Air Force firings reveal culture clash

The Austin American-Statesman ^ | Saturday, June 07, 2008 | Bob Deans

[Ernest_at_the_Beach]

Nuclear arms mistakes were reason for dismissals, but deeper divide over service's mission was at play, officers and analysts say.

By Bob Deans
WASHINGTON BUREAU

Saturday, June 07, 2008

WASHINGTON — In April, Defense Secretary Robert Gates traveled to Maxwell Air Force Base near Montgomery, Ala., to address an elite group of majors and colonels attending the Air War College in preparation for promotions to command positions.

For months, Gates had been at odds with Secretary of the Air Force Michael Wynne and Gen. Michael Moseley, the Air Force chief of staff, over how to increase the use of unmanned aerial vehicles to spy on insurgents and monitor roadside bomb sites in Iraq.

The Air Force brass, Gates confided, had been dragging its feet.

"I've been wrestling for months to get more intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance assets into the theater," Gates told the war college students. "Because people were stuck in old ways of doing business, it's been like pulling teeth."

On Thursday, Gates fired Wynne and Moseley, saying that inspections after two embarrassing nuclear arms mistakes in the past year revealed systemic weaknesses in how the Air Force takes care of the country's most dangerous weapons.

Behind the firings, however, lay a more fundamental battle over the future of the Air Force, service officers and analysts said, and a broader divide between a service set up to defend the country against a Cold War threat and a White House bent on defeating terror groups.

"There was a deep cultural rift between the U.S. Air Force and the office of the secretary of defense throughout the Bush presidency," said Loren Thompson, a defense analyst with the Lexington Institute, a security policy think tank in Arlington, Va.

"The Bush administration was determined to transform the military into an information-age military, and it defined that goal in terms that didn't have much to do with the goals of the U.S. Air Force," Thompson said. "As a result, year after year there were arguments."

Moseley and Wynne, by some lights, represented an old guard that fought for expensive manned aircraft like the $142 million F-22 fighter jet. Some officials said the two leaders were perceived to be slow to make the transformational changes Gates envisioned to create an Air Force that would rely less on pilots and more on technology to fulfill a mission centered on intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance.

"It wasn't just the nuke issue," said a senior Air Force officer.

Gates is likely to recommend to President Bush that he nominate a former Air Force executive, Michael Donley, to the service's top civilian post, a senior defense official said Friday. Donley, who was acting secretary of the Air Force for seven months in 1993 and served as the service's top financial officer from 1989 to 1993, would replace Wynne.

Additional material from The Associated Press.

Buzz up!

Vote for this story!

[SkyPilot]

One other thing you all might find interesting.

Gates deliberately timed the firings to send the biggest possible signal he could.

Gen Mosely was at the Corona Conference (meeting of all Air Force Generals) at Wright Patterson AFB.

Mosely had been hosting a four-star conclave of top Air Force leaders at the thrice-yearly Corona leadership conference at Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, Ohio. Moseley returned to Corona with Air Force public affairs chief Brig. Gen. Darren McDew following the meeting.

That was intentional. Mosely had to go back to all the AF Generals and tell them he was fired. Gates message was sent.

Moreover, Gates was none too happy with this:

Air Force leaders under fire for $50 million contract

The "Nuke Excuse" has been a great public sword for Gates to yield, but it wasn't the reason Mosely and Wynne were axed.

[SkyPilot]

ping

[Salvation]

Some assumption there. Unless it is based on facts. Facts, please.

Just because one Protestant is bad does that mean that all the Protestants in Kuwait are bad?

Just because one teach might be bad in Kuwait, does that mean that all teachers are bad?

You might do well to stop throwing bricks.

[Hulka]

You, my friend, make excellent points as well.

The studies and scenarios justifying and driving the requirement for 381 F-22 aircraft are against sophisticated threats, as they should be, because of this fundamental question: Do you want to be as good as the bad guy, or do you want to be better than your adversary.

With me, I want to be better than a potential adversary.

Problem is, as you note, is the fact the money isn’t there to invest for that much needed capability. And based upon what is “out there,” we simply can’t keep building more F-16s and F-15s. As great as those jets are, they are not 5th generation.

Personally, I would like to see the F-22 continue, actually field at least 183 operationally on the line. Additionally, I would like to see the Air Force build more F-15Es, as those are the heavy lifters and with their AESA and the other enhancements we are selling abroad, they can certainly do the job for a little while longer and they fill the fighter bathtub.

