di1630

If we are dynamically targeting with a "raider" inbound to a target, I would think recce-attack interface missions with faster assets designed for strike could do it safer. I just read an F-35 guided a sea launched to target. Forgive me, I'm not well versed on the stealth bomber mission but I would assume payload is the only thing a bomber offers over a s tactical sized aircraft so I would think it'd make more sense to have 4 x stealthy fighters rather than a single large bomber for the DT stuff. I know we will spend a lot to get this bomber designed/built. I just wonder if we are once again stuck in Cold War thinking where we'll need stealth bombers to penetrate and carpet bomb a heavily IAD defended Moscow. Sent from my iPhone using Baseops Network Forums

If I could park at an FTU and avoid any 179/365, pull O-5 pay plus another (higher) bonus, I'd be tempted. Easy flying(relatively) and once you stop playing the USAF game ie. do zero effort to get promoted, win awards or go to school, break it down and it's good pay to fly. Think about it, you take away the BS competition for strats (to get a good OPR, good OG rack and stack for assignment or school push), what are you left with.....flying and an additional duty which should be simple task delegation and decision making. Most additional duties at the O-5 level can be cut huge if you are willing to actually be a leader, stop looking for your bosses approval sack-up and stand up to the system as the USAF needs (because you don't care about the aforementioned career stuff). AWC via correspondence......F-no. I'd rather watch hours of "my little pony" with my 3 yr old than waste 1/69th of a second on that crap. When I hit my ADSC, I'll see what big blue has to offer. If I don't like it, I'll walk. Simple. It's just a job and I was told by someone from Randolph that with the 11F shortage, O-5's are going to have to fly like they are O-3's......I'm happy to oblige. Sent from my iPhone using Baseops Network Forums

It's not the same but can be just as fun. Military flying is very controlled so the fun isn't whenever you want and most real good flying is prohibited by various rules. Some of the most fun I've had is in small planes. An RV-8 for example Is terrific. Military flying is not what you see in air shows. JDAM and computers have taken a lot of the fun flying out of it so it's not all BFM and dive bombing. That's not to say it can't be a blast. It's just not what you see in movies and read about in books. But other than $$, it beats what I know of being a doctor which I hear has plenty of stress and work involved. Sent from my iPhone using Baseops Network Forums

A civilian the other day asked me what a stealth bomber could do that 69x stealth cruise missiles could not. Other than range, seemed valid, I didn't have a great answer. Is pouring our cash into a new strategic bomber a great investment or a jobs program? For a force that can't afford to upgrade its much-used CAS arsenal, flies 50yr old tankers etc., seems like we could do other things. Sent from my iPhone using Baseops Network Forums

Flying fighters is the greatest job ever. Being in the USAF is the price you pay to do it. Once you figure out the game and play it accordingly, you can have a great life flying fighters. If you allow however, the USAF will take all the fun and pound you, your family, your morale and love for flying into the ground. Sent from my iPhone using Baseops Network Forums

NATO has actually done some harm since the end of the Cold War. Without a substantial threat, our European allies have really let their military readiness go to hell all willingly and over reliant on the US. The problem is, they don't know it and we aren't calling them on it. Our allies are running around in their Eurofighters and Gripens thinking they are just barely below US capes but they are FAR below, and don't know it. I'm talking every level. They don't have tanker capacity, armament capacity and are reliant on the US in most ways past getting go #1 airborne. I didn't know this until I saw it firsthand how bad they are, across the board, from the way they train, organize and if you think the F-35 is a shitshow, you should see the Eurofighter.....a $100m jet with $40m in capes. It's really, really bad. Sent from my iPhone using Baseops Network Forums

For F-cks sake, You fatty drivers are only reacting to TCAS anyway when anyone gets within 6.9nm so you can file your HATR and bust someone's balls. Sent from my iPhone using Baseops Network Forums

I've heard good things about the AM T-346. Could fill adv trainer into an armed version for light attack like the Israelis did with it. But who we kidding. Our inept leadership and system will ensure we get the most costly, best looking if only moderately capable trainer 10yrs from now. Sent from my iPhone using Baseops Network Forums

Is it a 1 yr or 2 yr CFI renewal timeline? Sent from my iPhone using Baseops Network Forums

Pooooooooorrrrrrrr leadership trying to make their mark. Also known as a USAF fast burner. Reference 6-9 years of "what's wrong with the USAF" thread. Sent from my iPhone using Baseops Network Forums

Anyone think they will try to retain via bonus guys jumping ship at 20? Has it been done in the past? I might be willing to stay a few more years to keep flying an FTU gig for some extra cash. Thoughts? Sent from my iPhone using Baseops Network Forums

Guys, if you have even a RCH inclination to volunteers for a cross flow, do it. Worst case you can go back to flying heavies when your adsc is up. I've never met a heavy > fighter cross flow who regretted it. For those thinking "But my precious career and school slot!"........F-ck that! I know a lot of former pilots/generals and not one of them ever talked about how they miss command or schools. But they tell me often how much they miss the flying and when it's over, it's over. Nobody outside big blue will ever give a shit that you were an in-res ACSC/AWC guy below the zone.....but you'll be talking about your flying stories and experiences your whole life.

