MCO
-
Posts
289 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
4
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Gallery
Blogs
Downloads
Wiki
Posts posted by MCO
-
-
On 4/22/2020 at 10:52 PM, CaptainMorgan said:
Just got my PRF. Anyone know where “Promote now” ranks in the hierarchy of pushes? Obviously, “If I had one more DP,” or “Definitely Promote” with a P would have been better. On the E side, Promote Now beats Must Promote, is the same true for Os in the eyes of the board?
From my limited time working these, honestly very average but better than not having it. On the O side you want the definitely promote or the if I had one more line. Yours basically says if your records are good enough, promote him, but he isn’t my top. Not having the promote now however would be a message that they don’t think you are ready. We just switched to a whole new system though so who knows what normal is now.
-
1
-
-
3 hours ago, pawnman said:
Sure... But you're only flattening the current curve. There will eventually be a spike, and that spike will almost certainly outpace medical readiness no matter how long we wait.
Couple that with all the medically necessary but non-urgent procedures (removing tumors, replacing hips, reconstructing shoulders, etc) being cancelled and you've got a real fun time when both bills come due together.
The article even suggests we're going to make it worse by pushing the spike into November and December, when it's colder, people are already more vulnerable, and there's a lot more demand for gathering and travel than March/April.
The other advantage of flattening the curve other than what’s already stated is the effect of herd immunity, which is more effective if you already have a population of immune people.
-
6 hours ago, brabus said:
To be clear, only authority to quarantine those who have been exposed. Prove I’ve been exposed and then you can legally quarantine me in my house. Until then, go fuck yourself, I’ll leave my house when I damn well please. Doesn’t mean I won’t be smart about it (6’ distancing, won’t go throw a block party, etc.) There are people saying we shouldn’t be allowed to go for a run or ride a bike; that’s the line they’ve fully crossed.
This is exactly why I think the US will be hardest hit. Our freedom is awesome, but plenty of people will say "I thought this was America, I'll do what I want!" I agree with you that we need to protect our freedom from being attacked, but I also think we are going to pay a price for that. China can effectively fight it because they just point a gun at everyone and say don't leave your house. Not what I want, but it works.
Just to be clear, I think the price is worth it in the end.
-
On 1/10/2020 at 10:13 PM, di1630 said:
Guys, what makes a complex approach? Any good stories?
Sent from my iPhone using Baseops Network mobile appI don’t have a picture of it but I was sent to Beijing when I was refragged after show time and had to deal with a high level pax. Of course the J model is not GPS approved in China so now I’m the only aircraft shooting the non GPS arrival and it is about 15 step down segments in meters switching between headings, multiple VORs and NDBs and various speed restrictions. It was a little chaotic. Add to that gusty winds so I’m supposed to fly a 144kt approach speed, but I overspeed my flaps at 145kt.
Most of the time it’s when you are going into a field with no radar service using procedural deconfliction, probably some place like Africa or the Balkans, and you look at the approach plate and even after years of flying think what the hell is this. Luckily you usually can look over the approaches the night before but not always, and ATC seems to be good at getting you to join the arrival/approach in the one way you weren’t expecting. The more experienced you get the less this happens and the more you laugh at/teach the young guy struggling, but as the young guy going into some interesting fields in the middle of no where at mins, it’s everything to keep your SA up. I’ve shot multiple circling NDBs at mins after I was told in pilot training NDBs were going away and I’d probably never have to shoot a real one. I’m sure there are plenty of other guys on the forum that have had some ridiculous foreign approach sprung on them at the last second.
-
2
-
-
On 12/14/2019 at 10:48 AM, di1630 said:
Oh I’m not arguing to replace all or even a majority of flying with sims. I’m just saying that we CAN update and replace flown syllabus items with them and we should explore this and it’s being proven at the UPT/IFF level already.
Which and where to cut/change will widely vary by airframe. I’d say on the fighter side the A-10 has the least potential for sim replacement due to the stick-rudder mission demand and jets like the F-22/35 which are more sensor based have the most potential but I think they already do rely on sims heavily vs other fighters.
If time/money were unlimited, we’d do 100% flying. But F-22 cost what? $60k per hour?
We also need to get real
About updated missions. I was talking with a viper guy today who felt his community did too much A/A training vs his realistic real world combat role which he considered A/G. I don’t think he’s wrong.
