Mission #4: third trip to TK

There are several leadership responsibilities within a convoy. First is the convoy commander, who typically does the organizational work before the mission, briefs it to the higher-ups, and is in charge while we're on the road.

Second is the assistant, who does the little things like checking people's equipment and making sure the trucks are in the right order. If something goes wrong along the way, he'll be the one to jump our and coordinate on-ground stuff.

Next is the host nation truck master. When we get to our destination, he's in charge of making sure the HNTs get to the right place, drop their cargo, and don't get "lost" within the base.

Finally, there's the mission commander. This guy's in charge of the "green" trucks -- the Army ones. When we get in the gate, the MC's job is to set things up for drop off and pick up. That was my job for this mission.

For the frontload, we took a container of mail and some breakbulk.

Along the way, we saw the fruit blossoms in bloom and what I think is the gravesite of a Korean killed in 2007.

They moved the transient sleeping quarters to a different place than before. There's more privacy, but it's a further walk to the DFAC. Oh well. Breakfast was great -- can you believe they had jalapeno poppers? That's way better than hash browns.

One of the things we picked up for backhaul was a Forward Repair System (FRS, pronounced "fresh"). This is a neat thing -- a maintenance bay packed into the size of a 20-foot container, with its own crane and flatbed built into it. Our PLS trucks don't need any special equipment to pick it up, either -- they just reach back with the hook and lift it onto the back of the truck.

Everything worked well, apart from some spur-of-the-moment pick ups the evening before we left. We're supposed to have a "Transport Movement Request" before we move anything, but when it comes to backhaul our battalion is a bit more flexible. Unfortunately, we had the space for it, so I couldn't really say no.

Picking up that extra stuff didn't really take long, but it's the stress of figuring things out all of a sudden. I'm just glad we got it done before nightfall.

All in all, a good experience. I can mark my first stint as a mission commander as a success.

Mission #3: to Tarnak

This mission was interesting because we got to drive through Kandahar during the day. Here are some pictures from the two-day trip.

Left: one of my soldiers tightening a lugnut (counterclockwise because that's the direction of travel)
Right: the spooky single-lane bridge north of the city

Left: the ride down into the city
Right: children with what looks like cooking oil

Left: a restaurant in one of the city's few high-rise building
Right: the "road" to Tarnak

Left: my guys tightening down a generator to the flatbed
Right: the desert turning green

Left: a Chinook helicopter landing
Right: the helicopter leaving again

One other thing -- now that I've gone on three missions, I am qualified to lead one as a "mission commander."

Jellybeans - Packed with "Glucose Power!"

While I was up in TK last on my most recent mission, I saw some Australian jelly beans. I didn't eat any, but I did notice it advertised its "glucose power."

That's pretty wild for a candy company to make sugar content a selling point. They're not "loaded with sugar." They're "packed with carbohydrate energy."

Uh-huh. Two-thirds sugar by weight....

TOE differences

Every unit in the Army is allotted equipment and personnel based on a "Table of Organization and Equipment" (TOE). It specifies what kind of equipment you're supposed to get, the number of people you're supposed to have, and what kinds of job they do.

At least on paper.

According to our TOE, my company is supposed to be a "line haul" company with M1088s. In other words, we're supposed to be hauling stuff from point A to point B, then from point B to C, and so on. However, that's not the case.

In reality, we mostly have M1235 MRAPs and PLSs. The MRAPs provide security escort while the PLSs haul containers and break-bulk. Depending on the mission, we'll roll with either one, the other, or a combination of the two.

So while my platoon is entirely comprised of 88M Motor Transport Operators, we do more than just drive cargo trucks -- my guys can also man the heavy machine guns in the gun turrets. It's not exactly what they're specialized in, but we've trained for this role well enough to do a fine job regardless.

We run into problems because of personnel shortages in other areas. Our maintenance platoon numbers, for example, are based on the maintenance needs of the M1088s. Fixing PLSs, however, is a more complex issue -- while M1088s are essentially engines and fifth wheels, PLSs have container pick-up hooks and built-in cranes, too. That's more stuff to maintain with what was already a short staff.

It's nothing new for us. Even when we were in garrison, we had to "baby-sit" a fleet of 60 M967 tankers. Only a handful ever went out on mission, but the weekly maintenance requirement meant a drain on our resources.

This kind of thing happens all the time throughout the Army, based on operational needs. I've met tankers without tanks (an rather bawdy acronym there) and artillery guys who do dismounted patrols. Likewise, their MTOEs call for vastly different equipment than what they've actually got.

