Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Air Force plan to strip generals of authority
http://www.washingtontimes.com/ ^ | May 12, 2014 | Maggie Ybarra

Posted on 05/14/2014 7:17:34 AM PDT by Whenifhow

Senior Air Force leaders have drafted a budget-driven plan that would strip the three- and four-star generals who oversee major commands of their authority to manage their bases. A draft of the plan obtained by The Washington Times shows that the Air Force is aiming to consolidate support operations under the umbrella of a single center, known as the Air Force Installation and Mission Support Center.

The tricky endeavor would shuffle day-to-day base management issues — such as construction, maintenance and procurement of equipment and supplies — from under the authority of the senior generals who command the bases to the leadership of a two-star general who would run the support center, according to the draft proposal. The plan was born out of a directive from Air Force leadership last year to reduce headquarters operations costs at least 20 percent by 2019. It cites reductions contained in the Budget Control Act that were implemented by the Obama administration in 2011. The consolidation would affect the service’s 10 major commands, each of which specializes in areas such as technical training, management of non-nuclear combat air power and global air mobility.

(Excerpt) Read more at washingtontimes.com ...


TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Foreign Affairs; Government; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: airforce; general; military; militarypurge; obama
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-52 next last

1 posted on 05/14/2014 7:17:34 AM PDT by Whenifhow
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

“The measure of a man is what he does with power.”

~Plato




help support the most conservative online site
click the pic


2 posted on 05/14/2014 7:18:23 AM PDT by trisham (Zen is not easy. It takes effort to attain nothingness. And then what do you have? Bupkis.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Whenifhow
Is this some derivative of ‘the purge’?
3 posted on 05/14/2014 7:20:40 AM PDT by MichaelCorleone (Jesus Christ is not a religion. He's the Truth.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Whenifhow

In before the FR naysayers come by to assure us that this is normal, every president does it, and there is no purge...


4 posted on 05/14/2014 7:20:54 AM PDT by null and void (When was the last time you heard anyone say: "It's a free country"?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Whenifhow

Apparentlt outsourcing isn’t just for IT any more.


5 posted on 05/14/2014 7:22:26 AM PDT by MortMan (Avoid temporary variables and strange women.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Whenifhow

Well. Where we have a Hitler-like bunkerocracy like we have with the Obama administration, either commanding stupidly from the rear, foregoing Generals’ inputs altogether or commanding not-at-all (as in Benghazi), it seems these 3 and 4 Stars are about as useful as teats on a bull, doesn’t it. Why not strip them of their token power?


6 posted on 05/14/2014 7:23:33 AM PDT by Gaffer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MichaelCorleone; Nachum

It doesn’t appear to be a purge, but rather a “re-organization”, but perhaps others can offer expertise in this area.

from page 2 of the article:

The “concept of operations” document — or initial draft — shows that the support center would have control of services such as fuel distribution, vehicle and support equipment, material management, small-arms training and ammunition allocation. Although the official said some of that framework was altered after the generals reviewed and rebuked the proposal, it is unclear how much of the framework was carried forward to the revised plan.
Retired Gen. Charles F. Wald, former deputy commander of U.S. European Command, said the Air Force has to implement structural changes because it cannot afford to chew through its budget at the current rate. Gen. Wald, who is now vice chairman and federal practice advisory partner for Deloitte, said the plan to consolidate base operations authority under the umbrella of a single support center on the surface “makes perfect business sense.”
“I think we should have done this 20 years ago,” he said. “Here’s the problem: I would have done it if I had known how to do it. I didn’t.”


7 posted on 05/14/2014 7:23:41 AM PDT by Whenifhow
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Whenifhow

New Air Force Command announced:
Operations, Bases, Arms, Materiel, Authority (OBAMA) Command


8 posted on 05/14/2014 7:24:18 AM PDT by WilliamofCarmichael (If modern America's Man on Horseback is out there, Get on the damn horse already!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Whenifhow

This week we learn that the Army is downsizing by another 30,000, the VA is systematically rewarding management to deny treatment to vets making defacto death panels, and that only 1 out of 5 applying to the military are getting accepted.

Sorry, it sure sounds like a purge to me.


