The Flyboys Get Tough

Status
Not open for further replies.

280PLUS

Member
Joined
Feb 14, 2003
Messages
3,349
Location
gunnecticut
The Flyboys Get Tough

With more people in harm's way, the coddled Air Force starts stripping M-16s and pumping up basic training
By Julian E. Barnes

Generations of airmen have gone through the same drill at Air Force basic training: learning how to fold their clothes in precise 6-inch squares. Using tweezers to line up the folds of T-shirts exactly took hours. In fact, when the Air Force studied this test of precision and discipline, they discovered that the folding drill took 16 hours or more of training time over the 6 1/2-week basic course. But mastering precise folds is a skill of more use in a Banana Republic store than in the Iraqi republic.

With more and more airmen being deployed to hot war zones like Iraq and Afghanistan, Air Force leaders decided last year that they needed more focus on combat skills in their basic training course. Now airmen are rolling, not folding, their underwear and spending the freed-up time learning how an M-16 rifle works. "I would really prefer to worry about combat skills," said Airman Basic Julian Pià who graduated from basic in February, one of the first recruits not to learn the folds.

Currently, many Air Force recruits do not handle an M-16 until the fifth week of training. But the Air Force intends to start issuing all recruits a training rifle as soon as they arrive for basic and to spend more time teaching them how to use it. "We still have attention to detail, but we accomplish that objective with the M-16," says Chief Master Sgt. Steve Sargent, the Air Force's superintendent of basic military training. "We have them strip and rebuild the rifle in two minutes."

Back to basics. Air Force basic training is currently the shortest in the armed forces, and the emphasis has long been on preparing recruits to learn highly technical jobs. But with the Army stretched thin, the Air Force is being asked to guard its own airfields, provide engineering squadrons for Army bases in Iraq, protect convoys moving from Kuwait to Baghdad, and provide explosive-ordnance teams to defuse roadside bombs. So beginning last November, the Air Force began ramping up its basic training, cramming in more combat training, stepping up lessons on base defense, adding combat first-aid classes, and looking for antiquated exercises it could ditch. "This is a big culture shift for us, and I think it is long overdue," says Brig. Gen. Mary Kay Hertog, commander of the 37th Training Wing at Lackland Air Force Base in Texas. "We aren't trying to make people into Army infantry--don't get me wrong. We are trying to give them the basic combat skills they need to survive."

The Air Force has also continued to make the course more physically rigorous. Sargent says today's Air Force recruits are smarter but weaker than in generations past. "They are not in the best physical shape," Sargent says. "When they enter the fifth week, they are more fatigued." To address this, the Air Force now provides three days of strength conditioning and three days of aerobic workout every week of basic. Earlier this year the Air Force boosted the fitness test from 50 sit-ups in two minutes to 50 sit-ups in one minute. Airman Basic Tiffany Collins, a 20-year-old who graduated from the training course in February, thinks the service needs to step up the challenge further. "I think the changes are very good," she said. "My father was in the Air Force 24 years, and he said it was a lot easier when he did it."

The Air Force is planning to add two additional weeks to the basic course in October 2007. The service will also transform its current "warrior week" field training into a minideployment exercise called "the Beast"--a too-cute acronym that stands for Basic Expeditionary Airman Skills Training.

The end result of all of the changes, says Hertog, will be to "create a more lethal airman than what we have had in the past." But one not as prepared for department store work.
 
too too sad

I saw a similar article that said that fleet sailors would also be running (land) convoy protection missions.:eek:

I think the idea is rediculous. Zoomies should stick to running the airfield, and squidlies should stick to driving boats.

Is the current US military really that undermanned that these guys have to be pulled to do these groundpounder missions? Are we that bad off?! :confused:
 
In fact, when the Air Force studied this test of precision and discipline, they discovered that the folding drill took 16 hours or more of training time over the 6 1/2-week basic course. But mastering precise folds is a skill of more use in a Banana Republic store than in the Iraqi republic.

