PDA

View Full Version : UDM



Enigmatic Airman
12-05-2012, 12:13 PM
What's it like being one?

I figure at the very least it depends on your unit and their ops tempo. Anyone with good/bad details to share?

BoredUTM
12-05-2012, 01:02 PM
I know that the UDMs that work in the same office always have something going on. They always have people coming in for deployment folder checks/appointments, and if they mess up, they have to explain to the wing commander, I believe. It's not something that I'd like, but it sure is important, and they have to be on top of everything or they receive 'feedback.' The UDM stuff that I manage is scheduling people for shooting and CBRNE classes. That's all I have.

Demaskee
12-05-2012, 01:19 PM
The upside - The job can be very satisfying, you're always busy and you are doing something the is advancing a real mission. You'll have lots of interaction with people from all over the base and squadron.

The Downside - It is thankless. You take a lot of crap for stuff that is completely out of your ability to control. Such As:
- Airmen not showing up for appointments
- Personnel Readiness changing the outprocessing rules for the 50th time this week
- Short notice taskers forcing you to jump through several hoops to get someone out the door.
- Managing ever-changing profiles
- Fighting with supervisors to keep people current on training.
- Getting dimed out by everyone in the squadron (My UDM never told me, my UDM lost my dog tags, etc...)

If you are an organized/flexible person and slow to get upset, this is a good job. Good or bad, you will be well known in the squadron. You'll be talking to leadership on a daily (if not more) basis.

sandsjames
12-05-2012, 01:44 PM
Being a UDM sucks. I repeat. SUCKS! It's not so much taking care of the deployment stuff. It's that the commander expects you to babysit the squadron when it comes to all the training. Make sure everyone is up to date on CBT's. Brief the commander on the ARTS/SORTS qualifications, and have an explanation why Joe Blow is overdue on "Field Latrines", etc. If the UDM position was about getting people out the door, it would be alright. But, like everything else, it's about hand holding and taking the blame for the DB's who won't do what they are supposed to do.

imported_DannyJ
12-05-2012, 07:50 PM
Being a UDM sucks. I repeat. SUCKS! It's not so much taking care of the deployment stuff. It's that the commander expects you to babysit the squadron when it comes to all the training. Make sure everyone is up to date on CBT's. Brief the commander on the ARTS/SORTS qualifications, and have an explanation why Joe Blow is overdue on "Field Latrines", etc. If the UDM position was about getting people out the door, it would be alright. But, like everything else, it's about hand holding and taking the blame for the DB's who won't do what they are supposed to do.

This and about 50 other reasons. Top of my list is, unless your a 2G, you're out of your career field and get no SKT waiver. Looks great on your military resume, but not worth it in anyway shape or form.

Airborne
12-05-2012, 08:52 PM
Never do an additional duty that is an actual AFSC. A1, UDM, weapons/ammo, etc. It's too complex and thankless.

BRUWIN
12-06-2012, 12:43 AM
I despise UDMs. Everytime I deployed they were always buggin me about trivial stuff I needed to get done like weapons qual and medical. They tattle tale a lot too...when I blew something off they always got the commander on my ass. I don't know where they get off.

VFFTSGT
12-06-2012, 01:05 AM
Being a UDM sucks. I repeat. SUCKS! It's not so much taking care of the deployment stuff. It's that the commander expects you to babysit the squadron when it comes to all the training. Make sure everyone is up to date on CBT's. Brief the commander on the ARTS/SORTS qualifications, and have an explanation why Joe Blow is overdue on "Field Latrines", etc. If the UDM position was about getting people out the door, it would be alright. But, like everything else, it's about hand holding and taking the blame for the DB's who won't do what they are supposed to do.

This is so true...and it's not just training. It's babysitting everything about a person. Why they deployed and their GTC don't work, why they didn't deploy with item 'X,' why they missed their connection flight, etc.

Commanders should be going to the flights and/or supervisors and stop letting the BS excuse such as a UDM didn't tell them fly or whatever other excuses that leads to ignorance aka FAILING TO READ REPORTING INSTRUCTIONS and failure to follow UDM instructions. A UDM cannot make an individual read the reporting instructions; one individual can only babysit 100+ people so much.