9 posted on 05/14/2014 7:26:53 AM PDT by Nachum (Obamacare: It's. The. Flaw.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: WilliamofCarmichael

Now that’s funny!


10 posted on 05/14/2014 7:29:43 AM PDT by the anti-mahdi
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: MichaelCorleone

Probably — if there was a purge —. It’s consolidation of the worst sort. It weakens the traditional command structures and autonomy and will eventually breed a new type of base commander — one that has nothing to do but police racial, religious and sexual orientation attitudes.

Meanwhile, senior Military positions will be usurped by the political appointee process with no oversight. Making the military top heavy and more politically political rather than militarily political. Local contracts will be steered by political appointees back in ‘Washington’s’ Pentagon to more politically pliable contractors.


11 posted on 05/14/2014 7:32:25 AM PDT by Usagi_yo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Whenifhow

Air Force Installation and Mission Support Center = White House.


12 posted on 05/14/2014 7:33:07 AM PDT by Linda Frances (Woe to those who call evil good and good evil, who put darkness for light and light for darkness.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Whenifhow
Actually this maybe a good idea. I have dealt with three and four stars from all branches that didn't know jack about infrastructure and were lied to about issues and capabilities from underlings and the Generals didn't know enough to call BS.
13 posted on 05/14/2014 7:34:05 AM PDT by mad_as_he$$
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Whenifhow

And there will be a five-year plan for all of the bases, right?


14 posted on 05/14/2014 7:35:15 AM PDT by Izzy Dunne (Hello, I'm a TAGLINE virus. Please help me spread by copying me into YOUR tag line.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Whenifhow
Most major corporations are reorganizing this way. Instead of having each sector manage its own HR, IT, etc. they have stood up sectors that supply all of the support staff that provide their services to the other sectors.

Seems reasonable to me.

15 posted on 05/14/2014 7:35:21 AM PDT by who_would_fardels_bear
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Whenifhow

This is the Obama administration’s big, central government being forced on the military. Just as this big, central government can’t adequately micromanage the affairs of the entire country, this plan will be a disaster as top heavy managers at this new control center will fail miserably in their efforts to manage too many diverse things at once. Talk about the waste in the military budget now for procurement and contracts, wait until there is no one to watch the till.

This is just another aspect of the socialist progressives tightening their control over the country. First, it was the economy, then healthcare, then energy, now the military. Soon, big government will be just a communist dictator with czars to do his bidding.


16 posted on 05/14/2014 7:37:45 AM PDT by HotHunt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: who_would_fardels_bear
Consolidating into one single target does not sound reasonable.
Air superiority wins. Without it, we're sitting ducks.
17 posted on 05/14/2014 7:39:02 AM PDT by MaxMax (Pay Attention and you'll be pissed off too! FIRE BOEHNER, NOW!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: MichaelCorleone

Centralization of power and authority.

So you’ll have a politically connected 2 star telling an operational 4 star what to do.


18 posted on 05/14/2014 7:41:46 AM PDT by driftdiver (I could eat it raw, but why do that when I have a fire.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: trisham

The problem with this is that some high-up brass in another state doesn’t know what each base/lower unit needs. I’ve seen this problem with my Guard unit. Some of our training is localized, some organized by Brigade or higher. And when the higher units do the organizing, we ended up with some drills where we didn’t know if we’d have enough ammo to run through all the training for everyone. Other field drills, we got to go burn ~9000 9mm because we had extra and the paperwork to turn it back in just isn’t worth it.

Some stuff, yes, is better at a higher level. But some logistics just can’t be properly handled on a large scale, where people don’t know what’s going on, have little experience with it, and have ever increasing paperwork requirements to go through.


19 posted on 05/14/2014 7:42:16 AM PDT by Svartalfiar
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Whenifhow

Perhaps the homosexualization of our military can be more easily inserted by a more centralized command structure.


20 posted on 05/14/2014 7:43:59 AM PDT by onedoug
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: who_would_fardels_bear

Yeah, it doesn’t really work that well and makes for an organization which cannot adapt quickly.


21 posted on 05/14/2014 7:44:21 AM PDT by driftdiver (I could eat it raw, but why do that when I have a fire.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: Whenifhow

This will be a ‘SNAFU’ that will evolve into ‘FUBAR’.


