Leadership at USAFA BCT

[LineInTheSand]

Rocko.....JMPO but I think you're witnessing some ground pounders attitudes that working smarter instead of harder is less desirable because "it's not the way we've been doing it for the last 100 years". They attempt to cloak this attitude with statements about troops not respecting their leaders if they aren't sleeping in tents besides them.....regardless of whether these AF personnel will ever sleep in tents again. Add in a little resentment of the AF lifestyle and you'll see the end results in some of the posts on this thread.

BTW - specifically concerning USAFA - the training cadre get less sleep than the Basics. They wake up before them and often go to sleep hours after the basics. The basics know this. I'm fairly certain they could care less about how many of their cadre sleep on the ground AGAIN but instead are busy congratulating themselves on their wise decisions to choose the AF over the Army or Marines.

Ooooh... this could get interesting!

 

[falconchic88]

Based on what we did when I was a 2nd BCT cadre (over 25 yrs ago), and what a current 2nd BCT cadre has told me, not mush has changed. Part of the cadre always sleeps out with the basics. There is a rotating schedule. The Element leaders switch off with the Element NCOs, Squadron CCs switch off with Ops Officers, etc. The ones who leave don't leave until after basics are "tucked" in and are back before they are woken up. The basics don't even realize they aren't sleeping there, as the cadre sleep in a different tent anyway. Its really a non-issue.

 

[MemberLG]

. .

Seems to me the Air Force Academy (Along with ROTC, OCS etc.) must be doing something right as they have done a fantastic job of producing effective leaders and are accomplishing their mission. Are there ever issues? Of course but that also can be said for any branch of service and Service Academy.

I'm just not sure why the need to bash what the USAFA does at their BCT when the end results seem to be just fine. If it was broken then I'd say we need to identify what is broken and fix it. But if it ain't broke........

I am a cynical person, but I do have an idealistic side. It's dangerous to say dumb down our assessment of how our military is doing by making a general assessment that [various commissioning sources have done] "a fantastic job of producing effective leaders and are accomplishing their mission." For every feel good military story, I could probably find bad military story. The military has accomplished their missions, but could they have done them better? What were the cost of accomplishing those missions? The U.S. military did a good job getting rid of Saddam Hussein, i.e. "mission accomplished. But in my opinion senior military leaders neglected or failed their duties of managing the civil-military relationship. I don't think the military is blameless to place all the blame on lack of a post-conflict plan on Secretary Rumsfeld. Regardless, military service members paid with their lives.

Things like sexual harassment, cheating scandals, unethical behaviors of service members, mismanaged DoD procurements, and etc are all indicators that we might not be doing "a fantastic job of producing effective leaders." A worst thing we could do is to become complacent and stop looking to make improvements or accept "good enough."

 

[Hurricane12]

Rocko.....JMPO but I think you're witnessing some ground pounders attitudes that working smarter instead of harder is less desirable because "it's not the way we've been doing it for the last 100 years". They attempt to cloak this attitude with statements about troops not respecting their leaders if they aren't sleeping in tents besides them.....regardless of whether these AF personnel will ever sleep in tents again. Add in a little resentment of the AF lifestyle and you'll see the end results in some of the posts on this thread.

BTW - specifically concerning USAFA - the training cadre get less sleep than the Basics. They wake up before them and often go to sleep hours after the basics. The basics know this. I'm fairly certain they could care less about how many of their cadre sleep on the ground AGAIN but instead are busy congratulating themselves on their wise decisions to choose the AF over the Army or Marines.

Yeah. Such ground pounders. Much envy.

Also, tents?

 

[usna1985]

I'm fairly certain they could care less about how many of their cadre sleep on the ground AGAIN but instead are busy congratulating themselves on their wise decisions to choose the AF over the Army or Marines.

Have to admit this had me LOL. And I assume the remark was intended as tongue-in-cheek/good natured ribbing, b/c that's how I interpreted it. [And my dad was USMC enlisted and a USAF officer, so I can say this!]

In response to the original post . . . if this is the way it's always been done (i.e., not something this year's class is doing for the first time) and USAFA leadership agrees with it, I'm not sure I have a problem with it.

Our detailers got liberty 2/3 WEs during Plebe Summer (they rotated WE duty among the firsties). We were sorrier to see "our" firsties not around then we were resentful of their being off for the WE.

There is a balance b/t RHIP and leading by example. Let's face it, in the USN, officers have a much more "comfortable" lifestyle than the enlisted they lead. Chiefs have it better than E-1s and Admirals better than O-1s.

At some level, juniors in the military expect their seniors to have it "better." OTOH, it can't be all "do as I say and not as I do." The key is to find the right balance. I would like to think that USAFA has decided the current state is an acceptable balance given their needs, goals, etc.

 

[MemberLG]

Rocko.....JMPO but I think you're witnessing some ground pounders attitudes that working smarter instead of harder is less desirable because "it's not the way we've been doing it for the last 100 years". They attempt to cloak this attitude with statements about troops not respecting their leaders if they aren't sleeping in tents besides them.....regardless of whether these AF personnel will ever sleep in tents again. Add in a little resentment of the AF lifestyle and you'll see the end results in some of the posts on this thread.