Yeah, I get this pisses people off. Example 5 years ago most Eurofighter pilots were claiming “not a pound for air to ground” (aka 90’s eagle pilots) and are now begging for a A/G role to stay relevant as they find themselves a 90’s 4th gen A/A fighter in a 2020 world.
Heavies. I’m admittedly naive. I’d think you want to practice instruments in a sim and do real world mission stuff like assault landings and airdrop but maybe I’m underestimating the complexity of an ILS in a C-17.
Good discussion guys, I’m not saying I’m right, I’m saying I believe I’m right...big difference.
Sent from my iPhone using Baseops Network mobile appI agree with you. Also, there should be a fully qualified AC or IP in the seat in a heavy every time with a copilot, so take advantage of it. I usually let my copilot fly a complex approach until they are overwhelmed and then take it if I need too. Instruments aren’t hard but they will definitely kill you. If we don’t trust our ACs then either extend time to upgrade or don’t just upgrade everyone “because it’s their time”. You can get the majority of instrument experience in the sim just fine, and the rest as a copilot on the line. Tac flying on the other hand, which varies airframe to airframe in the MAF, needs ass in seat time.
On that same vein though, I think a lot of MAF leadership focuses on “sexy”, “cool” training that they can claim they prepped the fleet for instead of getting the crew force good at what we would actually be doing, wasting our training opportunities. Just my opinion.
-
6 hours ago, pawnman said:
It's about that time again...
1. Over in the bonus thread, there have been rumors about making the promotion zone a 5-year window and eliminating BPZ instead of "one and done". Love to see any official guidance on this. It's not that I doubt y'all...but I've seen nothing from my base or AFGSC about these changes.
2. What are you guys doing with the two-line PRF? My boss used the top line as basically his push line, leaving the bottom for the WG/CC push line (#x/xx I/APZ, #x/xxx majors, command, SDE, blah blah). Is your leadership trying to stick with the "normal" top line of all your best strats, flying hours, combat time, awards, etc? Or are they using it as a narrative and counting on the record to speak for itself?
3. What are you guys being told for timelines? Even between B-1 bases there's confusion. Ellsworth guys don't have the PSDM (and I haven't seen it either), but at Dyess the DS has the timeline, with the 150 accountability date being 4 Oct and PRFs due to NAF back on the 14th, with an MLR happening in early Jan (8th and 9th, IIRC...but obviously I'm not at work)
4. More opinion than fact-based...do the illustrious members of forum believe that the 2-line PRF, shift to competitive categories, and this rumored 5-year window will help or hurt the flying community's promotion rates as a whole?
The timeline is published by AFPC. No PSDM though so it’s not super helpful except to make everyone write their PRF. Luckily it’s only 2 lines so if some end up not on this board it’s not as much wasted time as it used to be.
As far as writing the 2 line PRF, no one really knows what right looks like yet, but you can’t use any info already in a PRF so it sounds like yours may get rewritten. What I’ve seen (which may or may not be normal) is top line a statement about why your experience makes you good to this point, and bottom line is your push line of strat or no strat and why you’ll be good in the future. Honestly though I’m sure everywhere is doing it slightly different based on their own interpretation.
-
11 hours ago, KWings06j said:
Did they say where the 5 years of IPZ start? Ie is year one the 2BPZ or the current IPZ?
No idea. Rumor here is 1BPZ is the new first year IPZ, but for all I know someone made that up.
-
21 hours ago, pawnman said:
Weird, because our DS gave us the timelines for this board. 150 day was October 4 and PRFs were due to NAF last week.
Will it just limit the number of APZ looks someone gets, or is the intent that an 06 guy and an 03 guy are treated the same for promotion purposes?
Yeah they gave out timelines with no PSDM. None of the wings have anything more than a timeline, which makes it hard to do PRFs. Your wing probably did what ours did and had people write PRFs so that there was something to hack on once the PSDM dropped.
The way it was explained was there will be no more APZ/BPZ. 5 years of IPZ and when you get promoted you aren’t tagged differently regardless of what year in the zone you were. Everyone getting looked at is supposedly treated the same as well.
Without the PSDM though we don’t know for sure, and we don’t know which years are going to be the new IPZ. Basically that means we aren’t really sure who is meeting this board. I know for you that would mean a decent chance of another IPZ look if this all happens this board. There is also a chance they push it to next board, but I doubt it with this much delay.