22 posted on 05/14/2014 7:45:46 AM PDT by Parmy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Whenifhow
Not much different from the structure of Tactical Fighter Wings: you have a Wing Commander for Flight Ops, and a Base Commander for logistics, personnel, etc. Both were Bird Colonels, although the Wing Commander was the ultimate person in charge.

When I was a Battalion S-4 (Supply Officer), the Battalion Commander let me run my shop. I caught hell when he thought I did something wrong, but that only happened a few times in 18 months. Never bothered me...I was just a 1LT, ass chewings were expected.

23 posted on 05/14/2014 7:46:00 AM PDT by Night Hides Not (For every Ted Cruz we send to DC, I can endure 2-3 "unviable" candidates that beat incumbents.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MaxMax
All of the logistical support staff can be organizationally structured under a single sector or command without being physically located in the same place.

There will still be the military equivalent of HR, IT, Facilities, etc. personnel based where they need to be to do their jobs. They just won't report to the base commander.

The advantages of a single command for all of these support services is that some services can be outsourced where it makes sense (e.g. computer help desks, etc.), they can standardize on technology across the Air Force, and they can get savings from purchasing for the entire Air Force rather than base-by-base.

We have to remember that Obama is more a pawn of Goldman-Sachs than he is a liberal. Goldman-Sachs is evil, but they aren't stupid. What they are telling Obama to do with the military is the same thing they are telling their corporate clients to do. It just makes good business sense.

Also, what is probably happening now is that whatever corruption is going on is going on at the base level. If there are kickbacks and bribes being paid to supply services to bases then all of that money is going to the base commander and his cronies.

Under this new organization, most of those decisions and the associated kickbacks and bribes will be happening at the national level. This will put more illicit funds in the hands of Obama's puppeteers.

24 posted on 05/14/2014 7:50:36 AM PDT by who_would_fardels_bear
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: Whenifhow
I can see all the less redundancy and saved money...

And a downside. Someone is going to decide how much fuel is needed, whether your base is in Alaska or Florida, for instance. The people making the decisions affecting logistics (what is actually allocated) will not be those familiar with the needs of the individual bases.

I have seen this in corporate infrastructures, and the results may look good on a balance sheet somewhere, but result in off-the-books rat-holing of essential supplies, which means the actual amount used and the official amount used will never be the same numbers.

Either that or performance is negatively impacted.

I can also see where the logistical end could be manipulated to impair the mission tasking of any given base, intentionally. With the amount of apparent infiltration of our Government by persons at high levels who may be less than trustworthy when it comes to having the United States' best interests in mind, this is a dangerous level of authority to concentrate anywhere.

25 posted on 05/14/2014 7:50:39 AM PDT by Smokin' Joe (How often God must weep at humans' folly. Stand fast. God knows what He is doing.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Whenifhow

A central planner’s idea, probably. So, all an enemy has to do is take out the support center, then everybody runs out of ammo and fuel. It does make it easier for a govt, tyrannical or otherwise, to control it all, however. I suppose if you object to this plan, you will be purged.


26 posted on 05/14/2014 7:52:53 AM PDT by virgil (The evil that men do lives after them)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: MichaelCorleone

Yes, MichaelCorleone, it’s very likely part of the larger purge of military commanders who may have some latitude in deployment and use of forces.
This is a dangerous and troubling development.

It’s time to take back the country. Start with the military forces.


27 posted on 05/14/2014 7:54:03 AM PDT by PubliusMM (RKBA; a matter of fact, not opinion. 01-20-2016; I pray we make it that long.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: MichaelCorleone

I don’t see a purge here. I’m kind of torn on whether or not it will work. As long as the authority to manage the base as base commander doesn’t dive too deeply it might make some sense to consolidate major construction and supply operations. I have seen base commanders, until recently almost all colonels not generals, who were very good managers and planners and others who were complete nitwits or largely self-serving and trying to shine for the next promotion board.

Day-to-day operational decisions should still be at the base commander level. The major projects may be better managed under one head. It probably can’t be worse (yeah, I know it could).


