Leaderboard

Those fighters are just doing their best impressions of a KC-135 during a coronet.

So just offer 10 days of 'marriage leave' or 'honeymoon leave' to anybody that gets married, regardless of orientation. I'm sure there are lots of hetero couples that would like to travel home for their weddings to be married in the presence of friends and family. After all, if we're striving for equality, shouldn't the rules apply to everyone?

They broke the day before.

Holy crap...as far as I can tell, this is actually a pretty damn good idea. Base gyms to be open 24/7 Summary: On commander approval, gyms will stay open 24/7, with access via CAC and security cameras in place. Surely, something or somebody will f*** this up.

You still have towels?

Works for me. May have to limit it...your leave turns into regular leave if you come back unmarried, you only get it every five years, etc. (gonna have to wait on that third marriage).

The new approach lights installed at San Francisco International Airport after the Asiana Crash...

Looks horrible.

https://www.af.mil/News/ArticleDisplay/tabid/223/Article/466762/bagram-pilots-save-60-soldiers-during-convoy-ambush.aspx I think this article is a good argument against yous guys advocating for a total RPA air force

Certainly not a dig at you, chim but just want to expand. Sure there are "some" limitations to RPA's. For example, if the wind shifts and you need to change runways, you may as well scrap the mission because it becomes a f#$king nightmare to change the taxi plan, not to mention, shutting down the rest of the airfield, and royally pissing off ATC who is clearing the airspace for this POS. (I can't speak for all RPA's, just one particular I had the pleasure of working with...) I guess that would be a limitation. Don't forget if the WX is less than VMC, there is a chance of an icy cloud or turbulence, mission is done. That seems like a limitation. The whole permissive environment thing comes to mind but that's been beaten to death. As long as we keep our conflicts with shitheads with livestock, mopeds, and IED's, we'll do fine with more RPA's. If you call "very capable" able to stay airborne for 22 hours with broke ass sensors getting shitty (or no) imagery that costs more than the manned version with a fraction of the product quality and reliability, then yes, I guess you could call them "very capable." Just my thoughts. Not a dig at RPA drivers at all. I do get that there are certain things that the RPA brings to the table that is an awesome compliment to the manned platforms. What drives me effen nuts is that Big Blue is subscribing more and more to the idea that RPA's could be the answer to everything.. Not true... never will be.

Good discussion so far! I prefer these threads than BODN politics nonsense, so thanks for the thoughtful reply. No, I'm no longer an airlift guy, that was a previous life. I've been a manned tactical ISR guy the past 5 years, so I'm pretty qualified to say no, "any ISR mission currently undertaken by a manned platform" will be soon accomplished by RPAs is false. We are an order of magnitude in technological development away from that. I appreciate RPAs, so don't take this as a dick measuring thing; but they are not even close to performing at a level required to take away manned ISR. We can agree to disagree here, because the examples I'd cite to prove my point aren't for a public forum. Moving on..... "once safety is assured" may be a long damn time. And whats the difference between a single pilot monitoring the computer and a single pilot? To keep a pilot there doesn't prove your point at all. I see no advantage to RPA passenger planes. right, they are. So, one might even say 'major things will have to change before the technology is ready for prime time." I always hear R&D guys talk about what is imminently about to happen, because they deal in a world of capability. In ops, we realize a technical theoretical potential isn't a true capability until you have proven it & can reliably replicate it. These 'evolutions in capability' that you gloss over are major issues that have resulted in mission fail on numerous occasions. Technical issues, but also user issues like the ability to keep crosshairs on target. copy, so how's that RQ-4 working out compared to the U2 lately? Again, a plane that doesn't exist and another one that sucks as examples really proves my point (namely, that this isn't ready to take over manned aircraft) instead of yours. current developments aren't operational capabilities. I never said RPAs were shitty planes and not worth our effort, quite the opposite. But you're right that I'm right... This has a long ways to go before its ready for prime time. Your assertion that NAS approval is the only thing preventing this technology from spreading like herpes to every corner of the world is false. The technological problems, the cost versus benefit, etc are preventing this from exploding. they already have clearance to fly in mixed airspace deployed, and yet your assertions aren't even on the AO way ahead slides, so agree to disagree. Again, this is a good discussion so please don't think I'm being an asshole; I prefer discussions and wouldn't waste my time with an argument here. But frankly I disagree with your POV. There are numerous other issues I haven't touched on holding RPAs back, like the massive footprint and personnel requirement to support a single orbit. T overall I think there is a bright future for this relevant and important technology, I just don't think it's so bright that it will plume out the pilot career.

You mean the same folks that in the 90s were saying we'd be flying hypersonic fighters on the edge of space that used directed energy weapons by now? How'd that work out? Don't get me wrong. RPAs have done outstanding work, and will continue to grow in complexity and capability. But as many have pointed out, there remain a ton of obstacles to overcome before we're ready for Skynet to take over our battles for us. Predicting that we'll overcome all of them in the next 15 years? Ballsy move, Cotton....

I don't buy the part in the trailer where the F-35 is IOC...

"What Exactly Is It You Do Again?: C-130 Navigators in OIF" Note: This is not a real book.

Talk to BQZips mom, apparently she's taught lots of dudes crab fishing.

I remember the worst standup I ever saw: 99-12 if memory serves me. We went through the entire class on an EP the instructors knew was difficult, but not that tough. Antonius...sit down. Antuna...sit down. Harrison...sit down. Penewit...sit down. Haskin...sit down. If I remember correctly, it was Eaglin who finally pulled through. Sound familiar?