Hacker MikeD and others..

[///AMG]

So, it's not that he had a combat attitude that wasn't appropriate for the training command -- it's more that he didn't buy into the falsehood that is "safety first". That there is an inherent risk that we accept when we fly airplanes for a living, and that it is not completely safe.

Fair enough, and I would agree with that sentiment

 

[bunk22]

I heard Looney talk several times before and during his tenure as AETC CC. What I recall from his spiel on safety was that "if safety was really #1, we would never even turn a wheel."

So, it's not that he had a combat attitude that wasn't appropriate for the training command -- it's more that he didn't buy into the falsehood that is "safety first". That there is an inherent risk that we accept when we fly airplanes for a living, and that it is not completely safe.

The last commodore at the wing I flew for put safety first, atop of everything. I understand he had a rash of mishap's, starting with the first day he took over the training wing. However, this safety first thing led to being overly cautious and hurt the moral of the wing big time. How's that you ask? The Commodore ended up attempting to hammer anyone who made a mistake. He threw out non stop threats. It really seemed that he took pleasure in the threats. One IP lost his wings....long story on that one but end result was FENAB due to the Commodore's insistance and though the board cleared the IP, the Commodore dissented and got his way. When I finished the FITU (Fixed-wing instructor training unit), we sat through a brief with the Commodore and it was all about the mishaps, then the threats including we are "5 seconds" from losing are wings and I drive out to the flight line to look for IP's making mistakes. Then the one on one and the IP letter, stating that the primary job in flight training is not to train pilots but to train officers. I still have that letter somewhere. This guy was not a good leader, one of the worst I've seen and having an absolute "zero" defect attitude in primary flight training is unrealistic.....or at least to have one where the IP is punished no matter what. We had a crew hit a deer on the runway at night and he said after many hours of consideration, he felt that it probably was not the fault of the aircrew. They were lucky in his opinion. Outstanding leadership :clap:

 

[///AMG]

The last commodore at the wing I flew for put safety first, atop of everything. I understand he had a rash of mishap's, starting with the first day he took over the training wing. However, this safety first thing led to being overly cautious and hurt the moral of the wing big time. How's that you ask? The Commodore ended up attempting to hammer anyone who made a mistake. He threw out non stop threats. It really seemed that he took pleasure in the threats. One IP lost his wings....long story on that one but end result was FENAB due to the Commodore's insistance and though the board cleared the IP, the Commodore dissented and got his way. When I finished the FITU (Fixed-wing instructor training unit), we sat through a brief with the Commodore and it was all about the mishaps, then the threats including we are "5 seconds" from losing are wings and I drive out to the flight line to look for IP's making mistakes. Then the one on one and the IP letter, stating that the primary job in flight training is not to train pilots but to train officers. I still have that letter somewhere. This guy was not a good leader, one of the worst I've seen and having an absolute "zero" defect attitude in primary flight training is unrealistic.....or at least to have one where the IP is punished no matter what. We had a crew hit a deer on the runway at night and he said after many hours of consideration, he felt that it probably was not the fault of the aircrew. They were lucky in his opinion. Outstanding leadership :clap:

Interesting to hear....I wouldn't have guessed this from talking to friend's of mine in his wing. It's funny to see how out of touch us students are in many cases