Leaderboard

I’d never argue against frequent live A/A missile and gun employment. They’re valuable, no doubt. I don’t see them as being quite so critical in 2019. We have so many tools available now to understand and visualize the actual WEZ of a particular A/A weapon. Employment within acceptable parameters is hammered from day one and we can accurately validate that with the debriefing tools available. To compare the inability of a 1960’s vintage fighter pilot employing early generation AIM-7s and AIM-9s to visualize the missile envelope with our current situation is just not valid. Using the Ault report as a justification for increased training ordnance employment is kind of a stretch, IMO. We have video of WSEP shots from multiple angles. We can watch how missiles pull lead, correct trajectory, bad shots, the importance of a quarter plane to avoid gun debris, etc. I watched as many of those videos as I could get my hands on as a new guy. I tried to shoot an AIM-9 as a newly MR wingman but it malfunctioned. I got to see an AIM-9 shot from the backseat another day. All valuable. My first live missiles were employed 6 months later on my first combat sortie. I heard about the delay when you hammer down on an AIM -7 and it takes an eternity to actually launch. It still made me start to say “ ah, WTF.....” until I heard the bitch light and become the great white hope. Would experiencing that in training have made me better equipped to employ it that day in combat? Probably not. There are just too many variables in A/A employment to say a single training shot is going to prepare a pilot for what he may encounter in combat. The Ault report involves ancient lessons that apply to fledgling employment of first generation A/A missiles by pilots without the tools we now possess to wield far more capable weapons. Should we ensure those weapons are maintained properly after captive carry sorties, sure. That’s common sense. Should we have guys shooting multiple missiles every year? If we had an unlimited budget, sure. Sooner in their career than later (but not too soon). Definitely. Necessary for success in combat? Probably not. Just my .02.

AFPC for the most part just hands the drop list for F-16s under the TBD box. There are still boxes for Luke, Holloman, Kelly, Tucson, but they usually are 0 slots. I think it’s because AETC/A1 & AFPC/DP2OR just do a faces in spaces after assignment night for SERE/IFF/B-course after and it’s easier to not assign a location until everything else can be flowed.

Bingo

KSPS 20-02 USAF (All active duty) A-10 A-10 F-15C F-15E F-22 B-1 T-38A Langley F-16 Luke F-16 Luke F-16 Luke F-16 Luke F-16 Luke F-16 Luke F-16 Luke F-16 Luke MC-130J Kirtland T-6 FAIP Canada CF-18 CF-18 Germany Eurofighter Eurofighter Eurofighter T-38 FAIP The great Oprah Viper giveaway has gotten its second wind.

OG staff meetings.

I need more information before I say this is true or not. //SIGNED// Gen Clark Griswold Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I'll take a stab and guess that there aren't enough IPs or infrastructure to push all of the pilot trainees they want through. *sigh* Blue tries to to put it out the (pilot shortage) fire by dousing it with water and realizes too late it's gasoline.

UPT Select!