All Activity

Bondi and Patel.

Hopefully Bondi. Unfortunately Trump seems to hire women based solely on the "Biff test."

Yeah but it's ChatGPT 2.5

Congrats on finally getting something!! Did you find out your projected IPT location from the UFT assignments person, Laughlin, or another source?

Noem fired. Clowned a bit too hard at the hearings yesterday, I guess. Who's next?

just got my date! Check vMPF boys/girls

Joe Don Baker, no shit? I knew it was based on the Sheriff Buford Pusser story. gonna have to track that movie down. Kirsti out btw.

Good analysis of recent Naval engagements from the “Sub Brief”

Reminds me of the “why can’t the boom just get a window?” argument when the KC-46 first came online and started demonstrating growing pains with the RVS. If we constrain ourselves to the way it’s always been done then we’ll never solve the problems facing us in the pacific fight.

Tell me more ChatGPT

Heard back from AFPC this morning that my dates are flowing through the system. Going to Laughlin mid-May with IPT projected for the end of June at Prescott.

As you are reading the .40 ones, the caliber debate is worth a mention as well. There has been a resurgence of 9mm over the years due to reduced recoil, lower prices and increased capacity. Nevertheless, even.40 S&W has a stronger impact than 9mm and a significant number of shooters like that middle ground between 9mm and .45 ACP. The disadvantage is that it has a snappier recoil and tends to wear the gun out more with time. Personally I believe caliber is not so important as compared to where the shot is and the way one will shoot the gun. When you are comfortable with.40, SIG Sauer P229, Heckler and Koch USP and Smith and Wesson M and P40 are all proven platforms. The most appropriate is the one that fits well in your hand and you can shoot it accurately and consistently.

Copy. Good to hear

We had a plan for optionally manned... Obviously this program was and is personal to me. In the simplest terms, the Tactical Tanker debate comes down to one core issue: vision. For years, we’ve all acknowledged the “tyranny of distance” in the United States Air Force fight—especially across the vast operating areas of United States Indo-Pacific Command. Distance is the pacing threat’s greatest ally. It stretches logistics, constrains sortie generation, limits persistence, and ultimately caps combat power at the worst possible time. The Tactical Tanker concept directly attacked that problem. If I could distill the entire discussion down to the basics: it was about putting more gas forward. Not incrementally more. Not marginally more. Transformationally more. The modeling—while I can’t share specifics here—showed roughly three times the fuel offload at the IPs compared to the current construct. Three times. That’s not a tweak. That’s a different fight. More fuel forward means: Fighters push deeper without sacrificing weapons. Bombers retain flexibility instead of flying razor-thin margins. Tankers operate with more options instead of predictable orbits. The entire air campaign gains elasticity instead of brittleness. In a Pacific scenario, fuel is range, range is presence, and presence is deterrence. The Tactical Tanker fundamentally changed the calculus of how airpower could be projected and sustained. And yet, the conversation kept getting stuck. Specifically—on the boom. The boom became the intellectual gravity well. Instead of stepping back and asking, “What does tripling fuel forward do to the operational problem?” the debate narrowed into technical objections and legacy expectations. The inability to zoom out and process second- and third-order effects stalled momentum. That’s not a knock on anyone’s professionalism. It’s a reflection of institutional inertia. Large organizations optimize around what they know. They protect existing paradigms. They scrutinize deviation more harshly than stagnation. But transformational capability rarely fits neatly inside legacy mental models. The Tactical Tanker wasn’t about replacing the fleet. It wasn’t about novelty for novelty’s sake. It was about solving the INDOPACOM logistics geometry in a way that current constructs simply don’t. At some point, we have to ask: Are we optimizing for yesterday’s constraints—or tomorrow’s fight? Because in the Pacific, fuel isn’t a support function. It’s the strategy.

@RegularJoe Aircrew didn’t fuck up in this event, not even slightly. The gross problems and blame lie elsewhere.

So...where does that fall in the "Chinese spy balloon" to "friendly F-15E" scale of kill quality?

I'll hop in on the fun 26-07 Drop 2 x MC130 3 x RC135 EWO 3 x F15E 1 x C130H (Guard) 1 x RPA 1 x B52

I don't disagree with you. I just have too much going on with life at the moment to worry about the periphery.

Fat Amy got her first kill. A yak130.

any intel if the 150 mentioned slots are all going to Laughlin? Or you guys think they are spreading them out across all UPT bases?

They did. It's a remake. IMDbWalking Tall (2004) ⭐ 6.2 | Action, Crime1h 26m | PG-13And here's the original. IMDbWalking Tall (1973) ⭐ 6.9 | Action, Biography, Crime2h 5m | R

Sorry forgot to post the response from AFPC: I am fine with you guys e-mailing starting Mid-March… I was just told by scheduler that that is the timeframe she hopes to be done. I do not like not keeping everyone informed. Was thinking about a mass e-mail but I think that was going to generate even more traffic, so I am planning on just answering questions as they come…

Especially in rural areas. It arguably has improved a little given social media/cameras are more prevalent unlike years past. Drug Task Force in Crittenden County made some cops quite a bit of money on the side over the years.

Fair point. I feel confident that she didn't single handedly run down and eliminate a threat to children.

In lesser TX primary news: Gonzalez was primaried to a runoff in TX23 by https://x.com/TheAKGuy 43% to 41%.