointed out that it's dangerous for us not to know them.

The recent turmoil in Egypt and the involvement of its military has made me ponder the role of the military in a democratic country. From the limited accounts I have heard, it appears Egypt's military refused violence on its people and acted as a voice of reason for Egyptian citizens. I wonder if that hellish experience were ever to visit our shores (and I pray to God that it never does), what would our military do? While I can't shake the images of Kent State, I think our military would do the right thing for our country. While we have disagreements and various political stripes and ideologies, we do have good people in our service.

Still I would advocate a much greater study of the U.S. Constitution in our professional military education. If I had my way, junior officer PME would include some of the best Constitutional scholarship our country has to offer. I envision visiting professors from the top universities, debate and discussion. I would include in the curriculum speakers from organizations such as Oath Keepers, and the Cato Institute, and others from across the spectrum of debate. I believe the importance of our Constitution rates serious study and consideration by those who have sworn before God to bear true faith and allegiance to it.

The rights of our people, military and civilian, and our basic freedom of speech and debate, grievances, worship, and liberty from the physical oppressions of government are laid out before us in our wonderful Constitution, and mostly in our Bill of Rights. I believe if we in the military take real efforts to honor our oaths to support and defend this great document, we will perhaps go a long way in understanding our citizens who employ and rely on us. To do that, we must dedicate study to our document and our rich American history, and to the jurisprudence and case law our courts have produced. It is a scholastic enterprise and there is plenty of room for debate and disagreement. While there many never be unanimity in our Constitutional views, when we better understand the document we can better defend it. When we better support and defend it, we support and defend Americans.

While I have not always lived up to this standard, it is my view now that service members should take every opportunity to exercise their American rights, so that we may prevent their apathetic loss over time. This perhaps will help us connect better with our citizenry. So many needs and desires of Americans have been addressed over years of pain and a history of struggle and, at great cost, have been etched into our sacred parchment. While this struggle and history is not complete, an understanding of it is an essential start for those of us in uniform to connect with our civilian brothers and sisters.

RPA as a Cultural Melting Pot

I haven't posted much lately and I imagine that trend will continue. I've got a lot on my plate after moving to my new assignment. I've been learning to employ a Remotely Piloted Aircraft (RPA) and I'm extremely happy to be doing so.

I'm also enjoying talking with some of the others in my training, and especially the air-to-air fighter pilots. I have been pleasantly surprised. I have a bias and anybody who knows me is fully aware of it, whether they want to be or not. Thankfully, a small handful from the air superiority business have failed to live up to my stereotype. We've had some great discussions. In one, a peer from the F-15C world took issue with my portrayal and he educated me on some areas that I have perhaps oversimplified. I still need to verify his assertions, but he made a great case that challenged my viewpoint. Even if the picture he paints is valid, my view of the role of airpower and our current challenges remains intact. But, if his view is accurate, then I have been too strong in some of my criticisms of his former community. I'm being vague intentionally.

My recent discussions have strengthened my understanding that we live in a complicated world and have many serious challenges. I'm enjoying this opportunity to have such conversation with people who disagree with me and who may hold a piece of the puzzle I'm unaware of. One source of huge potential value in my new RPA community is the melting pot of two worlds, conventional and non-conventional. While I'm protective of the culture of the non-conventional community from which I come, I'm very happy to see this interface. I love having my views challenged, and I'll gladly eat some crow to walk away with a better picture. The blend of cultures being experienced in the RPA world today has great potential to strengthen our ability to provide airpower in our complicated and dangerous world.

I'm also thankful for the civilian leadership we have enjoyed for the last several years, and I'm nervous about it changing. The 20 September issue of Newsweek has a great cover story on our Secretary of Defense, who isn't expected to stay in the job for more than a year longer. His leadership has been outstanding and the nation is fortunate to have him in office.

T-6 Crashes at Laughlin AFB in Del Rio, TX

Surfing the net today and saw that a T-6A crashed on a routine AETC student pilot training flight with an instructor and student. Thankfully both ejected safely and are apparently doing well according to news stories I have read. I'm very glad that is the case. Having just left Laughlin AFB and this particular squadron, I know several of the instructors and the hard work they put into doing a very demanding job. And the students are known to put in some long days too. I'm glad all involved are safe.