Of course, the F-35 will be a great jet, when it comes on-line. Here’s a thought, second source JSF production. Open a build-to-print second production line, that way you will generate more jets faster, achieve a cost-break due to massive supplier support and early buy of the parts.

A few ramblings:

The Army is getting the bucks, that is for sure, and the other services are fighting for their share of the pie, but it is hard to beat the blood on the floor argument of the Army. Hard to make an effective argument about emerging sophisticated threats when the 6 o’clock news runs another story about a fight today that cost American lives.

Even though the Air Force has been at war since 1990 (18 years), most people wouldn’t know it, and apparently Gates didn’t quite understand it as well. Yes he is a smart guy, but I am sure, like me, you have seen many in senior positions that may intellectually “know” something, but their judgment defies reality and what they know to be true is what counts. Because of the “long war” the Air Force is suffering burn-out of men and equipment and few inside the Air Force fully understand the cost, unless you are part of the line, let alone those policy-makers inside the Beltway.

The Air Force needs a mass infusion of budget dollars to recapitalize, and at the current pace, we will not recapitalize for about 100yrs. (And people complain about driving a car that is 5-yrs old. . .and those cars aren’t being shot at.)

FY08 was a real clear shot at the Air Force and the Air Force leadership refused to listen, especially when it came to the fighter bathtub. Moseley didn’t want to hear it. He had his White Whale to pursue to the ends of the earth.

The best way forward? I don’t know. But I do know the Air Force will need advanced 5th generation jets for future scenarios where we, if today’s trend continues, will stand alone against China and a re-emergent Russia. We should not, must not rely on our allies to support when a real war begins. I will not bet my life or yours that they will be there. Except, of course, for the UK.

I have seen the services fascinated by R&D to the point of losing focus and be beguiled by the secret-squirrel stuff. I have seen major defense contractors engaged in R&D actually resist moving a program from R&D to program status, because to do so would “take away” their pet project.

In FY09 PB we have many piece-meal RDT&E projects out there, which is good. However, there comes a time when we should actually produce something, drag it out of RDT&E and into Procurement.

The whole issue of budgets is a nasty one, and we all know “entitlements” are the real budget-busters. Until we control those entitlements we are in a losing battle.

Eventually the entire federal budget will be consumed by “wards of the state.” Problem is, those wards of the state vote.

End of ramble.

Thanks for listening.

[Hulka]

Obviously a misspelling.
Totally unintential.

[Doe Eyes]

This is news? Like any culture, shit happens when humans are involved.

The common folk should not be hearing this. Can't it be hushed up.

[Admin Moderator]

We cannot edit replies, only remove them. Sorry.

[Virginia Ridgerunner]

You know, man, I used to think that SecDef Gates was a hack brought in just to appease Reid and Pelosi after Bush sacked Rumsfeld. However, I’m really impressed with the job that he has been doing, and am pleased to acknowledge that I was completely wrong about him. He knows exactly what he’s doing!

[SkyPilot]

Not a ramble brother. You are plugged in, and you know what the hell you are talking about.

A refreshing change.

Hang in there. American is all on the same team. The enemy is the Enemy - and by God we will prevail against him.

I am glad to know the US has folks like you on the team.

V/R,

SkyPilot

[bboop]

Oh, wait a minute. One of the priests where we RCIA’d had been an Air Force Chaplain. He was AWFUL. Very personable, but he called me his ‘fundamentalist friend’ because I told HIM about Original Sin and he laughed me off.

Nice .... Were you there and met them? Isn’t that awful? You’d think they’d want the BEST priests in a war zone.

[bboop]

SkyPilot — Thanks for your thoughtful input here. I pray for all you guys every day (that I remember to). Fight on! And thanks for doing what you are doing. I hear wonderful things are happening in the Middle East because of YOU.

[tongue-tied]

Sorry, but I'll disagree back at ya. Where I am, the AF is in charge, and even the logistics support is a nightmare. We've tried to fix it, calling in NAVAIR for an inspection and eventual take over by civilians. The study found that we were completely clueless as far as what we had, what was on order, and what we still had to aquire. It is a rare occasion to see a supply mentor on the ANA side. They tell me now, the civilians have it, so we're done and they don't even pretend to work. They bide their time, waiting for their Bronze Star end of tour award. (USN doesn't award that level unless actual conflict. We give a damn about the awards system.)

