What is going on at the top??
What I observe as someone serving is the stratification across the generations that are serving. It seems to be a divide between “Millenials” or “Gen Y”, that are roughly 29-42 years old, and the rest. That is very sweeping, but when you meet a lot of Service folks you start to gain that impression. This means that the “Boomers” (56-60), “Gen X” (42-56) and the new “Gen Z” (18-28) tend to get along - in fact it would appear that the younger Gen Z absolutely despise Gen Y (or Millenials).
Jimlad1
Not so. What I observe as someone serving is the stratification across the generations that are serving. It seems to be a divide between “Millenials” or “Gen Y”, that are roughly 29-42 years old, and the rest. That is very sweeping, but when you meet a lot of Service folks you start to gain that impression. This means that the “Boomers” (56-60), “Gen X” (42-56) and the new “Gen Z” (18-28) tend to get along - in fact it would appear that the younger Gen Z absolutely despise Gen Y (or Millenials). Now of course there are exceptions to this.
The trouble is “the top”, to which this thread refers, is in so much trouble as they are out of touch. They believe that the Next Gen Air Force is what the very noisy Gen Y/Millennials are screaming for - with some proper virtue signalling - when actually they are in a minority and likely to be retiring when Next Gen Air Force 2035-2040 comes around. So ‘the top’ would appear to be missing this disquiet from the newer generations of the RAF who are getting more and more annoyed - of course, they communicate in their own way and you only have to see some of Gen Z’s memes to see how proper p!ssed off they are. Some of us younger Gen Xs are ‘read into these memes’ and it shows what a huge gulf there is between what the majority of the RAF wants and what ‘the top’ believes they should be doing. The final thing to say is that Gen Z do things, they are activists and will be great leaders - I can see them leapfrogging the Twitterati Gen Y within the Armed Forces. With some similar values to Gen X, then I like that, and the fact that many are fed up with Gen Y’s social media ‘cancel culture’. They want to go toe-to-toe and confront some of this and that is why you see our kids attending more live demonstration than ever before.
Fascinating stuff and ‘the top’ really needs to stop following the Twitterati Warrant Officers and listen to the brighter talent with greater potential beneath them…
Not so. What I observe as someone serving is the stratification across the generations that are serving. It seems to be a divide between “Millenials” or “Gen Y”, that are roughly 29-42 years old, and the rest. That is very sweeping, but when you meet a lot of Service folks you start to gain that impression. This means that the “Boomers” (56-60), “Gen X” (42-56) and the new “Gen Z” (18-28) tend to get along - in fact it would appear that the younger Gen Z absolutely despise Gen Y (or Millenials). Now of course there are exceptions to this.
The trouble is “the top”, to which this thread refers, is in so much trouble as they are out of touch. They believe that the Next Gen Air Force is what the very noisy Gen Y/Millennials are screaming for - with some proper virtue signalling - when actually they are in a minority and likely to be retiring when Next Gen Air Force 2035-2040 comes around. So ‘the top’ would appear to be missing this disquiet from the newer generations of the RAF who are getting more and more annoyed - of course, they communicate in their own way and you only have to see some of Gen Z’s memes to see how proper p!ssed off they are. Some of us younger Gen Xs are ‘read into these memes’ and it shows what a huge gulf there is between what the majority of the RAF wants and what ‘the top’ believes they should be doing. The final thing to say is that Gen Z do things, they are activists and will be great leaders - I can see them leapfrogging the Twitterati Gen Y within the Armed Forces. With some similar values to Gen X, then I like that, and the fact that many are fed up with Gen Y’s social media ‘cancel culture’. They want to go toe-to-toe and confront some of this and that is why you see our kids attending more live demonstration than ever before.
Fascinating stuff and ‘the top’ really needs to stop following the Twitterati Warrant Officers and listen to the brighter talent with greater potential beneath them…
You lose points for deploying the phrase "read in" though.
I take it that it there's no coincidence that this latest generation's parents are mainly Gen X (mainly due to people having children later)? I have to agree with previous posters, my younger Airmen (fat chance I'm calling them aviators) have no interest in this woke nonsense and remind me an awful lot of the younger and far more pickled 4everAD.
