Do we need the AF?
06-11-2008 | 11:24 AM
#21
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Mar 2007
Posts: 2,193
Likes: 10
From: Petting Zoo
Yeah I get that, that's why our enlisted JTACs are led by Aviators. My question about the enlisted vs rated is that our ASOS, on several occasions provided enlisted JTACs to support Marines. The reason why the AF opened it up to enlisted is because they were perfectly competent, and we didn't have enough rated guys to do it.
06-11-2008 | 11:52 AM
#22
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Sep 2007
Posts: 288
Likes: 0
Do we need an AF? I say "yes". Simply because the Army doesn't understand USAF doctrine. They don't understand how we employ our assets.
I can tell you that life as we know it would be pretty miserable if we re-integrated with the Army. Don't get me wrong, I like the Army folks I've met and worked with. They are a great bunch and I have the utmost respect for them; but that doesn't mean I'd want to rush out and join.
The Army philosophy is completely different from that of the USAF. I'd say about 180 out. And I can tell you from working with the Army for past couple of years now as an LNO that the majority of Army staff I've worked with have a fundamental misunderstanding of how we employ airlift. Not to mention ACC assets or Space. Bottom line, nobody knows our job better than we do. We need the AF.
I can tell you that life as we know it would be pretty miserable if we re-integrated with the Army. Don't get me wrong, I like the Army folks I've met and worked with. They are a great bunch and I have the utmost respect for them; but that doesn't mean I'd want to rush out and join.
The Army philosophy is completely different from that of the USAF. I'd say about 180 out. And I can tell you from working with the Army for past couple of years now as an LNO that the majority of Army staff I've worked with have a fundamental misunderstanding of how we employ airlift. Not to mention ACC assets or Space. Bottom line, nobody knows our job better than we do. We need the AF.
06-11-2008 | 11:54 AM
#23
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Sep 2007
Posts: 288
Likes: 0
06-11-2008 | 12:00 PM
#24
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Sep 2007
Posts: 288
Likes: 0
If there was a service that you could target for elimination it would be the marine corps.
How does the joke go?
I can understand that the Navy needs it's own private air force, and I can almost understand that the Navy needs it's own private army, but I just can't figure out why the Navy's private army needs it's own private air force.
How does the joke go?
I can understand that the Navy needs it's own private air force, and I can almost understand that the Navy needs it's own private army, but I just can't figure out why the Navy's private army needs it's own private air force.
I think that’s because back in ‘96 during one of the Clinton bombing raids to cover up his affairs the Air Force pilots couldn’t make it work to do the bombing run. It seems they had found the BOQ in Italy below standards and had all taken rooms out in town. Unfortunately, it snowed and they couldn’t make it to the base for the mission. So the Marine Corps, who had decided to put up tents on the beach vice pay for heated (who needs that luxury in the winter) rooms in the BOQ was called on to fly the mission.
Long story short... you call the Marines when you need it done!!!
06-11-2008 | 12:10 PM
#25
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Sep 2007
Posts: 288
Likes: 0
Well, kind of. I don't really know the Marine mindset so I can't talk to it. Though I find it weird you don't let enlisted do it. And found it even weirder that we used to send our enlisted JTACs to support Marines in ops when you didn't have enough of our own--why don't you allow enlisted JTACs?
But still, the AF puts ASOS's and ASOC's down embedded with the Army to do exactly what you described. If the Army doesn't do it, I suppose the intent is that the embedded AF unit will. Clearly, the Army doesn't always agree with how the AF employs airpower though, so maybe you're on to something.
But still, the AF puts ASOS's and ASOC's down embedded with the Army to do exactly what you described. If the Army doesn't do it, I suppose the intent is that the embedded AF unit will. Clearly, the Army doesn't always agree with how the AF employs airpower though, so maybe you're on to something.
06-11-2008 | 03:19 PM
#26
Line Holder
Joined: Apr 2008
Posts: 79
Likes: 0
From: Bunk Logging Other Time
You non Air Force guys misunderstand the comments posted from many of us. We don't dislike the Air Force as a service, we dislike much of the leadership and promotion standards. I wouldn't have wanted my time to be in any other service just like you and yours. We do see the sillyness that goes on, however, and see those that try to fight it get kicked out/ not promoted or leave out of frustration while those that perpetuate it move up in the ranks...
This stuff isnt new...go watch/read MASH, Catch 22 or Paths of Glory or any number of movies/books on the subject of military stupidity.
As far as the need for an Air Force, the US Air Force is the only service of the 5 that does not use air power as a support/defensive function inherently. You might not like that fact but it is true. Aviation is not the mission of your services. It is secondary at best. Attack a ship and all the navy planes go home to defend. Marines under fire? All the Marine aviation is recalled to defend... Army air power doctrine? That is why we separated to begin with i.e. Mitchell vs Pershing etc...
The United States needs heavy strategic bombing, strategic airlift, heavy spacelift, aerial refueling, tactical airlift on a mass scale, stealth fighter capability etc. etc. Most importantly we need people who are flyers first, not Marines, Sailors or Soldiers who also happen to fly aircraft. The other services do not provide that.
We all bring something to the table. The Air Force brings the bulk of the air power and a service dedicated to nothing else (except reflective belts
)
This stuff isnt new...go watch/read MASH, Catch 22 or Paths of Glory or any number of movies/books on the subject of military stupidity.
As far as the need for an Air Force, the US Air Force is the only service of the 5 that does not use air power as a support/defensive function inherently. You might not like that fact but it is true. Aviation is not the mission of your services. It is secondary at best. Attack a ship and all the navy planes go home to defend. Marines under fire? All the Marine aviation is recalled to defend... Army air power doctrine? That is why we separated to begin with i.e. Mitchell vs Pershing etc...
The United States needs heavy strategic bombing, strategic airlift, heavy spacelift, aerial refueling, tactical airlift on a mass scale, stealth fighter capability etc. etc. Most importantly we need people who are flyers first, not Marines, Sailors or Soldiers who also happen to fly aircraft. The other services do not provide that.
We all bring something to the table. The Air Force brings the bulk of the air power and a service dedicated to nothing else (except reflective belts
)
06-11-2008 | 03:44 PM
#28
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Mar 2007
Posts: 2,193
Likes: 10
From: Petting Zoo
Okay, to be extra honest, I actually hate passengers, but it does feel good in my flinty heart to carry guys back from deployment
06-11-2008 | 03:52 PM
#29
Moderator
Joined: Jun 2006
Posts: 4,077
Likes: 40
It was great on the way back too. I was expecting the C-130 business first cargo net and when we hit the flight line there was a C-17 standing by for us. What a tremendous difference, I actually had a real seat. I also enjoyed the "in the unlikely event of a water landing" brief.
I was very appreciative for the lift.
I was very appreciative for the lift.
06-12-2008 | 06:44 AM
#30
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Jul 2007
Posts: 216
Likes: 0
From: C-17 bunk/in the kiddie pool
Back to the thread. Of course we need the AF. If I was in any other service I wouldn't be able to buy my third different set of dress uniforms in a decade. How cool is that?
