Author Topic: USAF Woes  (Read 132487 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Fishbone Jones

    Staying right here.

  • "Some people will only like you if you fit inside their box. Don't be afraid to shove that box up their ass."
  • Army.ca Subscriber
  • Army.ca Myth
  • *
  • 266,987
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 18,237
    • Army.ca
Re: USAF Woes
« Reply #375 on: October 11, 2018, 14:16:34 »
Way out of my lane, but I find it interesting that Mattis, of all people, thinks that writing a memo demanding a certain percentage availability rate will actually result in that number. Did he provide the corresponding budget and miracle wand? Would it not have been a better metric to hold the air force to X number of concentrations of aircraft available and ready to be deployed (together with parts, weapons etc). Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't the RCAF aspiration to have a 6 Pack ready to go on a warning order and X number ready to scramble for NORAD air intercept, rather than percentages?

I'm on the same lane as you, however, I highly doubt that this is something Mattis decided over morning coffee. Most everyone here knows what goes on behind an order from the top. There are briefs, back briefs, progress reports, analysis reports and many other things that are taken into account. Mattis didn't get where he is by telling people to do things he knows nothing about. Perhaps it might not be possible to reach 80%, but, guaranteed, they'll be a lot better off, platform wise, than they are now. It will also expose the hold ups to the light of day where they can be dealt with. Again, I doubt that this whole thing was launched on an idea and a hastily prepared memo. I've seen lots of goofy command requests from floppers, but Mattis isn't one of those guys, IMO.
Diversity includes adverse opinions, or it is not diversity.
Inclusive includes adverse opinions, or is not inclusive.

Offline Old Sweat

  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *****
  • 211,800
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 7,634
Re: USAF Woes
« Reply #376 on: October 11, 2018, 14:24:01 »
To add to FJ's comment, I doubt that it came as a surprise to any of the recipients.

Offline CBH99

  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • 22,740
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 718
Re: USAF Woes
« Reply #377 on: October 11, 2018, 18:38:53 »
I'm on the same lane as you, however, I highly doubt that this is something Mattis decided over morning coffee. Most everyone here knows what goes on behind an order from the top. There are briefs, back briefs, progress reports, analysis reports and many other things that are taken into account. Mattis didn't get where he is by telling people to do things he knows nothing about. Perhaps it might not be possible to reach 80%, but, guaranteed, they'll be a lot better off, platform wise, than they are now. It will also expose the hold ups to the light of day where they can be dealt with. Again, I doubt that this whole thing was launched on an idea and a hastily prepared memo. I've seen lots of goofy command requests from floppers, but Mattis isn't one of those guys, IMO.


Agreed FJ.

I'm wondering if this order isn't almost a "reviewing" the system to find out where the weak points really are, so the weak points can be addressed & held accountable.  Is it the front line maintenance personnel?  Lack of spare parts?  Lack of certain support from contractors/suppliers? 

If the focus is 80%, but they can't get there because of "Problem A and Problem B" - that really helps iron out where the problems lay.

And while I don't mean to sound "skeptical" in a cynical way...I wonder if this isn't part of the same strategy for the 355 ship navy, and an extra 70 squadrons for the USAF?  As in - announce a very ambitious goal, knowing full well it might not be achieved - but they'll be far better off afterwards even if the goal isn't achieved.
Fortune Favours the Bold...and the Smart.

Wouldn't it be nice to have some Boondock Saints kicking around?

Online Chris Pook

  • Army.ca Subscriber
  • Army.ca Legend
  • *
  • 197,185
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 12,292
  • Wha daur say Mass in ma lug!
Re: USAF Woes
« Reply #378 on: October 12, 2018, 12:42:01 »
Perhaps it is as simple as this?

Situation:

Mission: You will have 80% of the following aircraft ready to fly on July 31 2019

Execution:

Support:

Command and Control:


The statement needs to be short, clear and to the point.
You will soon be told why it can't be done.... and then you can figure out how to get what you need to make it happen.

The alternative is that you get lost in bafflegab and nobody understands what it is you are trying to accomplish.
"Wyrd bið ful aræd"

Offline tomahawk6

  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *****
  • 98,840
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 9,268
Re: USAF Woes
« Reply #379 on: October 12, 2018, 12:58:34 »
Its like saying your unit will have 100% of your assigned vehicles road ready. Its embarrassing when your unit pulls out and trucks begin breaking down. For aircraft spare parts are an issue specially if you are dumping old aircraft and your new ones haven't arrived.

Online Chris Pook

  • Army.ca Subscriber
  • Army.ca Legend
  • *
  • 197,185
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 12,292
  • Wha daur say Mass in ma lug!
Re: USAF Woes
« Reply #380 on: October 12, 2018, 13:32:18 »
Its like saying your unit will have 100% of your assigned vehicles road ready. Its embarrassing when your unit pulls out and trucks begin breaking down. For aircraft spare parts are an issue specially if you are dumping old aircraft and your new ones haven't arrived.

Agreed that it is embarrassing.  But in the meantime it might get you closer to 90% of your assigned vehicles being roadworthy.  And ease some of the problems that occur when you only have 80% of your assigned fleet available.  Some compromises will not have to be made when trying to get your unit relocated.
"Wyrd bið ful aræd"

Online Colin P

  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *****
  • 123,760
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 8,812
  • Civilian
    • http://www.pacific.ccg-gcc.gc.ca
Re: USAF Woes
« Reply #381 on: Yesterday at 15:57:18 »
Up to 10% of the F22 fleet damaged by one Hurricane. You would think that in this age of ultra-expensive and irreplaceable fighters, they would have hardened shelters for them instead of regular hangers. You could likely build a lot of hardened shelters for the cost of just one aircraft.

https://thediplomat.com/2018/10/nearly-10-percent-of-the-us-f-22-inventory-was-damaged-or-destroyed-in-hurricane-michael/