Transformational AF SOS?

I recently graduated from the US Air Force's second Basic Developmental Education (BDE) course, which is better known as Squadron Officer School (SOS). The curriculum of SOS is undergoing a revision (as indicated here). One aspect I noticed was the retirement of Ken Blanchard's Situational Leadership Theory in favor of the Full Range of Leadership Model (FRLM) as the model of choice to mid-career AF Captains. Of course, the AF added its own spin on FRLM.

One aspect that was taught by my flight commander and the main lecturer was that both transformational and transactional leadership preferences have their place at different times. The claim boils down to that being a master "Management by Exception" (MBE) leader could be preferred over "Inspirational Motivation" in some circumstances. One example discussed was the under-fire scenario. In this scenario, the effective AF leader would use MBE to direct their troops, relying on the base relationship and training that the leader set with inspirational motivation to prepare the forces for battle. Transactional and transformational, under this theory, are now viewed as equal - the traditional "up and to the right" from laissez-faire up through transactional and up to transformational is replaced with a model in which laissez-fair is discounted and transactional and transformational are put on an equal horizontal footing.

This issue was debated at a fevered pitch in my flight room. A special forces officer commenting that transactional leadership is essentially dead and that he get the best results in the field using idealized influence and inspirational motivation. Other officers commented that sometimes the leader's attention may be over too many issues, so that using a more transactional approach can ensure a critical, single operation succeeds.

SOS did help prepare young officers to use the FRLM. SOS used several different methods: a lecture on FRLM, some discussion classes that attempts to build strategies for using FRLM in our home units, and a self assessment for each officer against the FRLM. Unfortunately, we used a different model to assess each other later in the course, which may be an artifact of being in the middle of the curriculum revision.

So, does this view hold? What issues do you see in advocating transactional preferences as being equal to transformational preferences?