KellyinAvon
12-06-2012, 01:38 AM
Ok EA, what kind of unit are you in? How many military assigned? That'll determine whether it sucks or sucks canal water.

Capt Alfredo
12-06-2012, 02:40 AM
Commanders should be going to the flights and/or supervisors and stop letting the BS excuse such as a UDM didn't tell them fly or whatever other excuses that leads to ignorance aka FAILING TO READ REPORTING INSTRUCTIONS and failure to follow UDM instructions. A UDM cannot make an individual read the reporting instructions; one individual can only babysit 100+ people so much.

Part of the problem with this is that reporting instructions are needlessly verbose, yet vague. The UDM will put a sheaf of reporting instructions in your deployment folder about 1.5 inches thick, but the only part that actually applies to you is on page 65, paragraph 8b. But the UDM doesn't know that. Or the reporting instructions are outdated, but the UDM doesn't know that either. Which leads me to the other part of the UDM problem: the UDM. Many times the UDM is an unwilling "volunteer" who does not care one damn about doing the job right and who is not proactive and would rather let the member "figure it out." I don't really blame them and this switch to a dedicated UDM might be the solution for which we search.

Enigmatic Airman
12-06-2012, 12:47 PM
Ok EA, what kind of unit are you in? How many military assigned? That'll determine whether it sucks or sucks canal water.

Medical unit, as far as people assigned we only have 3 flights maybe about 50-60 people. Thing is though when the guy was talking about the job (It's not official yet) it wasn't just for the units in our flight it looks like the UDM would be in his office so we'd be handling EVERYONE in the hospital I work at...

Maybe I'm understand wrong...

imported_oih82w8
12-06-2012, 12:48 PM
I thought that I heard/read somewhere that UDM's were going to be their own AFSC?

Probably because no one that I know of volunteered for this duty...they were volun-told!

sandsjames
12-06-2012, 01:11 PM
Another issue I have with the UDM position is the Commander's complete disregard for the AFI. It's states that the UDM position "MUST" be a MSgt or above, or civilian equivilant. This is a requirement for a reason (a lot of them listed above). However, most units consistently place SSgt's and TSgt's who are much more easily pushed around by the leadership, resulting in the job being miserable.

AF Comm Guy
12-06-2012, 01:21 PM
I spent two years as a UDM at Holloman and it mostly sucked but the job got done. All of the complaints here are on target. One of the worst things that can happen is to get a bad UDM. ART/SORTS don't get reported, deployments go unfulfilled and commanders look incredibly bad. The UDM answers directly to the commander so the commander should be picking that individual. It requires someone who is absolutely obsessive about getting details right and enjoys paperwork. Yes, those kinds of people do exist. Also, it has to be someone at least E-5 if not higher who doesn't give a damn about making friends. The worst thing you can do is get chummy with potential deployers because when their number comes up, they WILL try to leverage that friendship in order to get out of the deployment.

I know there has been a push to change the job over to GS positions, which makes a lot of sense. It's a job that requires a lot of historical knowledge so you need continuity. Also, they must have more than one person in that office or you will never, never, fucking NEVER get to take leave.

The biggest pain is waiting on orders to get cut. If you've got airman Snuffy who is supposed to deploy on December 15th but they don't get their hard copies until December 13th, that puts them in quite the pickle for out-processing. We had people who didn't get their orders until after they were due to arrive in theater. What the hell are we supposed to do? There's something very, very wrong with the system way up the chain. Maybe someone up there will read this thread and finally fix the problem. Christ, I could go on for an hour on this subject.

AF Comm Guy
12-06-2012, 01:23 PM
Another issue I have with the UDM position is the Commander's complete disregard for the AFI. It's states that the UDM position "MUST" be a MSgt or above, or civilian equivilant. This is a requirement for a reason (a lot of them listed above). However, most units consistently place SSgt's and TSgt's who are much more easily pushed around by the leadership, resulting in the job being miserable.

That's a newer requirement since I did the job but it's definitely a good idea. It take someone with stripes and a big pair of brass balls who won't get pushed around. A former TI might be a good pick. They are used to handling paperwork on multiple people simultaneously and they don't much care about making friends.

sandsjames
12-06-2012, 01:26 PM
I know there has been a push to change the job over to GS positions, which makes a lot of sense. It's a job that requires a lot of historical knowledge so you need continuity. Also, they must have more than one person in that office or you will never, never, fucking NEVER get to take leave.

