Standards in Free Fall

Stealth_81 said:
I thought that you mentioning that you’re a fighter pilot in every post was over the top, but now you’ve succeeded in mentioning it more than once in a single post. Well done.
Click to expand...
The other poster seems to have a reading problem. I cater my briefs to the student.
 
a400831 said:
Hi, you must be new here. I am a fighter pilot. I am in the worlds greatest instructing culture that has created the most dominant military branch the world has ever seen. Do you know the last time an American Soldier died from enemy aircraft? April 15th, 1953. For 70 years, we have enjoyed complete air superiority. Why? Because we have perfected the art of teaching fighter pilots. You might catch more flies with honey, but you don't win a war with it. You win a war by focusing the debrief on what went wrong so we can fix it next time.
Click to expand...
I see you are upholding at least part of the fighter pilot image.

Having read a few pages of the science as well, it turns out that fear, sarcasm, and ridicule might not the the best way to teach (or communicate in online forums). Though, you do seem to be well-versed in those techniques. Shall the forum posters limit themselves to only saying "2" or "lead you're on fire?"

Perhaps you should go for the "humble, credible, approachable" technique. Most of us don't have all the answers...but hey, maybe you are the exception. You seem to think so, based on your writing.




Break break

Also, remember that the answer to your question is currently slightly under two months, and fighter pilots had very little to do with it.
 
raimius said:
I see you are upholding at least part of the fighter pilot image.

Having read a few pages of the science as well, it turns out that fear, sarcasm, and ridicule might not the the best way to teach (or communicate in online forums). Though, you do seem to be well-versed in those techniques. Shall the forum posters limit themselves to only saying "2" or "lead you're on fire?"

Perhaps you should go for the "humble, credible, approachable" technique. Most of us don't have all the answers...but hey, maybe you are the exception. You seem to think so, based on your writing.




Break break

Also, remember that the answer to your question is currently slightly under two months, and fighter pilots had very little to do with it.
Click to expand...
I ask for people to do research on their beliefs. I am direct with my feedback.

I have reread my posts. Feel free to point out any fear sarcasm and ridicule via PM. Pointing out logical flaws and giving direct feedback does not fall into those categories. For all the topics discussed, I am more then happy to discuss the data behind my beliefs. No, I don’t know everything. However, like many others here, I have knowledge and insight unique to our individual career fields. This forum is a place to share that, and at times, apply course corrections.

To get back to the original point of all this, my comments were always made because cadets were trying to correlate academy traditions with success in combat. That I feel is a wrong statement, and should be addressed.
 
a400831 said:
I do not live under a rock. I simply, unlike you, actually understand the issues because I live and research them. Do you know the true reason for the recruitment struggles? MHS GENESIS. You have no idea what that is, and honestly I have lost patience with you and do not have the time to explain it. Do not even think about telling me, a fighter pilot, about the pilot shortage. You are putting your ignorance on full display. It is a retention problem, not a recruitment problem for my career field. Have you read the 2017 RAND Study about this? No. Because you, like these cadets, do not care to do any research on the issue.
Click to expand...
I promise this'll be the last post I make on this thread, in which I address much of what @a400831 said. For the above quote, I totally agree with it (it's probably the only thing we do agree on...) for MHS Genesis being the reason for recruitment struggles and the pilot shortage being a retention issue, rather than a recruitment issue. As for the 2017 RAND Study... cadets do care about this issue, and the majority of us were required to read it in core classes (I was required to read it in multiple classes so I am familiar).

a400831 said:
You have not been to SERE. You are not a SERE instructor. Leave the SERE instruction to the entire career field whose sole job is to instruct SERE.

Unless I missed something, I only read that you can't yell. I didn't see that you can not create stress. Yes get creative! Think! Secondary and tertiary plans are a way of life in the CAF. It is good you are seeing that now. Stop thinking about how it always has been done. Start thinking about the "why" and non-traditional ways of achieving the desired effect.
Click to expand...
While this is partially true, USAFA has a version of SERE which is mandatory for all cadets directly after their freshman year. It is accredited and is taught by cadets and legitimate SERE instructors from Fairchild who work in conjunction with one another. It is called Combat Survival Training, or CST, and fulfills the Survival and Evasion portions of SERE, allowing cadets to take a specialized course later on which only includes Resistance and Escape.