28 posted on 05/14/2014 7:54:59 AM PDT by RJS1950 (The democrats are the "enemies foreign and domestic" cited in the federal oath)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Night Hides Not

Yeah - I was thinking it was similar to the NAVSEA setup in the Navy. The ship architecture, technical, drydock designs, and ship systems design stuff (including things like steering gear leases)all come from NAVSEA, the Bases have one command structure to run the bases for support, and the ships are operated out of an operational command structure.


29 posted on 05/14/2014 7:56:58 AM PDT by reed13k (For evil to triumph it is only necessary for good men to do nothings)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: MaxMax

They’re not talking about consolidating operations. It’s about base level support at the higher levels of effort like major construction and supply chain. If the base commander is also an operational commander it frees them up to pay more attention to the operational components and missions.


30 posted on 05/14/2014 7:57:22 AM PDT by RJS1950 (The democrats are the "enemies foreign and domestic" cited in the federal oath)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: Whenifhow

Absolute idiocy. Installation commanders used to control 80% of their budgets. Now they control only 12%, yet are still being told to get the mission done while having to go hat-in-hand to the fricking FINANCE people to free up money.

Did I mention this is absolute idiocy?

Colonel, USAFR


31 posted on 05/14/2014 7:57:56 AM PDT by jagusafr (the American Trinity (Liberty, In G0D We Trust, E Pluribus Unum))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Whenifhow

The Army has something called the Installation Management Command (IMCOM) that has been doing very similar things for years. The Commanding General focuses on operational mission requirement and has a Garrison Commander who runs the installation, reporting up the IMCOM chain.

When I was a Garrison Commander, there was no IMCOM and I worked for the CG. When he told me to close the golf course, I closed the golf course. When the Chief of Staff of the Army told him to reopen the golf course, I reopened the golf course. That’s the way these things work.


32 posted on 05/14/2014 7:58:14 AM PDT by centurion316
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Svartalfiar

That’s how I got my Small Arms Expert ribbon - Navy Reserve Senior Chief called me up and said, “You still wanna qualify on the M-16? Get out to the range, cuz we’ve got 80 people’s worth of ammo and only 40 people.”

Colonel, USAFR


33 posted on 05/14/2014 8:01:34 AM PDT by jagusafr (the American Trinity (Liberty, In G0D We Trust, E Pluribus Unum))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: Usagi_yo
It’s consolidation of the worst sort. It weakens the traditional command structures and autonomy and will eventually breed a new type of base commander.

Yes an unaccountable one.

There was a time when a base commander or navy captain was like god. They were responsible for everything that happened under their watch including the mistakes of their subordinates.

If the vehicles did not run or the computers did not work, if there was no TP in the latrine the base commander was responsible.

Now striped of responsibility the base commander can't take action when things don't work. Some off sight, no name administrator centralized bureaucrat gets to make the decisions and allocate resources.

The problem with this kind of USSR central admin design is that no one is responsible for anything and nothing gets done.

Staff Sargent: “Commander our IT system is completely buggered.”

Commander: “I know, I can't do anything about it because IT department does not work for me, if they did they would be immediately removed and I would find someone who can do the job. As it stands now just fill out a task order and send it to DC perhaps this time they will respond.”

34 posted on 05/14/2014 8:06:43 AM PDT by usurper (Liberals GET OFF MY LAWN)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: jagusafr

35 posted on 05/14/2014 8:10:18 AM PDT by Yosemitest (It's Simple ! Fight, ... or Die !)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: Whenifhow

The Army did this over a decade ago, creating the Installation Management Command (IMCOM)(spit). Commanders had their authority stripped from them at that point and replaced with a multi-layered bureaucracy of pencil pushers, environmentalists and agenda pimps.


36 posted on 05/14/2014 8:17:06 AM PDT by TADSLOS (The Event Horizon has come and gone. Buckle up and hang on.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Whenifhow

!


37 posted on 05/14/2014 8:23:21 AM PDT by skinkinthegrass (The end move in politics is always to pick up a gun..0'Bathhouse/"Rustler" Reid? :-)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: trisham
No surprise here - been in uniform or working on AF bases since '74. The old days are gone. These days, a Captain flight commander has less lee-way with how he utilizes his resources than I did as an E-7. Wing commander micromanages group commander micromanages unit commander micromanages flight commander micromanages intermediate supervision. Intermediate supervision tasks folks and expects them to do their jobs and it works without us micromanaging them...what a concept.

