Leaderboard

Get your ATP.

I believe this explains everything when it comes to the Navy and this unfortunate situation:

Probably can’t fight it. Not a career ender. I’ve known multiple Q3 recipients go on to be great IP’s and Commanders. Get your story tight for the airline interviews. Don’t dwell on it. Sent from my iPhone using Baseops Network mobile app

Copy all and was surprised that they did not seem to know about the various turbos that AFSOC has that could perform this mission. Yeah, we kinda already have this capabilty (small on-demand airlift) but not integrated as part of conventional operations. I think that is what they were hinting at, airlift capability directly tasked by the customer vice customer putting a request into an AMD and waiting to see when they will get airlift for the small, high priority widget or party to travel between close to moderately separated locations. How much is enough or necessary to be operationally relevant? 50, 75, 100 tails?... felt they should have filled out that as they allude to losing LOCs in a European conflict and needing this light airlift to fill the gaps created by losing a bridge, port, major runway, etc... How much capability does this platform (if accquired) need? Range/speed, payload, defensive system, comm cabilities, NVG cockpit, etc... they seem to want to keep it basic (I would agree with that) and not too customized from a likely civilian airframe but would likely need some options not offered regularly offered from the factory... Just my two cents but if there was a way to pull some shennanigans and gain a possibly relevant capability, co-locate these with RPA bases and some overseas locations for good deal tours. Not the cheapest airplane but a Cessna Grand Caravan would probably fit the bill for STOL, speed, capability and adapability for other roles along with most of the desired military capabilities already engineered for this type

This "new normal" of guilty-until-innocent-but-still-treated-guilty is in large part a result of politics becoming team sports, where winning is the desire, instead of compromise. I think... How many Republicans defended Al Franken when he was drummed out for nonsense? How many excuse Trump when he says things that are obviously false? Both sides are doing this because we've prioritized winning over the truth. I don't think it's a new phenomenon, but the internet, social media, and the 24 hour news cycle has made it worse. Each side is convinced the other is stacking the deck, so they take their wins wherever they can, even when it's disingenuous.

This is true. In fact, I have a good friend who received a Q3 in his FEF on a check-ride. He was later selected for not one, but two "for-hire" flying squadrons afterwards. My guess is, you will have to learn how you can orate the learning value of this experience to future commanders/employers. The Q3 wasn't designed to be a career crusher tool and they tell you that when you make evaluator. I would think only a lazy commander would use it to make a prejudiced judgement on your future officer potential.

It's also possible this commander is, as many are today, hyper-vigilant in protecting his own career. Say the everyday typical student buffoonery happens, but this time it happens in a critical phase of flight requiring split second reaction time to correct it. Perhaps it's compounded by weather, gusty winds, com noise, etc. Metal gets bent and the CC is notified. The CC sits down behind his desk and weighs his options: "This IP made a mistake that any one of us can reasonably make with a bad student in poor conditions. I can call this IP in, lecture him, put him on a couple CT sorties, and perhaps have him give a squadron safety brief. I could go to bat for him at the OG and WG meetings. But metal was bent on my watch. What if it happens again? I'm going to get a lot of face time with the OG and WG over this and what if they think I didn't go far enough? If I give him a CC-directed Q3, it may be a little overkill, but then I have a high-vis corrective action paper-trail that I can wave around in the meetings letting them know that I'm an aggressive problem solver, and perhaps this won't affect my next assignment or chances for 0-6."

If only the AF thought about this before....

Imagine if the USAF would use airframes already in their inventory! C-146, C-145, CN-235, DHC-6, C-208 Crazy idea!

Mind as well just use a helicopter. Airspeeds and maximum altitudes are pretty much the same and you can shoot back.

That sucks, but you were the AC and the aircraft was damaged due to an error of the crew. I don't know the AETC culture on student initiated mishaps, so I don't know if that is within the realm of ordinary. Legally speaking, that sounds like a valid Q3...even if it's really lacking in bromanship or understanding.

Only thing I didn’t like about that story was the amount of people speaking anonymously about the highly compartmented and classified programs that were (I assume) used. Otherwise, great use of Cyber Command and the authorities and employment model they have moved toward.

Speaking as a MAJCOM HHQ A3V type... I don’t think you can fight a commander directed downgrade unless the downgrade is false. If you exceeded V2 standards in some way you have no grounds. However if the decision is not final and there are extenuating circumstances perhaps you can convince your cc that all evaluators have discretion and that Vol2 standards assume perfect plane, predictable weather etc, maybe you can get him to see your side. If the allegation is false IG complaint all the way. Maybe we need a process in the Vol2 where there is delayed action to ensure the accused is given proper due process. Much like a CC has to hear the accused side of an article 15 before ultimately deciding. I know NJP and Q-3s are not currently the same... maybe they should be. As a person who has given a cc directed Q3 I will say my decision was not final until I talked to the entire crew and thought about it for 24 hours. I did not presume anything until I spoke with everyone. If others aren’t afforded the same then we should ensure that they are... Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I think the persuasion would have to happen before the CC directs a Q3.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/with-trumps-approval-pentagon-launched-cyber-strikes-against-iran/2019/06/22/250d3740-950d-11e9-b570-6416efdc0803_story.html?utm_term=.a1069838cb86

Along the lines of Lawman’s thoughts: -Before you strike you have to hold the upper hand on the public narrative, and right now we simply do not in the international eye -They have proxy forces and military elements that don’t play normal rules that will be in play; they’re not as weak as Iraq during NW/SW -If your long term goal is the fall of the regime, you could very easily strengthen the gov’ts standing amongst the people via common enemy by attacking There are a lot of things the US administration may actually be considering on this one. The Iranians probably want us to attack because it benefits them in many ways...so maybe you wait it out until they mess up very obviously on the international stage. Or not, I’m just a dude.

One of my first Herc instructors told me the first step in any emergency was "wind your watch." I'm sure there will be a significant response, but I want it to be carefully considered and appropriately measured.

Thread re-revival. Will the G-V units take small aircraft guys, like AFSOC light fixed wing/NSAV type pilots or do they only look for large airlift types?