True; but the attention to detail that the task requires comes in useful when the same recruit is maintaining the big flying machine that I will be riding in. I certainly know that I want somebody who is detail focused in that role.
 
Is the current US military really that undermanned that these guys have to be pulled to do these groundpounder missions? Are we that bad off?!
__________________

Yes, in my opinion.
 
True; but the attention to detail that the task requires comes in useful when the same recruit is maintaining the big flying machine that I will be riding in. I certainly know that I want somebody who is detail focused in that role.
Sorry, but I disagree.

Someone who is trained to use TWEEZERS to fold tee-shirts is someone who is NOT trained to discriminate that detail which is important from that detail which is irrelevent. I perform just about all my own car repairs for the simple reason that I do not trust anyone, even (or "especially") dealership mechanics, to touch my vehicles. But my wife will confirm that I am hopeless when it comes to folding the laundry. It isn't important, so I refuse to obesess over it.

The brakes, on the other hand, ARE important.
 
Someone who is trained to use TWEEZERS to fold tee-shirts is someone who is NOT trained to discriminate that detail which is important from that detail which is irrelevent.

That is kind of the point of BASIC training though. First you teach them to pay attention to detail - and not by assembling jet engines or something important; but by having them do tasks that they can afford to screw up without anything exploding - like folding t-shirts. Later on when they know how to be detail-oriented, you can send them to an A-school where you teach them what type of details are important.
 
Interesting comments. Not being AF I would have never thought of it that way.

I'd say it also helps weed out those who can't handle details. In my BC company, we had a guy who in 9 WEEKS did not learn to put his sheet on his rack with the correct side up. :eek:

Friggin' guy cost us darn near every inspection we had... :cuss:

:p
 
The powers to be want a combined military force and much like other great ideas of the new America will fail. I really expect someone in DC to come up with outsourcing our military to Mexico or other third world country.:rolleyes:
 
I will have to see if the Air Force actually increases the length of BMT. When I went through in 1989 I was told "Your lucky, this is the last week that we have the 6 week course, next week it will be eight weeks!!!"

When I was a Recruiter in 2002-2005, I still had people telling me that they were told the same thing!

As for the rest of it, it wouldn't hurt to have more training with the M16, heck I only get to shoot maybe 100 rounds every year or so. Then again, I work on aircraft and don't have to worry about the ground pounding stuff. The people that do, actually get trained for it and spend more time on the range.
 
I think this is just the military reorganizing itself to handle new challenges.

Perhaps its time to demand the same thing of the Army. Start training them to the level of the Marine Corps. Everyone is a rifleman.
 
I think it is a good idea. If you are in the military reguardless of branch you should know how to handle small weapons from the cook to the special ops to the fly boys. Now your job should determine just how much of your training goes to that. For instance the cooks and stuff don't need to know how to go out and clear a building. But they should all have a basic knowlage of weapons and defending a position. Airfield with a bunch of air force guys should be able to defend itself because the people manning it should know each and every one of them how to. Least that IMO.
 
The weapons training has always been in the Air Force, it was simply saved for the people who actually needed it and given in the various tech schools down the road. The purpose of the boot camp crap is to test them mentaly and physically and give them the basics of what the Air Force is about, if you'r job requires you to become a weapons specialist or explosives ordinance disposal specialist, you will and believe me the training is more intense than any boot camp from any service.
 
Concerning manning levels and what have you, it's starting to look grim.

I'm AD Navy, and this is just what I see. Believe me or not, this is what's
going down out in the fleet right now.

"They" (the powers that be, I suppose) are starting to take people here
and there off of CONUS shore duty and send them on "temporary duty
assignment" to places like Kuwait, Bahrain, and of course, Iraq for six
month and one year stretches. At this point it's generally only specialty
ratings like GM, MA and Seabee rates, but they have also recently begun
sending E-5 and above with law enforcement NEC's.

And of course, they're always taking volunteers. They even have a
program called "Blue to Green", in case you want to go ahead and officially switch over to the Army side.

