Various articles seen this week too short for an entire post:
Wonder why they don’t have enough sailors or pilots??
How a sailor shortage is crippling ship maintenance at sea (Military Times)
The Navy’s manning shortages are curbing the service’s ability to repair its ships while at sea, according to a watchdog report released Monday. As of late last year, the Navy was lacking nearly 14,000 enlisted sailors to keep its aircraft carriers, surface ships and attack submarines properly manned, according to the GAO. . . . .
Newly Trained Air Force Pilots Must Consider Jobs Outside Flying Fighters or Bombers Due to Manning Shortfall (Military.com)
A new Air Force policy may require recent T-38 Talon pilot training graduates to fly aircraft other than fighters or bombers, even if those are their preferred options, in an attempt to fill the ongoing aviator shortage. A section of a memo, which was shared on social media and verified as authentic information by the Air Force, detailed that the service is “1,848 pilots short, with 1,142 of those being fighter pilots.” . . . . .
More Navy troubles:
Amphibious Ship Suffers Breakdown, Marking at Least Third Navy Mechanical Issue This Year (Military.com)
One of the Navy’s amphibious warships suffered a major mechanical failure earlier this week that forced it to return to port — at least the third such incident this year. . . .
Should have heeded Capt. Brent Ramsey’s warnings.
CLOSE Quarters:
The US Navy Is About to Launch a Submarine Built for a Mixed-Gender Crew, the First of Its Kind (Military.com)
A submarine designed to fully integrate male and female sailors is set to join the US fleet on Saturday. The USS New Jersey “is the first Virginia-class submarine designed and built for a full gender integrated crew,” according to Naval Sea Systems Command. “The submarine community is a fully gender-integrated warfighting force,” said Vice Admiral Robert Gaucher, commander of Submarine Forces Atlantic. Gaucher added, per the outlet, that all future nuclear-powered attack submarines and all new Columbia-class ballistic missile submarines are to be designed “gender-neutral from the keel up.” . . . .For the New Jersey, that meant adjusting many details, from the height of overhead valves to the privacy of washrooms and berths. Since admitting women onto submarines, the US Navy has faced the challenge of retrofitting and reorganizing vessels for co-ed use. Last year, the Navy announced plans to expand the number of submarines taking on co-ed crews from 30 to 40. . . . . Space is tight, and the distribution of bathrooms and berths doesn’t always match the crew’s needs, they wrote. “The number of women on board often does not conform to three- or six-man rack configurations,” they said. Similar issues apply to the washrooms, with some crews dividing up the space and others deciding to use them in all-male and all-female blocks. “Transit to and from these spaces for showering also warrants an unambiguous, uniform standard for decency,” they said.. . . . .
Co-ed subs are actually not a new idea. From 1959:
But there are some who don’t like it:
Military must move beyond integration to inclusion (Defense One)
Once troops are relieved of the burden of fighting for inclusion, they can focus all of their energy on promoting a military that fosters great people, leaders, and teams. (???) . . . . . Over the years, the U.S. military has taken varied approaches to integrating women into previously all-male teams and units. In the early 1990s, the first women to be assigned to surface combatants were sent to their ships and wished good luck. In 2011, when women were first assigned to submarines, the Navy took a boat-by-boat approach, integrating crews from the department head-level on down with several women sent to each boat at once. (In both cases, the greatest resistance came not from the male sailors, but from their wives.) . . . .
Worried wives was from an earlier article: Navy to allow women to serve on submarines (NBC News)
. . . . One of the most difficult groups to win over on the concept of coed subs has been women themselves — at least those who are married to submarine sailors. On blogs and online networking sites, wives of submariners have warned that close contact between the sexes at sea could lead to temptation and allegations of sexual harassment. “There’s a lot of Navy wives worried about their husbands cheating,” said Petty Officer 1st Class Glenn Gray, a missile technician on the Alaska, who said his wife isn’t crazy about the idea. “I’ve told her not to worry, because I’m married to her.” . . . .