BTW - specifically concerning USAFA - the training cadre get less sleep than the Basics. They wake up before them and often go to sleep hours after the basics. The basics know this. I'm fairly certain they could care less about how many of their cadre sleep on the ground AGAIN but instead are busy congratulating themselves on their wise decisions to choose the AF over the Army or Marines.

I couldn't resist

From a course I am took (Disclaimer: it's an Army course)

Critical Reasoning/Logical Fallacies

Arguments against the persons - "ground pounder"
False Dichotomy - leadership development is simple enough to use only the example cadre sleeping in the field with cadets to make a determination.
Appeal to Unqualified Authority - other forum members
Appeal to Fear - "attitudes that working smarter instead of harder is less desirable"
Weak Analogy - "they could care less about how many of their cadre sleep on the ground AGAIN but instead are busy congratulating themselves on their wise decisions to choose AF over the Army or Marines."
Red Herring -"little resentment of the AF lifestyle."

Kidding aside, we could have more intellectural discussion about difference leadership development philosophy/methods/training by each services than thinking the original post and subsequent response were more intellectual questions.

 

[scoutpilot]

Ooooh... this could get interesting!

Nah...the zoo staff has asked that we not hand-feed any trolls. It messes with the regular feeding schedule.

 

[scoutpilot]

I couldn't resist

From a course I am took (Disclaimer: it's an Army course)

Critical Reasoning/Logical Fallacies

Arguments against the persons - "ground pounder"
False Dichotomy - leadership development is simple enough to use only the example cadre sleeping in the field with cadets to make a determination.
Appeal to Unqualified Authority - other forum members
Appeal to Fear - "attitudes that working smarter instead of harder is less desirable"
Weak Analogy - "they could care less about how many of their cadre sleep on the ground AGAIN but instead are busy congratulating themselves on their wise decisions to choose AF over the Army or Marines."
Red Herring -"little resentment of the AF lifestyle."

Careful...you're going to invalidate a lifetime of posts for some!

Well played.

 

[scoutpilot]

Yeah. Such ground pounders. Much envy.

Also, tents?

I can't tell you how many times, after a flight, I've thought to myself "if I only I could've chosen better...oh, to be an Air Force weather officer. Or maybe maintenance!"

What to do with all this envy?!

I am no longer in the army, but to this day I still don't ask anyone to do anything that I won't do, I always eat last at the company outings, etc...

Some things just stick with you.

This one is probably better to agree to disagree.

Excellent point. There's a reason books like "Leaders Eat Last" are so resonant in the business and government world.

To put it in Air Force terms...why would a subordinate believe you'd lead the flight into a heavy IADS threat yourself if you wouldn't spend a few nights in tent?

Credibility matters. Don't think so? Ask your subordinates.

 

[aglages]

There is a balance b/t RHIP and leading by example. Let's face it, in the USN, officers have a much more "comfortable" lifestyle than the enlisted they lead. Chiefs have it better than E-1s and Admirals better than O-1s.

At some level, juniors in the military expect their seniors to have it "better." OTOH, it can't be all "do as I say and not as I do." The key is to find the right balance. I would like to think that USAFA has decided the current state is an acceptable balance given their needs, goals, etc.

Well said! Wouldn't surprise me if those that are complaining the most about different standards aren't the first to invoke the RHIP approach in their own military lives. Perhaps instead of AF envy it's actually guilty consciences?

I suspect that you are correct and the leadership at USAFA has more insight into their own "needs, goals, ect." than some relatively low level egotistical critic. We can only hope that with time and MORE experience some will gain wisdom.

 

[kinnem]

Yeah. Such ground pounders. Much envy.

Also, tents?

Exactly. DS, who just completed OCS got this immediately. "We don't need no stinkin' tents!"

 

[Rocko]

The major difference in that situation is that Drill Sergeants are trainers. Cadre are both trainers AND trainees.

So what you are saying is once you have become a leader then you no longer are required to practice it? Or are you saying that DI's are not leaders?

I'm not trying to be difficult, but I am having trouble following your logic.

I'm also not sure what this entire thread has to do with anything. Has the Air Force Academy been putting out bad leaders? Worse than the USMA or USNA?

If so, based on what?

If not, what's the point?

I guess I'm just a simple man.....

 

[scoutpilot]

So what you are saying is once you have become a leader then you no longer are required to practice it? Or are you saying that DI's are not leaders?

I'm not trying to be difficult, but I am having trouble following your logic.

I'm also not sure what this entire thread has to do with anything. Has the Air Force Academy been putting out bad leaders? Worse than the USMA or USNA?

If so, based on what?

If not, what's the point?

I guess I'm just a simple man.....

