Lord Ratner

Even though the MRAP is still much heavier, the "2 1/2" part of "2 1/2 ton truck" does not refer to the truck's weight.

There has only been one crash landing in the KC-135 where the crew lived, IIRC. So that's the scenario where they would be useful. Not the incident in Kryg. I'm hardly an expert on the plane, but anyone who has flown it knows its already a pain to land when fully functional. But that was before butters pointed out that all heavies have passengers on them on every flight. Oops.

To pile on-- So if the CG shifts to behind the center of lift, the horizontal stab (made of a movable stabilizer and yoke-controlled elevator) now has to work in the opposite direction (pushing the tail up, now, instead of down) to keep the plane under control. Possible, but only for small loads (sts) If the load shift happens rapidly on a large plane like that, the stabilizer can't move fast enough to start pushing the tail up (normally it is always pushing down). So you have the CG move behind the center of lift, causing the plane to start pitching up, and you have a horizontal stab still pushing the tail down while it re-trims (and the stabilizer vastly overpowers any inputs the elevator may put in). The result is about what you see in the video. That's bare-bones explanation. I don't know if the 74 stab is capable of generating lift in the opposite direction (up, in this case), but the result would be the same. I've heard tales of a KC-135 that allowed CG to get to 44ish, which is right about where the center of lift is. Apparently the plane started porpoising, which is how they noticed it.

U2570 A (2). Don't even bother asking them for a Non-A. You called, and lodging wasn't available. Just get a name. -or- U2570 A (3). Go in the day of, and if they don't have a room, write up your own quick MFR. If you haven't read the JFTR CH 1-5, you are doing yourself a huge disservice. I assure you, the finance 2-striper has not. 11-217, 11-2MDS-Vol3, 11-202, JFTR. All required reading for pilots.

For those of you getting new Jackets at Pops, apparently your old one will sell for a pretty penny on eBay to Japanese buyers. How do I know? I shipped my jacket back from AFG, and never saw it again. Yesterday I found a 6 month old FB message (it got filtered, which I didn't even know FB did) from a ex-crew chief who found it in a Thrift shop (He looked incredible) in Minnesota, and after hearing nothing from me, sold it on eBay for north of $200.

It's in the news already, 4 heroes according to the article. No further details. A toast.

I left out the AFT part (1.5 run) since that's fairly self-explanatory. Like I said in my first post, if I were king, this would be the test for people who couldn't pass the waist-measurement on the normal PT test, as a way to distinguish between the fat-asses and the dudes who are mini-hulks. If you can't do a single pull-up or push-up and you fly a desk, fine, I can (easily) get over having people who are completely out-of-shape in the AF, since many will never need to be, ever. But I can't accept seeing some fat f*ck who can't look at a treadmill without working up a sweat max-performing his blues belt or wearing a flightsuit way past bingo-velcro. It makes us look bad. You don't have to work out to not be fat. Somehow this country managed it 50 years ago, and many other countries are still doing it today. Eat less.

I'm going from memory here, and only the male standards: Pullups: 7-21 Standing Long Jump: 6'ish - 8' Situps: 95 max, i forget the min Push-ups: 45ish-72 600m Sprint: 2:05 - 1:35 Min score gets you 25 points, max gets you 100. 250 points required to pass IIRC, and you could only fail one event. EDIT: Apparently you cant fail any of the events anymore. Good. Thx, Muscle

Interesting you say that. I've spoken to a few people who were "in the room" when the new PT standards were developed, and according to them (take third-hand information on the internet with the due grains of NaCl), the metrics were designed with far more emphasis on predicting future medical costs to the service. Shockingly enough, fat people (pardon the oversimplification) cost more, even if they are just "bigger dudes" and can run the hell out of the 1.5 mile. But, there is a vaild argument for the idea that if said fat-ass is a valuable and productive member of the team, then they are worth the future costs. I don't have an answer for how to fix that. But, I also agree (somewhat) with those who think it doesn't matter if Amn Snuffy the finance desk jockey can do 70 push-ups. But I also strongly dislike obesity, and have no desire to see it tolerated in the military, so here's my idea: If you can't pass the waist measurement, you take the USAFA PFT and AFT. You pass, congrats, you've shown that your fatness (as far as the standard AF PT Test is concerned) is not affecting your ability to physically participate in the rigors of military life (whatever those are...). But if you can't pass the USAFA PFT and you can't pass the waist measurement, then you're just a fat-ass I guess, so see ya later. Just a thought.