Plus, the GS is a good idea since the position is "non-deployable" (when I pointed this out to my commander he said "Find me someone else who can deploy with your UTC and I'll follow this rule).

Enigmatic Airman
12-06-2012, 06:32 PM
Another issue I have with the UDM position is the Commander's complete disregard for the AFI. It's states that the UDM position "MUST" be a MSgt or above, or civilian equivilant. This is a requirement for a reason (a lot of them listed above). However, most units consistently place SSgt's and TSgt's who are much more easily pushed around by the leadership, resulting in the job being miserable.

If I get picked that would be hilarious considering I'm still a SrA (Should pin Staff on next month though).

SomeRandomGuy
12-06-2012, 06:42 PM
Part of the problem with this is that reporting instructions are needlessly verbose, yet vague. The UDM will put a sheaf of reporting instructions in your deployment folder about 1.5 inches thick, but the only part that actually applies to you is on page 65, paragraph 8b. But the UDM doesn't know that. Or the reporting instructions are outdated, but the UDM doesn't know that either. Which leads me to the other part of the UDM problem: the UDM. Many times the UDM is an unwilling "volunteer" who does not care one damn about doing the job right and who is not proactive and would rather let the member "figure it out." I don't really blame them and this switch to a dedicated UDM might be the solution for which we search.

You are right about the reporting instructions. The only problem is that often reporting instructions conflict with each other. We had one person who was deploying to Al Udeid. In his reporting instructions it said he was supposed to bring an M16 with him. At the airport everyone was freaking out because no one arraigned to have an M16 issued. the unit mailed one to him. When he arrives in theater he finds out that the latest and greatest reporting instruction tell the member not to bring a weapon as they will be issued one in theater. How are you supposed to follow reporting instructions when they often conflict with other guidance?

VFFTSGT
12-07-2012, 03:12 AM
Part of the problem with this is that reporting instructions are needlessly verbose, yet vague. The UDM will put a sheaf of reporting instructions in your deployment folder about 1.5 inches thick, but the only part that actually applies to you is on page 65, paragraph 8b. But the UDM doesn't know that. Or the reporting instructions are outdated, but the UDM doesn't know that either. Which leads me to the other part of the UDM problem: the UDM. Many times the UDM is an unwilling "volunteer" who does not care one damn about doing the job right and who is not proactive and would rather let the member "figure it out." I don't really blame them and this switch to a dedicated UDM might be the solution for which we search.

For that to remotely be a problem...the individual would have to actually begin to even attempt to read. When asked if they read it and they say no...well...

There are a ton of reporting instructions that are specific...that individuals still fail to meet.

All current reporting instructions are posted for all to see on AEF Online (AFRIT) - granted, not the best website...If someone is still placing them in a folder, they need to be told to get up with modern times.



The biggest pain is waiting on orders to get cut. If you've got airman Snuffy who is supposed to deploy on December 15th but they don't get their hard copies until December 13th, that puts them in quite the pickle for out-processing. We had people who didn't get their orders until after they were due to arrive in theater. What the hell are we supposed to do? There's something very, very wrong with the system way up the chain. Maybe someone up there will read this thread and finally fix the problem. Christ, I could go on for an hour on this subject.

This is a failure of the Installation Deployment Readiness Center (IDRC) and the UDM should be raising hell with the Installation Deployment Officer (IDO).

VFFTSGT
12-07-2012, 02:35 PM
Another issue I have with the UDM position is the Commander's complete disregard for the AFI. It's states that the UDM position "MUST" be a MSgt or above, or civilian equivilant. This is a requirement for a reason (a lot of them listed above). However, most units consistently place SSgt's and TSgt's who are much more easily pushed around by the leadership, resulting in the job being miserable.

Curious where that is...not seeing it...

imported_DannyJ
12-07-2012, 04:25 PM
You are right about the reporting instructions. The only problem is that often reporting instructions conflict with each other. We had one person who was deploying to Al Udeid. In his reporting instructions it said he was supposed to bring an M16 with him. At the airport everyone was freaking out because no one arraigned to have an M16 issued. the unit mailed one to him. When he arrives in theater he finds out that the latest and greatest reporting instruction tell the member not to bring a weapon as they will be issued one in theater. How are you supposed to follow reporting instructions when they often conflict with other guidance?