Yeah, sure. Reminds us of the findings of this report:
The Women in Army Special Forces Report reads like a soap opera
A USAFA grad noticed something unusual about a recent article by the Air Force Academy. He notes that “the mission of the United States Air Force is to fly, fight and win – airpower anytime, anywhere.” In support of this, the USAFA mission is “to educate, train, and inspire people to become officers with character who are motivated to lead the U.S. Air Force and Space Force in service to the nation.” With those statements in mind, what is one to think of the USAFA PR feature on C2C Grace Dailey, who is majoring in philosophy with a minor in religion?”
He has a point–rather odd for a warfighting academy.
HIs performance was lacking in the different jobs he had, but uses this excuse:
Robins Air Force Base Staffer Sues, Says Bosses Discriminated After Learning He Was Gay (Military.com)
Algae??
Tim Walz Pushed to Power U.S. Navy with Algae to Fight Climate Change (Breitbart News)
“The Pentagon understands it’s a risk to the climate, it’s a risk to the environment, and it’s a national security issue,” he declared. “They’re trying to create the Great Green Fleet, where we power our Navy using algae.” . . .
Good news: the legal cases brought against the DEI agenda keep growing
Obesity among troops costs Pentagon more than $1 billion per year, new study finds (Stars and Stripes)
American troops are too fat, and it is costing the Pentagon more than $1 billion of taxpayer funding each year, a study of obesity among active-duty service members published Wednesday found. . . .
A STARRS member’s observations: “Here’s a problem that unarguably results (in part) from lowered standards (“loosening of military fitness standards to ensure the services have enough troops in their ranks” and “increased use of body composition waivers to bring overweight recruits into the military”) and leadership failures, and that adversely affects military readiness. It’s also very costly, both directly and indirectly. Are commanders no longer responsible to ensure that their Soldiers are physically fit? Their (and their buddies’) lives on the battlefield, and the mission, depend on good physical fitness. When seven out of 10 Soldiers are overweight or obese, per BMI (not a perfect measure), that’s a leadership failure. Obesity is a “top driver of separations.” Leadership failure. $1.25 bn spent annually treating warfighters’ obesity-related diseases. $99 million annually in lost productivity. Yes, it’s a societal problem, but the enemy doesn’t care that we have a societal problem, and we will have physically challenging missions to accomplish on the battlefield (and even when not on the battlefield, warfighters must be in good health to minimize obesity-related disease and ensure availability to do their jobs).”
Another member’s comment: “Unmentioned here is the newest social taboo—“Fat shaming”. ANY comment on someone’s weigh—even a positive one, as in: “you look great. You lost a lot of weight” is now considered politically incorrect and could result in an HR complaint in the civilian world and a harassment complaint in the military. Fatsos are the newest protected class in the DEI world. The post 9/11 habit of wearing BDU even at the Pentagon obscures a multitude of sins. I remember being astounded how fat some of my colleagues were once I saw them in Alphas at some ceremonial occasion. Remember, the new USAF uniform—the Billy Mitchell heritage Buzz Moseley pushed—was strangled in the cradle because it had a belt and accentuated every “beer belly”. The Army’s new Pinks and Greens were designed specifically to be “forgiving”. Being overweight is dangerous in the military. A multimillion bomber. Rasheed and crew were injured because their weight exceeded the weight specs of the ejection seats. Imagine a 5’2” woman trying to drag a 6’4”, 275lb injured comrade from a raging fire. It’s not just an issue of health, discipline, appearance, etc. Lives are literally in the balance.”
Politicized Navy. Well we’re not surprised where he stands:
Navy secretary breaks law with political statements about presidential race, watchdog says (Politico)
Navy Secretary Carlos Del Toro broke the law by publicly endorsing the reelection of President Joe Biden and criticizing former President Donald Trump in several statements he made while on official duty overseas, the U.S. Office of Special Counsel said Thursday. In a report to the White House, the watchdog agency said Del Toro’s comments about the presidential election came in a BBC interview in response to questions after a speech in London. While he later reported the remarks, his unwillingness to take responsibility for them is troubling, the special counsel said. . . . .
Nor him:
Kirby: ‘No use in responding’ to a ‘handful of vets’ on Biden’s botched Afghan withdrawal (Fox News)
‘Obviously no use in responding. A “handful” of vets indeed and all of one stripe,’ Admiral Kirby said in a ‘reply all’ email chain . . . .
Leave a Comment