Last edited by 4everAD; 1st Dec 2021 at 09:12.
Will Airmen Aircrew now be Aviator Aviators?
Can we still have " Master Aviators" ( Master as in Principal), or do we need to change that because of the alternative meaning in the connotation of slavery?
Same goes for "Chief" and Native American sensibilities?
What's the grief about "Aviators" who do not fly? Lots of Pilot Officers and Flying Officers do neither.
Can we still have " Master Aviators" ( Master as in Principal), or do we need to change that because of the alternative meaning in the connotation of slavery?
Same goes for "Chief" and Native American sensibilities?
What's the grief about "Aviators" who do not fly? Lots of Pilot Officers and Flying Officers do neither.
Last edited by Tengah Type; 1st Dec 2021 at 10:53.
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Hanging off the end of a thread
Posts: 32,892
Received 2,831 Likes
on
1,209 Posts
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Hanging off the end of a thread
Posts: 32,892
Received 2,831 Likes
on
1,209 Posts
I know the feeling. As a Stn exec I felt that Cmd contributed little or nothing to our operation other than serving to divert us from our primary task. When I got to Cmd nothing changed my mind, We reorganised, renamed, cheese pared and spent a lot of energy running the HQ. I sometimes felt if all the units disappeared, leaving just the HQ, the grown ups would barely notice. As a small cog in the large machine I felt sometimes, very occasionally, I improved things at Stn level but as a larger (yet still relatively small) cog I don't think I contributed to achieving even one extra sortie. The battles I fought with the bean counters sometimes achieved a small win but mostly it was trying to do the same with less. It was about then disillusionment set in.
Sir Harvey Jones when he did the troubleshooter series many. many moons ago visited such a company, he was shown around the works that was falling apart, had no money spent on the facilities for years and years where a workforce were struggling to produce the product and get it out of the door, next he was taken to the brand new office building, light, warm and up to date with all the latest gadgets, stopping at a desk he asked someone what they did and he said he generated paperwork that went to someone else that basically signed and filed it.. he pointed out that was why the company was failing, they were not spending where it needed to be and everyone in that office building were overheads that those producing the goods were paying for and they had lost touch with their product.
Last edited by NutLoose; 1st Dec 2021 at 11:32.
Once the system has resolved the problems of infrastructure and the basics of hot water and heating referred to above
anson harris
But it doesn’t, does it? They have chosen the masculine form of a noun that describes someone who flies or operates aircraft. So that excludes females and also excludes, and effectively ignores, any of the other professions in the RAF. What about the medics, the engineers, the gunners, the PTIs, the cartographers, the squippers, the clerks, the air traffickers, the musicians, the loggies, the police, the trainers, the chefs, the intelligence analysts et al? None of whom are either Aviators or Aviatrices, and this planned change of name effectively excludes them and ignores the vital roles they perform.
which seeks to include all
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Great Britain
Age: 51
Posts: 340
Likes: 0
Received 11 Likes
on
5 Posts
Yes, Project HYDRO reported last year. https://www.raf-ff.org.uk/programme-...he-air-estate/
Key points
- Programme HYDRO is a key Air Force Main Board priority, driven by the Deputy Commander Capability with progress to be reviewed monthly by our Chief of the Air Staff.
- HYDRO will recover heating and hot water in 2 phases: short-term measures in the next 2 years to recover hot water quickly, and longer-term recapitalisation of our estate over 10 years.
- HYDRO/1 will start immediately and be completed before Apr 22. It will be guided by an RAF estate ‘heat map’ and a ‘worst-first’ plan led by HQ Air.
- HYDRO/1 will restart boiler maintenance, start water softening, purchase spares, lease/purchase temporary water heaters, fit external water connections, remove underground asbestos and be run by a dedicated team.
- HYDRO/2 will recapitalise our complete estate, including underground district hot water systems, over the next 10 years and beyond. It will be a prime factor in the HQ Air strategic infrastructure plan, along with accommodation, new aircraft/equipment, runways and family support facilities.
