F-16.net

Quote:

Don't necessarily agree with it. It's too easy for Ops to abuse the weekly schedule, even if it means taking jets out of Scheduled Mx or adding jets that were going to sit for Phase flow mgt just to make front lines.

I agree OPS wants one thing FLY. We saw our FMC rates go down and down until the floor dropped out. Then it was rush rush rush to get them fixed.
The racing world is a good example of how to do it. The car is ready when its ready, so it should be with jets!
Let OPS worry about buying new furniture for their office and leave the jet repair to the pros. We'l call you when it's ready.

F-16.net Sponsor

When the racing world gets a warfighting mission your analogy will work.

Of course Ops wants to fly--that's the mission.

I would infer from your post that the squadron you were/are in suffers from poor leadership. See Meathook's post.

As far as AF organizations go........"the more it changes, the more it stays the same."

Newbie Joined: Sep 16, 2004 Posts: 4 Status: Offline

I think the major point from the maintenance stand point is 1 boss. Right now the AMU's are whipping boys for AMXS/MXG and the FS/OG. The AMU's are shunned by all the support maintenance squadrons. This is due in part our mentality when it comes to EMS/CRS and MOS. They are support to us as we are the last line of maintenance and deep down they resent that fact.
How many chiefs does an AMXS have? depending on the wing 3-4. How many OIC's (includes assistant OIC's) does AMXS have? 6-12 once again depending on the size of the wing. Now how many Chiefs does a FS have? 1 How many OIC's in a FS? 2-3. See how over inflated the AMXS way of doing things has become? Not only do you have AMU/FS leadership tell you what your priorities are but AMXS/MXG telling you as well.
Most people who remember the old days remember a lot more camaraderie. A sense of pride because you were in the FS and that meant at least in theory you were protected under the umbrella of the pilots. As we all know in a flying wing the pilots rule the roost. But, when we went to AMXS we became just a mechanic.

tbiscuit78 wrote:

I think the major point from the maintenance stand point is 1 boss. Right now the AMU's are whipping boys for AMXS/MXG and the FS/OG. The AMU's are shunned by all the support maintenance squadrons. This is due in part our mentality when it comes to EMS/CRS and MOS. They are support to us as we are the last line of maintenance and deep down they resent that fact.
How many chiefs does an AMXS have? depending on the wing 3-4. How many OIC's (includes assistant OIC's) does AMXS have? 6-12 once again depending on the size of the wing. Now how many Chiefs does a FS have? 1 How many OIC's in a FS? 2-3. See how over inflated the AMXS way of doing things has become? Not only do you have AMU/FS leadership tell you what your priorities are but AMXS/MXG telling you as well.
Most people who remember the old days remember a lot more camaraderie. A sense of pride because you were in the FS and that meant at least in theory you were protected under the umbrella of the pilots. As we all know in a flying wing the pilots rule the roost. But, when we went to AMXS we became just a mechanic.

HERE HERE... THE crowd goes wild. I'm just sitting here laughing my a$$ off thinking how much money we have spent just on signs and crap with the change over in the last 5 years and now they are going to reverse it. Classic.

Let me put it simply. What was/is more important on your uniform? The Fighter squadron patch or the AGS patch? We'd live and die for our FS (TFS for us old guys). AGS is where we got our boots, ho hum.

NO SLACK IN FIGHTER ATTACK.

F-16.net Editor Joined: Sep 23, 2003 Posts: 2862

Don't worry. I am sure this thread will be around in 5 years when they make another change. Very Happy

maddog2840 wrote:

Let me put it simply. What was/is more important on your uniform? The Fighter squadron patch or the AGS patch? We'd live and die for our FS (TFS for us old guys). AGS is where we got our boots, ho hum.

NO SLACK IN FIGHTER ATTACK.

Great call Maddog! I was in two AGS's (4456th and 56th) and an EMS (401st), and wouldn't give a second thought to any of those patches. Id someone asked what unit I was in at MacDill, I was a 63rd Black Panther, and at TJ a 614th Lucky Devil - even though, strictly speaking, I was never 'in' either unit.

It's a matter of pride and teamwork and a connection to the mission, no not turning jets - as important as it is, and as much as we hate to admit it, we're there to support those guys (and girls) who put warheads of foreheads - the real mission. We're all a team, we have to be - for any of us to succeed - and the 'cleaner' and closer we can make that team, the better for all of us.

Mike

Mike

Arctus
Looks like you have been around since 91, I've been around since 72. This has gone around so many times now it's comical.
Seeing jets fly is great for moral, but from a superintendents point of view answering why your FMC rate is low is no fun when the guy your talking to is the reason for the problem.
I also saw a total disconnect from the back shops when we made the change in the 90's. We lost the link that helped keep all maintenance groups together.
But again my view point is from a different perspective than yours.

Elite 2K Joined: May 13, 2004 Posts: 2945 Location: Utah

This is perfect - , I love it - ACMIguy wrote - Seeing jets fly is great for moral, but from a superintendents point of view answering why your FMC rate is low is no fun when the guy your talking to is the reason for the problem.

How true ..... Wink

Meathook wrote:

This is perfect - , I love it - ACMIguy wrote - Seeing jets fly is great for moral, but from a superintendents point of view answering why your FMC rate is low is no fun when the guy your talking to is the reason for the problem.

How true ..... Wink

I'll buy that as well.

As an old AGS/AMU guy, I never had the opportunity to work at homebase, 'directly' for a flying squadron, but did get to see a lot of OPS Command vs. MX Supervision standoffs - while we on the flightline were standing around (or more likely riding around in the bread truck...) with broke jets waiting for someone, anyone, to make the call. Any call.

Mike

This is the best news I have heard in a long time. MX should be aligned with ops, when they are there is more mutual respect between MX and the Pilots. I've been in long enough to see thing both ways, and I can honestly say that I enjoyed working closely with the pilots. There were alot more headaches when we transitioned to AMXS, not to mention the percieved "lack of respect" from OPS to MX. I hope this comes to fruition before I leave the Air Force!!

Elite 2K Joined: May 13, 2004 Posts: 2945 Location: Utah

I think it is the way it should be, it becomes personal then too, squadron pride and team-ship go a long way towards a common goal of any Air Force - it is the way it was when I first got in (1969)...I too saw it changed and then go back to square one, time and time again...I never understood why!

Glad to see it goes back to the basic squadron concept - lets hope it stays there (but for how long)....

Amazing but it has my vote - worked for me for a very long time.

Yeah, but if we go back to the way it was, we need to change AFSC designations again. While we're at it, we need SAC, MAC, TAC and ADC again, too!!! Especially ADC! Sixes forever!!

Enthusiast Joined: Aug 24, 2007 Posts: 86 Status: Offline

DCM? No DCM.
DCM? No DCM.
DCM? No DCM.

Change the patch again. (oh, but THIS time we REALLY mean it)

C'mon, get on board! Don't make waves! Don't be bitter! Don't resist!

Repeat ad nauseum, ad infinitum, dept of redundancy dept, etc, etc, etc...

Sigh.

F-16.net

Forum: General

USAF leaders consider returning AMUs to flying squadrons