Leaderboard

I know the EA-18 Growler demo team isn't going.

Hopefully someone kicked some rudder because lead got lucky with having enough space to eject. Since everyone made it and are OK: Rejoin to the piggyback position? Is that a new Ace and Gary maneuver?

Is there any rage bait you don't fall for?

Probably for the best. The Navy should be going with an already proven platform vs the T-7 just like how the Air Force should have as well. We waste so much time and money trying to reinvent the wheel when we don't have to. UPT is a great example of that. We don't need some new revolutionary trainer aircraft, we need something that works. Same with the syllabus and all of the changes in the last 6 years for UPT. New pilots are coming out of UPT with less experience and that puts more pressure on the FTU to teach things that they should have learned in UPT like TOLD. /rant

CNBCTrump storms out of interview after being challenged abou...The president said he would like to see the weaponization fund proceed despite setbacks.He's starting to flail. Just goes to show how no matter what's going on or what he's doing, at his core his ego cannot be controlled. Literally nobody gives a shit about January 6th or his nonsensical election fraud claims, yet he keeps bringing up these losing topics because he can't stand the idea that there are any losses whatsoever.

I’m not sure it was appropriate during a Memorial Day speech, but 10,000,000 illegals coming through (most completely unvetted) in 4 years is definitely an invasion. Mayorkas should spend his remaining days in a federal (max security - no frills - death row type) prison.

You clearly don't know what it takes to fly precision loops to Van Halen, while taking all the 60 series.

Pretty impressive landing roll. Actually a no roll. T/O is incredible as well. I’m not sure the tires even rotated fully.

So 19AF can now solely focus on continuing to gut the UPT enterprise

Did anyone see the events around the King Air that crashed (ditched), 80 miles offshore? Sounds like a movie in the making as they ditched and all 11 people on board survived and were rescued by the Coast Guard and the 920th. Everyone surviving a ditching then being rescued...Well done

Sample size of one school (unrelated to AF training) - vast majority of young CFIs suck (and we’ve ran through a lot in the last year, hired from all over the country). Their work ethic and maturity are significantly lacking is the best way to sum it up. Now add in their complete lack of experience and unwillingness to acknowledge that - it’s a recipe for bad decisions and poor instruction. I can only imagine this is plaguing these AF-contract flight schools. UPT is, for all the valid BGCs, vastly superior to a standard flight school, especially when trying to produce military pilots at scale.

Don't you remember Red Dawn? Wolverines!!!