Thats why you should be getting on AEF online and checking reporting instructions around a month out from RDD.

KellyinAvon
12-08-2012, 01:19 AM
Medical unit, as far as people assigned we only have 3 flights maybe about 50-60 people. Thing is though when the guy was talking about the job (It's not official yet) it wasn't just for the units in our flight it looks like the UDM would be in his office so we'd be handling EVERYONE in the hospital I work at...

Maybe I'm understand wrong...

UDM for a Med Group?? Oh man, tryin to get a bunch of Docs to go to appointments and complete training?? I feel for you brother.

KellyinAvon
12-08-2012, 01:30 AM
Thats why you should be getting on AEF online and checking reporting instructions around a month out from RDD.

Roger that, at least a month.
At the SNCO Academy in 05 we had this Chief (definitely a Chief) came in and talked to us about training the new Iraqi military. He said they had a guy deploy to their location with a Vietnam-era (3-prong flash suppressor), full-auto capable M16. He said all the Marines in the camp next to them wanted to see it because they'd never seen one. That was 10 years after we converted from M16-A1 to A2. Nothing surprises me when it come to deployments.

imported_DannyJ
12-08-2012, 08:40 PM
Roger that, at least a month.
At the SNCO Academy in 05 we had this Chief (definitely a Chief) came in and talked to us about training the new Iraqi military. He said they had a guy deploy to their location with a Vietnam-era (3-prong flash suppressor), full-auto capable M16. He said all the Marines in the camp next to them wanted to see it because they'd never seen one. That was 10 years after we converted from M16-A1 to A2. Nothing surprises me when it come to deployments.

I think that very rifle must have ended up in my armory at FOB Union in 2011. No shit, triangular guard and all. BTW, the USAF, IMHO has no freaking clue when it comes to deploying.

VFFTSGT
12-08-2012, 09:57 PM
Roger that, at least a month.
At the SNCO Academy in 05 we had this Chief (definitely a Chief) came in and talked to us about training the new Iraqi military. He said they had a guy deploy to their location with a Vietnam-era (3-prong flash suppressor), full-auto capable M16. He said all the Marines in the camp next to them wanted to see it because they'd never seen one. That was 10 years after we converted from M16-A1 to A2. Nothing surprises me when it come to deployments.

Yeap, my entire unit deployed with those in 05. I heard it didn't turn out good for the base, but I am sure everyone still got 5's on their EPR's and no one was fired...so it couldn't have been too bad for them...

KellyinAvon
12-08-2012, 11:12 PM
I think that very rifle must have ended up in my armory at FOB Union in 2011. No shit, triangular guard and all. BTW, the USAF, IMHO has no freaking clue when it comes to deploying.

The Multi-National Forces-Iraq ACCE team (Air Control Coordination Element, Bob) had what must have been a CAR-15 (they described it as resembling a full-auto M-4). Handy for commutes around the green zone.
It is concerning how hard deployments could be. The last one (2 C-130s each to PSAB, Seeb, Oman and Ali Al Salem) I was involved with at no-hope-Pope before I cross-trained (and left that God-foresaken sh!thole) was a CHARLIE-FOXTROT (that's phonetics, Bob) of epic proportions. That was in 1999 and I said, "How many years have we been goin to the desert??" back then. Considering how it seemed to get harder every time, you must have to deal with some FUBAR (I think Bob knows this one) sh!t that I can't even comprehend. It seemed so crazy since we'd just sent 8 A-10s to ALLIED FORCE a couple months before and everybody kicked a$$ getting them out of town. I dunno, glad you're there to herd the cats these days. My cat-herding days are long behind me.

KellyinAvon
12-08-2012, 11:46 PM
Yeap, my entire unit deployed with those in 05. I heard it didn't turn out good for the base, but I am sure everyone still got 5's on their EPR's and no one was fired...so it couldn't have been too bad for them...

