Toro

No shit. Buy a Casio.

This is why we can't have nice things.

Suck it, Van Damme! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T-D1KVIuvjA#t=10

You just fixed a problem that made my computer folks give me the thousand yard stare. Thanks.

Me thinks it's down. It recently migrated from the standard webmail that's been around for quite some time to a shitty "Outlook light" version that has many of the features removed. Just tried to log in and it's not working. We use the Scott site: https://scottapc.mail.us.af.mil/OWA/

Valid

You know there are people out there who have never flown a T-6, right?

I normally would agree with this, but the picture - while not taken out of context - did not have the full context of what was going on. The atmosphere at this event wasn't like most of us would picture a memorial. From NBC Nightly News: Selfie at a funeral: head-up-ass level of ignorance and tackiness Selfie at a celebration of somebody's life: not that big of a deal

AIB is out: Bird strike brought down T-38 Anybody know how to access the original AIB report? I'm curious to see how it differs from the SIB.

Wow. Okay, here's everything you wanted to know about Mandela but were afraid to ask.

Unfortunately he might. We literally had to change the meaning because of douchebags like him. Definition of LITERALLY 1: in a literal sense or manner : actually <took the remark literally> <was literally insane> 2: in effect : virtually <will literally turn the world upside down to combat cruelty or injustice — Norman Cousins>

Why is it an issue? Because of dickbags like this? Anybody who has issue with this might want to try and read the US Code: Position and manner of display It shouldn't be terribly surprising that somebody from South Carolina is making a huge stink about it.

Exactly. Shut Up - before you get too spun up, I suggest you also look to see if there's a local sup to 2903 (assuming your command chief doesn't send out 6-9 references it prior to the CUI). It may specifically detail how patches are worn on that base. If still nothing, just take the patch off until the CUI is over.

At first I thought I was reading an Onion article. NORAD Santa Tracker under fire for giving Santa a fighter jet escort

Gents, Assuming there are no OPSEC issues, please post your info here vice PM for others to reference.

"If they don't believe their parents, maybe America's teens will listen to the Pentagon's top general." Anyone with kids stopped reading right there.

Go see Requiem for a Dream. You'll see a hell of a lot more than that (skip to 1:30). SUPER NSFW!

Good God, stop while you're behind.

Big enough problem to threaten a 30-day grounding, but not a big enough problem to walk over and tell one of your subordinates to put their hat on? Chickenshit. He must not have had a chief with him to correct the uniform infraction.

Same.

What's the difference between loading a truckload of dead babies and a truckload of bowling balls? You can't use a pitchfork with the bowling balls.

Sticking with the Nav theme... Two Navs walk up to a machine that is dispensing pilot wings. The wings cost 0.50, and each Nav has only a quarter. They discuss it, and determine that they're going to each put in a quarter, and they will take turns with the wings. They each put in a quarter, turn the knob (sts), and the wings pop out. The first Nav takes the wings, pins them to his chest, and struts around proudly. After 6-9 minutes, the second Nav jealously says, "All right, that's enough...my turn," to which the winged gent says, "FUCK YOU NAV!"

Yes...but. After the report is finalized and approved, requests for inputs to a Memorandum of Final Evaluation (MOFE) are sent to involved parties for any inputs they have to the report. Here's from the safety investigation reg (91-204): 7.2 Memorandum of Final Evaluation (MOFE). Organizations will review Class A and B final message/formal reports and send their response back to AFSC within 45 days after final message release by the convening authority. Comments received after the 45 day deadline may not be considered in the MOFE unless an extension is granted through AFSC/SEFO. 7.2.1. AFSC will publish a MOFE on all on-duty Class A safety reports within 90 days after release of the final message. Additional MOFE requirements and exemptions are specified in AFMAN 91-22X. 7.2.2. AFSC will consider inputs from the following in preparation of the MOFE: 7.2.2.1. Convening authority. 7.2.2.2. Lead command of weapons system (AFPD 10-9). 7.2.2.3. Air component commanders of unified commands when the mishap occurred during contingency operations. NOTE: The unified command staff offices must agree to safeguard the information according to rules contained in this instruction. 7.2.2.4. Designated action agencies (OPR/OCRs). 7.2.2.5. Commander of the mishap wing. 7.2.2.6. Statements of person(s) found causal in the formal report. 7.2.2.7. Air Force agencies outside the investigating command if their functions were involved in the mishap (e.g., HQ AFFSA/A3A for air traffic services and airfield management, DCMA for mishaps involving contracts managed by DCMA). 7.2.2.8. Unsolicited comments. Agencies and organizations reviewing the final message report may comment on the investigation, findings, causes, and recommendations even though they are neither in the chain of command nor a designated action agency. So in theory, your comments could fall under that last category, but I doubt this would happen. First, it assumes your safety office queried for comments from the general public (and you would have to represent an "agency or organization"). Next, it assumes that you actually get a chance to read the report, hear of the MOFE, and reply within the 45 day limit. Last, it assumes that they actually took your comments - this would probably be your biggest hurdle. Your best bet would be to convince your safety office to submit comments on your behalf (which they would actually have to submit on behalf of the Wg/CC).

False I've been to one on several occasions for neck pain. It doesn't solve the problem immediately, but the issue has always tended to go away shortly after.

I've split this discussion from the MC-12 thread into its own. If 7 day history (in the tabs) is part of the problem, it will be summarized in the report. I take it you've never looked through mishap tab data - it is mind-numbingly overwhelming. Getting the recreation videos is what you want, not tab data. I 100% agree that the AFSEC too close-hold on things like briefings and videos. I've had safety officers try on a couple occasions to get them - totally possible, but it takes longer than it should. As far as the privilege concern, I see this is a MAJCOM/leadership issue, not AF Safety as a whole. It seems like most of the concerns over the release of privileged information for punitive purposes has been in AMC. I've never seen or heard of it in ACC or AETC (not to say it hasn't happened). I have personally overseen two class A mishaps, and in both the pilot was found at least partially causal. In both cases, the pilot was required to acknowledge the findings (and allowed to provide input), and both pilots were extremely concerned about how that would affect them. I explained there was nothing that could happen to them as a result, and in both cases absolutely nothing happened. The MAJCOM/CC is the convening authority, and if they are allowing that information to be used for anything punitive, then your problem lies with leadership, not the safety process.