busdriver

This is true. I have three SA 1911/2011s, one is a TRP from 2015 timeframe. The fit is good, so is the accuracy. I shot it a lot. I also have a stainless range officer that is very loose (from day one), and was terrible accuracy wise and a Prodigy that was also terrible (after the Cerakote wore off). Mileage may vary.

At the risk of being told "no shit": Kimber warranty service is terrible. I bought a long slide 10mm double stack 1911 (DS Warrior LS) mainly since a 6 inch barreled 2011 in 10mm seems comically fun. But their new 2011s seemed to be getting good reviews, so I figured I'd give em a try. It didn't run. over the course of 100 rounds, it would three point jam once per magazine (maybe 2 out of 3 magazines) give or take. So I RMA'd it. They found a feed ramp that was not in spec and said the pistol woul need a new barrel, and I would have to pay for it (no chance). Their justification was "the modification/polishing apparent on the barrel is not consistent with any work we perform at the factory." On the phone the rep said it would never have got out of their (paraphrase) looking like that. Basically, they don't make mistakes. I had the gun store verify with the distributer that the gun was in fact new, and hadn't been a test gun or something. Brand new. So basically one of their techs fucked this thing up, and QC missed it, and I'm left holding the bag. Since they will never get another dime of my money, I'll probably spend a bunch more to get a legit smith to build something cool. So don't buy Kimber. They're just as shit as ever. Que the "no shit sherlock" responses. I deserve them.

Ah yes, the "skin on the line" defense. The second cousin of the wookie defense.

Van Dyke was charged with “unlawful use of confidential government information for personal gain, theft of nonpublic government information, commodities fraud, wire fraud, and making an unlawful monetary transaction.” Semantics aside, my point stands.

Of a sort, yes.

Insider trading and fraud. Classified info or not, this is pretty clear cut.

Just to clarify for the heavy guys: Fighter RTMs all have 96 sorties. So two sorties per week, over a 48 week training year. So they calendar determines the size of the pie. It was a big "ah-ha" moment for me when I figured that out. That's about what we were talking about at ACC back then.

Hogs have a BFM requirement now. The RTM is a zero sum game, put something in, you must take something out.

Transitioning the remaining A-10 units to F-16 would be the way. But given how dumb we can be, it wouldn't surprise me if they push those squadrons to F-35, and then convert a handfull of C-130 units to F-16s. But realistically this will slow roll until the current Bob's are out of the seats; and then instutional mono-mania will set back in and all focus will be on NGAD.

The answer back then was guard Vipers, and a few AD TASS units (Nellis, Korea, and maybe Spang?) for advocacy reasons. I don't think the plan made it out of the A3 before the A-10 got saved again though. The giant problem is the RTM. There isn't enough room to do a like for like transition without almost completely dropping air to air, which was a non-starter for the F-15E.

Your last sentence is what gives me pause. Chopping assets in a manner not much different than push CAS seems a different animal than planning stand off munition waves. Mainly requiring a release of assets much earlier. Quibbles aside, I would think the other speed bump that would need to be sorted is who buys the munitions. SOCOM bought tends to be forbidden fruit for the CAF (laser SDB). I'd think the optimum Jiu Jitsu move would be to get Big Blue (probably through the Guard) to buy the desired munitions for NGB Vipers (or whatever) to free up the allocation process and money streams. Assuming I'm remembering my staff time correctly and there haven't been changes.

CH, what's your take on AFSOC tasking outside the TSOC bubble? I remember the unleash the gunships article from years back, but it always seems to come back to funding and SOCOM's penny packet. Is there a realistic future where CFACC target taskings via ATO would actually flow to a TSOC asset? I like the idea, I'm just a bit cynical I suppose.

Blockade on Iranian ports starts tomorrow. "What the President means is...."

Conservative estimate.

Probably. I'm of the impression that it's a foregone conclusion, all indications from big blue pointed (over the last 5-6 years) in that direction. This could very well be the thing to re-light the fire. Fucking good work everyone. TOML