Standards in Free Fall

[usafa2525]

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.

Given that Olds was known for his strong opinions that went against established principles, especially regarding dogfighting; his general noncompliance with facial hair standards which culminated in the creation of Mustache March; and his outward publicity concerning rules in the Vietnam War, I'd say that Robin Olds wouldn't agree with your post.

"We weren't allowed to dogfight. Very little attention was paid to strafing, dive-bombing, rocketry, stuff like that. It was thought to be unnecessary. Yet every confrontation America faced in the Cold War years was a 'bombs and bullets' situation, raging under an uneasy nuclear standoff. The Vietnam War proved the need to teach tactical warfare and have fighter pilots. It caught us unprepared because we weren't allowed to learn it or practice it in training." -- Olds, 1996

 

[flieger83]

"We weren't allowed to dogfight. Very little attention was paid to strafing, dive-bombing, rocketry, stuff like that. It was thought to be unnecessary. Yet every confrontation America faced in the Cold War years was a 'bombs and bullets' situation, raging under an uneasy nuclear standoff. The Vietnam War proved the need to teach tactical warfare and have fighter pilots. It caught us unprepared because we weren't allowed to learn it or practice it in training." -- Olds, 1996

Hence the creation of Top Gun and the USAF Fighter Weapons School. And the relearning of what it meant to be a tactical pilot, not just a nuke platform.

 

[unkown1961]

Given that Olds was known for his strong opinions that went against established principles, especially regarding dogfighting; his general noncompliance with facial hair standards which culminated in the creation of Mustache March; and his outward publicity concerning rules in the Vietnam War, I'd say that Robin Olds wouldn't agree with your post.

"We weren't allowed to dogfight. Very little attention was paid to strafing, dive-bombing, rocketry, stuff like that. It was thought to be unnecessary. Yet every confrontation America faced in the Cold War years was a 'bombs and bullets' situation, raging under an uneasy nuclear standoff. The Vietnam War proved the need to teach tactical warfare and have fighter pilots. It caught us unprepared because we weren't allowed to learn it or practice it in training." -- Olds, 1996

From what I've read it looks like the current commandant is the one who went against established principles and changed up traditions. In any event, I don't think Olds would have liked cadets anonymously complaining about orders on a discussion board.

 

[Blue&SilverBear]

From what I've read it looks like the current commandant is the one who went against established principles and changed up traditions. In any event, I don't think Olds would have liked cadets anonymously complaining about orders on a discussion board.

It’s not just about “changing traditions,” it looks like an attitude of risk aversion. I’m not giving credit or blame for that to any one person, but it is the antithesis of the Robin Olds attitude.

 

[justme]

...
On the anonymous cadet social media platform, "Jodel", people were constantly castigating him for every little thing....

Since monitoring Cadets posts in Jodel was specifically mentioned in this USAToday article, I can't imagine how bad of a "bloodbath" this might become. Crazy times we live in.


copying link here as well for clarification...

To combat bullying and extremism, Air Force Academy turns to social media sleuthing

Monitoring cadets' posts would align with efforts elsewhere to screen disinformation and hate speech, but experts worry about privacy rights.

www.usatoday.com

 

[All3Services]

"We weren't allowed to dogfight. Very little attention was paid to strafing, dive-bombing, rocketry, stuff like that. It was thought to be unnecessary. Yet every confrontation America faced in the Cold War years was a 'bombs and bullets' situation, raging under an uneasy nuclear standoff. The Vietnam War proved the need to teach tactical warfare and have fighter pilots. It caught us unprepared because we weren't allowed to learn it or practice it in training." -- Olds, 1996

Hence the creation of Top Gun and the USAF Fighter Weapons School. And the relearning of what it meant to be a tactical pilot, not just a nuke platform.

And why we should keep the A-10 in service until something even close can come along.

 

[jebdad]

Since monitoring Cadets posts in Jodel was specifically mentioned in this USAToday article, I can't imagine how bad of a "bloodbath" this might become. Crazy times we live in.

Wow! That is crazy. That article is very disturbing. They are going to spend nearly $300K to have someone monitor cadet's jodel accounts. What is next?

 

[flieger83]

And why we should keep the A-10 in service until something even close can come along.

The problem with the A-10 is that in a "near peer" conflict it won't survive. It wouldn't survive in Ukraine today. I don't think there's anyone that would disagree that there isn't a counterpart that has the same capability but is Gen 4 or Gen 5. What do we do to "replace" it? That's been a question for a LONG time.

 

[severn]

... so I appreciate you all in this thread, sincerely. I'm a total outsider in terms of service and branch. I can tell you what brings smiles to us on the fields: fast movers and 500 pounders.

 

[A1Janitor]

The problem with the A-10 is that in a "near peer" conflict it won't survive. It wouldn't survive in Ukraine today. I don't think there's anyone that would disagree that there isn't a counterpart that has the same capability but is Gen 4 or Gen 5. What do we do to "replace" it? That's been a question for a LONG time.

Sell them to our enemies?

 

[104FW_QA]

The A-10 is more survivable as any of these other 4th gen, non stealth aircraft, F-16, F-18, or Apache. Are they going away any time soon? I do see budgetary considerations playing a larger factor in the decision. It is simply cheaper not to operate so many different aircraft types.