We've been down this road, and similar paths, constantly and consistently since the 1970s. I'll believe that Big Blue is serious about CSAR (and CAS) beyond the A-10 when the following things occur: 1. SPECIFICALLY, in-writing, designate a MINIMUM of FIVE squadrons (of the MDS of their choosing) that will take CSAR as a PRIMARY mission. These squadrons will take dedicated, three week (or longer) TDYs to Moody AFB to learn, refine, and become proficient in the CSAR mission so that when the last Hog flies West, the mission is so deeply ingrained in the PRIMARY focus that no stress or strain can erase it. Why 5? I'd argue that's the absolute minimum number for a somewhat regular AFFORGEN deployment rhythm. Welcome to the world of low-density, high-demand. Who's going to want to go into no-kidding combat without Sandys? They will also publish the recurring training events that will prove to the entire CAF that the commitment of NEVER leaving a comrade behind on the field of battle is alive, well, and preserved in the United States Air Force. This won't happen, because it hasn't happened. In order to do this, those five squadrons will have to give up other missions in order to focus on CSAR. It isn't a pickup game, and if we relegate it as such, we're breaking faith with our own. Period, dot, full-stop. So, what can we ask that F-16, F-15E, or F-35 squadron to give up in exchange for keeping CSAR alive at such a pace that our own don't lose faith in our ability to come snatch them from the Valley of the Shadow of Death on the worst day of their lives? Draw the line in the sand. Demonstrate the commitment. Spoken words are hollow. Write it. Sign your name to it and accept the accountability for the decision. If we're not willing to do that, to that level, then we have to get serious in another way. Alternative COA: Give the mission in its entirety to the US Navy. Carriers are near the fight and are mobile. Sign it all over if we're not willing to do what it takes and maintain the mission at the standard that was forged in the skies over Vietnam. The mission has been tinkered with and tossed around a few times, and every time that's happened, it hasn't been good. We had to relearn the TTPs in Desert Storm, and that only happened because enough A-1 vets were retained in the young Hog community to keep the idea alive. Draw the line and go big, or punt on fourth down. Doctrinally, the USN is the closest to the USAF CSARTF in terms of composition, so push it all over there. Zero's perfect solution because I have the pens: Get serious about what war has really been over the last forty years, and the elements that will endure REGARDLESS of the war we want to fight. Our track record on predicting future conflict is pretty terrible, so (as they love to say at Air University) use the past as prologue and keep the things that you've always somehow needed, even if you didn't want them. Get serious about the USAF commitment that's existed in this manner since the original Sandys made it clear that they would walk through Hell in a gasoline suit to bring a comrade home. That means extending the A-10 until 2035, with all that's needed for such sustainment-- depot, WIC, FTU, test, and spare parts. That timeline gives the service time to develop a proper follow-on A-10X. You can even bolt-on some after-market add-ons to make it a VERY formidable F/A-10X and take the low-end counterair vs the low-slow toys so that the super expensive machines can focus on their high-end fights. Better yet, call it the ATTACK-MULTI-role FIGHTER, or AMF. You could field it in no time since you've got a foundation that you know works-- put some new versions of the -34 on there that get 15K lbs of thrust or more, add on every means of plug-and-play munition, EW, and comm suite that already exists, and of course, keep the gun. Done. On the ramp by 2035 so that the last of the c-models can take their place in the boneyard. We need the pickup truck in an era where everyone just wants the sports cars. EVERY conflict since Desert Storm has proven that. Bottom line at the bottom is that there is a numbers game that we're losing and will continue to lose so long as we don't accept the harsh reality before us. Budgets aren't big enough to field an entire fleet of exquisite and VERY expensive fighters. You can't field an NFL team with all quarterbacks, but it's also damn near impossible to field a winning team without those high-speed, highly paid leaders who pass and carry the pigskin. You need linemen. You need knuckle-dragging brawlers. There's already not enough to go around, and the trend is continuing downward. If you're going to transfer the mission, DO IT RIGHT, and START DOING IT NOW so that the new guys can learn from the experts. If you think it's a pickup game and that you can re-learn it on the fly after your one upgrade ride four years ago, you'll be joining Jack in the Esfahan Hilton. We're already late.

Buddy my job is literally to travel around the country and stay in different cities. Just because it happens sometimes in other cities doesn't mean there's a comparison. California has been orders of magnitude worse since the pandemic. And it's not even close.

He is OFF THE CHART, that be no man's land:

Last week I had what I can only describe as a "pure" ending to a flight, I live for those moments. Unfortunately as a ham-fisted pilot I don't get to realize them as often as I would like. The flight started off with weather that was not forecasted. Taxiing out there was a literal wall of fog approaching the field obscuring the trees. I hustled up and got airborne just before the field went below mins. I did not see the ground for the next 300 miles. I had extra gas and was now questioning the TAF at my destination, already planning divert options when 40 miles from home the sky opened up and I could see the coast. At 35 miles I could see the field and asked for lower. Surprisingly they cleared me the visual from 35 miles out. I did some quick pilot math and pulled the throttle back to just above idle and started down. I never touch the throttle again until I touched down. Blind squirrel found a nut, divine intervention or pure luck...It just felt good.

Selling my 1979 A185F if anyone is looking for a great performer with the IO-550 and 88” Prop. STOL kit, Wing Extensions, VGs, etc.

Dudes with giant balls make biff sport wood. Not that there's anything wrong with that.