EDIT: if a mod wants to move this to the PRF thread I’m not opposed
-
-
18 minutes ago, pawnman said:
Source?
PACAF commander told our base that at an all call last week. Also PACAF staff thinks that’s why the PSDM for Lt Col is 2 months late so far. Sounds like they are trying to switch to the 5 looks in the zone with no BPZ starting now. In another thread it sounded like someone on this board is a lot closer to the source and was confirming this as well. no idea on how this will affect specific year groups.
-
1
-
-
On 11/10/2019 at 6:05 AM, Chuck17 said:
Of course it can - and, as I originally posted, the info I have is it’s going to a five year window. Don’t care if you want to shoot holes in that information brother, do what you like. All I’m passing is that’s the brief I saw. Take it or leave it.
Chuck
I can second that I’ve heard similar rumblings in my corner that this may be coming down the line soon, though I haven’t seen specifics.
-
48 minutes ago, SurelySerious said:
WTF tactics does a GH have?
When to effectively apply ctrl alt delete.
-
8
-
-
5 hours ago, ayz33 said:
Not sure why you're so riled up about this. I'm just saying I'm not just a kid who just came out of high school.
See you at Sheppard
You’ve already figured out how to be good at pilot training as a cadet. The Air Force could really value your insight. Please help your instructors with their rack and stack when you get to Sheppard.
-
1
-
1
-
-
On 9/7/2019 at 12:43 PM, FltDoc said:
Does quality of cadet exactly correlate with success in UPT? No, of course not.
As others have said, drive, discipline, and willingness to learn tends to lead to success and it's unusual to completely lack it as a cadet and discover it as a student pilot.
As a prior UPT primary phase IP, I'd say that's the way to bet.
Even overall...now, about twenty years after commissioning, my class and the few around mine, about 30-45 people total, if you ranked them as cadets and then saw how their careers went, there's few big surprises.
Far from scientific, but that's what I see looking back.
Career wise? Don’t disagree. Good cadets tended to have decent careers. More of a correlation. Abilities as a pilot? I saw almost 0 correlation between cadet ranking in my fellow ROTC cadets (my school had about 150 in my junior/senior years) and how they did in pilot training. PCSM seemed to be one of the few things that did correlate. Obviously this is just my point of view and there are always exceptions, but it was a fairly sizable group.
-
3 hours ago, Seadogs said:
So if you got at 69 PCSM score, you are screwed and SOL for UPT?
No, a good PCSM from what I saw was just a decent indicator. Plenty of dudes with bad PCSMs picked it up quick. My point is while even that may be an indicator there is no cookie cutter perfect every time UPT student, and a lot of what you think is important to UPT as a cadet doesn’t translate to automatic success in UPT.
-
2 hours ago, ayz33 said:
Thanks for the response. What do you consider to be the most important traits in students?
Your score on whatever the hand eye coordination test thing was, and previous hours in an airplane. Abilities as a student? Mostly irrelevant. It shows a drive to succeed. Lots of “bad” cadets are great in UPT, and lots of “good” cadets are terrible.
-
23 minutes ago, brabus said:
Former viper bro now working in the embassy world already crushed this WOM - according to him, only applies to children of parents who were not naturalized US citizens at the time of child’s birth. So basically this affects very few people.
Another bait article completely misleading people, likely in order to incite dislike for the current administration. Standard bullshit that even smart people choose to form an immediate opinion on without doing any actual research/fact checking.
What if one parent isn’t a citizen, just a green card? That effects more than a few people.
-
1
-
-
21 hours ago, magnetfreezer said:
Talk to the wing historians - you'd be surprised at what they compile.
My wing hasn’t had a historian for close to 2 years
-
1 hour ago, Clark Griswold said:
The yearly flying hour budget for G-Hawk guys to fly the Aero Club Cessnas for the 12th RS was about $90k for the entire squadron for the entire FY.
It was so little money ACC didn’t even know about it until they began the process of creating the 18XX AFSC and started to audit the existing RPA squadrons.
We argued like hell for it but no soup for us or anyone else flying a robot. ACC said it would be too much trouble at OCONUS locations because GA type aircraft are almost exclusive to CONUS US airspace... #totalbullshit
Sent from my iPhone using TapatalkThe global hawks here at my overseas base are parked next to the base aero club hangar...