 

[All3Services]

Kind of off topic but in line with the comments above, as someone who used to be on the ground calling them in, I can tell you I agree with severn but there's nothing like watching a Hawg come in and mess stuff up!

 

[Mallard Duck]

Some of the top graduates at USNA are athletes.

Its a fallacy to assume athletes are dumb or aren’t qualified.

Some of the top graduates at USNA are athletes.

Its a fallacy to assume athletes are dumb or aren’t qualified.

It's a fallacy on your part to think that this was the intent of my question. On the contrary. I was simply asking for statistical information which I am sure exists. 'The point I was trying to get at is nowhere near to what your preconceived notion is. Thank you for your response but please refrain from jumping to these types of conclusions. Have a great day.

 

[Mallard Duck]

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.

Hey, thanks for the response, this is what I was simply wondering. There is no intent on my part to disparage varsity athletes. -- heck I have of my own at USNA; At least you did not jump to that conclusion and I thank you for that. Good response.

 

[A1Janitor]

I misunderstood this:

In other words, are these academies squandering resources simply to be competitive in sports at the college level?

The answer is no, they are not. They are producing good officers.

 

[OldRetSWO]

The problem with the A-10 is that in a "near peer" conflict it won't survive. It wouldn't survive in Ukraine today. I don't think there's anyone that would disagree that there isn't a counterpart that has the same capability but is Gen 4 or Gen 5. What do we do to "replace" it? That's been a question for a LONG time.

Roger that!
The closest Russian aircraft to the A-10 is the SU-25 and they have not fared well against the Ukrainians. Having served as a member of a number of Joint Task Forces where we had A-10s working for us, I loved having them but there is a huge difference between the Iraq/Afghanistan conflicts and the threat to our air assets in a near-peer battle. The Navy has been swatting down cruise and even ballistic missiles over the past few months and those types of capabilities can also be found in some unfriendly ground forces.

 

[OldRetSWO]

The A-10 is more survivable as any of these other 4th gen, non stealth aircraft, F-16, F-18, or Apache. Are they going away any time soon? I do see budgetary considerations playing a larger factor in the decision. It is simply cheaper not to operate so many different aircraft types.

F/A-18 and F-16 have other missions beside battlefield close air support and are faster/more maneuverable and hopefully more survivable than A-10. Apache is different in some ways but probably sill more survivable through use of terrain and mission selection.

 

[Mallard Duck]

I misunderstood this:

In other words, are these academies squandering resources simply to be competitive in sports at the college level?

The answer is no, they are not. They are producing good officers.

Perhaps I did not say it correctly. The squandering I am referring to is in the 'chase' to be competitive in some, not ALL D 1 sports (think the 'co called lesser ones') I think based on your previous posts you probably know what I mean. In no way am I referring to squanderous behavior as it concerns the individual students overall.
As a fan, of course I want to see success on the field in FB. But as a taxpayer and citizen, I believe that this chase has the potential to get out of hand at the expense of mission readiness. I have the utmost respect for all the midshipmen. Although I am a vet, no I never attended an academy, far from it LOL. In my minds' eye though, as having gone to college, and having seen how D1 athletes were treated back then (a long while ago) I am having difficulty resolving things along these lines as it pertains to the service academies. Maybe I am wrong, wouldn't be the first time, but I believe as a citizen and taxpayer that the mission of the DOD in our countries defense should always come first. Not saying that it isn't but I just wanted to re-iterate that.

 

[Zaphod Beeblebrox]

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.

I agree with many of your statements. That said...

I'm careful not to marginalize the combat experiences of people I don't know. But you lecturing me about this is like a cadet lecturing you about it.

You are correct: Robin Olds would ask "Why?" But for some questions, he just wouldn't because there ARE stupid questions.

There are enlisted people who someday you may supervise and some of them have suffered terrible experiences growing up and/or went through tough initial entry training. They may be JTACs or PJs who went through the ringer. It may help your credibility with them if they knew you came down from your ivory tower and had gotten your hands dirty in a way that didn't involve flying a jet. They need to know your training suck factor was at least equal to their own, preferably greater. None will be impressed that you participate in "Silhouette Contests" whatever that is. I don't think that's too much to ask of a leader.

Anyway, the picture you painted of you tearing holes in the sky and flying over contested islands is interesting. But guess what? The last time we fought in the 1st and 2nd Island Chains, for the first few months, US fighter pilots did virtually all of their fighting with a rifle, leading ground crews as infantry against highly skilled enemy ground troops. With tragic results. So maybe doing some high/low crawling and otherwise learning how to embrace the suck might be good for every aspiring officer, regardless of the readiness rates of their future airframes. You like research so read Doomed at the Start and Pacific Alamo.

Kudos for berating doolies for wanting grittier training. Apparently, your posts will be the toughest, most challenging thing they endure this year.

I hope your next assignment is as an ALO.

If I've inaccurately characterized anything let me know.

 

[baovevietnam]

Update they CANX'd all Friday Recognition events. Stay tuned for what Saturday will look like!