It's a big mess, but the only army that's ever perfectly suited for its mission is one that's sitting in a garrison, thinking about the last war they fought.

And that is definitely not us.

Family update

I can tell that my kids are growing. SY got a Skype username set up, so now we're able to do video calls. Even with a slow connection, the picture is better than nothing.

I'm surprised at how well P is speaking. He can say "crocodile" and repeat questions. I told him, "I'm happy to see you," and he said, "You're happy to see me?" That was pretty cool.

His Korean is doing well, too. He and SY were eating something together, and she offered him the last whatever-it-was, saying, "마지막이야," (it's the last one.) He gave it back to her and said, "많이 멱었어," (I ate a lot). So, not just good Korean, but a nice gesture, too.

C is a happy little girl. She'll play with P's hair, and he'll laugh. When SY needs to step away for a moment, she'll put C in the playpen; P plays with C nicely and keeps her occupied.

Deployment APFT

Today’s PT test wasn’t the best I’ve ever done, but I’m still pretty happy with how it went. I got 79, 94, and 73 (push-ups, sit-ups, and 2 mile run) for a total score of 246. That’s not too shabby considering I hadn’t done too much PT since the company started Individual Replacement Training (IRT) in July or August.

My APFT in September was pretty bad – without having run in a while, it was not pretty. After that, things dropped off a lot. We had block leave, my wife got sick, and during that time working out was my last priority.

Since January, though, I’ve picked things up. I went to the gym every other day or every third day, even when I went out on mission. I was happy to be in charge of myself for the first time since I joined the Army. And apparently, my time on the abdominal cruncher really paid off.

So yeah, it wasn’t my best, but I’m pretty happy with it. It was my own PT program, and it worked. I even set a goal to get to a 13:18 two mile by the end of the deployment. That would be better than I did in high school, when my one mile (only) time got as low as six minutes.

Alas, the first sergeant wasn’t happy with the overall company results, though, and decided to have everyone do PT all together. We lieutenants chafed at the idea that we too would all have to do it under the first sergeant’s guidance, but the commander said it’s important to motivate the soldiers and support our NCOs. She said there’s a perception that “officers do whatever they want.”

My response was, right! We do what we want because we take responsibility for ourselves. None of us failed. But it was to no avail.

So our NCOs make decisions that affect the officers, without our input, and we have to support them. Who, then, is the subordinate and who is the platoon leader?

Endangered species: the high speed E-5

I could use some good E-5 sergeants.

Ideally I'd have a full dozen experienced guys who could show soldiers what right looks like, but right now I've only got about half that, and the ones I've got have limitations.

Two of them have health problems that prevent them from wearing their armor, which also means they can't go on mission -- they're only fit for motorpool guards or computer jobs. Two have financial issues stemming from our home garrison barracks policy. The policy states that all unmarried E-5s, including those who have custody of any children for 180 days or less, be housed in the barracks.

Those two only have partial custody, which means they have to maintain two residences during the time they have their kids -- their barracks room and some other place. That can be expensive.

Financial problems aren't career killers, but they do limit the kind of advice these sergeants can give soldiers. If E-5s truly are the "backbone of the Army," and the "moral exemplars" for young soldiers, the future of Army mentoring looks rough.

I doubt Transportation ever had much appeal for the Army's "best and brightest." I understand why: the point-based promotion system means it takes a long time for guys to get promoted. They don't typically get to go to the "cool" schools (like Airborne), and the 88M occupation series probably has a comparably lower rate of degree-holders than the rest of the Army (another source of points). And it's not like they ever get practice time at the range (expert marksman gets you points) -- they've got jobs to do.

Unfortunately, most of my E-5s are over 35 and hoping to make it through to retirement, which is a scary thing for my E-4 specialists -- recent policy changes mean they have to at least make E-6 to stay in 20 years. They wonder how many years it'll take for them to get promoted, and I don't have an answer for them.

For now, though, I use my E-6 Staff Sergeants as mission commanders and my E-5s for detail leaders. It's not a long-term-oriented strategy, but by the end of the day the job gets done, and we literally are making it one day at a time.

Still, I think the future health of the Army requires that we pay attention to the needs of these low level NCOs. What the younger guys need is the kind of thing that can't be taught in a class or sergeant's time training -- it's something that can only be relayed by personal example, and that takes time and attention, a precious commodity no matter where we are.

That's the crux of Logistics: in garrison, we're tasked out all over the place and busy; during deployment, it's even worse.

The fact we're still able to make it work amazes me -- and I'm among those doing it....

