busdriver

Not on HH-60s, we do have something similar to the HUD tapes on fighters, but you have to turn it on manually.

Air conditioning? Pansies.

Wasn't the Hog designed so that a gear up landing wouldn't cause much damage?

Freddie, another interesting read is "Shooting to Live" by Fairbairn and Sykes. They advocated the 1911 over larger calibers (like the .455 Webley) due to being a semi-auto. They felt that volume of fire was important, basically saying you should be shooting in bursts so that your handgun approximates a machine pistol. (paraphrased, but close to their words)

I just finished reading the FBI's handgun wounding paper. ( yes I know I should have read it a long time ago ) What I found interesting was that I drew a different conclusion about caliber selection than M2. He rightly found that a .45 is better than a 9mm or .40 in a single shot scenario. I got out of that report that all handgun rounds are so pathetic that the real answer is multiple hits. What I decided was that with my 9mm, I get more shots faster and more accurately.

Based on the timeline of when it will "replace" the A-10, I'm inclined to think it isn't. The A-10 is simply going to go away and the Air Force will finally be rid of the hated Hog. <-Cynic

I can only assume this was one of the tanker crews near where we were landing: Assumed comment: "I could fly a helo, looks like fun." Actual comment on ground: "Yeah I'd be fun for a few months, but can you imagine flying that thing in the desert? All the heat and sand, flying around at 500 feet, FUUUCK YOU, I want to be at 25 thousand feet."

As mentioned above, the Marines need the B model to operate off their little ships. As to the JSF replacing the Hog, good luck performing the Sandy mission. JSF as Sandy basically means Rescue must self escort.

it's officially time to move the damn CAOC back to the states. Who's up for a 365 to Tampa?

you guys don't have a NPA tube in your IFAK?

Caveman: No one with a half a brain would stand toe to toe with us now is only because we pose a credible threat. If we do not continue to advance we will pose less and less a threat, until the incentive to shut up and color won't be there anymore. On the other hand, I agree that most of the wars we will fight in the future will not be full up industrial scale conventional conflicts and we need to focus some attention on small unconventional wars. As to the cost of the F-22 and stealth. I don't really think the two are as directly connected as some people imply. A modern fighter with all the avionics of the Raptor would cost very close to what the Raptor costs. The basic shape hasn't changed much since the prototype, so I'm led to believe that the stealth aspect is a pretty known commodity, the avionics and software development is what I would think costs so damn much. But I don't really know, I'm just speculating. EDIT: for grammar

I hadn't noticed any difference in bolt size. I'm not sure I understand what you're talking about re: bolt bounce. A description would help. I do know that the piston guns have a problem with the BCG tilting due to the moment created by the piston on the "gas key." HK solved it by adding pads to the aft lower end of the bolt carrier.

The good idea fairy is just people looking to write something on their OPR/EPR. You can't very well write "Everything was working great, so I just let it keep working!"

Gotta agree

Not married myself, but here's another option: Do the justice of the peace thing, then move to where you need to go, bring the new spouse. Once you get settled, plan the grand ceremony and do it right. It gives you the advantage of staying together and getting your new family on uncle sugar's books while giving you time to plan.

For those of you who haven't seen a PMAG, the follower is designed so that it cannot tilt and the plastic feed lips are very strong. I haven't had the chance to test this myself, but I read an internet test report from a guy who left one loaded his entire deployment (army style) only unloading it by shooting and it fed perfectly the entire year. This was a pre-production example as well. EDIT: I have a few, but only had 2 trips to the range to test them. So my personal experience isn't enough to go on.

Look up the ADC piston system. The initial test guy put something like 5000 rounds through it without cleaning, no FTF or FTE ever. The AR still has small parts/springs that make it prone to failure. However, a piston system while easier to clean also heats the BCG less (very little actually) so those little springs (extractor) are less prone to failure. Will the AR DESIGN be as reliable as the AK DESIGN with the addition of the piston? Probably not. The AK was designed so that inferior craftsmanship would affect it less. Also, many AR problems are due to magazines. EVERY AR failure I've ever had was due to a GI mag, PMAGs do wonders. That said, AKs are not immune to problems. A friend was involved in Iraqi advising, training helo guys. They would receive shipments of AKs and he said they often had to combine 2 or 3 AKs to make one good reliable weapon. Granted some of this was piss poor quality control that sometimes meant missing parts! But for an equal quality AR, an AK will always be less expensive. On the other hand, if you deploy with an AR, you should probably train with one. EDIT for spelling

MY EYES, ZE GOGGLES ZEY DO NOZING

Where is this not having to deploy coming from?

My contention was with the "Nonpecuniary Considerations Affecting Air Force Pilot Retention." Specifically the points that increasing the number of pilots to reduce ops tempo would adversely affect readiness, proficiency and capability. In the final portion of that section you make the point that a longer commitment helps create a more stable force, yet we've only just started into the gap between 8 year and 10 year opportunity to get out. Based purely on the original purpose of ACP, you're right the Airlines aren't the great deal they once were and ACP isn't really needed. On the other hand, we don't really know what the effects of broader ops tempo increases AF wide will be until 2010. The brunt of extended deployment burden is being born by pilots not yet eligible to get out. But based on the hit the heavy community took from VSP, there is plenty of discontent to go around.

Dude, tail wheels aren't the in-conquerable beast that many claim. I'm sure a tail wheel helo is a bit different, but still....

His first proposition is probably correct, there is not a large threat of the airlines pulling away fixed wing pilots. That said, AFPC's VSP bungle hemorrhaged mid level IP types from multiple heavy communities. So we might have a new gap in experience. That said he makes the claim that two policies have resulted in a more stable pilot force: More pilots produced out of UPT -So this may help deployment rates, except out commitments have gone up since the plus up occurred in 2000. -On the topic of more pilots to reduced ops tempo, we shouldn't forget that more pilots either means more aircraft to keep them proficient, or less flight time. We all know we aren't getting more aircraft, get used to flying a sim I guess. Longer commitment (10 years starting in 2000) -Since 2010 hasn't gotten here yet, know one knows how this change will affect the stability of the pilot force. Typical myopic AFPC type thinking. Didn't we predict this same logical failing would be used to support killing the ACP? For someone with so many degrees, he made some awfully obvious mistakes.

I will pistol whip the next mother fucker who says Reynold's number, and god help you if you bring up Laplace transforms.

You forgot scorching grass LZs in that dust out I'm not sayin, I'm just sayin

I feel left out of the poo flinging, so I'll add this... If you can't hover, you're queer. Go helos, you'll sleep better at night knowing that you are a superior pilot, better looking and over all a better human being than those stuck wing weirdos.