If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#21
|
|||
|
|||
"BUFDRVR" wrote in message ... BUFF, I'll have to disagree, but I'll preface this by saying I only worked in 2 units during the great "reorganization circus". I only worked in two as well, but it was a success story in each one. Just taking a wild guess here, but were they B-52 units? grin I seem to recall that most of the positive comments I ever heard were from people that worked either fighter units, or bomber units. The flyers there seemed to have a better grasp of "teamwork", and a much higher respect for the wrench-benders. And I guess that there were much fewer fliers assigned than in my units (AWACS and JSTARS). We, the flightline folks, stayed where we were at, because we located next to the flightline. In many cases around the Air Force, I'm sure this was true and in a perfect world working in the same building would be the norm, but I don't think its required to make the ops-mnx cooperation successful. Never saw the bosses come down to the shop Failure of leadership, not the system. Agreed. If you went over to the OR and walked into the building in BDU's, EVERYBODY looked down at you. I'll have to take your word for it, but I find it hard to believe. I thought more highly of our young enlisted folks than I did many of our young officers. Not to say that it never happens. Like anywhere, I met my share of outstanding folks, and real idiots. From my point of view, it's entirely the right thing to do. Again, that's MY view, a 16 year maintainer working E-3's and E-8's. Obviously you're not alone or the reorganization would not have taken place. I've been at the Pentagon since July, but as I was leaving, some of the old (pre-1993) problems were beginning to surface and nearly everyone I talk to about the reorganization feels it was a mistake, you're the first I've seen in favor of it. I think it's the "full-circle" theory at work. Every few years you make a change to the system, and eventually you'll come back around to the beginning again (don't like the weather? Wait, it'll change). Since the start of my career coincided with the separate MX/OPS squadrons, I MIGHT be a little biased to that system. Pete |
#22
|
|||
|
|||
"Vee-One" wrote
"BUFDRVR" wrote If you went over to the OR and walked into the building in BDU's, EVERYBODY looked down at you. I'll have to take your word for it, but I find it hard to believe. I thought more highly of our young enlisted folks than I did many of our young officers. Not to say that it never happens. Like anywhere, I met my share of outstanding folks, and real idiots. AWACS and JWACS squadrons have very few pilots, and you would be hard pressed to find them in the sea of other positions. I think it's these other positions that you may have identified as being BDU sensitive. If there's one kind of people we all liked to bail out of jail, it was the crew chief's and cooks. Course now, I've only been TDY to Tinker twice in my life, but I never saw so many enlisted crew dogs in my life. The gomers were everywhere. |
#23
|
|||
|
|||
"Gene Storey" wrote in message news:Ueesb.872$6p6.283@okepread03... "Vee-One" wrote "BUFDRVR" wrote If you went over to the OR and walked into the building in BDU's, EVERYBODY looked down at you. I'll have to take your word for it, but I find it hard to believe. I thought more highly of our young enlisted folks than I did many of our young officers. Not to say that it never happens. Like anywhere, I met my share of outstanding folks, and real idiots. AWACS and JWACS squadrons have very few pilots, and you would be hard pressed to find them in the sea of other positions. I think it's these other positions that you may have identified as being BDU sensitive. You're right of course. A few minutes to clear my head and re-read the posts can do wonders for my comprehension (but not for my ego). But there were also the folks who really believed in the hard-crew concept, and they stuck together like rats on a ship (sorry, Navy). If there's one kind of people we all liked to bail out of jail, it was the crew chief's and cooks. Course now, I've only been TDY to Tinker twice in my life, but I never saw so many enlisted crew dogs in my life. The gomers were everywhere. Not hard, considering a typical crew. The number of back-enders far outweigh the flight crew, and it seems like more and more them are enlisted. As a rule, the only ones we (maintenance) got along with were the ones that we worked with (i.e. Radar troops and the Airborne Radar Techs, the com/nav folks and the Comm Techs, etc.) |
#24
|
|||
|
|||
Note- "Success Story" from the ZSSG(1) point of view is very different from
the definition of "Success Story" from the LGM(2) point of view . . . Yeah, no doubt absorbing On-Equipment Maintenance into the Ops squadrons was a wonderful idea . . . from the Ops point of view. But was it a success from the USAF point of view? Nope. 1: Zipper Suited Sun God 2: Little Green Mo********ers Steve "BUFDRVR" wrote in message ... BUFF, I'll have to disagree, but I'll preface this by saying I only worked in 2 units during the great "reorganization circus". I only worked in two as well, but it was a success story in each one. We, the flightline folks, stayed where we were at, because we located next to the flightline. In many cases around the Air Force, I'm sure this was true and in a perfect world working in the same building would be the norm, but I don't think its required to make the ops-mnx cooperation successful. Never saw the bosses come down to the shop Failure of leadership, not the system. If you went over to the OR and walked into the building in BDU's, EVERYBODY looked down at you. I'll have to take your word for it, but I find it hard to believe. I thought more highly of our young enlisted folks than I did many of our young officers. From my point of view, it's entirely the right thing to do. Again, that's MY view, a 16 year maintainer working E-3's and E-8's. Obviously you're not alone or the reorganization would not have taken place. I've been at the Pentagon since July, but as I was leaving, some of the old (pre-1993) problems were beginning to surface and nearly everyone I talk to about the reorganization feels it was a mistake, you're the first I've seen in favor of it. BUFDRVR "Stay on the bomb run boys, I'm gonna get those bomb doors open if it harelips everyone on Bear Creek" |
#25
|
|||
|
|||
The typical breakout is "On Equipment" vs. "Off Equipment."
There are indeed "Organizational Management" reasons for either centralizing or decentralizing functions in an organization; regrettably, those who make the decisions don't generally learn these things. Too busy flying to learn. Steve Swartz "BUFDRVR" wrote in message ... One experience was more recent, 2001 Cope Thunder in Eilsson (sp?). , where ops and the flight gear clubhouse (complete with lockers and showers) was in a totally seperate building than the hangar and maintenance. Space is always at a premium. Our Life Support shop was located across the street in a seperate building, but there was no room in the squadron building, perhaps the same is true at Eilson? I'm taking it that line specialists, bomb loaders, maintenance, flight gear, and ops are all different squadrons? As of 1 OCT 2002 you are correct, kind of.. There are now Ops Squadrons and Maintenance Squadrons. I'll pleade ignorance on how they've got the maintenance squadrons broken up (crew chiefs in one, hydraulics in another, etc.), however, from 1 OCT 1993 till 1 OCT 2002 we were all (except the back shop guys) in one squadron. This current "break up" is considered a mistake Air Force wide. BUFDRVR "Stay on the bomb run boys, I'm gonna get those bomb doors open if it harelips everyone on Bear Creek" |
#26
|
|||
|
|||
|
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Considerations for joining flying club | Marty Ross | Instrument Flight Rules | 20 | September 30th 04 05:55 AM |
A-4 / A-7 Question | Tank Fixer | Military Aviation | 135 | October 25th 03 03:59 AM |
USAF F-4 | TWINMAKER | Military Aviation | 3 | October 2nd 03 02:28 AM |
USAF Fighter-Attack SPO members from the 1980s? | R Haskin | Military Aviation | 0 | September 20th 03 12:06 PM |
FS Books USAF, Navy, Marine pilots and planes | Ken Insch | Military Aviation | 0 | July 20th 03 02:36 AM |