American food comes to KAF!

I guess the DFAC upper management heard about everyone's complaints about the DFACs, and decided to make a change. Starting at the Independence Dining Facility, American food would be served.

The response has been HUGE. Compared to the "line" in my last post, check this out.

The line starts outside, goes through the hand washing/card swiping area...

...and all the way up to the serving area.

They answered my complaints about the hot sauce and the salad dressing. (I don't know about the coffee yet.)

On top of that, they're serving Otis Spunkmeyer cookies. I didn't even think about that. (Yay!)

Appropriately, a few days before my dad sent me an article from Slate about unhealthy military mess halls messing up people's weight. Basically, it says the military shoots its soldiers in the foot (figuratively) with the way it feeds its people. They issue height/weight standards, but feed service members in ways that set them up for failure.

I asked some people what they thought about it, and they agreed with the story: it may be good for morale, but most of it's bad for your health. Speaking from a platoon leader's perspective, I agree, too. About 15% of my people have issues with weight control.

From a business perspective, though, it's really hard to argue with the numbers coming that door these days. Apparently, you need more than an Army to keep people from eating what they want.

How not to run a DFAC

One of the reasons I've heard people give why they don't like the Dining Facilities (DFACs) here is, "They don't serve American food." I've never really understood that (are spaghetti, pizza, or "French" fries American?), but I think I can give examples of what they're talking about.

Why am I eating french fries for breakfast? Because they're available, and I didn't find anything else I'd rather eat. They have pancakes, but no syrup.

Looking around, I thought, "I could use steak sauce." Hot sauce is hard to come by, and despite an extensive variety of things called "salads," (like bean salad, beet saclad, and carrot-cucumber mix), there's never any salad dressing, but they always have steak sauce out, no matter what meal it is.

So maybe the the food's not the problem so much as the management. It shows in these kinds of little things.

We call these "graham crackers" (and improper use of an apostrophe). I don't know why they're giving graham crackers out, but I'm going to guess when management ordered them they thought they were something else. Either way, calling graham crackers by their literal description is one of those things that says, "DFAC management is not American, and doesn't know what you want."

Here's a good way to decrease traffic at your DFAC:

Serving only water in the "Juices and Drinks" cooler. When I see that, it just makes me angry. If it were a command decision, like "To improve soldier health, we're not going to serve soft drinks," that'd one thing, but this is just poor management. Here's another one.

I don't drink coffee, but if I did, I wouldn't drink this.

One reason why my soldiers like going on mission is that they get to eat at better DFACs. They may have to wait in line a little, but they're willing to deal with that. By comparison, DFACs here in Kandahar have NO line.

Wait till you see the next post. "American" food has come to KAF.

The Army Combat Nightshirt

The Army makes this cool thing called the Combat T-shirt. Instead of wearing your normal khaki undershirt AND the coat AND your body armor ...

...you can eliminate a layer by wearing just the combat T-shirt underneath the armor. The chest area is thin enough that you don't sweat as badly in the summer, while the sleeves are made of more rugged material. Even better, there's extra padding around the elbow for added comfort.

Great idea, right? Way to go, Army!

Oh, but wait. With a new uniform item comes more uniform guidelines, and there's no theater-wide standard on how to wear the combat T-shirt. That means the sergeants major have to get involved. And that's when things get messed up.

Every FOB we go to has a different standard for wearing the combat T-shirt. Some don't care what you do; others say you can't wear them to the DFACs; still others say you can wear them only when you wear the armor. With all the places we go, it gets kind of confusing.

In the end, the decision was made (and I am consciously using the passive tense for this) that we would not wear the combat T-shirt EVER. Not in the summer, not when it's 110 in the shade, never.

Simply put, it's more important to have uniform discipline than comfort when we're on the road (even though the security escort company can wear theirs).

So for all the money the Army spent supplying us with combat T-shirts, apparently the only time we can wear them is in bed. Army Combat Nightshirts.

Hello... 1945?

Every month, we have to account for sensitive items, such as radio sets and weapons. This month, that duty has fallen to me.

The weapons side is easier. There are weapons on hand in our armory, and those issued out to soldiers. The armorer and I read the serial numbers of the ones on hand first, and then go through his hand receipts to account for the rest. That part took about two and a half hours -- not too bad.

The communications issue is more complex, for several reasons. First, unlike the weapons, I don't know what each thing does, which makes it difficult to describe what to look for. Second, our comms guy is less organized than the armorer, so there are discrepancies to untangle. Finally, we have a lot of "theater-provided equipment" we inherited from the last unit.