I believe you missed something for the yelling portion: no yelling, no basic wakeups, cannot say the word SERE or POW (in at least 20 squads), cannot dim lights, etc. A few squadrons (although not my squadron) were told by their AOCs that the purpose of Recognition was expressly to not induce stress, and that upperclassmen were only allowed to speak encouragingly to C4Cs. To reiterate, almost all of these rules were partially reversed on Saturday. Again, if you have non-traditional ways of achieving stressful environments, I am all ears. You have tons of experience doing so, and I am just a dumb cadet. (We have tried information overload, as you referenced, but they are already used to that. As a freshman I took over 20 credit hours each semester, so needing to memorize a little extra information was not a big deal.)

a400831 said:
I firmly believe, as someone who has seen combat, that these small traditions mean very very little in the grand scheme of your career. I understand that anecdotal evidence from a previous grad. The training pipeline is a world difference now then in the 70s. This is apples to oranges. Do you know what prepares you for combat? UPT/IFF/SERE/B-Course/MQT/Spin up. 3-4 years of dedicated training. If you think that a freshman year at USAFA is more important than all of that training, you are being willfully ignorant.
Click to expand...
I didn't mean to imply that I think training at USAFA is more important than the more advanced trainings you mentioned. Otherwise, there would be no need for officers from USAFA to go through these trainings in the first place. The thing is, though, that the vast majority of officers who went through these traditions do value them across generations. Are they the end-all-be-all? No. But the added value from the extra training which USAFA has via its traditions is significant enough to make USAFA special and a useful experience inside and outside of combat. If USAFA didn't add any extra value to officers, there wouldn't be much reason for the institution to exist in the first place besides for PR.

a400831 said:
The cadets have plenty of people in their chain they can express grievances to. People who can actually make change. You have no situational awareness on this, and are making the wrong assumption that recourse doesn’t exist. Also, remember this. These are cadets. They don’t know anything, while assuming they know everything. If they don’t like being told at times to shut up and color, well they shouldn’t be in the military. What I see here is cadets complaining they can’t yell and give orders to younger cadets, while complaining about having to follow orders themselves. This isn’t a democracy. This is the military. Is it a lawful order? Yes? Follow it.
Click to expand...
As I mentioned in previous posts, cadets such as myself use multiple avenues to address grievances. The Chief and the Comm hold meetings with cadets, stress that decisions have cadet input, and ask for feedback. But, at the end of the day, these are all facades, as I have learned over time. I have been in several meetings with the Vice Comm where cadets from every squadron were able to recommend changes to the CS&D. With the exception of a few changes which the Comm had already approved, pretty much no changes were accepted. So, to say that these meetings with cadets actually use cadet input is not exactly true. The Comm also claims to utilize feedback given to him by the wing, but the Commandant Anonymous Feedback Link has not worked this entire year. Perhaps he is getting feedback in different ways, but they are not very well publicized and are few-and-far between.

a400831 said:
"Cadets will not conduct the low or high crawl in snow or on wet, uneven, or rocky terrain." - after he escaped from a POW camp in Vietnam, Capt Lance P. Sijan only had to low crawl on a field flatter than Kansas. And when his captors tried to catch him, they had to low crawl too, because otherwise that wouldn't be fair!

----Full agree with this rule. Low and high crawls have high injury potential and low reward. They are simply done to be painful. Don't hit me with "But POW's". If I am captured I will do anything I need to do to survive. We do not train to that extreme level often and when we do, it is under supervision of professionals (SERE). Show me a POW that would have escaped if only they did more low crawls at the academy and I will buy you lunch.

"At no time will the weight of the ruck exceed 20% of the individual's body weight." - when you are carrying survival equipment on a deployment, it'll never be heavier than (1/5)*[your body weight]. God takes care of the rest. Hope you can call in that 9-line, because you definitely won't have anything weighing more than a few books to help medically!

