tac airlifter

I don't know anything about BREXIT but if China, POTUS and John Oliver think it's bad..... I'm probably in favor of it. Also: TEXIT NOW!

TT, I was expecting that reply. But we've treated these expanding wars as a sideshow for years, to our national detriment. The USAF is leading the preponderance of KS activity. We don't get a pass on the outcome. Vietnam was a war plan authored with fail above our level, but we still have tons of L2 about our own failed implementation practices. If we're being tasked incorrectly, and we are, where are the GOs advocating better usage? It's a cop out to blame politicians when our leaders are the ones championing shitty practices. Where is the AT-6 or equivalent? Where is the advocacy for better intel analysis practices? Where is the equitable distribution of work load? Why do I see so many O4/5's who haven't deployed at all while others have done a 1-1 for a decade? we suck, and it's our fault. Until we have done everything in our power to be better, it's wrong to blame politicians. Yes, building a Jeffersonian democracy in a culture thousands of years entrenched in tribalism is stupid. Where are the GOs saying that? I could go on and on, from streamlining the strike approval process to ending dumb ass wasteful 365's, to constantly sending brand new know nothing BPZ never deployed types to command units downrange allowing them to check the command box without ever judging the merit of their work. WTF are we doing? From strategy to administrative implementation, we suck. The line guys are kicking ass. The institution is failing. And there is value in saying that fact, because until we acknowledge our failures we can't hope to fix anything. It's past time for us all to be on the same page: we are losing wars, the enemy is gaining ground, and it's our fault. So what do we do about it?

You can be a sitting WG CDR at 24 years as an IPZ guy your whole career. AFSOC just had one picked up for a star. The problem isn't the math, it's the erroneous assumption that BTZ is required to compete for GO. di1630s post was so incredibly spot on. The facts are undeniable after 15 years of losing wars: we suck. Much like an alcoholic must first admit they have a problem, our force, at every level, needs to accept the reality that we are not accomplishing the tasks set before us. There should be a firestorm of debate about why, and a willingness to examine and scrap all aspects of our institution that have brought us defeat. Instead no one is talking about this, they all want to preserve the system that did them a solid despite the fact we are failing. The careerists all keep chugging along "mentoring" younger people to be like them. Disgusting.

I was told Monday.

I've never understood this. Why is this a huge secret until the official day? Anyway, yes commanders have it and some already told their folks.

I totally agree, and said almost exactly that in my end of course feedback.

I'm not an ASG guy, but since no one else answered you I'll try. But take it with a grain of salt. My impression is that ASG programs, especially SAASS, select people who already have a record indicative of O-6 or higher potential. Then they advertise that their grads go on to high ranks, but there's a bit of "chicken and the egg" with those claims because the candidates likely would have been successful without the extra year. Ergo, to increase your chances of being selected for SAASS, do all the things you would normally do to have good paperwork, then arrive at your IDE and apply. For ACSC, volunteering for MDOS will help your chances, being a PAS guy will hurt your chances. My impression only!

Keep it that way and you will easily recover. Although this will always be on your record, there are lots of dudes who stay in great shape with a single failure chalked up to some freakish event. If you demonstrate consistent excellent scores, this will be a minor blip and a good L2 you can share with young guys when it's your turn to give advice.

Ragged: good advice above. I totally understand how this could happen, unfortunately we live in a time of exaggerated repercussions for this singular event. Are you someone who normally struggles with PT, or do you typically score an excellent? I highly recommend you rearrange your entire schedule and prioritize PT. No one will care that you were second in your UPT class if you are borderline on PT, so knock the retest out of the park and never let this be an issue again. Anecdote: my SQ commander failed a PT test, but he was a guy who normally scored excellent and had a hernea in the middle of the test. Freakish event, but he was told to get an excellent on the retest or expect to be fired. Kick ass on the next one bro, start scoring excellent and you can mostly recover (although this will never go away). Fail another one or have a record of barely scraping by and unfortunately it will be a huge negative discriminator for you that will definitely override however good you are at flying. Good luck!

Tanner Higgens Matthew Roland Ryan Hall Till Valhalla, we remember.

Would that location be a practical one to convert into a PCS assignment? I recall that discussion regarding the deid, but I would never want to PCS my family there.

Valid. Too bad they can't just station folks there instead of doing 6 month deployments to train.

Can families come to Guam?

What's your platform? ADO is awesome in most.

Designated hitter would solve that issue. Stateside bases could still be on shift for it; I'd volunteer for that. FYI, I did volunteer for RPAs at CVS just to stay ops & fend off staff. Denied. Honestly, all of these minor issues have solutions, it's all about priorities. If the AF cared enough to fix the RPA world, they could. But they don't care. They care about F35s and the future war with China which will never happen.

