Toro

Your base are all belong to us

Do not see The Mummy. I wasn't terribly impressed by the trailer, but I followed the wife to it skeptically. The first 20 minutes is military-centric and is so ridiculously implausible that it ruined the rest of the movie. F- , zero points, I want my money back. Sent from my iPad using Baseops Network Forums

I wanted this to be professional, efficient, adult, cooperative. Not a lot to ask. Alas, your Mr. hatedont did not see it that way... so he won't be joining us for the rest of his life. Yes, that was a new account, and apparently created by the same person who created two others prior (which he stopped using after getting shit on). He has been put into permanent time out.

SNAPs get what's coming to them. This would have been collateral damage.

Three day weekends and holidays are probably your best bet, and plan on you doing most of the travelling. Meeting up in San Antonio isn't too bad of a drive for him, and San Antonio has an airport if you can fly. If you really want to stick together after UPT, start looking at AFSCs that will let you transfer to wherever he's stationed because an 8 hour drive is probably optimistic in the future.

Well I was being somewhat tongue-in-cheek, but if you insist... My personal experiences with safe spaces is limited since I haven't lived there in two decades, but my TV and internet still work, so I know that they exist at UC Berkeley, UC San Diego, UC Santa Cruz and many other locations. Schools that have historically been the poster children for free speech and expression now suppress free speech and expression if it there is potential that it could offend. Adam Carolla and Denis Prager have started a documentary after being cancelled at universities for just discussing the matter. Safe spaces didn't exist when I was growing up in California, but I saw plenty of examples of what is now becoming commonplace in terms of suppressing anything that the (leftist) norm disagrees with. Only hours after the Gulf War campaign was announced, I walked home through a massive march of "Peace Protesters" who were the absolute opposite of peaceful. My high school had a weekly free speech debate on various topics, and the two absolute outcasts were a Christian fundamentalist and a military brat who were routinely booed from the platform. One of my high school friends enlisted in the army after the Gulf War kicked off, and when I walked with him in public in his uniform, I saw him get heckled by random people on the street. The students at my college tried to shut down the ROTC program because they thought it bred baby killers. The list goes on, and while I'm know it's not indicative of everybody in California, it's absolutely a sample size.

Having lived in California for my first 22 years and Texas for a total of nine (including the last six), I wholeheartedly disagree with this. If you're talking about environmentals and landscape, California wins unless you're into miserably hot and dusty yellow. Austin is a rare exception, but it's more like California because of the culture than the landscape. Now if you're talking about the people, Texas wins hands down unless you like hanging out with a bunch whiny little bitches who don't want you to infringe on their safe space.

Holy shit if that's not the pot calling the kettle black.

I'll have whatever you're drinking.

The best thing you can do when trying to educate people on the meaning of Memorial/Veterans day is to not be a dick. I see way to many people slamming on folks who don't understand, while not actually doing something to educate them. The prime example is this condescending asshole: http://video.foxnews.com/v/4914517757001. He has done this many times. In all the time he has spent making people look dumb, he has spent zero time making people smarter. Don't be like this dick.

Hit or miss. The only GO who I have for frame of reference for this question is Mark "Grace" Kelly, a previous Sq/CC who actually refutes my point. If you look at his bio, the reason he counters this stereotype is right there in his duty history. Save for one year at ACSC, he flew for the first 20 years of his career. I was constantly impressed at his tactical proficiency when he was my Sq/CC. He would develop completely non-standard CT sorties to get us to go out and try new and challenging tactics. I remember sitting in the bar and listening to him talk about his Aussie F-18 exchange tour and he was drawing out schematics to the Hornet's radar on a bar napkin - from a system he hadn't used for five years. He is the exception, not the norm. Too many of the young officers who are fast tracked for leadership commit to that objective at the expense of tactical proficiency. For them, the queep takes priority over 3-1 and meetings take priority over flying. Without a solid foundation, there isn't much to build on, and when you take them out of the cockpit for years on end, the result is somebody who needs an experienced handler whenever he goes to fly.

Having instructed Senior Officer requalification courses in the Strike Eagle, I can say this is almost entirely false.