-
2
-
-
2 hours ago, pawnman said:
Further, I can believe the fitness standards are dumb, while at the same time being livid that this person can take command while being so wildly out of standards. Big Blue has told us that PT tests are important. I've seen people denied PCS medals over a failed PT test four years ago. I've seen people denied the ability to apply for WIC over a failed PT test seven years in the past. And then we put someone who can't put a PT test in charge.
I don't know, maybe it's my own salt coming out that I never did anything wrong, never failed a PT test, did all the PME, etc...and this person who has either failed, or will fail, their next PT test is fit to be a commander, while the Air Force is telling me I'm in the bottom 25% of my year group by passing me over for promotion. I'd bet my next bonus installment that she makes Lt Col out of this command slot.
Then go be a mx Officer. All you have to do is not quit to command. Higher risk reward in the flying world, but at the end of the day you get to go crew planes and put warheads on foreheads. Do you really want to go back in time to commissioning and choose a non aircrew path to command?
Not doing anything wrong does not a good commander make either. It just means you took care of what you can control, but it doesn’t mean you’d make a good commander. Not that you wouldn’t but one doesn’t necessarily equal the other.
-
Obviously they flipped 1 and 2, but I’ll forgive them.
-
1
-
-
1 hour ago, pawnman said:
Because despite not getting into high-g dogfights, those bomber guys have spent a career flying the aircraft as a weapon, integrated into a package, studying air threats and learning how to prioritize tasks in the cockpit to fly and release weapons.
Meh. Replace release weapon with airdrop and it sounds like a local herk sortie minus the 4 ship formation low levels and formation tac arrivals.
A better argument is they flew 38s in UPT and therefor have relevant experience.
-
1
-
-
4 hours ago, brabus said:
I started to go soft on my opinion of this a while ago because honestly I don’t want to see my wingman until initial...don’t really care about tac formation, etc. I said. Well, that was an easy opinion to have when I’d spent over 3 years flying with only weapons officers and highly experienced IPs. I went back to the CAF and couldn’t believe the lack of capability I saw in the young guys...not their fault, as I quickly realized how shitty AETC was doing at producing a quality product. I then spent months of my time teaching basic fighter pilot shit to these guys, including just calling off tactical training for 15 min as I did tac turns and rejoins with a kid who was struggling...great dude, but what the fuck is going on when I had to prioritize basic flying training over tac training in MQT? Talked to a couple of my counterparts around the CAF, and they had literally the exact same story to tell.
The reduction of fighter IPs in UPT combined with reduced syllabi and UPT/IFF/FTU not washing out studs has created a significant safety and combat capability problem. So 11Ms aren’t the root cause, but it is one of the more significant contributing factors.
I think you are close but I think the 2 real problems with 11Ms (I’m a pimply faced herbivore herk driver) are 1, they don't understanding it’s a different flying in the fighter world with different skill sets. There is some overlap with some heavies but not all and it’s hard to teach from that perspective but you can overcome it with some extra hours. 2, and I think the bigger problem is who is considered a good pilot in the heavy world. Guys that have the -1 memorized and are good office workers but have hands of 2 ton bricks are considered great pilots on most platforms. Hand skill almost doesn’t matter based on the type of flying being accomplished. This means you send your “best” pilots to go fly planes that actually take some SA and hand skill and the reason they sucked in UPT comes right back to the forefront. Also it seems everyone is getting a fighter now, which means who is getting the heavies? The bottom of the class, even more so than it used to be. 10 years ago # 3 of 27 is going heavies and adding to those platforms. (While also contributing to the current fighter woes). Not the same today (also contributing to some of the perceived lack of talent. Not every fighter pilot is 1 or 2 in his class, he may have been 7 or 8 now)
-
1 hour ago, bennynova said:
Isn’t the list out publicly? Or is that tomorrow?
List should be out
UPT Next
in General Discussion
Posted
And there are C130s. 7 month FTU, 3-4 months of it is tactics, formation, and airdrop. Are students from the new system going to be ready or is it going to be on the FTU to teach some of this basically from scratch?
I had the benefit of going to Corpus, which was designed as a C130 prep course taught completely by C130 pilots on the AF side. So honestly I don’t know what right looks like.