66

— The number of errors contained in an Air Force technical order instructing airmen on how to load nuclear weapons. “When this was reported through proper channels, the wing was told to submit 66…forms – the normal process for requesting changes to T.O.s…The T.O. was virtually unusable,” a review of the service’s nuclear-weapons prowess reports. “A major issue is that the people doing hands-on work are expected to perform without error, and the consequences for error, even one that causes no damage or mission failure, can be severe. Yet, these same people are handed a T.O. with 66 errors and told they will have to do the work to correct the deficiencies that slip through the review system.” The report, here, praised the airmen doing the hands-on work, but noted several problems with their commanders. The Air Force has been struggling for six years to ensure it handles nuclear weapons safely following some well-publicized snafus.

Wounded in Action

A pair of airmen perform a security check around a disabled C-130 at Forward Operating Base Shank, Logar Province, June 6.

I have been made aware, from the chain of command and from direct feedback from the Fleet, that we are spending too much time performing administrative tasks, or perhaps completing duplicative or competing requirements by ISICs [Immediate Superiors in Command] or others, which keep us from being effective -- that prevent us from keeping `Warfighting First.' To help address this imbalance, you will need to stand up a Navy-wide working group.
— Admiral Jonathan Greenert, the chief of naval operations, in a recent letter, here, to the head of the Navy’s nuclear propulsion program. h/t CDR Salamander
  1. 1
  2. ...
  3. 13
  4. 14
  5. 15
  6. ...
  7. 20