VFF I read your post, came back and read it again. Then I thought about it a while and now I'm back. Back in the old days when Equipment Management was a section in the Supply Squadron (also from the old days) I was the EMS NCOIC when the M16-A1s converted to A2s and serial numbers for weapons began being tracked in the supply computer system. With everything involved with this, and knowing that a percentage of weapons in storage are inspected periodically I really can't imagine how this sh!t could not only happen, but go on for at least 10 years. More if you go back to when the triangle grips were replaced on the A-1s late 80s, early 90s.
Here's what Kelly sez shoulda happened:
NAF (Numbered Air Force, Bob) Commander flys to base responsible for a$$hattery described above; rips Wing-King a new a$$ on the flightline, gets back in jet and leaves.
Wing-King (after securing new a$$) brings MSG (Mission Support Group, Bob) Commander in, rips new a$$. Instructs MSG/CC to send next-highest ranking LRS officer (Logistics Readiness Squadron, Bob) to Wing-Kings office. Current LRS/CC just got fired. New LRS/CC reports for a$$ ripping from Wing-King and MSG/CC because they are both really pissed.
LRS/CC returns to squadron, rips a$$es of, and fires everyone involved. Scorched-Earth policy on OPRs/EPRs/Decs for the a$$less.
Highly motivated replacements eliminate all problems.

VFFTSGT
12-09-2012, 12:13 AM
VFF I read your post, came back and read it again. Then I thought about it a while and now I'm back. Back in the old days when Equipment Management was a section in the Supply Squadron (also from the old days) I was the EMS NCOIC when the M16-A1s converted to A2s and serial numbers for weapons began being tracked in the supply computer system. With everything involved with this, and knowing that a percentage of weapons in storage are inspected periodically I really can't imagine how this sh!t could not only happen, but go on for at least 10 years. More if you go back to when the triangle grips were replaced on the A-1s late 80s, early 90s.
Here's what Kelly sez shoulda happened:
NAF (Numbered Air Force, Bob) Commander flys to base responsible for a$$hattery described above; rips Wing-King a new a$$ on the flightline, gets back in jet and leaves.
Wing-King (after securing new a$$) brings MSG (Mission Support Group, Bob) Commander in, rips new a$$. Instructs MSG/CC to send next-highest ranking LRS officer (Logistics Readiness Squadron, Bob) to Wing-Kings office. Current LRS/CC just got fired. New LRS/CC reports for a$$ ripping from Wing-King and MSG/CC because they are both really pissed.
LRS/CC returns to squadron, rips a$$es of, and fires everyone involved. Scorched-Earth policy on OPRs/EPRs/Decs for the a$$less.
Highly motivated replacements eliminate all problems.

Yeap, it's pathetic knowing I deployed with a weapon obsolete by 20 years. We were pretty shocked at the time too - especially the older folks at the time who had more insight into how long ago they were suppose to have been replaced. Some people even claimed theirs had what looked like blood spots on them....you would think not, but when you given a M-16 with triangle hand guards on them that were suppose to be replaced 20 years ago...nothing is surprising at that point.

Capt Alfredo
12-09-2012, 12:37 AM
Speaking of idiots, why is it everytime I go to the "undisclosed location in Southwest Asia" the PERSCO people act like they've never in-processed anyone in their lives? It's not like multiple rotators with hundreds of passengers don't fly in every week, yet every time it's a goat rope lasting at least two or three times as long as it should, complete with buffoonery and PERSCO detectives searching for a clue.

VFFTSGT
12-09-2012, 12:59 AM
Speaking of idiots, why is it everytime I go to the "undisclosed location in Southwest Asia" the PERSCO people act like they've never in-processed anyone in their lives? It's not like multiple rotators with hundreds of passengers don't fly in every week, yet every time it's a goat rope lasting at least two or three times as long as it should, complete with buffoonery and PERSCO detectives searching for a clue.

Because whether they excel or suck at their job, they still get a 5 on their EPR - so what's the motivation to care?

KellyinAvon
12-09-2012, 01:40 AM
Yeap, it's pathetic knowing I deployed with a weapon obsolete by 20 years. We were pretty shocked at the time too - especially the older folks at the time who had more insight into how long ago they were suppose to have been replaced. Some people even claimed theirs had what looked like blood spots on them....you would think not, but when you given a M-16 with triangle hand guards on them that were suppose to be replaced 20 years ago...nothing is surprising at that point.