Just following Ukraine's lead...They used successfully used an automated robot over a month ago to recover a trapped and wounded soldier. The robot survived two mine strikes and safely brought the soldier home.

Matters not...between the promotion bullshit and this...dude is off his rocker.

As a prime contractor, turned DoD Civ, turned prime contractor the federal civilians who hate contractors are the ones who would never get hired by one since they’re worthless. Those are the ones DOGE should’ve rid from the civil service.

It's always the management causing the issues. I've worked with engineers from all the main contractors. Some got more of the 'tism than I care to interact with, but they're working hard for the nation. It's always the damn managers, and execs, that delay, ask for more money, etc. Also, some gov civs fucking hate contractors even if they're kicking ass, solving problems, and creating/improving capes. That was a new one for me in my brief time in DoD contracting.

Turns out doing a demo without the most basic of formation flying skills is not ideal.

I have a new theory but no data. Was there a Coldplay song playing on the airshow PA?

I’m an equal opportunity hater - fuck em both!

I think this sounds like a solution in search of a problem.

Whoever made this is next level!

We had a rental van in Germany year ago. We were flying down the autobahn when the dude in the passenger's seat rolled down the window....the combination of speed, airlfow and age on the van was just enough to tear the headliner loose.....BOOM....we were all suddenly sitting there covered in a cloud of insulation, it looked like a scene out of a movie, all we could do was laugh. Took us a while to get all the insulation out of our hair, teeth and flightsuits. The next day one of the guys super-glued the headliner back into place. We turned the van in a few days later and never heard a word.

I’ve returned a car OCONUS missing a door. Said “have a nice day” and left. Never heard about it ever again. Seen many GTC rentals returned all kinds of screwed up over my career, never seen or heard of anyone getting screwed (questioned by the CC is a different story).

I'm glad they didn't have a radar gun on the Destin bridge 40ish years ago.

Nope. Do it. What's the magic number? 4? Because I've been to 4 different CA cities and witnessed the horror show with my own eyes. None were SF.

Blancolirio said their airshow flying was an additional duty. Well, that should just about take care of the airshow demos in the Growler. Glad they all got out, but why a colossal waste of money and not a good look for Naval Aviation.

Look at the picture again. Dude shit in the street, not on the sidewalk. It's the little things....

Two has some spalining to do...parroting other holy cow lucky they all got out and didn't get tangled up. I thought it was AI at first...they were stuck together after first contact.

Sure thing, as long as you quit sending all your idiots to Texas, especially Austin! And I don't have to say Texas is great, everyone knows it is except for all the Californians moving here!

Another fundamental disagreement. You believe that there is such a thing as a state of peace. I believe that's a fantasy of well-meaning but historically ignorant people. We may create different enemies and different problems. But there was never the possibility, much less the reality, of doing things perfectly such that we have no enemies. Go back a hundred or more years and see that there was never a desire for peace, and that the people complaining now about being displaced from their lands were the displacers not very long ago... They weren't holding hands as peaceful Pearl Farmers before the United States started meddling in the Middle East. They just slaughtered each other. Similar to the many myths told about the noble native Americans before the evil Europeans arrived. Again, and I'm not pointing this specifically at you though you do seem to fall into the category, I just find it childish to have this view where the United States is constantly framed as actually not always the good guy or objectively wrong or all the other ways in which people do gymnastics to avoid the reality that there has never been a country as powerful as we are that has shown the Goodwill or restraint that we have. And many of the countries that are today viewed as paragons of global morality and cooperation (Nordic countries especially) are just the powerless husks of once-ruthless imperialists, fed and watered by the global power of the United States post WWII. The conversation always falls apart when the idealists are forced to identify some country that's better. They can't, because the ideology requires all things to be compared to a hypothetical. Again, everything is short-term with this argument. The jcpoa only afforded 10 years of reduced enrichment. They were allowed to build and maintain all of the facilities required to enrich to weapons grade, and the second that we pulled out the agreement, they did. And it's largely irrelevant because you've already conceded that they want a nuclear bomb. So there's really not much else to talk about. They want it, they can't have it. Everything they've done has justified our refusal, up to and including October 7th. You think it would be better for the US to allow that to happen. I don't. And I think all the hand-wringing about Trump is over-complicating his position, which is basically mine: Iran can't have nukes, and we won't trade terror funding for temporary compliance. The end. Good convo.

