Jump to content


Popular Content

Showing content with the highest reputation since 08/19/2018 in all areas

  1. 13 points
    He accepts offer and completes a PCS to DC to work for CSAF. Six months later AFPC drops a 365 to Afghanistan on him...PCS ADSC won't let him turn it down and he finds himself sitting in Kabul guarding TCNs in the chow hall.
  2. 11 points
    Just got an interview with SWA with: 2,800 total 1000 hrs in T-6 1500 hrs in KC-135 Not sure how close that is to “min time” but probably pretty low comparatively.
  3. 11 points
  4. 10 points
    The 40 hour work week has nothing to do with socialism. Zero. No one here is talking about work hours and child labor when they refer to socialism. Socialism is easily summed up by the old Soviet mantra, from each according his abilities; to each according to his needs. Another simple socialist concept is an equality of outcome (not to be confused with equality of opportunity). They are not fatal due to the evil intent of their promotors. They are fatal due to their irreconcilable conflicts with human nature. Remember, there are no flawed political philosophies, only flawed human characteristics. The success of a political philosophy is measured by how well it mitigates and minimizes the effects of those human flaws. Sent from my Pixel 2 using Tapatalk
  5. 9 points
    So now you’re just re-quoting anonymous people on an internet answer site to support socialist ideas? What do you think happens to money in a rich person’s portfolio? Does it just get locked away in a vault somewhere to gather dust? No, it is invested in companies through stock purchases or maybe as venture capital, hell even if it is just sitting in a bank account it is loaned out to support other economic activities. Just because someone has a large portfolio doesn’t mean that wealth is not utilized somewhere else in the economy. The general state of the economy and financial institutions’ outlook has a lot more to do with the availability of capital than rich people ‘hoarding wealth.’ Wealth is not finite either. If it was, we would all be trading beads still. So your argument of the $20 is moot, because the poor six who have nothing would go work somewhere there is money and they would be paid for it. Geeeez man, where did you go to school? Universal income is not the solution, people don’t need to be disincentivized from working. Free college is not the answer either, as a large portion of college degrees don’t apply in the real world which is why you see psych majors working retail and people with liberal arts degrees working as baristas. Welfare with job training in a needed skilled labor area is what works. If we want to give any sort of schooling away for free/reduced cost then it needs to be in the area of the trades. Kids today are taught as long as you get a college degree you will be successful, however when everyone has a BS/BA because government guaranteed loans make them easy to get, it has now become the new high school diploma. People focus on 4 year degrees and ignore well paying trade jobs like electricians, plumbers, auto mechanics, etc. I forgot to address estate and property taxes. Estate taxes are a bad idea because how fair is it to pay taxes on income twice? If I’m ‘rich’ I’ve already paid upwards of 30%+ on any income I’ve made or capital gains taxes if it is investment income. So because I’m smart with my money and I actually have a nest egg to give to my children or grand children, the government now wants to take another piece of my pie? No thanks. Also the other issue raised with that is large farms that are passed down to future generations but because of the value of the land they fall under the estate tax, now junior has to take out a loan or sell part of the property to cover the taxes after Paw dies. It’s un American. Property taxes I have an issue with because many public school districts piss away the money and give a poor product in return. If we had vouchers where my money that I PAY in property taxes was portable to private education, guess what, it decreases class sizes in the public school and gives my kid the kind of education I choose (since it is my money after all), instead of being indoctrinated with left wing views like kindergarteners learning about a transgender teddy bear. F that noise.
  6. 7 points
    Option A. Quit before they kick you out. Drink beer and chase women. Graduate. Join the guard. Profit Option B. Quit before they kick you out. Drink beer and chase women. Graduate. Get required qualifications and get hired by a airline. Profit. Option C. Combine A and B.
  7. 7 points
    It’s cause AFSOC/acc/Air Force doesn’t really want it. AFSOC blows their load on gunships. ACC is fighter mafia. And the Air Force is incompetent. Look at the history and and origin of the U-28. It wasn’t any Air Force types pushing that rope. And look how AFSOC/Air Force treat that platform. There’s your answer for light attack. Itll continue to be the red-headed step child
  8. 6 points
    I know it’s tragic, but it should be emphasized that these guys delayed ejection specifically to protect those innocents on the ground from having a flaming ball of wreckage dropped on their houses. Heroic. Just wish they both could have made it out... Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
  9. 6 points
    Stark would be best served if he remains anonymous rather than revealing himself. There is nothing to be gained by Stark becoming part of the solution: he made his points in his articles, an even offered proposed solutions. His job is done. And now leadership can get on with doing their f'n jobs with the issues identified. They shouldn't have needed an anonymous public input "from the trenches", but since they did, the least they could do is actually display some of that leadership skill and take action to fix the identified issues...like they should have been doing all this time anyway without proving Stark's hypotheses true. My favorite part of the article: If you look at the three (or is it four, now?) "Dear Boss" letters that have been made public in the last 40-ish years since Capt Keys' famous letter, you'll note that they ALL cover essentially the same territory and have the same types of complaint. So, how is it that Goldfein thinks that "we got better as a service" as a result of that letter? Is that what it means when people keep bringing up the same problems year after year, decade after decade? Good call, Fingers. Keep your skull down, Col Stark, and keep fighting the good fight.
