BFM this
Supreme User
-
Joined
-
Last visited
Everything posted by BFM this
-
Russia and China can wag their fingers at us all they want. At the end of the day, this is 100% their fucking monster. Russia as recently as the 90's and China continuing to this very day. But as great an idea as it is, pinning this tail on the dragon is not going to be that easy. -
This happens every year. They increment it out to the last two months, right before the next yg is supposed to start pinning, then cash out the remaining 40% remaining over two months. Every. Year. Don't know why. At this point I don't actually think it's the shoe's fault.
-
Random thought I just had before my morning coffee kicks in. As the KC-46 line gets up some steam, with Airbus tankers in an off the shelf status, wondering if there's opportunity for a private venture to acquire and employ a dozen or so tankers over the next several years. DoD has found itself woefully unable to support it's training needs in both A2A and A2G, leading to the rise of Blue Air, Drakken, and ATAC, among others. Likewise, for years Omega has been filling the gaps in DoD's probe and drogue coverage, and the premium on those assets is going nowhere but up as the numbers of grey tails goes down. Seems to me that a handful of tankers available on a contract basis is going to have no trouble finding business in the coming decades. As an aside, while they're not fighting fires, the heavy fire tankers haul trash in the off season; same model could be applied here.
-
My discussion with the lodging manager about a TLF revolved around me and my three kids and dog in a one bedroom, and something about signing a liability waiver for the lead based paint (I had a two year old). Nope.
-
Go there They're up at Alliance I believe.
-
Some Chik-fil-a's are open on Sunday, guessing this would be such an example
-
-
BaseOps, like so many functions within the Air Force, has become its own rice-bowl economy, run by self-licking ice cream cones.
-
Why deal with the baseops A1C who can't be bothered to open GP Ch4, or his NCOIC boss that makes shit up based on the day of the week. I'd gladly file with ForeFlight if there was a scrubbed military option.
-
NSFW pics in 3, 2...
-
WHAT? I said "with all due respect".
-
That sounds like Air Force standard for over complicating the simple.
-
+\- still an option if you click the heart
-
In 2010 I was told that I'd received an assignment to RPAs. At the time, I was told that RPAs would be a "one way door": that I would likely never get a traditional flying assignment going forward.. Let's suppose that I would have a choice between the following two options: A) I could participate in a dual qual program, where there would be ____ available to fly 1.5 times per week while I was in RPAs. All else would remain the same. B) With my orders, I would be loaded into a TX to return to my grey-tail jet in FY+4yrs, reflected on my orders. I'd take B, hands down. Two of the three hypotheticals that you state are RPA, and the idea of having an ACE or companion trainer program in RPAs is not new. However, two points: first, while in an RPA assignment, it's a full time gig. Whether in lean times and you're spending large chunks of time as seat meat so that your bros can take leave, or when big blue starts to scratch the surface of adequate manning, leaving time to get in the vault, develop some skills in a CT setting, etc., it deserves full time attention, just like ALO, DAO, white jets, etc. Let me go for a day so that I can go do AHC in the MOA or at best pew-pew some .50 cal into the rags, and that's a day that my bro can't take leave, or at the very least that the mission suffers. Second, an ACE or companion trainer at RPAs wouldn't have sweetened the bitter pill of the "one way door" mantra being peddled by HHQ. The only antidote to that was when guys started getting jets (TAMI, UPT-d, everybody) in 2013. Time out of the cockpit is not a new concept. You're introduced to the idea in your commissioning source: remember the career progression pyramid that includes a "broadening" tour somewhere. That pyramid also showed that broadening is followed by a return to ops. Here's the rub: big blue hasn't been budgeting for a return to ops, at least not in the decade that I've been paying attention. Everyone departing for some gig out of the jet always had the same concern: having to "compete" for a TX to get back in the jet. "TX slots very limited, likely only available for leadership, Chief of Safety, or BNR this cycle. Korea will be the highest Pk for all others,..." Remember that boilerplate caveat on the Fighter Porch page in the portal? That's what folks saw (likely the first thing they looked at) when they had orders in hand to ALO/RPA/AETC/Staff, and it set the tone--it sent a value message to those that big blue NEEDED for the task on their orders. Takeaways for Big Blue: 1) If you're not planning on a TX for every "broadening" bill paid, then you will reap what you sow for failure to adequately plan. It's nothing more than paying off one credit card with another. 2) Pulling the CPIP punch at 10.0 crews/CAP? Fuck you, Big Blue. Standby for another round of soul searching (RAND, CBO, CPIP-II report) in 4-6 years. You never learn: until an RPA squadron is staffed and put on the same battle rhythm as any other AF squadron, the rest is all BS eyewash. 3) Someday, you'll need 11x's to help out and/or broaden in areas that might be fenced off today. When that time comes, if some A1 good idea fairy utters the idea of a "one way door", act swiftly and surely. Crush that idea in the crib, and quietly (or fuck it, publicly and loudly) remove said nearsighted dipshit from any remote chance of doing damage in the future--allow them to seek opportunities elsewhere.
-
Nah, that's about Bexar Co standard.
-
WOM. AFI11-202V1 2.2. Requalification Training. 2.2.1. Unqualified up to 39 months at the end of a non-flying assignment, or up to 51 months at the end of any active flying assignment. Complete training in all delinquent items (as applicable), additional training as directed by the squadron commander, and a requalification evaluation IAW AFI 11-202 Vol 2 and AFI 11-2MDS Vol 2. An ETCA formal school flying training course (TX-3) satisfies this requalification requirement, if specified in the applicable AFI 11-2MDS Vol 1. 2.2.2. Unqualified 39 or more months at the end of a non-flying assignment, or 51 or more months at the end of any active flying assignment, up to 8 Years. Complete the appropriate ETCA formal school flying training course (TX-2) and a flight evaluation IAW AFI 11-202 Vol 2 and AFI 11-2MDS Vol 2. 2.2.3. Unqualified in MDS Over 8 Years. Complete the appropriate ETCA formal school flying training (TX-1) and a flight evaluation IAW AFI 11-202 Vol 2 and AFI 11- 2MDS Vol 2. Don't know if MDS specific V1s are any more restrictive.
-
If that's the case, then there's a failure somewhere in either the chain of command, the functional, the individual, or all of the above. One dude I knew who wanted to remain RPA had to lobby pretty strong to recat. This was when the 11F storm was cresting the horizon; porch didn't want to let him go. Or, dudes that are still (unwillingly) in droneville could be there as an easy bill payer for the porch, which again would be a foul, imo. Regardless, if they are still there, they are way beyond their commitment, and have had ample opportunity to exercise their prerogative options--at this point, big blue is not chaining them there against their will.
-
Huh? TAMI dudes were flowed back out to their jets about the same timeframe as the first UPT directs. ...unless they re-cat'ed
-
-
Or just give them a call. Their number should be in the FCG.
-
-
Wow, stubborn motor. Marines had something similar about 20yrs ago in a unit I was in. IIRC (second hand, wasn't on board the plane) one blade tossed itself about a half mile away, and the rest of the hub shelled itself, peppering the cockpit with fragments.
-
Correct
-
We'd be well served if a few more CCs took cue.
-
Irregardless (Siri auto-completed, btw), if the word gets used enough, it will gain normalcy. https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/normalcy https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/irregardless