I'll end my post here.

Edit: The Air Force has released the results of the public Accident Investigation Board. The loss of the five million dollar aircraft was the result of the instructor pilot inadvertently shutting the engine off during a formation rejoin. The instructor then incorrectly attempted a procedure to restart the engine which damaged the engine. Read more here: http://www.laughlin.af.mil/news/story.asp?id=123245117

"Who Will Defend Us?" - AETC in the Rear View Mirror

A couple days ago I drove out the front gate of a pilot training base for the last time. Three years in AETC has certainly proven to be educational, as it was when I was a cadet, and I'm looking forward to returning to my combat command with its subdued patches, vitally important wartime mission, and the quality leadership that such an environment produces. My time in the training command was valuable and I learned a fair amount. The people I worked with were highly motivated, extremely hard working and made the assignment more enjoyable. The flying was great and I learned a lot about my communication weaknesses in my attempts to instruct young officers. I was able to do some small good while I was there and my greatest reward was seeing young officers motivated to act with courage.

After I taxied in from my final flight, a group of instructors and students met me and showered me with champagne in the traditional way. I had hoped to avoid that but I have to admit the people who showed up made it an unexpectedly pleasant gesture. No leadership, just bros from the trenches. The greatest compliment of my assignment was overhearing a young instructor pilot in that gaggle ask another instructor, "who will defend us now?" Thankfully the name of another instructor was offered up as a potential. I barely know the person who posed the question and he probably doesn't realize I heard it, but it was an important question I'd like to address here.

Who will defend us from a careerist system that doesn't truly recognize or reward achievement, character, or hard work and that expects us to put ten pounds in a five pound sack? Who will defend us by simply elevating the unvarnished truth up the chain of command even when it's not desired?

Answer: You will or nobody will.

It's not about the timeline or the training mission. It's about the profession of arms and the quality of airpower we are able to offer our nation, even in a job that may appear far removed from the battlefield. If we allow a toxic situation to go unchallenged or if we "play the game" then we are partially responsible for the quality of the leadership that gets produced and the direction our service takes. If we don’t challenge a system where politicians advance over professionals, or if we allow ourselves to fudge the numbers, or if we become spin doctors to mask reality, then we help advance an Air Force of politicians, frauds, and spin doctors. And when the nation asks for airpower, what will the nation get? It will get the perception of air power while the rifleman and the nation suffer the cruel cold reality. It’s hard to lay hate on our enemies and bring Americans home alive armed only with a perception. As military officers we have no right to "stay off the radar" or "hold our cards" and comfortably lay low -- we are in the profession of arms and we are expected to act courageously even at risk to ourselves. Even when far removed from the blood and bullets.

The place I left offers ample opportunity for officers to meet this obligation and to grow into "mission and people" leaders. They have the opportunity to follow our Secretary of Defense by challenging leadership when it asks for ten pounds in a five pound bag. Magic is not an Air Force core competency, and we don't need any more magicians in tax-paid positions.

Of course I have taken liberty with the question "who will defend us" -- the pilot who uttered it may not have amplified it as I have above. He was more than likely talking about a more specific situation where leadership expects magic. The ten pounds demanded: healthy happy family lives, safe flying, physically fit airmen, PME, master's degrees, quality instruction. The five pound bag: an undermanned squadron, more students, routine 12 hour days, double and triple turning in blazingly hot weather, ORM sheets with little utility, and regular six-day weeks.

I'm almost certain he was talking about six day work weeks in the training command and my email up the chain on why I thought leadership's thermometer might be broken and a better risk assessment might be in order. In my email I discussed a 1999 Air Force Times article entitled, "Worked to Death - How Doing Too Much Cost 12 Crewmen Their Lives," which took a look at a fatality at Nellis involving two HH-60s that had a midair collision. According to the article, the overwhelming contributing factors that led to the disaster cited by the lead investigator, Col Denver Pletcher, included "a high ops/pers tempo coupled with leadership problems, internal and external training deficiencies, broken squadron processes, low aircrew experience level, and midlevel supervisory breakdown." The Colonel wrote that the "squadron was on a path to disaster." The article explains that the squadron had been operating under that same ops temp for five years prior to this accident but that "By then, problems were chronic: Squadron processes broke down, morale was bad, the training burden was increasing and there seemed ever-less time to prepare for the next deployment or exercise." In my email I offered what I saw as similarities with the mishap squadron. But recognizing that six-day weeks might be necessary, I also provided my inputs on how best to implement a six-day work week. It was up to leadership to make the call, but it was up to me to raise the red flag.