  10. 5 points
  11. 5 points
    Duck's future isn't riding on this one, so it'll be on time.
  12. 5 points
    Her fiance really dodged a bullet on that one!
  13. 5 points
    You have a fundamental misunderstanding of how wealth works. And I've already addressed it. Wealth is not finite. There is not just $20 to spread around. The guy with $17 CREATES hundreds more through the invention of new demand. And one of the hardest truths is that the poor do not create much at all. There's a reason economies are rated based on GDP growth. Growth. It is the creation of wealth that makes a country strong. And our "poor" people are a hell of a lot better off than the poor people in socialist nations. And in more progressive capitalist nations. And guess what? When you create new wealth, it makes you fantastically rich. I believe that you think the things you wrote. I'm not calling you disingenuous or otherwise questioning your character. And I think you believe those things out of a genuine desire for a better world. But you're just wrong. Do you think it's a coincidence that the greatest advancements in the elimination of poverty and improvements in the standard of living worldwide has been entirely driven by capitalist nations? Entirely.
  14. 5 points
    I get that's a common sentiment in order to show gratitude to the departed, but that's not at all how it went down in reality. It's also not the first time I've buried a co-worker where the folk tale gets pressed that there was a heroic suicide for the sake of the people on the ground, later to reveal a more simple and less flamboyant answer (spatial D and mental unwillingness to get out, as was the case with my UPT SRO and his Hornet crash). You don't have to rub it in the surviving's faces at the funeral. But for us who still remain and do the job tomorrow, damn right we owe the departed some roasting, if we are to honor the legacy of his sacrifice, and learn a god damn thing or two instead of repeating it. The conversation about collateral damage in the jet was to me, simply ancillary to a suspension of disbelief that stemmed from the fact they (and I am also not above reproach in that fallibility) did not immediately internalize the absolute nature of loss of control once dual hydraulic failure ensues. The common urban legend is that you can steer with windmilling hydro when the engine fails but windmills. First of all, not true enough to warrant consideration. BUT, this is worse than merely windmilling hydraulics, because the gearboxes were severed and thus there would have been actual zero input to the pumps. That means no shit, other than the engines effecting pitching moments of little consequence as they throttle jockeyed, the aircraft was immediately ballistic. The decision to delay ejection was neither the correct one nor one that saved lives on the ground. It may have actually killed the deceased, if one is to conjecture that he would have had extra time to gather enough presence of mind to get his sh*t together, un-f*ck his own seat from the way he left it on takeoff, and punch. But this is conjecture since we will never know if he failed to punch himself out due to incapacitation (due to the incorrect sequence selected, and the FCP seat blasting him with the rocket) or inappropriate reaction to stress (aka frozen by panicking). As to the latter, the SIB had some insights into that question which now the AIB sort of refutes, and paints the survivor in a not so positive light. I'm a little bit disappointed by this reversal in findings, but that's for the survivor to live with. Never miss an opportunity to STFU when it comes to USAF interviews is all I got to say about that one. I also don't trust the safety process enough to open my trap, but that's my bias. Exactly. And you're being kinder than I. Generally the checklist now allows for anywhere before takeoff. Most people either stow them in the hammerhead, or all the way back before pulling chocks. I do the latter, but sometimes I break order and do it in the hammerhead. And I'll challenge anybody here who flies these things come and assert they've never forgotten to arm their seat until they get to the MOA and go "..oooh shit...*muffled cllllllick* ". I only say that so people don't misinterpret my criticism for the complacent CRM in the conduct of a requal sortie that was conducted with a CT atmosphere (they all are) as some sort of gratuitous aspersion, when in reality we have all been guilty of it at one point or another. The lesson learned for me is exactly that: treat CT rides with respect. And treat requal guys like idiot UPT students. Sure, don't verbalize that to them, but treat them with the same skepticism. The fact is, we don't as a collective. I also don't agree with the shortened "feed the fight" figther-centric thing we got going on at the schoolhouse, with shortening the callouts. Not so much because it's somehow blasphemy, but rather because the UPT bases, Red Bulls in particular, are actually going the opposite direction, precisely because of this accident. But I'm preaching to the choir here. Stay safe out there.
  15. 5 points
    Sure Ned, you are safe...when has the USAF ever lied?
  16. 5 points
    Perhaps he’ll be permitted to “take the black” and finish his time in AFPAK Hands.
  17. 5 points
    Wow. What an incredibly ignorant statement. We can absolutely discuss the issue, but honesty is warranted first. "Unarmed black citizens" are not being "executed" by police.