I just think it can't be going too good when they have to borrow people
from the Navy to make up the difference over there in the middle east. :uhoh:
 
6 years Army, 15 Air Force. My comments:

I saw a similar article that said that fleet sailors would also be running (land) convoy protection missions.

I think the idea is rediculous. Zoomies should stick to running the airfield, and squidlies should stick to driving boats.

That was the theory that almost got rifles taken away from airbase combat engineers. Excessive specialization is for losers. "Excuse me! Point that RPG over there! We're AIR FORCE! The Army's over THERE!"

Fact is, if you're on the ground, and 95% of the USAF is on the ground, you're a target. You have to be prepared to return fire.

AF fuel convoys are run by AF fuels troops. AF supply convoys are run by AF supply troops. Are you suggesting the Army should do it for them? Ditto for the Navy.

Currently, AF Basic PT requirements are STIFFER than the Army's by a substantial amount, so they can erase that crap.

The attention to detail is more important in Basic. If they can't follow frustrating orders in garrison, they can't be trusted to do it in the field.

My wife just did Army Basic last year. It was crap. No neatness, no care or consideration. Graduation Day, I was about half a second from ripping the "Drill Sergeant" a new hole for daring to show me a barracks that filthy (And this was a week after SMA Preston visited :what: ). Gail spent a day getting "familiarized" with small arms other than the M16. She couldn't recall the designation or aiming procedures for an M203. She did recall the basics of pointing it downrange. Better she have spent that day having her barracks and locker tossed and rebuilding it a few times. Sure, they learned some awesome combat skills. I saw those losers at DINFOS for her AIT (Which requires some of the BRIGHTER soldiers). There wasn't 1 in 10 I'd trust to follow my orders, because 25% of them weren't obeying their Drills there in peacetime--I watched 10% of them WALK OUT OF FORMATION when the Drill turned his back.:what:

People pay to shoot weapons. They don't pay to clean latrines. That's why you do it a lot in Basic.
 
That is kind of the point of BASIC training though. First you teach them to pay attention to detail - and not by assembling jet engines or something important; but by having them do tasks that they can afford to screw up without anything exploding - like folding t-shirts. Later on when they know how to be detail-oriented, you can send them to an A-school where you teach them what type of details are important.

Hell Bart, after I left Boot Camp I spent 12 weeks in A-School learning to fold things also!

Course I was a Parachute Rigger and attention to detail was a valued attribute!
 
Every Airman 1st Class is a first class janitor!

:p :D

I know I was, and so were most of the folks in my flight.

We also spent a lot of time sitting around on our butts once the cleaning was done, and we never got enough of the "military stuff" like shooting or the obstacle course. We were bored young men who had expected at least a little excitement. It would not suprise me if the real reason for this was to counteract falling enlistment rates.

I will never forget a buddy of mine stuck in services, he spent four frustrating years asking folks "Do you want fries with that?". Yes, his job was an important one, and someone had to do it, but he sure did not want it, and he got out as fast as he could.

When you get right down to it both neatness and rudimentary combat skills are important, but it would appear to be an either-or choice. I suspect a lot of airmen get thrown into hazardous situations with no training beyond the AFQC course, which teaches how to use an M-16, but not when, or what to do when you are being shot at.

I always thought the Army had to clean latrines too, that would explain some experiences though...;) The soldiers who had been using a radio as a buttcan were unhappy when I told them to ship it back to the depot.:cuss:

I guess a two to three week course after basic, sort of like the old mobility school or ABGD school would have been too much to ask for.
 
Clean97GTI,

The Marine Corps has the right idea. Run till your heart almost explodes and PT till you almost die! Everyone is a rifleman. Everyone fights. Good basic skills and overall fitness are the building blocks. The folding and latrine cleaning is meant to break you down and have you rebuilt. You are a member of the group and will behave accordingly. Discipline is the key. Without discipline all you have is rabble!

