Forum: General F-22A Raptor forum

HatTrick wrote:

Yes, we (im a maintainer with the VAANG) are very happy to be part of this new and exciting airframe.

Say hi to Crockett for me. Tell him it's from his "Little Rabbi".

F-16.net Sponsor

Quote:

HatTrick wrote:
Yes, we (im a maintainer with the VAANG) are very happy to be part of this new and exciting airframe.

I am not trying to slam anybody here, but this is the biggest problem with the integration. HatTrick is speaking for all the members of the VaANG with a comment like this, when not everyone is happy to be a part of the move. The people that are going down right now are not the people that should be going down. Most of these early birds just roll over and do what the Active want them to do instead of standing up for their rights as a technician or an active Guardsmen. Tell all about the 15 minute rolling lunches and spending hours on the flightline without getting the breaks that they are alloted. I am not saying that there should not be a little compromise but there sure is a lot of smoke being blown up the backside if you know what I mean. By the way, we have lost 7 jets so far, I think, with one leaving on Wednesday. 86-0243,86-0232 to DC, 86-0245 to Texas, 85-1546,86-0225,86-0228 and 86-0254 to Iowa and 86-0230 to DC next week. That BRAC list is not even close to being right from what I have witnessed so far.

Well the nice thing about being in the Guard is that those of you who cannot/will not play well with others (Active), can simply quit if you like. As far as being told what to do...rank is rank and the jets belong to the AD AF. I do think that if the powers that be want the move to the new airframe that (x) numbers of airframes should be alloted to the guard unit specifically. As an aside...when the 16's came to Richmond they demonstrated one of them for the crowed and it was put into a spin....do you know anyone that has video of that?? Been searching for years for it.----Check

checksixx wrote:

Well the nice thing about being in the Guard is that those of you who cannot/will not play well with others (Active), can simply quit if you like. As far as being told what to do...rank is rank and the jets belong to the AD AF. I do think that if the powers that be want the move to the new airframe that (x) numbers of airframes should be alloted to the guard unit specifically. As an aside...when the 16's came to Richmond they demonstrated one of them for the crowed and it was put into a spin....do you know anyone that has video of that?? Been searching for years for it.----Check

Yeah, the nice thing about the Guard is that we can quit. Problem is, unlike AD, we do not have to live within 50 miles of the base and with this move alot of people will have to move to the crappy Hampton Roads area. Sorry not for me, my family is already rooted into the school and sports of the area I live in and besides that I moved 3 times in 4 of my 6 years in the AD AF thanks to the wonderful BRAC and I choose not to participate in this one. So that means I go back to Traditional Status for the 4.5 years that I need to retire and then see ya! I agree that it would have been great to get our own airframes and things probably would have been alot better but the AF is only going to get so many of those F-22s that are so great. Still have not worked out all those bugs yet I see(what's taking so long). I was at Griffiss AFB in 93-94 when they brought the first F-22 crash victim in on a flatbed for testing. Now about the rank is rank thing, during the week as a civilian technician I am a WG-12 and that has nothing to do with rank even thou I still wear the uniform during the week with my TSGT stripes on them. Now when I am on drill status as a TSGT then it is little different story, but that is only one weekend a month and two weeks a year, or when ever I am on orders. So as a Technician working four 10 hour days from 0645 to 1730 I am entitled to two 15 minute breaks a day and a 45 minute lunch under the current contract. Just alittle bit of ranting and raving, not trying to offend anybody. Most of the AD do not understand the whole civilian technician and guard thing.

checksixx wrote:

Well the nice thing about being in the Guard is that those of you who cannot/will not play well with others (Active), can simply quit if you like.

That sort of attitude doesn't even fit well with current management directives and philosophies within the Active Duty. I hope you aren't currently in a position of leadership. But it further illustrates the problems of integrating the actives and ANG. If this trend of integrating the actives and reserve components continues I believe the ANG will lose the one thing that really keeps it going - it's personality. Many people join the ANG specifically because it isn't the actives and they didn't like what they saw in active duty and wanted something better. For the bulk of folks the ANG was the best of both worlds. But if you make it a little clone of AD you will lose all the great things that the ANG brings to the fight. Specifically, tons of experience and very well maintained jets that rarely break at an incredibly cheap price to the taxpayer. The Richmond unit was one of the best units I've ever been a member of and I can truthfully say I think it's a sad day for this great unit.

Irunwire wrote:

Most of the AD do not understand the whole civilian technician and guard thing.

True. Most AD don't even understand the ANG overall. Try to explain Title 10 vs Title 32 and command structure for each and how your boss can change overnight and your PERSCO function instantly become an office at McGuire. Or try to explain why AFRES has IMA positions but ANG does not. Or why it can take 15-20 years to sew on Master and why you can't just pick up move to another unit and keep E-7. Try to explain why it's not disrepectful to call your pilot by his first name (because you bounced him on your knee when he was three years old visiting the flightline for the first time with his dad who was your first supervisor). Try to explain how difficult it is as a Traditional to balance two careers for 20 years and not start drawing retirement until you're 60 (and maybe only do that for five years before you croak). Or as a technician to have to put in 30 years working the Line with very little possibility for promotion to supervisor.

