Perhaps some NOTAMs would have been useful?

[milplt]

OK, I said throw spears - and that's fine and I expected it - but explain to me how what I said is unprofessional. You may not agree with what I said, or I may be making a point that you think isn't worth making, but this certainly isn't a worse case of "airing dirty laundry" than posting internal memos about a mishap and lending official credibility to what was previously just some pictures on the internet with a paragraph about the cause that may or may not have been true. This isn't a lecture, but a discussion. "That's unprofessional" is an equivalent argument to "that's stupid" - no point,just an opinion.

In AMC a while back (when I was there), it wasn't routine, but it wasn't uncommon for crews to check out the kyk-13 and codes from command post and leave them on the bus or on the airplane. It just wasn't treated that seriously. Read some of those magazines or information posted from the spotters, and they not only show you the picture of the C-17 passing through EGUN, they'll write about where it came from and where it is going and sometimes what it was carrying. Some people just like to talk to those spotters along the fence. That stuff wasn't necesarily "classified", but I don't think it was meant for release to the general public. But since it doesn't have a stamp across it, some people feel like they can release whatever details they feel the urge to. It was nice to get someplace where that stuff received the attention and protection that it deserved. OPSEC/COMSEC doesn't only refer to info that is officially labeled, it refers to everything - including phone calls home to CINCHOUSE. There is nothing improper about reminding people to be vigilant - it has been said many times before on this same board about some airline's internal info that was posted when it maybe shouldn't have been. And there is certainly nothing wrong with stating how some people keep their info close hold.

It's a slippery slope in my opinion, and there is no hard line that people can see. Look at how many first hand accounts of current ops (from both the ground and the air) you can find on the internet and in some of those British air combat magazines. It's the old story of - individually, you can't get much from it, but taken all together they start to paint a picture.

As long as some people consider the fact, my point has been made.

 

[milplt]

Thebluto - like I said - this wasn't anything against you. As a relatively old cranium, I thought that this would be a good opportunity for everyone to re-cage what they say - be it about safety stuff or not.

I got the stuff myself, and once it's public it's public. Someone dropped the ball - but we have to be careful about unwittingly confirming with official sources what were previously just public thoughts or conjecture about something.

As an analogy, notice how people are writing rumors all of the time about airline hiring or bids or whatever - but you never see any official sources getting on these boards and confirming them.

 

[hawg2hawk]

but explain to me how what I said is unprofessional.

OK, I will. Having been around awhile myself, I should mention for the record that I agree with everything you said. It's just that I might have chosen a more appropriate (e.g. less public) forum in which to point it out. Unprofessional might be too strong a word, but you're certainly not following your own advice.

It's the old story of - individually, you can't get much from it, but taken all together they start to paint a picture.

Look back and see how many of your comments fit this bill. You just handed out some EEI's yourself during the course of your internet OPSEC lecture. I'm not sure that was the effect you were looking for.

Is any of this, including the safety stuff, really critical in this case? No, or I wouldn't be addressing it here. In this case, I suspect a friendly PM to the offending party would have been more appropriate than a public nut-kicking. The down side of a PM is that you don't get to show everyone how much you know about SIB's and OPSEC, but it's probably better as far as actual OPSEC is concerned.

Just my $.02, of course.

 

[milplt]

You've got a point, as in the fact that an IM could have been in order - I actually thought about that after I made the post. The thing is, it was not my intent to "nut-kick" anyone and I think that is obvious. But this is not a bad public message to state, not just to brag on knowledge or whatever other imagined reason you may have conjured up. For a while, I have been thinking that across the board too many people have been saying too many things on too many forums - so instead of murmuring to myself about it all, I saw this one opportunity to do some little part to point that out - just to feel as if I did what I could. It doesn't only apply to web posters, the Pentagon as a whole is way too eager to embed journalists with real-time feedback (the Marine shooting the wounded personnel) or to show videos of weapons deliveries (or even be quick to point out that we attacked the wrong house - when, in fact, we probably have a better record than the post office on finding the right locations for our deliveries). I am sure with enough study you can glean some sort of capabilities info from all of those officially released videos. One good thing that I can say about the French is that, if you ever flew with/against them,they were in receive only mode as far as intel went.

As far as my posts go, I don't feel that I compromised anything at all - but if you see otherwise, PM me where I am wrong on that one - or is it your intent to go for the nut-kick or the public proclamation of your knowledge. Not looking to argue with anyone, but I 'll stand by what I said until someone proves me wrong.

Bottom line is that I rarely post, and when I do it is hardly in the form of the nut-kick. Somewhere along the way, the "mentoring" (I actually hate to use that word) of our dudes stopped and we became a "you do what makes you feel good" organization like the rest of society - hence the SNAP. I have obligations that don't stop when I take off the uniform and I saw a requirement for me to make a statement. No nut-kicking, just telling it like it is and moving on. Nothing personal, no malice, just a debrief item. But then again, some communities have pretty short to non-existent debriefs (that is just a joke).

 

[hawg2hawk]

You've got a point, as in the fact that an IM could have been in order - I actually thought about that after I made the post. The thing is, it was not my intent to "nut-kick" anyone and I think that is obvious. But this is not a bad public message to state, not just to brag on knowledge or whatever other imagined reason you may have conjured up. For a while, I have been thinking that across the board too many people have been saying too many things on too many forums - so instead of murmuring to myself about it all, I saw this one opportunity to do some little part to point that out - just to feel as if I did what I could. It doesn't only apply to web posters, the Pentagon as a whole is way too eager to embed journalists with real-time feedback (the Marine shooting the wounded personnel) or to show videos of weapons deliveries (or even be quick to point out that we attacked the wrong house - when, in fact, we probably have a better record than the post office on finding the right locations for our deliveries). I am sure with enough study you can glean some sort of capabilities info from all of those officially released videos. One good thing that I can say about the French is that, if you ever flew with/against them,they were in receive only mode as far as intel went.

As far as my posts go, I don't feel that I compromised anything at all - but if you see otherwise, PM me where I am wrong on that one - or is it your intent to go for the nut-kick or the public proclamation of your knowledge. Not looking to argue with anyone, but I 'll stand by what I said until someone proves me wrong.

Bottom line is that I rarely post, and when I do it is hardly in the form of the nut-kick. Somewhere along the way, the "mentoring" (I actually hate to use that word) of our dudes stopped and we became a "you do what makes you feel good" organization like the rest of society - hence the SNAP. I have obligations that don't stop when I take off the uniform and I saw a requirement for me to make a statement. No nut-kicking, just telling it like it is and moving on. Nothing personal, no malice, just a debrief item. But then again, some communities have pretty short to non-existent debriefs (that is just a joke).

I'm sure you meant to say "we" have obligations that don't stop when "we" take off the uniform, which is why we're having this discussion. We'll brief that as standard. I'm also sure you've sat through enough debriefs to know nut-kicking when you see it, and this ain't. Just a friendly f*ck you contest. And in the interests of avoiding the 12 hour eagle debrief with 6 hours devoted to comm,

Hasta.

P.S. The F-15 debrief concept shows in your writing style. Why say in 5 words what you can say in a paragraph or two? And that too, is a joke.