I remember CATM (combat arms training and maintenance, Bob) guys talking about the different ammo for the A-1's and A-2s. The 62 grain bullets used in the A-2 would have made an A-1 not hit the side of a barn past 100 meters if I remember right.
Then again, you could make an AK-47 out of parts made in 4 different countries; pick up crap Russian ammo out of the mud and hit something at 100 meters.
When the CATM guy said A-2 ammo wouldn't work for crap in an A-1 I remember think swiching from 100 grain to 80 grain bullets in a .243 was no problem at all. It concerned me the M16 was that picky about ammo.

bb stacker
12-09-2012, 02:14 AM
the loose twist rate in the older rifles will not stabilize the heavier grain projectile currently in use. the older a1 had a twist rate of 1/12 whereas the newer a2 has a 1/7 twist.

the udm job does suck, but it did have some perks. i was pretty much my own boss and came and went as i pleased. left early and stayed late as needed.

if you do take the job, make a pst for your email and never delete an email as long as your in that job. it will save your ass, it did mine many many times.

KellyinAvon
12-09-2012, 02:58 AM
the loose twist rate in the older rifles will not stabilize the heavier grain projectile currently in use. the older a1 had a twist rate of 1/12 whereas the newer a2 has a 1/7 twist.

the udm job does suck, but it did have some perks. i was pretty much my own boss and came and went as i pleased. left early and stayed late as needed.

if you do take the job, make a pst for your email and never delete an email as long as your in that job. it will save your ass, it did mine many many times.

Ok I get it, the A-2 is really a lot more different from the A-1 than just full-auto/3 round burst. I see says the blind man.
It still is concerning that our weapon of choice for almost 50 years has such tight tolerances we can't put ammo (not Russian/Chinese crap, but US-made ammo) of a slightly different weight (7 grains = 455MG) in the rifle and expect to hit anything.

VFFTSGT
12-09-2012, 04:42 AM
I remember CATM (combat arms training and maintenance, Bob) guys talking about the different ammo for the A-1's and A-2s. The 62 grain bullets used in the A-2 would have made an A-1 not hit the side of a barn past 100 meters if I remember right.
Then again, you could make an AK-47 out of parts made in 4 different countries; pick up crap Russian ammo out of the mud and hit something at 100 meters.
When the CATM guy said A-2 ammo wouldn't work for crap in an A-1 I remember think swiching from 100 grain to 80 grain bullets in a .243 was no problem at all. It concerned me the M16 was that picky about ammo.

Yeah...the sad thing is, while most remained in storage, I actually carried mine with ammo for a period of time because I traveled from one location to another within Iraq...what good that weapon would have done me. Thank goodness I didn't have to use it.

That time-frame was a turning point for I think and one of many reasons why I rarely trust anyone outside my span of control within the military and question everything anyone tells me.

KellyinAvon
12-09-2012, 11:04 AM
Yeah...the sad thing is, while most remained in storage, I actually carried mine with ammo for a period of time because I traveled from one location to another within Iraq...what good that weapon would have done me. Thank goodness I didn't have to use it.

That time-frame was a turning point for I think and one of many reasons why I rarely trust anyone outside my span of control within the military and question everything anyone tells me.

Military services have 3 responsibilities: organize, train, and equip. The Meatloaf song doesn't apply here, 2 outta 3 is EPIC FAIL in this case. There is so much of what you do (not just you VFF, everyone with US AIR FORCE above their pocket) that requires trust in the action of individuals you'll never meet, ESPECIALLY at a deployed location. VFF does his job, Suzie does her job, Jim-Bob does his job, everybody does their job and good things happen (unless you're a bad guy). When I (used to) hit send on a SIPRNET (Secure Internet protocol router network, Bob) e-mail, somebody in Comm made sure the S (secure) was a fact. Might have been Suzie, might have been Jim-Bob, might have been VFFA1C. I could go on but I'm a two-finger typist.
BLOB (bottom line on bottom, Bob. :biggrin That's a Blutarsky-ism): Too many people let this happen, check the EPIC FAIL block on the "Equip" line of the basic responsibility performance report. Rant not over:target I'll be back.

gumbo31
12-10-2012, 12:01 AM
I'm a UDM and I wish I would have did a little research like yourself before I accepted the position. Everything that has been stated in previous posts is true. It's a thankless job where the ability to screw up is huge. There are so many things that you are responsible for but have have very little control. Not to mention; the cryptic reporting instructions, the ever changing equipment lists, solving all kinds of self created crisis. If you have a choice, don't do it.