No, what you are dealing with is a confused finance troop. They made the same mistake with me. Due to everyone having a GTC, no PCS or TDY advance payments are authorized. Think of this like an accrual voucher that you file before ever leaving. Those are gone. What you need to specifically ask for is a Pay Advance, which is authorized (1 month for O's, 2 with CC signature) as part of a PCS. Remember, the 19 year old is generally mis-quoting an email his buddy told him about when they were closed for training. And the E-7 who shows up after is mis-quoting the same email that he forwarded to the nineteen year olds without fully reading it.

Thank you for pointing this out. Up until now I though hard landings were measured in G's or VVI. Number of tires blown is a much easier Ops Limit.

Since the Grammar Police have already made an arrest, this made me laugh: "I are routinely task saturated during my simulator training"

"A poor design for the fuel tank venting system also means that when the single-engine jet is below 20,000 feet, its descent rate is limited to no more than 6,000 feet per minute" I thought that one was fun. Getting chased by the mighty F-35 Lightning II? Nothing a Split-S can't solve.

Stopped trying. Huge difference.

I don't post much, but there is a lot of talk about fairness going on, and I've never been a huge fan of fairness (joking). The military is not about fairness. Pick your flashy motivational phrase (hot iron on target, kill people and break their things, peace through superior firepower), but the military has always been the exception. Socialized medicine, pay structures, limits on freedom of speech, the draft, so on and so forth. It's not about fairness, it's about keeping America safe (regardless of how you think our current conflicts tie in to that). That doesn't mean avoid change, but unlike the real world, where you can make a change based on a principal and see how it plays out, I think it needs to be proven first, then implemented. Because after you wade through all the political BS and passion for "fairness," there are a bunch of kids out there getting paid a hell of a lot less than most of us that worry every bridge they cross or dead animal they drive past is a bomb. Their lives aren't acceptable collateral damage in this war for gender neutrality. To all the men on this board (everyone?), do you guys even remember what it was like to be 18 or 19 (or even a bit older)? Was there anything in the world more confusing/frustrating/amazing/baffling/infuriating than women? Maybe everyone here was Arthur Fonzarelli, but I doubt it. Does anyone think fairness (taught through CBT no less) is going to quell the horomones a 19 year old who will fall in love with the local barista because she writes a heart on his (and everybody else's) receipt? Put them through the training. Seperately. Then, if they can hack the pure physical nature of it, integrate the training in a few classes, and watch to see (if) the dynamic shifts. If it doesn't, find the platoon with the highest average age, and integrate them at home, keeping them away from the action until they can run through every training exercise (our flag equivalents?) and experience ZERO loss in effectiveness. Show me that, and I'll be the first in line to congratulate women and welcome them in. And in case this pops up, the DADT repeal is different. At least with the people I know, it wasn't much of a secret that there were gay/lesbian members serving. The "trial phase" happened when the leadership stopped actively investigating all but the most blatant cases of DADT violations. Not the most tactful way to go about it, but the results were about the same.

No. It will be given to you during Phase 1. That is when you should start learning it. All of my advice takes effect on day one of UPT. Not earlier.

Background: Current UPT instructor (FAIP) Don't worry about the Boldface/Ops limits. You will have plenty of time in phase 1 (about 6 weeks) to learn it cold. In fact, don't worry about much before phase one starts. Most of it won't make sense anyways. Once phase one starts, use that time to get ahead in three key areas. These areas will be much easier to work on once you have had the initial simulators, since they will give you some perspective. The three key areas: Checklists: in the T-6 there is a single-page document (often folded in half to have two sides) called the Consolidated Checklist or something like that. It starts at the cockpit check and ends with the Engine Shutdown checklist. Memorize it. Know every checklist, item by item, cold. Use your cockpit poster to help you memorize it, and when you are taught about the "flow and verify" method of running a checklist, use it. Radio calls: they are listed out, generally put together in some sort of gouge document the Simulator Instructors hand out. Memorize them. Be able to spit the radio calls out, and know when to say them. Every single one for the various Contact profiles. Departure Procedures. At CBM there are four you use in the Contact Phase. Memorize them. Cold. They are simple, and short. Know them like the back of your hand. When you are first starting in UPT, every time you have to think or read anything, the plane takes an immediate vector into an UNSAT. Minimize the time you have to think and read by learning those three things before C4001. It will let you focus on more important things, like being pointed in the right direction, and staying on altitude. When you hit the flight line, you will have the opportunity to go to the UTDs on your own and practice checklists. Do this, many times. When I was a student I went about 3 times a week to the UTD. It helps, and not only does it help you fly better, it makes your instructor a lot happier when he/she doesn't have to spend 25 minutes melting in the summer heat waiting for you to fumble-###### through the checklists. Caveat: There are other things you are responsible for learning. Those things should be made clear to you, and you will still need to know them. But don't neglect the three things above. IMHO, they will affect your flying more than anything else, other than raw skill. Caveat II: Just my opinion. I am by no means the most experienced IP.