Consolidation of power is just another step towards subjugation - I don't see any stopping it.

38 posted on 05/14/2014 8:26:34 AM PDT by trebb (Where in the the hell has my country gone?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: MichaelCorleone

Oh my... What ever could go wrong with this?

On the other hand the installation where I was a contractor at had the Commanding General order that all of the Fire Hydrants were to be repainted from red to Brown.

As a side note the number of vehicle accidents involving the brown hydrants increased greatly. The most common comment was that the hydrant blended into the background and the driver didn’t ‘see’ it.


39 posted on 05/14/2014 8:26:52 AM PDT by The Working Man
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Whenifhow

Some of these generals might not implement the new ways of doing things fast enough for the centralizers, so we’ll do it for them.


40 posted on 05/14/2014 8:28:34 AM PDT by TBP (Obama lies, Granny dies.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MichaelCorleone

You might call it “purge in place.”


41 posted on 05/14/2014 8:29:14 AM PDT by TBP (Obama lies, Granny dies.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Whenifhow

The Army and Navy have done it this way for years. And I think USAF should be re-absorbed into the Army anyway.


42 posted on 05/14/2014 8:50:08 AM PDT by DesScorp
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DesScorp
Thats a good idea. I can just see a tank commander flying an airplane.

He would probably outrank the poor schlub who went to flight school.

43 posted on 05/14/2014 9:15:46 AM PDT by Dan(9698)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: null and void

Yeah, because creating a separate command and support structure will reduce the overall costs of running a base.

/s


44 posted on 05/14/2014 9:17:30 AM PDT by Justa
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Whenifhow

How does this work ?

A tractor known as a tug hooks on to an aircraft and tows it to its location
Three of the four tugs on base are acting up and need new distributer caps. Before the “reform” the supply sgt would go into the parts cage and get the parts and the tugs repaired as needed.

The new procedure using inventory control allows only a minimum of spare parts on hand. And maintainence filling out a three page report as they work on the tug. But because of inventory control only one cap is now available. The supply sgt must fill out the req form in quadruplicate with a copy going up to each in the chain of command and finaly to the Pentagon for purchase approval . Meanwhile the one tug that is available is used to tow the aircraft into a reventment (if in a foward airbase) as radar detects suspicious aircraft approaching....Well you get the idea..


45 posted on 05/14/2014 9:33:16 AM PDT by mosesdapoet (Serious contribution pause.Please continue onto meaningless venting no one reads.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Izzy Dunne
"And there will be a five year plan for all of the bases, right?"

Of course, Mr. Dunne. And your first, and possibly last, assignment will be to the beautiful northern Siberia kolkhoz. We expect great production from you.

46 posted on 05/14/2014 9:53:04 AM PDT by diogenes ghost
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: Whenifhow

Consolidate support operations under the umbrella of a single center.
The central committee makes move.


47 posted on 05/14/2014 9:57:06 AM PDT by Vaduz
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Whenifhow
One of my co-workers received a letter from DTRA (Defense Threat Reduction Agency) that indicated that DTRA expects another round of sequestration style budget slashing. The expected (desired?) consequence is that so little money will be available that DoD contractors will be forced to consolidate and perform massive layoffs.

A more indirect clue comes from Clif at HalfPastHuman (web bots) where his data suggests that federal interagency conflicts for funding will manifest as defaults in payments to vendors (read DoD contractors) in a time frame about 90 days after the Wall St market goes bearish.

Both of those inputs suggest that a DoD contractor should be making a good plan B now.

48 posted on 05/14/2014 10:18:11 AM PDT by Myrddin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Dan(9698)

“I can just see a tank commander flying an airplane.”

I can see pilots doing what they’re supposed to be doing again: supporting forces on the ground properly. Ain’t ever going to happen with USAF, who are infected with “Old guy and a sportscar” syndrome: nothing but sexy planes for those guys.


49 posted on 05/14/2014 10:44:57 AM PDT by DesScorp
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: Whenifhow

gheesh…. back to having to trade paperclips for helicopters sort of back channels supply system …...


50 posted on 05/14/2014 3:08:32 PM PDT by Squantos ( Be polite, be professional, but have a plan to kill everyone you meet ...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-52 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson