Muscle2002

Civilian leadership is absolutely setting the conditions to make it nearly impossible to hold blatant and wanton lapses in airmanship accountable. All anyone will have to do is post on social media to garner attention from on high, say, "But the public loved it!" and "What about the Blue Angels", thereby garnering a public pardon of sorts. I would not want to be a commander right now if a true case of buffoonery occurred.

Yes, this conflict has been a tactical success so far. The Joint Force has shown that rhetoric matches reality. However, tactical success must convey strategic meaning, as Colin Gray would write. I'm not sure we can have strategic success if the objectives keep changing and the Administration cannot convey the necessity of this conflict to the body politic.

True, but the reason the aircraft was lost was not enemy activity or engagement.

To be clear, my post was sarcasm embodied. I shared merely to highlight the rampant hypocrisy of the “unbiased” press.

Now, the media "does" its job.

It's not cancer-related, but I did not think the link warranted a separate thread. It's interesting but not surprising that more of these stories are coming to light. https://www.nytimes.com/2024/12/08/us/navy-pilot-brain-injury-topgun.html?unlocked_article_code=1.f04.Wr3y.VkX0hUK8HMLz&smid=url-share

I suspect most CAF aircrews do not even have lakebed runways in their crosscheck. When I flew Green Flag missions in R-208, we talked about Edwards as a divert option, with its two main runways, but spoke nary a word about lakebed landings. Lakebed landings are not something people think about, except for the Hawg. Remember, Mountain Home made a big deal about landing on a taxiway. https://www.mountainhome.af.mil/News-Photos-Videos/Article-Display/Article/3681602/gunfighters-complete-operation-garrison-forward-phase-one/

Doing so would require a waiver of the law by SecDef. https://uscode.house.gov/view.xhtml?req=granuleid:USC-prelim-title10-section9321&num=0&edition=prelim

In theory, the problem you described of transnational problem sets was addressed by Gen Durnford's efforts to change the law and make CJCS the global integrator. However, while the title sounds great in practice, the CJCS still has next-to-no authority and can only advise. The real global integrator is SecDef since he issues EXORDs that dictate how forces are allocated during the force management process.

It is almost certain that he would only fly a fighter during the course and then go back to heavies for his test assignments.

Yes, this process is still followed with minor tweaks. Your Record of Performance, Flight Evaluation Folder, application statement and recommendations, interview, and in-flight performance at Edwards determine your overall score, with the first three determining if you are invited to the interview.

That may be why there are rumors swirling around that Gen Berger will get the nod for CJCS because of his willingness to upset the apple cart in his approach to “Force Design.”

Even now, we have GOs and senior O6s with less than four years of command time. I know a few who did a quick one-year squadron command tour, followed later with a one-year wing vice commander stint, and then wing command.

The Marines allow members to substitute their PFT run with a rowing machine above age 45.

The DAF just released a new policy governing body composition effective April 2023. No more waist measurements. Now, it’s waist-to-height ratios. The first measurement will be non-retributive. Afterwards, not meeting the required ratio “will be considered a failure to meet standards and will require enrollment in a formal self-directed BCIP that may result in consideration for administrative action, including separation for continued failures.” https://www.af.mil/News/Article-Display/Article/3262830/department-of-the-air-force-outlines-new-body-composition-program-for-airmen-gu/