Yeah - we could just quit as another poster so inadequately put it. Thankfully we don't. Because if we did the AD could not meet its commitments and the country would be much more vulnerable.

falconfixer860261 wrote:

That sort of attitude doesn't even fit well with current management directives and philosophies within the Active Duty. I hope you aren't currently in a position of leadership. But it further illustrates the problems of integrating the actives and ANG. If this trend of integrating the actives and reserve components continues I believe the ANG will lose the one thing that really keeps it going - it's personality. Many people join the ANG specifically because it isn't the actives and they didn't like what they saw in active duty and wanted something better. For the bulk of folks the ANG was the best of both worlds. But if you make it a little clone of AD you will lose all the great things that the ANG brings to the fight. Specifically, tons of experience and very well maintained jets that rarely break at an incredibly cheap price to the taxpayer. The Richmond unit was one of the best units I've ever been a member of and I can truthfully say I think it's a sad day for this great unit.

Mmmm...careful falconfixer as your taking something I said in reference to another situation and twisting it. I was in a position of leadership when I was active duty and was very effective. The point I was trying to imply was that the ANG is very diverse and flexible. They should offer the move and allow people to shift to different locations/positions to compensate for something that many probably didn't expect, should they decline the transition/re-location. I for one have no doubt of the ANG's high level of personnel and equipment. I have relied my life on ANG members in combat, so I surely wouldn't make that remark or imply such a thing.

I am a believer that if someone is "forced" to move to Langley and they don't want to be there, they could potentially cost the life of a fellow co-worker. We don't need someone like that on the line at Langley...we have enough problems on base as it is. Hence my reference to 'quiting'. It's an option but not something I would expect of ANG members from what I've seen.

-Check

checksixx wrote:

falconfixer860261 wrote:

That sort of attitude doesn't even fit well with current management directives and philosophies within the Active Duty. I hope you aren't currently in a position of leadership. But it further illustrates the problems of integrating the actives and ANG. If this trend of integrating the actives and reserve components continues I believe the ANG will lose the one thing that really keeps it going - it's personality. Many people join the ANG specifically because it isn't the actives and they didn't like what they saw in active duty and wanted something better. For the bulk of folks the ANG was the best of both worlds. But if you make it a little clone of AD you will lose all the great things that the ANG brings to the fight. Specifically, tons of experience and very well maintained jets that rarely break at an incredibly cheap price to the taxpayer. The Richmond unit was one of the best units I've ever been a member of and I can truthfully say I think it's a sad day for this great unit.

Mmmm...careful falconfixer as your taking something I said in reference to another situation and twisting it. I was in a position of leadership when I was active duty and was very effective. The point I was trying to imply was that the ANG is very diverse and flexible. They should offer the move and allow people to shift to different locations/positions to compensate for something that many probably didn't expect, should they decline the transition/re-location. I for one have no doubt of the ANG's high level of personnel and equipment. I have relied my life on ANG members in combat, so I surely wouldn't make that remark or imply such a thing.

I am a believer that if someone is "forced" to move to Langley and they don't want to be there, they could potentially cost the life of a fellow co-worker. We don't need someone like that on the line at Langley...we have enough problems on base as it is. Hence my reference to 'quiting'. It's an option but not something I would expect of ANG members from what I've seen.

-Check

Thanks for the clarification. The further explanation was helpful as I did miscontrue your meaning - but I sure wasn't trying to twist anything. Easy to do on e-mail. No harm, no foul I hope?

Hey Falconfixer, When were you a member of the 192nd?

16DCC wrote:

Hey Falconfixer, When were you a member of the 192nd?

1987 to 1993 - worked with Crockett on 228 and also A-7D 72-0228. Got a great story about a guy named Richard (I think but can't remember his last name) who crewed the two seater back when Governor Doug Wilder made us drop the squadron emblem....It's the story behind his tattoo....

I have been in the unit since 1987. Iwas acc on 72-0966 with Barlow. I still work ther as a Tech. Crew chief. r. Laird crewed the D model.

16DCC wrote:

I have been in the unit since 1987. Iwas acc on 72-0966 with Barlow. I still work ther as a Tech. Crew chief. r. Laird crewed the D model.

I'll PM you. Most everyone won't be interested in two old farts yabbering.

falconfixer860261 wrote:

Thanks for the clarification. The further explanation was helpful as I did miscontrue your meaning - but I sure wasn't trying to twist anything. Easy to do on e-mail. No harm, no foul I hope?

None at all, were all on the same side here. BTW...are you aware of any video of the F-16 spin performed when they came to Richmond??

-Check

checksixx wrote:

falconfixer860261 wrote:

Thanks for the clarification. The further explanation was helpful as I did miscontrue your meaning - but I sure wasn't trying to twist anything. Easy to do on e-mail. No harm, no foul I hope?

None at all, were all on the same side here. BTW...are you aware of any video of the F-16 spin performed when they came to Richmond??

-Check

Nope - don't remember that. Maybe too many years and too many deployments ago. I was there the day we parked the jets as they came in from Spang and I've got a great story about some wine in a travel pod. But I can't tell that one here.....

BRAC! What BRAC............Our fearless leaders entered into an agreement, so our fearless, wonderful, think of themselves all the time pilots, could fly the best fighter in the world. I ve been full time for quite a few years. This has been the best job I ve ever had. Until now! What made it the greatest place to work. THE PEOPLE. Sure, there was plenty of bitching and moaning in Richmond. I think maybe though, you could count on one hand, the people who wanted to see it close. Those people would have been from the opps side of the base.

Forum: General F-22A Raptor forum

192nd FW/149th FS first Guard F-22 unit