There's a difference between fake news (FB trash) and media sources that lean towards an agenda. Sadly, I think there are few if any truly unbiased news sources these days, so it has become a requirement to read/watch everything critically. Anybody who whole-hog believes everything that their source offers without at least considering (not necessarily agreeing with) opposing sources is a fool. I subscribe to several news sources and leading up to the election I was disgusted by the WaPo's level of Trump bashing because, separated from politics, they have had excellent investigative journalism pieces. What is sad is that the free press is what makes much of our government accountable to the people, but we're at the point where we only believe what suits us. To watch people who deny stories about Trump because they don't believe the news source - while Trump himself is tweeting in confirmation of those actions - is just mind boggling. 100% valid, but this is where the problem lies with Trump. I'm doubtful that the specific details of the conversation in question will ever be known, but I don't think this was a cognizant action by Trump. In other words, I don't think Trump was briefed on code-word classified info provided by the Israelis, to which he then turned around and said, "I'm gonna give this to the Russians." I imagine that he handled this discussion like he does any other discussion; he doesn't stick to script, he improvises (poorly), and he likes to throw in tidbits of data that he has heard from here and there to sound like he has a solid grasp of his point. I can imagine him saying, "Listen, we're gonna crush ISIS. We've been tracking them for a while and we know that they've got plans to do XYZ on commercial airplanes. We're gonna stop it. It's gonna be great." Meanwhile the guys in the room are looking around nervously because this on the talking points. The president's staff shouldn't have to go into damage control this often in response to what he says or tweets.

It's a decent idea, but a Reddit blast won't answer what's needed at your unit. One of my jobs at my last assignment was Wg/DS, where I had around 20 folks (mostly enlisted) assigned to me. A couple days after I took over, I pulled every single one of those people into my office individually for a few minutes to chat about them and to ask questions similar to that Reddit post. I got some pretty damn good ideas from one and two-stripers who had been in the office longer than I had been on the base, but they had never thought to offer them up. After our talk, an A1C told me that not only had she never been in the DS office, but the two previous DSs hadn't so much more to her than "Hello" and "Good Bye" on a daily basis. That is the problem with leadership. At least the author of the Reddit post is making an effort to look down in the trenches rather than up the chain of command.

Sheppard has its own IFF squadron. The squadron is not backed up per se, they have a timeline just like other IFF units and are obliged to stay on the timeline. The larger issue is the pipeline as a whole and the choke point is generally the FTUs. Guys graduating UPT on a fighter track in the same class may have IFF classes that are months apart, and guys graduating from Sheppard might end up going to Randolph while Columbus guys come to Sheppard. It's all about aligning the dates to their FTUs, not necessarily finishing on a first come basis.

Much more of a passive observer these days, but said offender aggravated enough people to get the thread reported to all the mods.

All bitches, dudes, bros, FGOs and wiggers go back to your corners. cantfly is in time out, redirect all bitching towards the AF.

I doubt you'd get a waiver for an incentive flight, but the medical process for an incentive is nowhere near as in depth as a Class 1. A Flight Doc would have to say for sure, but everything is good now, I wouldn't think it would be an issue. Ejection seat aircraft do incentive rides all the time.

In PIT?

Keep pushing. One of these days I'll just get annoyed enough to tell it....

Are you a C17 guy? Travis is the only base I can think of in the Bay Area, and even that is more than an hour away. They won't send you somewhere that you aren't eligible to perform your duties. You can claim it as your home of record when you retire and have them do your last move to that area. EFMP will be your other issue with PCSing. It will limit the number of locations you can be based.

Redshift is now in time out. You may now resume rational discussion. ETA: I've left his original post and responses to that post, but deleted all subsequent posts and responses to those posts. As you were...

I don't entirely disagree with you, I guess I'm biased towards my own history. I consider myself fortunate enough to have had a great 19.5 year career; never really had a bad assignment, all of which but one were flying. But those last six months went downhill quick and led to me seven day opting and rescinding my son's GI Bill so I could get out before Big Blue tried to fuck up my fun factor and potentially post-AF flying chances by sending me to a non-flying job. A lot of fighter guys are leaving because even though they love their flying, they're sick of Big Blue not letting them fly enough - again, not MDS specific. That was 100% the case for me, and I punched.

The pilots leaving are doing so across all MDSs, which shows that the problem is systemic and not related to any particular airframe, but a clueless leadership. If anything, your devil's advocacy proves my point - the lifestyle problems *might* change and retention could improve, but that's a crapshoot. Next year, tankers will still be refueling, Hawgs will still be strafing, and the Vipers will still Bingo out of the fight early.

Deployment rates, manning, training requirements, TDY types and locations, and other issues that drive quality of life are easily subject to change. Aircraft missions are not.