For the record: I was banned from the forum by Helodude for responding to personal attacks after multiple users refused to engage with sourced arguments. I'd invite anyone reading to scroll back and judge whether the tone of my posts was meaningfully different from what CH, LR, brabus, M2, and others post regularly without consequence. M2 liking DFRESH's reminder to the forum is a nice touch, given that personal attacks, or unsourced, baseless statements are a regular feature of his contributions here. M2, name one politician or member of this forum, any person that matters that ever said Iran should have nuclear weapons? Not "criticized the strategy," not "questioned the outcomes," not "doubted the rationale." Said Iran should have nukes. I'll wait. What people are actually frustrated with is an administration that can't keep its story straight. In June 2025, the program was "completely and totally obliterated." By November, the White House's own document downgraded that to "significantly degraded." In February, Witkoff said Iran was "a week away from industrial-grade bomb-making material." Days later, Trump said Iran could "soon" hit the American homeland with missiles, when the DIA's own assessment says 2035 at the earliest. Then we launched Operation Epic Fury, and Gabbard told the Senate the program had been obliterated again, while refusing to confirm it had been an imminent threat. The Director of the National Counterterrorism Center resigned over it. That's not one position. That's five, in twelve months, depending on what needed justifying that day. Pointing that out isn't advocating for a nuclear Iran. It's asking the administration to pick a story and stick to it. But sure, use an internet meme and stick to a strawman, false equivalence, and false dilemma with the 2A.

At least he missed the sidewalk.

The Air Force decision process is much like the pendulum on a clock but without the ability to remember what the pendulums location used to be or predict the future location. So, the AF just repeats history thinking it has found something new and unique.

Not to worry, I won't.

Apples and oranges... While North Korea has been a threat since 1953, tell me how many Americans have been killed as a result of that regime since? Now, how many Americans have been killed as the direct result of Iranian-sponsored terrorism since 1979? If you think Iran is less likely to use nukes (if they get them) than North Korea, please elaborate why. Yeah, North Korea is somewhat unpredictable; but I feel they are far likely to go full on stupid unless they feel the regime is threatened versus Iran who would use them (especially against Israel) for far less justifiable reasons. Iran’s leadership blends religious ideology with state strategy, which could make its decision-making less purely deterrence-based than a typical state. North Korea’s primary goal is widely viewed as regime survival above all else. Iran has a long track record of using proxies (Hezbollah, militias, etc.) that creates a scenario where escalation could occur indirectly or ambiguously. Iran operates in a densely contested region (Middle East) with multiple adversaries, frequent conflict and short missile flight times which increases the chance of miscalculation, rapid escalation and pressure to act quickly in crisis. This recent conflict with the US, and the fact that several Middle East countries are siding with the US on it, has clarified who are their allies and who are their adversaries. Overall, Iran's ideology, proxy conflict and regional instability far more increase the risk!

I know sourced arguments are a rarity and have very limited effect around here, but here goes nothing. It is a fact that they were in compliance for the duration of and slightly after Trump tore up the deal. https://www.armscontrol.org/blog/2018-06-08/iaea-report-confirms-irans-compliance-jcpoa Here’s a report from our own congress on the JCPOA: https://www.congress.gov/crs-product/R40094#_Toc205812494 “Until July 2019, all official reports and statements from the United Nations, European Union, the IAEA, and the non-U.S. participating governments indicated that Iran had fulfilled its JCPOA and related Resolution 2231 requirements.” And another one CIPAssessing The Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action Iran Dea...The JCPOA must be properly understood as working before we can attempt to understand why the Trump administration left the deal.“The record shows that Iran complied with the terms of the JCPOA.”

