Hacker

...and when a UPT Wing Commander's job effectiveness wasn't measured using graduation rate.

As I've frequently posted, this is the annual total UPT attrition per FY (from the AF's circa 2001 study of effectiveness of UPT student selection methods). There are plenty of individual class at individual base snapshots that show extremely high attrition, but given these overall numbers there were obviously classes with substantially higher graduation percentages that offset the high numbers.

I can honestly say "it wasn't like that" in the places I was in during the mid-late 90s (both as a non-flyer and a flyer). I had CCs who actually attempted to give rudder corrections first, and mete out punishment when they had to to guys who colored outside the lines but were otherwise good folks that wouldn't leave a mark. Personally, I saw this change between 2001-2005 to the "a good leader is one who kills flies with sledgehammers" that we see currently.

That's the first intelligent fitness-related development I've seen from the USAF since 1991. As a fighter back-injury-sufferer, I could've used a little of that rather than "take some Motrin and get on the flying schedule next week".

Among all of the institutionally-biased informed and uninformed opinions on the matter, this is really the bottom line. War is an ugly business -- and it is meant to be.

Can't speak for the Growler, but when I was leaving the F-15E they were retrofitting the fleet with solid-state digital recorders that simultaneously recorded all of the displays and all the comm for debrief. Sort of a digital super-VTR. I'm sure that's what they're talking about, and not a "CVR".

Danerys has needed to hire an ALO for quite some time. Her dragon tactics have been ass for more than just this season.

Every day is a safety down day at the airlines.

Oh, no, I got your mockery of the post you quoted...I was steering that part of the convo in a different direction.

The speculation that I've heard was that there was a combination of basically spatial D and poor airmanship. The spatial D was the minor upset while IMC, perhaps with a somatogravic "head-up illusion" where the FO perceived the acceleration as a more dramatic pitch-up than what actually occurred (and requiring a more dramatic pitch-down to counter). It may have also been combined with a flight director commanding something that also didn't add up in the FO's mind. The poor airmanship was just the inability to fight through the startle effect, turn off the automation, get on the dials, and just fly the airplane. One of the 767 sim instructors I know said it was like a 4-5 second duration, full-yoke-forward input required to get to 49 degrees nose low. The only way I can see that is with the FO just basically becoming frozen by the startle effect and unable to mentally sort out what was happening. Sometimes good pilots make huge mistakes. Sometimes poor pilots make even bigger ones.

IMHO all of the AAMP videos are excellent. Saying so, especially among non-military background airline pilots, is guaranteed to generate a response.

IMHO, that summary -- if correct -- is grossly under-playing the FO's control inputs that placed the airplane (reportedly) 49 degrees nose low. That's not just a minor erroneous response to an upset.

Pictures of neat stuff that ISIS probably demolished.

Junior Short was a good fighter pilot and a good Squadron CC back when I flew with him. Yet another lost to the General Officer lobotomy.

Just like two years of Trump-Russia conspiracy theory tv coverage pumping out more smoke than a Saturn V rocket launch.