You should have seen him in the mighty MC-12. Monitoring the Copilot Monitoring the Autopilot never looked so intense.

I've had this argument with many other instructors. "Don't cancel until you have radar termination is sight" "Don't cancel until you are cleared direct" "Don't cancel until you are well clear of GTR (insert other airspace here)" "Don't cancel until you are at least 3 miles to radar termination" "Don't cancel until you are number one for radar termination" I hear these taught to students on a regular basis, and they all make me cringe. First, they are techniques, not procedure, and if someone is downgraded for canceling early (yes, I've seen it more than once), that's a foul on the IP. But more importantly, these are techniques whose purpose is to avoid, rather than promote airmanship. In every case they are meant to mitigate the possibility of making common VFR errors (getting lost, violating airspace, interfering with other traffic) by avoiding VFR flight all together. Not exactly building a strong skill set. And the result is a student (and one day a pilot) who only knows how to find a point by being vectored within 3 miles and then cancelling. Which, in my limited experience, often leads to misidentifying the point, due to only looking for a specific point (building, dam, tower, runway) instead of looking for the whole location (building between two freeways, dam on the north side of a oval lake, tower surrounded by chicken coops along side a river, runway with 12,000 feet of concrete and a military base attached to it). Anyone with any exposure to UPT can see the AF aversion to VFR flight. I saw the same thing in the MC-12. </FAIP soapbox>

One of my biggest gripes with UPT is that I have only two rides [EDIT:] in Phase Two [/EDIT] to teach the student "everything he/she needs to know" about flying VFR. We military pilots love to brag about how much better we are than most of the civilian flying world, but god help me when I tell another pilot that I didn't "back-up" the VFR flight plan on the GPS. If you made it back without incident, your check pilot should have gotten a swift kick in the jimmy.

Haha, I miss the Crows, though I'm shocked you were able to get him/her to stop taking about Challenge and Response checklist discipline or the importance of Vref long enough to talk about Joe Jackson.

You mean the National Association of Senile Aviators? Bumped into Kelly at HSV (the one who recently went to space, not the brother) and a handful of never-going-up-again astronauts joyriding 3 blue T-38s to DC for some "mission research." Even had a FAIP or two in the bunch. Good to know there's a place for dirty-minded pilots when they get too old for the green bag.

Checks, but since you don't get it for flying in the AOR (but instead for getting shot at) I figured it didnt relate to the dude's article much.

I thought about that, but that's not really combat pay either. It's combat zone pay. Quibbling, maybe, but it's location based, not activity based. And yet again, has nothing to do with flying or any differences in flying hazards. Am I still off? :shrug:

I'm just a dumb O-3, and I'm having a hard time staying conscious with all the big words being flung around, but: Is anyone getting "combat pay?" I get "Hardship Duty Pay" which according to Google (who has multiple AADs) is for places "where living conditions are substantially below the standard compared to the continental United States." Ok, so it has nothing to do with flying (everyone here gets it), and RPA guys in CONUS wouldn't qualify, just like finance or SF or medical or flying guys wouldn't qualify in the US. Next is Imminent Danger Pay, which again according to Google: "A member is entitled to IDP when assigned to a designated IDP area." Ok, so you get it for being in a certain location where presumably there is imminent danger (the weekly IDF attacks should cover that). Again, nothing to do with the flying hazards. You either are, or are not in an IDP location. Yes, the UAV guys are very much fighting a war, but no one I know is getting paid extra to fight a war. That's kinda the job description for "military service." I don't think it's fair that guys in the UAV field who already got a pretty raw deal are getting shafted on promotions and what not, but that's another discussion. If the UAV guys want Air Medals and additional pay, then move the control trailers to one of the bases in-theater. There's plenty of room. The argument in the article that flying is no more dangerous in-theater than it is back home is irrelevant (and wrong) since we don't get anything special for flying here or there. Either that, or I'm getting hosed. EDIT: I missed Huggy's Air Medal criteria, and moving the trailers to AFG wouldn't qualify them for Air Medals. So put the trailers on stilts as well.