---- You are not training them in a CRO/STO pipeline. You are training them to be a cadet. If they are going to be calling in a 9-Line, they are going through years of training with professionals to be able to do that. Giving them a super heavy ruck is not your place and can lead to injury for no reason.
Click to expand...
I wanted to address this reply from awhile back, just so everyone is on the same page about the purpose of USAFA. USAFA is meant not just to give people a bachelor's degree and a commission, but to educate them on USAFA heritage and a variety of AFSCs, regardless of whether those cadets will actually be going into those AFSCs in the future. The Commandant's own Phase System states the following about Phase 2: AFSC & Heritage/Profession of Arms Education (Oct-Feb): "Two-Degrees will understand the different roles of AFSCs.... Three-Degrees will understand the variety of capabilities that AFSCs provide.... Four-Degrees will understand what AFSCs are available...." and "[All classes will] develop an appreciation for the history and heritage of [the Air Force and USAFA]." The best way to teach people is through experience. Talking people through what a low-crawl is, or what Phase II is in the CRO/STO/TACP pipeline, will not be nearly as beneficial as experiencing at least the parts of their training that don't necessarily require professionals. So it is my place, under the guidance of the Commandant, to give not just freshmen but all classes a meaningful, vivid experience. You say that I am "training them to be a cadet," but to be a cadet is to understand broadly and experience small parts of a multitude of AFSCs and their training. I understand the safety concerns with these, which is why there are realistic bounds on training, as would be found in any AFSC. There are also safety concerns with flying airplanes and jumping out of them, but cadets teach both of these skills to other cadets with no problem.

I hope you enjoyed your CT BFM flight. I appreciate the discussion, but I think it's just not going to be possible to reconcile our beliefs about what meaningful training is. You claim that I know nothing about the Air Force, but, to be honest, you don't know very much about USAFA, its traditions, its purpose, and the role of a cadet, so there's ignorance on both sides of the aisle.
 
I can’t speak to success in combat, but there are direct examples of POWs crediting their Academy experiences for sustaining them through captivity.

I'm a reserve mission support officer in a mostly remote staff assignment. I’m about as far from a fighter pilot as you can get.

But I fully believe that the full package of USAFA that I experienced (academic, physical, and military) is what has made me successful in my life so far. It’s how I can balance a family. a civilian career, a military reserve career, and serving my church and community.

It’s why I’m not intimidated to brief the CEO of my Fortune 100 company and why I could handle my Managing Director cursing at me in my first civilian job (he managed by fear but realized quickly it didn’t phase me). It’s why I can work a full day, come home for dinner with my kids, and log back in to knock out Air Force work for a couple hours.

This isn’t just old guys railing about “tradition” like changing the mascot at Ole Miss. A lot of us really do believe in the experience that we had, even if it wasn’t fun in the moment. We believe that an Academy experience should be challenging in all aspects, and right now it looks like it has moved away from that across the board: lighter core curriculum, shorter intramural seasons, less military training.

The irony here is the Cadets are BEGGING for a tougher experience.
 
Some of this reminds me of one of my kid's experiences in AFROTC Field Training - was told they had good leadership characteristics but just didn't yell loud enough. I'm guessing some who yelled loud enough but didn't fulfill the other characteristics got the high marks. This was from a college senior so it makes me worry that we have too many college students preparing for leadership thinking that yelling is part of leadership.
 
Last edited:
unkown1961 said:
Some of this reminds me of one of my kid's experiences in AFROTC Field Training - was told they had good leadership characteristics but just didn't yell loud enough. I'm guessing some who yelled loud enough but didn't fulfill the other characteristics got the high marks. This was from a college senior so it makes me worry that we have too many college students preparing for leadership thinking that yelling is part of leadership.
Click to expand...
Yelling can be a leadership tool. A battlefield gets pretty noisy. Forceful commands help overcome hesitation while instilling confidence. Often commands are given from a distance with lots of background noise. It may not be useful day to day but it is a skill useful in tactical situations such as field training or combat. Hopefully this puts your son's field experience into context.
 
Zaphod Beeblebrox said:
Yelling can be a leadership tool. A battlefield gets pretty noisy. Forceful commands help overcome hesitation while instilling confidence. Often commands are given from a distance with lots of background noise. It may not be useful day to day but it is a skill useful in tactical situations such as field training or combat. Hopefully this puts your son's field experience into context.
Click to expand...
I understand what you're saying. Making oneself heard above the din of the battlefield definitely sounds relevant, especially for the Army. But this was Air Force Field Training. Outside of places with loud background noises, I feel a confident voice delivering orders is more effective than a shouter. I had a shouter as a boss and he had no respect from anyone. It was a she by the way. She's very successfully into AD now. :)
 