Break them down. Rebuild them correctly. Weed out the non-hackers. Then again what the hell do I know! If I knew anything I'd be sitting on a beach gulping Dacquiris with the Swedish Bikini Team. SIGH!!!:(
 
NM: The "Falling enlistment rates" is agitprop as far as the AF is concerned. At least one quarter last year, you could not choose an assignment. Open general, and WHEN they had an opening, that was what you got.

Everyone going to the sandbox either gets or is supposed to (commanders can be screwups, after all) 10 days of the basics--weapons, convoy, etc. Which is pretty much what the Army gets.

Of course, back in the 80s, cops, engineers and a few others were bona-fide combat troops, at least as far as defense went--we had M60s, M203s, a couple of Browning .50s and M16s all around.

It was the "but we need to avoid that green, Army stuff and stay blue!" mentality that put it in the mess it was in during the early 90s, that it's still recovering from now.

Personally, I'd like to take every single one of those pencil pushers (Because it's ALWAYS the pencil pushers who never deploy who have that attitude) and stick them on a convoy out of Baghdad International. A couple of rounds of incoming hot would do their attitude a WORLD of good.

Best thing about being an AF engineer in the 80s: Target identification. "Airman, if it comes through that fence it is hostile and you will shoot to kill."

"Yes, Sir!":evil:
 
I have 6Yrs US Navy, 10Yrs US Army, and 6.5Yrs USAFR. The Air Force is very weak in the "Ground Defense" arena, and has very little shame about it. I had 5 of our drivers/operators ship to Iraq in 2004, and the went through 6wks at FGt Lostinthewoods before they deployed to drive combat convoy ops in the litter box. I got all of them back, but they now understand why I get buggy about some of the stupid things I hear. I have been told "Chill youir jets we are the Air Force, and if we need a weapon, the army's dead, the navy's dead, the marines are dead, and we are next." This is a plan for failure and needs to be corrected in basic, and from there on up the food chain.
 
Halfelf: amen.

That was the attitude that got them overrun in 'Nam (Tan Son Nut? At least one airbase).

Also, very few people in the AF know radio protocol.

They are far more disciplined, motivated and professional in mindset than the typical soldier, IMO (Tell an airman to be somewhere at 0900, he'll roll out of his rack at 0830 and be there, coffee in hand. Tell a soldier, and you'll have to wake up his entire platoon at 0500, hold an accountability formation, go to chow, mill around for a bit, neaten up the barracks, meet at 0830 and hold another roll call to have them ready for 0900), but that mindset is geared for a technical shop, not a battlefield.

If the two could meet somewhere in the middle...
 
Ca-ca de Pollo, where's the 'Warrior Spirit'?

In Mikee's world, anyone who joins some segment of what might fall under the collective term Armed Forces must have sound operating knowledge and reasonable proficiency with rifle, pistol, and knife, regardless of their MOS. When TSHTF, everyone is an infantryman. Any questions?:fire:
 
When TSHTF, everyone is an infantryman. Any questions?

Rifleman would probably be a better term. Pretty much all enlisted folks are specialized for a reason. Yes, everyone should know how to point the rifle in the correct direction and hit what they're aiming at. Across the board, more firearms training would be a good thing.



Is the current US military really that undermanned that these guys have to be pulled to do these groundpounder missions? Are we that bad off?!

Besides the fact that everyone in the military should be able to point a rifle in the proper direction, yes. Yes, we are.

The real problem isn't exactly the numbers. It's the quality. Retention is more important than recruitment, in my opinion. It's fine and dandy to grab as much fresh meat as possible, but keeping the skilled folks is REALLY important.

I like to think I'm an example. I'm not Rambo, but I was one of the best radio geeks in my entire division. For a number of reasons, I walked. I noticed a lot of other very skilled folks leaving also. I'll keep my opinion of how badly things are gonna be down the road to myself.
 
No argument here, RevDisk.

And recruiters are a big part of the problem. Sure, promising someone they'll NEVER have to go to Iraq might get them to sign on the line and meet quota...but when they DO get sent to Iraq, they'll be a #@!$ poor troop for having been misled.

Assuming they don't get out in the meantime and leave a big #@!$ hole with no one in it to do the job.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top