I suppose that depends on your opinion of "good leaders" and your level of exposure to them. I've met some pretty piss poor leaders in the AF, especially on the pilot side. But I've met them in the Army and Navy, too. I have to admit that the Marines tend to be better than most, at least in my experience. MemberLG hit the nail on the head. It's easy to say and suppose we've been producing an outstanding product at USAFA and the other academies. It's also easy to point to a number of incidents which regularly give us reason to worry about the product across the services.

The question about drill instructors is an interesting one. Drill NCOs are responsible first and foremost for all aspects of indoctrinating new service members into the military. It is their sole professional function for the time they're on the trail. I don't know if a drill instructor now stays with his troops in the field. And I can't say why they didn't back in the 80s. Perhaps in the intervening time, some good leaders intervened and made it clear that a leader is with his troops.

Should they be with their troops overnight? Yes, I think so. Does being responsible for the myriad aspects of those soldiers' lives 24/7 absolve him or her of the imperative for good leadership in a situation like that? No.

There is, however, a different construct and echelon of leadership between a drill NCO responsible for a large formation and a first-line leader (like a cadet squad leader) who is not yet a true member of the military and is in still in the formative stages of "knowing what right looks like." Drill NCOs have families and other job duties that may require that from time to time they spend time away from their formation.

Again, having never been a drill NCO and being unwilling to speak as an expert from a position of ignorance on the subject, I can't surmise too much further than that. However, based on experience in various school scenarios, that is often the case with instructors/trainers (half are training the formation and the other half of maybe third are setting up the next training).

So again, I can't say what the practice is now. And it may vary between the harder BCT locations like Benning or Sill versus the more "relaxed" places like Jackson. It shouldn't, but it may. Nonetheless, there is a difference between a cadet who is being taught what how to lead a small unit and a drill instructor in the "real" military. Perhaps the biggest difference is that we trust senior NCOs to know when not being with the formation is necessary.

The personal attacks get pretty amusing on this subject. Plenty of compensating going on. Rank does indeed have its privileges. It has the privileges of pay, benefits, and interesting jobs. Anyone who's had the honor of actually leading servicemembers in our armed forces knows that those privileges are far outweighed by the responsibilities of rank.

One huge responsibility of rank is to set the example at all times. That means big things--grand, life-altering moral things like not getting a DUI and choosing the harder right at a time in combat when a "blind eye" might seem expedient--as well as little things, like scoring a 300 on your PT test (or service equivalent) and making sure your troops have food before you go through the chow line, or not asking them to do things you wouldn't do. As the old NCO saying goes, "anytime you do the wrong thing or pass a mistake without making a correction, you've set a new standard."

Once upon a time I had a SCO who used to use his NTV to drive his gear and himself to the flight line in Baghdad, right up to the aircraft, enjoying the AC. The rest of us humped our gear there and back like pack mules. For a lot of guys, that's the biggest thing they remember about their commander. He wasn't willing to be in the suck like his troops. He took all the privileges he could.

If I recall, Rocko, isn't your son at USMA? I am sure he'd have an opinion on this.

 

[GoSox]

If you'll pardon a post from another "ground pounder," it seems that USAFA does realize that time in the field is a good way to give young troops a shared experience, some pride as a unit, and a change of pace from spit and polish barracks games during basic. I will admit to finding it surprising, given that USAFA has chosen to have an Army style field exercise, that they don't replicate the experience more fully with the cadre living in the field with their basic cadets.

But I've always thought the class-wide summer field experiences at West Point (first during Beast and, then during Buckner) was superior in training to what we had at USNA too (see above about "spit and polish barracks games"). I can't speak to the Coasties -- don't know enough other than having met some outstanding USCGA grads -- but I think West Point seems to have thought the most and is doing the best with using the upper class years to teach leadership principles. And that probably makes sense given what most young 2LTs will be doing, vs. the different roles for many young AF and Navy junior officers.

I enjoy this Board in part because we can compare/contrast/critique the different approaches of the various service academies. Scout was blunt about it but in my experience them combat pilots generally do fire with both barrels, verbally or otherwise!

 

[scoutpilot]

If you'll pardon a post from another "ground pounder," it seems that USAFA does realize that time in the field is a good way to give young troops a shared experience, some pride as a unit, and a change of pace from spit and polish barracks games during basic. I will admit to finding it surprising, given that USAFA has chosen to have an Army style field exercise, that they don't replicate the experience more fully with the cadre living in the field with their basic cadets.

But I've always thought the class-wide summer field experiences at West Point (first during Beast and, then during Buckner) was superior in training to what we had at USNA too (see above about "spit and polish barracks games"). I can't speak to the Coasties -- don't know enough other than having met some outstanding USCGA grads -- but I think West Point seems to have thought the most and is doing the best with using the upper class years to teach leadership principles. And that probably makes sense given what most young 2LTs will be doing, vs. the different roles for many young AF and Navy junior officers.

I enjoy this Board in part because we can compare/contrast/critique the different approaches of the various service academies. Scout was blunt about it but in my experience them combat pilots generally do fire with both barrels, verbally or otherwise!

You make me blush, buddy!