I'll believe it when I see it.
Well the stink of being CDS (or not being CDS) hasn't been exclusively draped on the RCN has it? There is enough has-beens, near do wells, and boot lickers from all parts of the CAF to stink up all of Canada. In the end, what CDS has really moved the ball towards anything? We are hostages to the whims of the PMO and always will be.
McDonald-Baines-Edmundson
The Axis of Weasels?
I don’t have any real insight/experience on a would-be post-integration Fleet Air Arm, but will say that from the green side, there is (or more accurately was) much visible bemoaning by FMC about the poor state of support by Air Command, and yet for the actual “Deeds, Not Words” bit, FMC threw aviation under the bus several tomes; first ‘giving’ the green CF-5s to Air Command (no meaningful pushback when AIRCOM stated they’d be transferring the CF-5s from 10 TAG to FG), then deciding to not fund the CH-147’s upgrade from C to D-models, which was followed with FMCS decision (it funded aviation at the time) to let the Chinook be decommissioned; then the infamous CH-146 purchase in 1992 (again, FMC still had the funding means and decision for tactical aviation).The initial iteration of Maritime Command would have been great, the Navy had been advocating for control of the MPA community for years. But as per all the other maneuvering and backstabbing post Hellyer, the Air Force mafia was able to wrest control of all the flying communities from the Army and Navy.
That is my initial assesment as well. Except he forgot that the Marines need the Navy to get to the fight.I have it in my head that Hellyer wanted us to be an organization similar to the USMC. Truth ? Or did I fabricate that ?
Same within the RCN. There was always a fight between the Airdales and the Line Officers with the dasterdly submariners wanting a piece as well. Usually the Line Officers won, but as mentioned above their views were short-sighted as well.Don’t get me wrong; I don’t think that being CDS is by any means the be all to end all. Some have been complete bootlicks, others unimpressive, some influential.
Ah yes, forgot the third horseman of the RCN Apocalypse… Shame on me.
I don’t have any real insight/experience on a would-be post-integration Fleet Air Arm, but will say that from the green side, there is (or more accurately was) much visible bemoaning by FMC about the poor state of support by Air Command, and yet for the actual “Deeds, Not Words” bit, FMC threw aviation under the bus several tomes; first ‘giving’ the green CF-5s to Air Command (no meaningful pushback when AIRCOM stated they’d be transferring the CF-5s from 10 TAG to FG), then deciding to not fund the CH-147’s upgrade from C to D-models, which was followed with FMCS decision (it funded aviation at the time) to let the Chinook be decommissioned; then the infamous CH-146 purchase in 1992 (again, FMC still had the funding means and decision for tactical aviation).
So, while many will romanticize the “parent service as proponent for component aviation”, the reality (at least in the green side) was that environmental aviation is just one more card in the deck and doesn’t always (often) make the cut compared to core environmental capabilities.
HQ bloat came, it seems to me, with the 2000s ... I watched, in absolute horror, as commanders were downgraded (and reduced in rank) and staff officers were promoted and given absolutely unnecessary and inappropriate authority.Would that have more to do with HQ bloat ?
Don’t get me wrong; I don’t think that being CDS is by any means the be all to end all. Some have been complete bootlicks, others unimpressive, some influential.
Ah yes, forgot the third horseman of the RCN Apocalypse… Shame on me.
I don’t have any real insight/experience on a would-be post-integration Fleet Air Arm, but will say that from the green side, there is (or more accurately was) much visible bemoaning by FMC about the poor state of support by Air Command, and yet for the actual “Deeds, Not Words” bit, FMC threw aviation under the bus several tomes; first ‘giving’ the green CF-5s to Air Command (no meaningful pushback when AIRCOM stated they’d be transferring the CF-5s from 10 TAG to FG), then deciding to not fund the CH-147’s upgrade from C to D-models, which was followed with FMCS decision (it funded aviation at the time) to let the Chinook be decommissioned; then the infamous CH-146 purchase in 1992 (again, FMC still had the funding means and decision for tactical aviation).
So, while many will romanticize the “parent service as proponent for component aviation”, the reality (at least in the green side) was that environmental aviation is just one more card in the deck and doesn’t always (often) make the cut compared to core environmental capabilities.
That is my initial assesment as well. Except he forgot that the Marines need the Navy to get to the fight.
There is a story floating around that the reason the Airforce was given NavAir was the result of a study.Same within the RCN. There was always a fight between the Airdales and the Line Officers with the dasterdly submariners wanting a piece as well. Usually the Line Officers won, but as mentioned above their views were short-sighted as well.
True, and many submariners (since command of a sub was LCdr position) became very effective surface ship commanders (a Cdr position).There is a story floating around that the reason the Airforce was given NavAir was the result of a study.
Wait for it ......it wasn't a sturdy of how to make the most effective use of Maritime air .
It was a study that showed that a higher percentage of Naval Aviators were getting ship commands then surface warfare types. And it looked like it would continue into the future.
Ouch?
Gator Navy is still run by the Navy, the Marines get to ride in them.They still do. But the USN buys the Marines ships that will take them to the fight.
Isn't Marine an acronym for My Ass Rides In Navy Equipment?Gator Navy is still run by the Navy, the Marines get to ride in them.
I think we're saying the same thing.
Just woke up and I am thinking General Brock invented the Helicopter in 1812? Must have more coffee....Lol I had google heliporter
We is.Gator Navy is still run by the Navy, the Marines get to ride in them.
I think we're saying the same thing.
Does that include Members of Parliament having affairs with foreign nationals.....Global Affairs.
That sounds like the most MARS/NWO thing I've heard in a while.There is a story floating around that the reason the Airforce was given NavAir was the result of a study.
Wait for it ......it wasn't a sturdy of how to make the most effective use of Maritime air .
It was a study that showed that a higher percentage of Naval Aviators were getting more ship commands then surface warfare types. And it looked like it would continue into the future.
Ouch?
Snide remarks aside. We as a force suffer so much because of egos and agendas. Like the unwritten rule that you have to a ring knocker to be CDS.That sounds like the most MARS/NWO thing I've heard in a while.
I'd 100% believe that to be true.
I always assumed that was MAD related. If you tried to be a strong CDS and restructure the CAF that one of your classmates would burn you out with tales from one’s history at school.Snide remarks aside. We as a force suffer so much because of egos and agendas. Like the unwritten rule that you have to a ring knocker to be CDS.
I heard the words Incestuous self liking ice-cream about those fine institutionsI always assumed that was MAD related. If you tried to be a strong CDS and restructure the CAF that one of your classmates would burn you out with tales from one’s history at school.
Snide remarks aside. We as a force suffer so much because of egos and agendas. Like the unwritten rule that you have to a ring knocker to be CDS.
If you want to evolve the culture of the officer corps through an institution at the input end of the spectrum, you need to broaden the flow through that institution.