- HYDRO/2 will be led by an RAF airfield review that will identify the RAF’s long-term footprint and sequence for major works, which will include hot water systems.
anson harris
But it doesn’t, does it? They have chosen the masculine form of a noun that describes someone who flies or operates aircraft. So that excludes females and also excludes, and effectively ignores, any of the other professions in the RAF. What about the medics, the engineers, the gunners, the PTIs, the cartographers, the squippers, the clerks, the air traffickers, the musicians, the loggies, the police, the trainers, the chefs, the intelligence analysts et al? None of whom are either Aviators or Aviatrices, and this planned change of name effectively excludes them and ignores the vital roles they perform.
But it doesn’t, does it? They have chosen the masculine form of a noun that describes someone who flies or operates aircraft. So that excludes females and also excludes, and effectively ignores, any of the other professions in the RAF. What about the medics, the engineers, the gunners, the PTIs, the cartographers, the squippers, the clerks, the air traffickers, the musicians, the loggies, the police, the trainers, the chefs, the intelligence analysts et al? None of whom are either Aviators or Aviatrices, and this planned change of name effectively excludes them and ignores the vital roles they perform.
anson - it's usually a good idea to read through the whole of a thread to avoid going around in circles.
Read what Lima Juliet wrote in #66 - it gives you the reason why your contribution is a waste of space.
Read what Lima Juliet wrote in #66 - it gives you the reason why your contribution is a waste of space.
I did read it. You seriously think that "airman" or "airmen" is a term that most people would look at and think "oh yes, that includes everyone" and particularly for a young woman wanting to join: "yes, that sounds like a modern organisation that would value my contribution"? You can think what you like of me, but the reality is that the Armed Forces must adapt, or wither on the vine. The sooner you accept that, the easier life will become.
Cpl Clott, Thank you for bringing Operation Hydro to our attention. I cannot believe that something like hot water and heating in service accommodation requires action by a 3* and regular intervention by CAS. How on earth was it allowed by those in charge well below that level to become such a problem or is this simply the manifestation of centralising budgets and responsibility rather than leaving them at local level where those who are more immediately aware of the problem could find local solutions if they had the resources.
Heating and hot water matter much more than what you are called, provided it is polite.
Heating and hot water matter much more than what you are called, provided it is polite.
anson harris
I guess the question is, do you use words like human, woman, mansion, layman and mankind? All come from man meaning person or people. Of course you could go for what that loon Trudeau tried to do and make up words like “peoplekind”! But that didn’t go so well!
https://www.theguardian.com/world/20...rsonkind-viral
I think the bottom line is that Airman is not really offensive as a term, as isn’t human, layman, mansion, mankind or woman. So why bother to change it in the first place? You just define it as ‘the gender neutral term for that work in the Air Force” (which is how the USAF managed this), rather than the craziness of trying to reinvent things by using a word that already has meaning and a gender - Aviator.
Anyway, if you want a laugh, and fancy a bit of edgy comedy, then have a watch of this:
I guess the question is, do you use words like human, woman, mansion, layman and mankind? All come from man meaning person or people. Of course you could go for what that loon Trudeau tried to do and make up words like “peoplekind”! But that didn’t go so well!
https://www.theguardian.com/world/20...rsonkind-viral
I think the bottom line is that Airman is not really offensive as a term, as isn’t human, layman, mansion, mankind or woman. So why bother to change it in the first place? You just define it as ‘the gender neutral term for that work in the Air Force” (which is how the USAF managed this), rather than the craziness of trying to reinvent things by using a word that already has meaning and a gender - Aviator.
Anyway, if you want a laugh, and fancy a bit of edgy comedy, then have a watch of this:
Anson Harris:
From: https://www.gov.uk/government/statis...e-armed-forces
I’m not seeing the withering that you’re predicting??
You can think what you like of me, but the reality is that the Armed Forces must adapt, or wither on the vine.
Applications to the RAFRegular Forces in the 12 months to 31 December 2020 were 39,353, an increase of 23.0% compared to the 12 months to 31 December 2019 (31,992). Over the same period, applications to the Volunteer Reserves have increased by 31.8%, from 3,785 in the 12 months to 31 December 2019 to 4,990 in the 12 months to 31 December 2020.
I’m not seeing the withering that you’re predicting??