USAFA_86 said:
Be advised: here comes a scorching hot take/rant. USAFA standards have been falling and if you've recently visited the wing that much is obvious. However, IMHO the core issue is with the athletic department. Recent years have seen USAFA place more and more emphasis on its D1 sports programs. A shining (and disgusting) example is that the three highest-paid individuals in the entire Department of Defense are the three Service Academy football coaches. Where are the DoD's priorities you ask? Take a look at the budget breakdown. This allocation of funds/priorities trickles down into USAFA culture. A fine example of this phenomenon is the multi-million dollar addition to our football stadium (which we were never completely filling), while the Sijan dormitory is actively falling apart. Cadets will frequently mention the "Tzo gap" which describes the growing social gap between recruited athletes and "normal" cadets. I want to be crystal clear in that I do not place the blame on the athletes. At least not on all of them. Some of my good friends are on the numerous sports teams here and their lives are significantly different than that of the normal cadets. Notice I say "different" and not "harder." I always think it's funny when people try to compare their lives and daily routines to see who has it worse because it's a fruitless argument. All of our lives are challenging in different ways, and arguing about the specifics is pointless. Back to the main issue, athletes and cadets on club teams have practice after school every day. This means that they cannot come to training sessions or DDTs that are specifically designed to develop them. For instance, this year my squadron has 28 freshmen, and there are only 4 of them not on LOS or IC status. That means that after school when we do training sessions, there are only FOUR freshmen in attendance. How are we supposed to develop the 4-degree class if I only see 4 of them at our DDTs? The result is that many 4-degrees, whether willingly or unwillingly, miss all of the heritage and military instruction that is supposed to go on during 4-degree year and carry more of a care-free attitude into their upperclassmen years. Again, this issue stems from the fact that USAFA and the DoD as a whole have drifted away from their core missions. USAFA should not be a D1 school. Our focus should be on developing officers ready to lead Airmen in the coming fight. I think the U.S. as a whole has been spoiled by the wars in the Middle East in which we suffered minimal losses and maintained air superiority for the duration of the conflict. People are not ready to see what a real fight looks like, specifically one where we're losing hundreds of people, ships, and planes per day. I can only hope that the DoD and USAFA make a massive course correction, returning to our core mission of defense before it's too late.
Click to expand...
I am wondering here; Is there any statistical information regarding what happens to the D1 athletes after the USAFA (and the other academies). What are the ratios of D1 athlete commissioned officers vs. non D1 commissioned officers, who stay in the service particularly in critical positions? In other words, are these academies squandering resources simply to be competitive in sports at the college level?
 
Mallard Duck said:
I am wondering here; Is there any statistical information regarding what happens to the D1 athletes after the USAFA (and the other academies). What are the ratios of D1 athlete commissioned officers vs. non D1 commissioned officers, who stay in the service particularly in critical positions? In other words, are these academies squandering resources simply to be competitive in sports at the college level?
Click to expand...
Oh oh army has done a study on this a football players highly recommend looking it up
 
Mallard Duck said:
I am wondering here; Is there any statistical information regarding what happens to the D1 athletes after the USAFA (and the other academies). What are the ratios of D1 athlete commissioned officers vs. non D1 commissioned officers, who stay in the service particularly in critical positions? In other words, are these academies squandering resources simply to be competitive in sports at the college level?
Click to expand...
Some of the top graduates at USNA are athletes.

Its a fallacy to assume athletes are dumb or aren’t qualified.
 
Mallard Duck said:
I am wondering here; Is there any statistical information regarding what happens to the D1 athletes after the USAFA (and the other academies). What are the ratios of D1 athlete commissioned officers vs. non D1 commissioned officers, who stay in the service particularly in critical positions? In other words, are these academies squandering resources simply to be competitive in sports at the college level?
Click to expand...
I don't have the specifics right in front of me but my varsity team at USNA produced a shuttle astronaut and 4 flag officers just from the classes that I served with. Of the last three USNA supes, I know that at least two of them were varsity athletes. Commandants were 50% or more varsity athletes. For my class, I think that none of our four 4 star Admirals were athletes but lots of the other 30 or so admirals/generals were.
In terms of ratios, I'd say that athletes were over-represented at those levels. As for retention to 20 and 30 yrs, I don't know for sure but I think that athletes were at least proportional to their numbers in the class who stayed that long and probably more than that.
 