  18. 4 points
    It's almost that time of year again! 😋
  19. 4 points
    T-X projected for IOC 2024, with IFF getting the first jets, followed by AETC....contract award was supposed to be June, then July, now it's almost September...we'll see. AETC has a real problem...the math doesn't work for them. Trying to grow their way out of a pilot shortage by upping production, while balancing hours on the C model fleet. The only answer is to cut the syllabus and fly less per student (aka lower standards), hoping that innovative things like VR training can make up the difference. With the A model, I don't know Huggy, I think we're starting to hit the exponential snowball of failing components sooner that the SPO projected. The MTBF is decreasing on lots of components, harder and harder to keep Code 1 jets on the line. They (the SPO) have a plan on phasing the A models in for something called the TRIM mod. Which is basically a light weight version of the Pacer Classic 3 mods on the C model to beef up the structure and extend their structural life. A models have never been cracked open, only x-ray'd and other NDI during phase, so we don't exactly know how bad they are from a structural standpoint. Gearbox issues are becoming a problem for the As too...and the other elephant in the room is avionics. We're laughable as an IFR platform. Not on track to meet the 2020 ADS-B either (like everyone else). Multiple jets down right now for HSI problems. Dual UHF radio is a joke. TACAN decommissioning all over the place, no ability to navigate point to point (Thank you Steve Jobs for iPads). Meanwhile NASA is upgrading their avionics...again. My time is being spent right now trying to convince the frozen middle at ACC that this is important and we need to spend a few dollars to make these things last for 10-15 more years.
  20. 4 points
    If the hot topic in the "What is right with the AF" thread is the GTC and DTS, we are proper fucked.
  21. 4 points
    While the T-38 is older than you want, don't try to make this an issue. AETC pushed the C-model. Lots of "new shit" on the jet. The got what they asked for. The millions of $$$ spent on the PMP and the MB seat (how many millions???) would have been useful elsewhere. A-models with 21,000 hours are doing pretty well from a safety viewpoint. Yes, the fleet needs to be replaced. No argument there. No: Paul's jet having dual airframe-mounted gearbox failures is more a function of shitty maintenance than anything else. As a retiree, I'm not "in the know" as much as I'd like to be on his death. Yet. But I'd gladly jump in ANY Beale T-38 and go fly it. Because Beale has some quality guys working those jets. And I'll continue to fly the civilian T-38 without any qualms. It's well maintained, and the seat is solid, in the unlikely event I need it. T-38 crashes should have no bearing on T-X timeline. It should be based on the fact we need an upgraded trainer for our future F-22 and F-35 pilots.
  22. 4 points
    Having your card show up on someone’s slide as unpaid is the best way to get someone to kick finance in the ass to pay your voucher ...
  23. 4 points
    Not discounting your detective work, but $50k seems like a cheap price to rig an election in the most powerful nation in the world. I would think they would have asked for millions, especially from someone who is a billionaire. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
  24. 4 points
    pretty cool. standing by for Guardian to tell us how much he hates Fingers in 3, 2, 1....
  25. 4 points
    Lawman, To begin, it’s not like we have lots of data points on such events. The variables involved probably make such an event so unique that assuming there is one good option to resolve it is not valid. There may be nothing that can be done in some cases to significantly improve the outcome. At least one other person has mentioned this, but it appears to be worth repeating. When aerospace vehicles get shot down, they don’t turn into harmless confetti and flutter to the ground. Since there were so many potential victims in close proximity to the flight path of this aircraft, there’s absolutely no guarantee that a shoot—down attempt wouldn’t have made things worse. Removing any chance of the aircraft remaining under the control of this individual who indicated he had no desire to hurt others by shooting it with air-to-air weapons certainly wouldn’t ensure it crashed somewhere desireable. Missiles don’t always hit what we shoot them at either. Setting up a shot geometry that ensured a wayward missile wouldn’t hurt someone on the ground may have been difficult, if not impossible. A mach 2+ unguided missile with a live warhead schwacking someone’s house or dropping into one of the venues you mentioned wouldn’t be any better than the possible outcomes you’re concerned about. Opting to gun him might have reduced the radius of potential problems from the inevitable rounds that didn’t find their mark - but they’re still going to fly for several miles once shot. Based on your description of the area, it doesn’t sound like raining several hundred rounds of 20 mm HEI over the surrounding area would have been a good option either. It’s also a bitch to gun an airborne target that’s flying relatively straight and level at low speed. “Safe” shot geometry with the gun would have probably been even more difficult to set up and execute without risk to those on the ground than a missile. There’s a reason we test and practice with missiles and guns at White Sands or in large, over-water Warning Areas. This is not an ROE problem. Making the choice to shoot him down over a population center is almost always going to be the lesser of two evils. Both options carry enough risk that it’s probably a coin toss. Once he lines up on a target with intent, the shot may diminish the result but definitely doesn’t guarantee no loss of life or property. Think about the second 9/11 airliner hitting the tower and what was in its path leading up to impact. If an F-15 was there to pump a couple of missiles into him and halt that attack a few miles short of downtown Manhattan, that obviously would have been great. But, the crash site was going to be a mess, with plenty of casualties and damage. A lesser “evil” for certain, but still an evil that wasn’t warranted in the Seattle case because the same threat wasn’t indicated to those observing and speaking with the individual involved.