I don't know how it got to Afghanistan, but a lot of that TPE (like the phone in the picture) is ancient. But because it's "sensitive," the Army can't throw it away. Nor can we recycle it -- it'd require specially cleared people, and that would be too expensive.

So we hold onto it and maintain monthly inventories on it, and wait to hand it off to the next unit.

Exercise those freedoms I defend

"I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it." --Evelyn Beatrice Hall (under the pseudonym "Stephen G. Tallentyre"), in The Friends of Voltaire.

That's what it seems I'm doing.

First, there's that Westboro church that protests at military funerals, saying it's God's punishment for American tolerance of homosexuality. If you've got access to my father's Facebook page, you can see his ... uh ... rather strong opinions on that matter.

They don't really bother me that much, though, because they're clearly in the wrong. Showing up at a funeral, uninvited, is just plain bad manners. They should be permitted their message, but not at the expense of a grieving family.

Then there are the folks opposing the reintroduction of ROTC programs at universities like Columbia University.

Columbia banned ROTC 42 years ago, during the peak years of the Vietnam War, but continued the ban even after the Vietnam War and the draft ended. More recently, opposition centered on the military ban on open homosexuality -- liberal groups on campus were able to maintain the status quo as a standing protest of the more conservative military policy.

Yet even now that DADT has been repealed, some groups still fight its reintroduction. According to the February 23 Stars and Stripes (the only newspaper we get here), former Army sergeant and Purple Heart recipient Antony Maschek was heckled as he advocated its return.

As cited in the New York Post on February 20, some students shouted "Rascist!" and held placards with such messages as "The military preys on low income communities" and "1 in 3 female soldiers experiences sexual assault in the military."

And as Sociology Professor Emeritus Herbert Gans told The Post, "Universities should not be involved in military activities .... Columbia should come out against spending $300 billion a year on unnecessary wars."

That stuff bothered me.

It's fine to oppose the military's policies. It's healthy to criticize its failures in handling sexual assault cases. And I definitely approve of a healthy debate about the necessity of a war (I just wish we'd had more of that in 2003). But the ad hominem attack was simply irrational -- unhelpful to the debate.

More tellingly, though, was the professor's comment about the university's involvement in military activities. That kind of Vietnam Era thinking suprised me -- he would rather limit a student's right to choose than permit the presence of a philosophy he opposed.

I don't understand this kind of thinking. The Army hasn't drafted anyone since 1973, corporal punishment is not tolerated, and with the GI Bills, the military does more to get minorities into college than any civilian institution.

In fact, I think ROTC has more in common with a college football team than the Army of 40 years ago. Students volunteer to participate, do physical exercise to train, attend training camps, receive scholarships, and hope for a related job after graduation. It's true that ROTC has some restrictions based on physical characteristics, but is rejection for transgender status really any different than being cut from a team because of physical stature?

To continue the comparison, why are sports teams not accused of exploiting low income communities? The lower classes of society are lured by the offer of money to risk threat of serious and life-long injury. And minorities comprise a greater percentage of professional teams than the population at large -- does that make them rascist?

Lastly, I take issue with veteran Van T. Barfoot, the 90 year-old who wanted to have a flagpole in his front yard despite his housing association's rules. He wasn't content with the existing rule that permitted flying the flag from a house-mounted bracket, so he disregarded the rules and put one up anyway.

The housing association threatened legal action, but then backed down in the face of the national controversy and let the veteran have his way.

This guy bothered me, too. Yes, he's a hero. He served in World War II, Korea, and Vietnam, and he earned a Medal of Honor for unparalleled valor.

But he let the media use his service record to turn a clear violation of rules into a "veteran's free speech" matter. Just because we're veteran's doesn't give us the right to pick and choose the rules we're going to follow. This wasn't a matter of free speech -- he could have flown his flag in the manner prescribed. He just wanted to do his own thing; if anything, that's poor discipline.

To the retired colonel, I say (and I'd say it respectfully), "Sir, that's not cool."

Kids are doing well

I was happy to hear from SY in our conversation today that the kids are doing well. P is speaking Korean just about fluently -- on par with other Korean kids his age. He put a blanket on C while she was sleeping, and proudly announced, "이블 덥었어" [I put the blanket on].

He woke up the other day and said, "I want to talk to 아빠." It's nice to know he misses me.

He's using comparatives ("I'm taller"), but hasn't mastered the "than" part. It's only been six weeks, but I can already see in his face that he's grown a bit.

Gosh I miss them....