Top FAIP = King turd on Shit Island.

Good words to the young guys who ask "why are all the pilots quitting...you have the best job in the world."

I own about 69 shares of a company that went bankrupt...can I write this off on my taxes?

$12B could have bought a few more F-22s I think. http://www.cnn.com/2016/09/02/politics/us-air-force-f-15-upgrades/index.html

Man, I'll be honest, flying fighters isn't what you see in the movies. Hell, it's not even what it was 15 years ago and I'll tell you why.....Technology. Don't get the idea that it's rolling in on a soviet tank in a 60 degree dive and pulling the trigger or saddling up on the 6 of a mig-29 with thrust vectoring to employ your gun. It's just not like that. I won't say it could never happen but nowadays with bombs that can guide themselves to where you are looking with your helmet mounted sight or data linked missiles....you don't need to be chuck Yeager or robin olds reincarnated to be a good fighter pilot these days with the stick and rudder skills. You will find however the successful fighter guys all have common attributes that allow them to work well as a team, problem solve, multi task, perform under pressure. The biggest thing is you have to want it. A lot of dudes want to be fighter pilots but don't understand the reality of it. Hard work, long days, kicks in the junk by your IP's...but it all pays off. It's an awesome job but again, not what you see on TV and 50 year old stories.

Everyone is hung up on flying "aptitude" when the real focus needs to be "attitude". Give me a MAF guy who really wants to fly fighters and has a kickass aggressive attitude and he/she will do fine. I've known guys in almost every fighter who cross flowed back in the day. A lot of them were badass dudes. I saw some great potential students end up in T-1s or others because of bad luck/timing. Get some of them cross flowed and they'll do just fine after some experience.

Scorpion has No gun?!?!......still almost effective as the 20mm noise cannon with limited ricochet ability in A/G missions.

You could buy all the F-35s, scorpions and A-29s you want and pair them with A-10s, RPAs, you name it. Simple fact is, we don't have an objective or strategy to win and without that, we just drop bombs to drop bombs. We would be wasting the resources no matter which jet we are employing so we might as well have F-22s doing ISR at $69k per hour. Oh, and from the rumor mill. Look for F-35s slinging whatever expensive munitions they can load on such targets as tents and parked vehicles soon to get their "combat proven" stamp. Regoddamndiculous at all levels.

We do not know what the next war looks like. We never do. It's why we have aircraft designed to be supersonic low level bombers and day-VFR air defense fighters doing low intensity CAS being led by generals who grew up thinking killing migs was the primary mission. Meanwhile after doing years of low of intensity CAS, we want to retire the jet that does it best and do it instead with a jet that costs 5x as much designed to fight the wars how we thought they'd look in 1996 when said aircraft was designed. But instead of buying planes for fighting the current war and know at likely future war (because that's a waste), we are procuring a new stealth bomber and upgrading our nukes. Priority problems? Anyone?

Anyone have a good idea for where to park $100k for 3-4years?....I need min risk of loss, really just looking to keep up with inflation until it's used for business startup money.

No, IP skills does not always equal the guy who should be leading the squadron...tactics, yes, people, no. Listen, I know a ton of great WIC grads. And I know just as many non-WIC grads who were topnotch IP's but not pushed to leadership because they didn't have a patch on their arm....even though they were the most respected flyers/leaders in their peer group. I know some dudes who went to WIC simply to pad their resumes to get further...all smart, capable pilots but lacking the natural charisma or leadership traits normally desired. Because big blue pushed their paper record, the sq's were worse off when they were in charge. Good tactical leadership in flight , poor squadron leadership. WIC grads are generally above average as a pool to choose leaders from but if they'd rather be an exec than a chief IP, find someone else for WIC. A WIC grad should spend a good chunk of their career giving back to others with their tactical education. The system is broken...when people try to justify WIC grads in exec spots to get promoted, I fear we have lost our focus.

All this patch talk goes deeper to another problem: going to WIC was never supposed to be a career enhancing milestone....it was so that an already good IP could go, get firsthand experience and bring it back to the sq. If there were enough resources, everyone would go to WIC.

Fighters are terrific overall and I've never met a fighter pilot who regretted flying them vs something else. The only bad part of flying fighters in the USAF is the USAF. I've seen a constant erosion of lifestyle fun and reward but it is still the best job in the world....just not as fun as it used to be or "could" be. Once you figure out the USAF game/system and realize the USAF needs you as an 11F more than you need it, the work drops off and the lifestyle quality dramatically increases. If you are willing to stab your bros in the back and sell your soul to climb the exec ladder into rank/school/Job etc. you will be miserable, hated or burn yourself out.