Hacker

Biden got on the "mandatory assault weapons buyback" train a couple days ago, too. How can you "buy back" what you have never owned to begin with??

Honestly couldn't tell you. I do have a bunch of undergrad education in social statistics, but much of that at this point is lost to history. I had the pleasure of working with Dr Patterson and Dr Carretta down at Brooks back in the mid '00s while I was going through a medical issue, though, and I did hear them discuss this topic (the validity of various methodologies in selecting pilot candidates) in detail. They had piles and piles of data that they were constantly compiling and evaluating, and were eager to tweak their algorithms when they found something new. They were actually quite excited that the PCSM had held up with a correlation that was statistically significant over time (at that point, more than a decade of use and something like 10,000 pilots it had been used on). Beyond that, I'm out of my depth in this discussion. I don't know if Carretta is still working for the AF, but Patterson has since retired...might want to look them up and ask the question if you're really interested in an informed answer.

There's actually a pretty close statistical correlation between PCSM and success at UPT. Anecdotes aside, that's what the data says. That's kind of the entire point behind its existence. To wit: https://psycnet.apa.org/record/2011-11428-002

Can't speak for those fellas, but one of the now-F-15E squadrons wore berets at one point back in the day, too: the 492d "Madhatters". They picked up the squadron nickname from having adopted the headgear local to where they were based (and the unit moved around quite a bit in the postwar/interwar years) and that included berets while in France. Since they're UK-based now, it is a British bowler hat currently.

Jim is a retired F-111 WSO, so he doesn't know. He's asking those who do, since it doesn't seem to make sense to someone with plenty of military aviation experience but who has been away from the game for a while. I can see why, from his perspective, it seems like a very stupid idea.

...and when a UPT Wing Commander's job effectiveness wasn't measured using graduation rate.

As I've frequently posted, this is the annual total UPT attrition per FY (from the AF's circa 2001 study of effectiveness of UPT student selection methods). There are plenty of individual class at individual base snapshots that show extremely high attrition, but given these overall numbers there were obviously classes with substantially higher graduation percentages that offset the high numbers.

I can honestly say "it wasn't like that" in the places I was in during the mid-late 90s (both as a non-flyer and a flyer). I had CCs who actually attempted to give rudder corrections first, and mete out punishment when they had to to guys who colored outside the lines but were otherwise good folks that wouldn't leave a mark. Personally, I saw this change between 2001-2005 to the "a good leader is one who kills flies with sledgehammers" that we see currently.

That's the first intelligent fitness-related development I've seen from the USAF since 1991. As a fighter back-injury-sufferer, I could've used a little of that rather than "take some Motrin and get on the flying schedule next week".

Among all of the institutionally-biased informed and uninformed opinions on the matter, this is really the bottom line. War is an ugly business -- and it is meant to be.

Can't speak for the Growler, but when I was leaving the F-15E they were retrofitting the fleet with solid-state digital recorders that simultaneously recorded all of the displays and all the comm for debrief. Sort of a digital super-VTR. I'm sure that's what they're talking about, and not a "CVR".

Danerys has needed to hire an ALO for quite some time. Her dragon tactics have been ass for more than just this season.

Every day is a safety down day at the airlines.

Oh, no, I got your mockery of the post you quoted...I was steering that part of the convo in a different direction.

The speculation that I've heard was that there was a combination of basically spatial D and poor airmanship. The spatial D was the minor upset while IMC, perhaps with a somatogravic "head-up illusion" where the FO perceived the acceleration as a more dramatic pitch-up than what actually occurred (and requiring a more dramatic pitch-down to counter). It may have also been combined with a flight director commanding something that also didn't add up in the FO's mind. The poor airmanship was just the inability to fight through the startle effect, turn off the automation, get on the dials, and just fly the airplane. One of the 767 sim instructors I know said it was like a 4-5 second duration, full-yoke-forward input required to get to 49 degrees nose low. The only way I can see that is with the FO just basically becoming frozen by the startle effect and unable to mentally sort out what was happening. Sometimes good pilots make huge mistakes. Sometimes poor pilots make even bigger ones.

IMHO all of the AAMP videos are excellent. Saying so, especially among non-military background airline pilots, is guaranteed to generate a response.

IMHO, that summary -- if correct -- is grossly under-playing the FO's control inputs that placed the airplane (reportedly) 49 degrees nose low. That's not just a minor erroneous response to an upset.

Pictures of neat stuff that ISIS probably demolished.

Junior Short was a good fighter pilot and a good Squadron CC back when I flew with him. Yet another lost to the General Officer lobotomy.

Just like two years of Trump-Russia conspiracy theory tv coverage pumping out more smoke than a Saturn V rocket launch.

I agree -- under-rated flick, partly because of the ridiculous political-pop culture "controversy" about the lack of a flag-planting scene. Well researched and well filmed, sort of reminds me of The Right Stuff in feel, but obviously much smaller in scope and more intimate. My problem with First Man is that Gosling plays Armstrong like a robot in an attempt to show him as intellectual and introverted (both of which were undoubtedly true). Does Gosling even smile once in the movie? I think that really portrays him a bit unfairly, as he is emotive and funny in the public appearances I've seen. Period interviews -- and even ones from later in life -- show him differently.

Although the "regional airline flying on a major airline pay scale" thing isn't really my cup o' tea, I have a neighbor who has been at SWA for about 8 years now and he loves it. Lives in base (Vegas), bids reserve, and at least during the non-summer months, doesn't appear to do much work at all. Every time I go running past his house, he is out in his garage restoring a late 60s Mustang. He loves it and makes fun of me for (apparently) only flying nights and working too much, at that. Different strokes.

The AF has long since become not just a "One Mistake Air Force", but actually a "One Perception Of One Mistake Air Force." You'd be surprised how frequently a CDI, conducted by someone basically untrained and containing evidence and information unconstrained by any functional legal standard, is used for quite severe administrative actions under the authority of the Commander -- actions which, too, have such a low legal standard for evidence and justice so as they may effectively be given based on the whims of that Commander.

It was 200 & 1/2 in USAFE for an experienced pilot when I was there.

No, there is no such nuanced definition in the AF.