Mallard Duck said:
I am wondering here; Is there any statistical information regarding what happens to the D1 athletes after the USAFA (and the other academies). What are the ratios of D1 athlete commissioned officers vs. non D1 commissioned officers, who stay in the service particularly in critical positions? In other words, are these academies squandering resources simply to be competitive in sports at the college level?
Click to expand...
Any competitive parity that the service academies enjoyed in NCAA revenue sports, probably ended with the advent of NIL. I can't see any athlete that can potentially garner NIL money is going to even remotely consider a service academy moving forward. NCAA sports are likely to look significantly different over the next decade.
 
a400831 said:
An understandable statement, let me clarify.

I fully agree that temporal stress is a good training tool that forces prioritization. However, like all tools, it should be utilized appropriately. If cadet trainers order a random room move that causes a cadet to only get 4 hours of sleep, then the cadet gets a poor grade on an academic assignment the next day, I 100% put the blame on the cadet trainers for not setting their subordinates up for success.

Case in point: As an instructor pilot, I induce plenty of stress into my students flight. However each period of stress is carefully timed to test their prioritization while not over task-saturating them. If you look at the stress performance curve, too much stress causes a decrease in both learning and performance. If I put a B-Course student into the middle of a massive Red Flag OCA-AI scenario, and they screw it up, the failure is on ME for putting them into that overwhelming scenario they were not ready for, not the student.

Additionally, and I can't stress this enough, my goal as an IP is to fly a stable platform for my students. How can I expect them to succeed if I am not flying my own briefed contracts, airspeeds, altitudes, ect. Instructors should provide a stable platform (in the air AND on the ground) that facilitates learning, not create instability for the sake of instability. That only creates frustration and friction.
Click to expand...
We want our warriors to be mentally and physically tough; resilient and embrace the suck. Don't care if you're AF or USMC. You seem to be a scholar detached from the warrior.
Be careful over-selling your combat bonifides and understanding of war. SEEING combat while dropping a JDAM in a permissive environment from 20,000 feet is not the same as BEING IN combat. Mortar rounds at Balad don't count (see "Boots on the Ground" by Dos Gringos).
I had the privilege of meeting Robin Olds who was the guest speaker at my brother's change of command (he had 32k on his back, too). What would Olds think of you? Would he agree that group PT, high/low crawling, or doing push-ups before entering quarters during initial entry training detracts from national security?
 
Zaphod Beeblebrox said:
We want our warriors to be mentally and physically tough; resilient and embrace the suck. Don't care if you're AF or USMC. You seem to be a scholar detached from the warrior.
Be careful over-selling your combat bonifides and understanding of war. SEEING combat while dropping a JDAM in a permissive environment from 20,000 feet is not the same as BEING IN combat. Mortar rounds at Balad don't count (see "Boots on the Ground" by Dos Gringos).
I had the privilege of meeting Robin Olds who was the guest speaker at my brother's change of command (he had 32k on his back, too). What would Olds think of you? Would he agree that group PT, high/low crawling, or doing push-ups before entering quarters during initial entry training detracts from national security?
Click to expand...
I never made any statement that overstated what I have experienced downrange. You are correct no pilot will ever understand the stress of taking mortar fire on the ground and I never made that point. I am stating that I have seen more war and understand it better then the grand majority of cadets at USAFA (minus previous E's with boots on the ground experience). We can both agree to this point. I would be careful marginalizing combat experiences of individuals you do not know.

I think he would very much agree with focusing on the "why". Considering he isn't with us anymore, it's a moot point.
 
usafa2525 said:
I hope you enjoyed your CT BFM flight. I appreciate the discussion, but I think it's just not going to be possible to reconcile our beliefs about what meaningful training is. You claim that I know nothing about the Air Force, but, to be honest, you don't know very much about USAFA, its traditions, its purpose, and the role of a cadet, so there's ignorance on both sides of the aisle.
Click to expand...
Time will tell what approach is the best. Best of luck on the path to your commission.
 
Zaphod Beeblebrox said:
What would Olds think of you? Would he agree that group PT, high/low crawling, or doing push-ups before entering quarters during initial entry training detracts from national security?
Click to expand...
I can guess one thing Olds would agree with @a400831 primary gist - that the cadets should follow orders, be quiet, and stay away from anonymous posts.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top