Yeah, just another moderate Democrat sprinting to grab the flag of moderation on a bunch of issues only after they have been settled in the court of public opinion. Where was he 2 years ago when the trans issue was burning brightly and parents were mobbing school board meetings to stamp out the ideology from their schools? Where was he when the teachers unions were keeping schools closed during covid, resulting in those math and reading scores? Where was he when Latinx wasn't the punch line of a joke but another crazy attempt to cram fake racism into every corporate budget? If he has a recent interview talking about the evils of Hamas or how the Whitehouse Ballroom project isn't fascism, maybe he's the guy. But as far as I know the only prominent Democrat in the entire country that isn't blowing in the wind of progressive ideology is Fetterman. I definitely would have lost the bet if you told me that the most rational consistent politician in Washington would be the guy recovering from a stroke. 🤣😂 I'm waiting for after Trump's presidency ends, for Democrats to suddenly realize the value of overturning Roe v Wade. Anyone notice how absent abortion is from the national discourse since that ruling?

That's pretty much everything we need to know about your position. This is exactly the Obama/Mandami/Sanders position. Call it power-guilt or whatever, but it takes an absolutely tortured view of morality, statecraft, and human nature to find the Iranian regime (both the old Mullah-led regime and the current IRGC-led regime) somehow deserving of nukes because of the most unintelligent interpretation of US and Israeli histories. It's been fascinating to watch conspiracy-susceptible (and attention whoring) conservatives like Tucker Carlson and Candace Owens fall into this rabbit hole and become indistinguishable from the progressive politicians they became famous by attacking.

*AFRC may be different, but this is from the perspective of a career ANG DSG who lived in base for both gigs. My old boss is the current 4-star Chief of the NGB, a member of the joint chiefs of staff, and he did ACSC and AWC by correspondence (SOS in-res). A squadron mate just put on a Star to work at the state level (via indispensability...woof) and I don't think he did in-residence for anything. We've had multiple pilots on various staff gigs in Hawaii, Europe and NGB and none of them did ACSC or AWC in residence. In the 20+ years I was in my ANG wing, I can't think of anyone who has been leadership in my wing, who did ACSC or AWC in-residence. The sky is the limit and in-residence likely won't change that. About the only thing I can think that in-res is good for, is that I believe it doesn't count toward your 5-years of USERRA time. So many questions that need answered to provide anything meaningful. Do you live in base for your airline gig, your mil gig or both? How far away from your 20? How old are you? How much pain are you willing to suffer just to get that 20 year pension (I say suffer because I did not enjoy full time work in the military...too much desk time)? Will your airline allow you to sneak past the 5 year point, will you be in a job that can be given a USERRA waiver? Also, best case scenario, if you can even sneak past the 5 year USERRA to get your AGR retirement, what age would you draw that vs a DSG retirement (I'm getting my DSG retirement at 57, I know others getting it at 55)? Is the lost pay at the airline worth that to you? Does momma want to be drug along to more moves while you chase these assignments? Kids? It sounds like momma wants to get settled into a forever home. For me, that would be priority #1 because if she ain't happy, it's likely you won't be either. From that viewpoint is where I'd make all future decisions. I'm a big proponent of just going DSG and flying full time at the airline. Maybe take the occasional set staff orders to Hawaii/Europe on times of your own choosing if Momma is onboard. Then again, I was always much happier as a DSG and insanely happier now that I'm out and have more free time than I know what to do with...good problem to have.

Agreed, TN blows, don’t move there. It’s the worse state in the union by far and everyone needs to quit moving there since it’s so terrible. I would never even consider moving there, especially if I had blue hair, was a trannie, a liberal, or otherwise wanted to ruin this great nation by fixing all the “right wingers”. Let that place stew in its own misery. PS: MS can have Memphis and thereby reduce crime by about 85%.