If all forms of review are flawed, what do you suggest?

I don't understand that statement. 2niner: I also signed the 20 year bonus. I like flying, and even though staff is awful I think I have a good chance of flying again. I'm not interested in the airlines, I like my AF mission. Also, ANG has no appeal to me. Just figure out who you are and what you like, then pursue that. Hard when you're young. If I could do it all over again while keeping the knowledge I've gained, I would be a WO in the 160th. I am glad GC posts on this board; arguing with him is fruitless. His opinions are the unvarnished versions of opinions I hear from GO's routinely. it's good he is so forthright; expect that attitude from all your senior AF management, but normally obfuscated by platitudes. Forewarned is forearmed. I have no illusions about the cowards running our AF. I chose to stay because no where else affords me the opportunity to kill AQ/IS; and although our organization doesn't value that, I do.

You know that not everyone who goes in-res wants to, right? About 30% of the folks at ACSC have told me they also would have prefered an option to decline while staying in the service; one girl even asked Gen Welsh why they force people to go in-res who don't want it. I went third look, with my only other choice being 7 day opt. I don't want to do that, because I still believe in the value of my mission. I'll suffer through staff for a chance to go back to ops. FYI, I volunteered for RPAs to stay in ops. Denied. wolfpack: good call and good luck.

AFG pilots are trained to employ. A better question is who lazed in the weapons. Or who cleared the strike and under what ROE.

Lawman, have you actually taken a course with a bullpup or been trained on them? I ask because training might assist surmounting the obstacles you mention. The Aussies seem to reload their AUGs at the same speed our guys do, as does the IDF. So I'm wondering if the idea of faster reloads using conventional designs is more a training issue than indicative of inherent design superiority. I don't know. besides, I'm not planning to deploy with it. It's for fun shooting with my son and maybe HD..... Hopefully a full speed combat reload isn't required for either scenario! Also, my "full speed combat reload" is probably slower than my "which end do I stick in? Hmmm I wonder if it's all the way seated.... Oops, guess not" range reload speed. its supposed to have a 4-5 lbs trigger pull from a factory upgrade, it's one of the reasons I waited for this vice buying the Tavor. And my son can shoulder it, whereas he struggles with my other rifles (although I did buy an AR pistol for him, he of course never "shoulders" it as the ATF would not approve). Also, at least agree that it looks like fun! I need you to help me justify this!

Sure, and sorry for the delay. In Iraq circa 2006/7 the Army's #1 airlift request was getting stuff flown into Taji. There was a lot of fighting around Taji. I did a bunch of -130 deployments to Balad, and one day I happened to be the guy picked to fly the AMC/CC around the AOR. I asked him why we weren't flying into Taji, being that Army commanders at LSA Anaconda (Balad) were always asking us the same question, being told to call AMD, and subsequently being told no. He told me that he owned the pushback against authorizing us to fly into Taji, and he was extremely proud of it. Army helos were regularly taking SAFIREs IVO Taji, and he believed he was protecting his people (me) by denying the request. "Why would I make you fly somewhere unsafe?" But the Army had to resupply and operate out of Taji. It's in the heart of the Sunni triangle and at the time, security in that area was crucial to US strategy. Because AMC refused to fly into Taji, the task was left to Army helos and ground convoys. They are significantly more vulnerable to attack. It's pretty hard to hit a herc on a Pen-D with an RPK. It's not hard to use an EFP on some 21 year old kid driving truck #23 of a huge convoy. By embracing risk aversion for his fleet that AMC commander put more people in greater risk. Stated another way: his risk aversion didn't actually decrease risk, it merely forced another to accept it. And the people forced to accept it were far more susceptible to the dangers. When I pointed this out, I was completely blown off with a sarcastic comment about how his priority was my safety..... Etc.. It's a foul philosophy. There's absolutely nothing special about me and I'm sure a lot of dudes reading this have similar tales; but I hope this story illustrates the principal I was attempting to convey.

I'm considering an X95. Never owned a bull pup, but I find the concept intriguing.

Assuming that person is allowed to carry off base, why not let them carry on base? And how exactly do you propose to protect us against the random nut jobs who carry illegally? This whole "cold light of reality" thing is nonsense. You have no idea who is carrying next to you legally or illegally off base, and no idea who is carrying illegally next to you on base. That's the cold reality: you have no idea who is doing what. So why make rules that only responsible people will follow, to their detriment? Your attitude is irresponsible.

who is fingers?

Richmond is plan B if I can't find a good outfit in Norfolk area.