While I never really got a response to my email, it appeared to have a temporary effect and I got the credit in the trenches. Due to Operational Risk Management (ORM) reasons, the six-day weeks were canceled. But they came back several months later as I was out-processing and preparing for my new assignment. Perhaps the thermometer was fixed and leadership had the benefit of good information when it made its decision. It certainly may be possible that 72-hour work weeks and multiple physically demanding training flights in 100+ degree weather is an acceptable risk that is justified by the importance of the desired result. It's also perhaps a calculation that could lead to an undesired result. Such is the nature of our business. This nature requires good information to be provided up the chain of command even when the environment is characterized by "do what you know I mean, not what I say."

Who will defend you? Who will provide the information up the chain to ensure leadership has an accurate reading, whether they want it or not? You will, or nobody will.

Military Officer vs Activist

Happy belated Independence Day. I haven't posted in some time, but I hope to make up for it by posting something fairly interesting.

As those who grace my blog with their time may know, I've had some bad experiences with "law enforcement." I've found that some public servants act in ways that have little to do with the public good. Readers will be somewhat familiar with my unlawful arrest at the hands of a city cop for allegedly not using a blinker during a lane change and the damage it had on my military career. The untruthful charge was dismissed in court and I have a lawsuit pending. But I have also had some issues with federal law enforcement, specifically the Border Patrol, and the latest episode with that agency has resulted in footage on YouTube. I have adapted to the threat by using surveillance technology. It has also resulted in a lawsuit pending against the Department of Homeland Security. As such, I will not provide a great deal of detail on the incident except for links to the full video footage where readers can judge for themselves. I will state one important fact. The checkpoint is not on the border but rather is 40 miles inland on a highway. This is an important distinction when researching applicable law governing immigration checkpoints. Before I provide the footage, I'd like to bring up the topic of military service and activism.

The oath of office "to defend the Constitution against all enemies foreign and domestic," makes for an interesting line between a military member and an activist, in my view. There has been recent discussion concerning the unfortunate incident involving General McChrystal and civil-military relations. I don't have anything worthwhile to offer on that specific situation, but I do think it may be helpful for military members to remember that they have a civil duty domestically to support and defend our Constitution. Our job is not just about blood and bullets. We must defend the Constitution of the United States wherever we are, and against any who threaten it. Unless, of course, we are of the view that oaths offered before God are not binding. That is not my view.

Activists are almost considered antithetical to military members, at least by many in our armed forces. In my conversations, the Vietnam era seems to have burned into the minds of many servicemen the image of long haired hippies spitting on soldiers. I tend to think there is, or should be, more similarity between those who fight for civil liberty at home and those who defend the nation abroad. I think if that commonality could be better acknowledged then perhaps the civil-military relationship would be strengthened. Certainly not all activists are standing up for Constitutional issues. But many are. In my view, we should be citizen soldiers, not just soldiers, and should stand up for freedoms on our own soil instead of simply fighting for it in foreign lands.

I haven't lived up to my expectation fully and I don't consider myself an activist. Others don't either. My Border Patrol video has garnered me fire from activists who claim I was too cooperative with federal agents who were acting unlawfully. Upon reflection, I tend to agree with these critics and I feel I have not honored my oath to the fullest. If exercising one's Constitutional rights supports those rights, as I think it does, then it's a valid criticism that I have been too cooperative and have not fully "supported" the Constitution. While some activists have considered me a pushover and have labeled me a "professional goon being professionally gooned," I have also gotten thinly veiled death threats and vituperative commentary from others who appear to think any American standing up to law enforcement is wrong. I find little of value in this point of view. But even a couple of people I considered friends have taken this view.

The video has been uploaded to YouTube by an organization I founded after my unlawful arrest, Veterans Against Police Abuse. The ten minute Cliff's Notes version is embedded below. To watch the full 30+ minute unlawful detention without the annotations included below, from two of the several cameras, click here.