We constantly tell the GO how we're working toward sending detachments to various air bases but we are not there yet. More training is required for the ANA and supply support (again) is nonexistent. His reply is "Great, so I hear we are on schedule for detachments to A, B and C".

It is almost funny to watch the USN trek each day to mentor their ANA counterparts yet watch the USAF remain behind because they have to prepare power point slides for the next brief. I say "almost funny" because now the AF will take over the op and be completely in charge. A sad state of affairs for the ANA, in my opinion.

Maybe the Air Force you remember or work with is different, but here they are a laughingstock of ineptitude.

These are my opinions and feelings, but it is the common opinion here at Kabul. US and foreign militaries included, they ridicule the USAF. It is pretty bad when the French disdain you.

[PurpleMan]

“but it wasn’t the reason...”

What was?

[5Madman2]

I saw it-some where in the 90’s, they politicized the Senior NCO corps, It became more important to “Fill the squares” for promotion than actualy knowing the job and leading.

Couple that with the drawdown of the 90’s where a lot of the best airmen and NCO’s left because they saw the writing on the wall. Much of what was left over was NCO (No Chance Outside)

Roll in the lowering of compliance standards you speak of in exercises and inspections brought by Quality Air Force and it made the brew that has caused many of todays functional problems in the AF.

There are other factors I am sure-but these are the ones that come to mind now

[Mr Rogers]

Perhaps, but my time was only a year ago. I avoided both Kabul & Bagram like the plague. It was the Navy who ran our supplies. The Navy CDR told me he didn’t needed to track failure rates - he just ordered everything when needed. Unfortunately, our high failure rate parts needed some lead time...

He also refused us permission to modify the installation to prevent future failures from water and rubbing. I ordered all my folks in writing to do the mod anyways. Since the CDR never came out to see anything, he never found out.

My point isn’t that the Navy has rotten people. They have many outstanding people - and some horse butt idiots who don’t know their own jobs, let alone have the initiative to adjust to changing conditions. That isn’t a Navy fault, but a human one.

In my experience, the Navy, USAF and Army folks in Bagram supporting the folks in the field were about 80% worthless. And don’t get me started on the Navy Chief who got pissed off when I turned in more ammo than I had been issued...

[Hulka]

If you don't object, I would like to offer my take on this. Of course, SkyPilot may have other thoughts or perspectives.

As mentioned here previously, the arguments between Air Force leadership and the Sec Def were well known and while counter-productive, didn't reach the level of dismissal. They did generate a lot of bad blood, however.

The “Thundervison” scandal. It was not too deeply reported that Moseley had a direct hand in this unethical source selection. It was not just “Happy” Hal Hornburg.

The recent Air Force the tanker deal-—awarding the contract to EADS/NG. As discovery continues, and more and more facts are uncovered, too include documentation on all source selection communications inside the Air Force and without, we will likely see evidence of high-level interference. Things are going to be real ugly inside the Beltway, that is, if the losing party (Boeing) wishes to go, ahem, “nuclear.”

Finally, I think what we saw was a culmination of events leading up to the last straw—the last straw being the nuclear issue.

Bu that's just me talking.

[Hulka]

Thanks for the kind words, and back at ‘ya.

V/R

Hulka

[tongue-tied]

That isn’t a Navy fault, but a human one.

Point taken, there are "stars" in lead jobs in all services apparently. How they got to where they are is generally a mystery, but once there we still must work for them.

My observation stands as far as my slice of life is concerned though: we will be set back severely by putting the AF personnel we have on ground in charge of our jobs. The progress we made in 8 months will be undone soon after we leave. If for no other reason than the lack of trust and respect from the Afghans for the AF guys there. If you interacted at all with them, you know how much respect means in the ANA/us relationship. When the Afghans roll their eyes when you mention AF, the impression has been made.

Maybe I'm a dork, but I am considering extending my tour just to make sure my specific area doesn't suffer when we are sent home. I guess I invested too much in this already to relinquish involvement. It will kill my advancement opportunities, but it matters to me somehow.

[SkyPilot]

The recent Air Force the tanker deal-—awarding the contract to EADS/NG. As discovery continues, and more and more facts are uncovered, too include documentation on all source selection communications inside the Air Force and without, we will likely see evidence of high-level interference. Things are going to be real ugly inside the Beltway, that is, if the losing party (Boeing) wishes to go, ahem, “nuclear.”

You know, I didn't even think of this until you mentioned it.

Holy cow.

I am sure certain Senators and Congressman will be delighted to open up that can of worms.