SFC Private RallyPoint Member 81747 <div class="images-v2-count-0"></div><p>I don't think there is any argument that we perform our duties on a sliding scale between, "the welfare of our Soldiers," and, "the accomplishment of the mission."  What we do is inherently dangerous and requires mitigation to eliminate unreasonable risks, however some risk needs to be accepted in order to accomplish the mission.  This is addressed through Composite Risk Management, safety briefs, route statuses, PT Belts, and any number of other measures.</p><p><br>A)  Would you categorize military risk management climate as too risk adverse, just right, or too risk inclined?</p><p> </p><p>B)  What do we do as a military culture to align this properly?</p><p> </p><p>I am open to all responsese but am especially interested in the thoughts of E*-E9, CW3-CW5, and O4-O6.</p> 2014-03-22T04:15:13-04:00 SFC Private RallyPoint Member 81747

<div class="images-v2-count-0"></div><p>I don't think there is any argument that we perform our duties on a sliding scale between, "the welfare of our Soldiers," and, "the accomplishment of the mission."  What we do is inherently dangerous and requires mitigation to eliminate unreasonable risks, however some risk needs to be accepted in order to accomplish the mission.  This is addressed through Composite Risk Management, safety briefs, route statuses, PT Belts, and any number of other measures.</p><p><br>A)  Would you categorize military risk management climate as too risk adverse, just right, or too risk inclined?</p><p> </p><p>B)  What do we do as a military culture to align this properly?</p><p> </p><p>I am open to all responsese but am especially interested in the thoughts of E*-E9, CW3-CW5, and O4-O6.</p>

2014-03-22T04:15:13-04:00 2014-03-22T04:15:13-04:00 SSG James Doherty 81760

<div class="images-v2-count-0"></div><p>SFC Burroughs,</p><p> </p><p>    I believe this to be entirely command dependent.  I have been several places where the command wouldn't take any risk to get the mission done and places where they didn't care what the risk was Mission First.</p>

2014-03-22T04:47:08-04:00 2014-03-22T04:47:08-04:00 Lt Col Private RallyPoint Member 241582

<div class="images-v2-count-0"></div>I suppose it depends on the impact of the mission and how critical it is. We use the concept of operation risk management or ORM in the flying world. This gives a gauge on whether or not we can push a mission. In some cases we may have a high ORM score and be ordered to launch a mission. If we have a routine mission and the impact of us not launching is low and there is adverse weather we most likely will delay until conditions are better. At times we might be supporting something that is critical that we get up in the air. Then we have to weigh the considerations of what if run into a bad situation and end not being able to support the mission anyway then we might be stood down.<br /><br />It is commander dependent usually it requires a higher hq approval to push a mission. As a flyer we all want do our part and push a mission as best we can. At the same time we are not helping the mission if we crash and kill ourselves.

2014-09-15T02:15:37-04:00 2014-09-15T02:15:37-04:00 2014-03-22T04:15:13-04:00