KellyinAvon
12-10-2012, 01:19 AM
I'm a UDM and I wish I would have did a little research like yourself before I accepted the position. Everything that has been stated in previous posts is true. It's a thankless job where the ability to screw up is huge. There are so many things that you are responsible for but have have very little control. Not to mention; the cryptic reporting instructions, the ever changing equipment lists, solving all kinds of self created crisis. If you have a choice, don't do it.

Mandatory AND forbidden?

KellyinAvon
12-10-2012, 01:30 AM
Military services have 3 responsibilities: organize, train, and equip. The Meatloaf song doesn't apply here, 2 outta 3 is EPIC FAIL in this case. There is so much of what you do (not just you VFF, everyone with US AIR FORCE above their pocket) that requires trust in the action of individuals you'll never meet, ESPECIALLY at a deployed location. VFF does his job, Suzie does her job, Jim-Bob does his job, everybody does their job and good things happen (unless you're a bad guy). When I (used to) hit send on a SIPRNET (Secure Internet protocol router network, Bob) e-mail, somebody in Comm made sure the S (secure) was a fact. Might have been Suzie, might have been Jim-Bob, might have been VFFA1C. I could go on but I'm a two-finger typist.
BLOB (bottom line on bottom, Bob. :biggrin That's a Blutarsky-ism): Too many people let this happen, check the EPIC FAIL block on the "Equip" line of the basic responsibility performance report. Rant not over:target I'll be back.

Ok, I'm back. This really bothers me (Vietnam-era M16s still around in mid-2000s and finding their way to the AOR with troops who may need to use them) for a couple (3) reasons
1: one of my career fields was responsible
2: MANY people new about this for years and did nothing.
3: People were set up for failure in possibly the worst way imaginable.

Robert F. Dorr
12-10-2012, 01:51 AM
Unit Deployment Manager?

Underwater Demolition Man?

Yeah, yeah. I know.

Chikasaz
12-10-2012, 03:47 AM
Unit Deployment Manager?

Enigmatic Airman
12-10-2012, 02:43 PM
Yes, Unit Deployment Manager

THats crazy about the weapons...don't have anything that bad but I've had Pilots and other Aircrew tell me "It's Classified" when I ask where they are needed. I have a need to know but they try to argue with me so I just say "I can look it up you know"...SMH...

imported_DannyJ
12-10-2012, 03:05 PM
BLUFBTBLOB - It's great for expanding your knowledge on how the AF does business, and you'll meet lots of people from different agencies, but its a hard job. If you aren't ready for it, it can eat you alive. Minimum 2 year tour, all hours of the day, no SKT waiver, no deployments. Think long and hard before you accept.

gumbo31
08-22-2013, 12:11 AM
Has anybody seen any changes at their base in regards to making UDM a special duty? At my location nothing has changed.. it's business as usual.... UDMs deploying, commanders swapping UDMs out. I'm a UDM and this creates problems throughout the chain.

imported_DannyJ
08-22-2013, 03:31 AM
Has anybody seen any changes at their base in regards to making UDM a special duty? At my location nothing has changed.. it's business as usual.... UDMs deploying, commanders swapping UDMs out. I'm a UDM and this creates problems throughout the chain.

I don't see shit changing any time soon. I look back at the year I did it and can say it did actually expand my total AF view. I think this DEF should be included in the whole special duty crap they're pushin. UDM (you have no idea how many times I spelled that DUM) should be a promotion discriminator. The job sucks that bad.

imported_oih82w8
08-22-2013, 01:17 PM
The last I heard/read was that UDM's were supposed to have their own AFSC. That way they can get trained and keep doing what they were trained to do instead of herding up a bunch on non-vols to acomplish this. :smashfreakB:

UDM duty sucked big time! Talk about babysitting. I was thrown into it right before Squadron Mobility merged with the Group. The Group NCOIC (TSgt) ran circles around me so I gracefully stepped aside.