ClearedHot
-
Posts
4,100 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
352
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Gallery
Blogs
Downloads
Wiki
Posts posted by ClearedHot
-
-
-
Engineering degrees are highly desired but not required. Math or science degrees qualify you to apply.
-
Try Royal Bag ( http://www.royal-bag.com/ ), they are located out the back gate at Osan AFB, but they ship to the U.S. If the “name tapes” or “luggage tags” are not on the website drop them a line and tell them what you want. They have almost any color, aircraft, badge you want to embroider. Hope that helps.
-
Airguardian,
I am in DC for another year of school (SAW), the Marine Corps version of SAASS. Looks like I will go to the Air Staff afterwards. You still in training?
-
Polys are not for basic clearances. Usually related to special jobs.
-
Yes
-
The approved work-around, don't tell anyone. It is a BS rule. Spend a few minutes on Saturday morning watching the parking lot and you will see how closely it is followed.
-
I watched a few guys get hurt doing stupid things in UPT, most simply washed back, but one was medically disqualified for a stupid accident.
Just my opinion, but I wanted to become a pilot ever since I watched my old man fly an F-4 up intial on his way back from Vietnam. You may be an expert on the bike, but if it were me I would focus on UPT for a year and hit the race track once I had my wings.
-
You will have time to ride on the weekends, a good way to blow off steam. However, you will have to make time to attend a motorcycle safety course and take a road test. They will attempt to discourage you at every point because the Air Force loses a lot of people each year to motorcycle accidents. Bottom-line, you can ride, but they will make it difficult for you.
-
Huey,
"Context matters", you mentioned the clueless and referenced my post (#2) specifically so I assumed you were rolling in. Either way no hard feelings, I am glad people are debating the issue, because there are many unaswered questions.
I have a very unique vantage point of the CV-22 program from my last job. While I don't think it is the answer for AFSOC, they have waited so long there is almost no other choice. The PAVELOW is one of the most capable systems in the world, but they are very tired and in need of another SLEP if they are going to remain viable.
There is a certain faction that would rather see AFSOC get the 53E from the Marines and retro-fit the PAVE equipment to give AFSOC a three engine helo that can takeoff at 100,000lbs.
I agree about the CSAR capability. We need something that can dash across the FEBA at relative high speed and retrieve downed crews.
About my Dad, he's a retired F-4 / F-15 Pilot, he'd rather just roll in with a MK-82.
Cheers
-
You wanna call me immature, but it was you who insulted my background in the first place.
I am all for a cease fire, but before you tell me to act like an adult you might want to go back to the top and read the posts...for the record you rolled in on me first...Anyway, I'll step down from my soapbox for a while. Sorry bout the lengthy posting, I'm just tired of the uninformed making judgements about things they know little about.Per the ROE, I rolled in out of self defense.
My comments on the CV-22 are based on the last few years working with guys who have flown it. As well as sitting on tactics review boards, where the facts showed the airframe comes up short. I worked in an office with four PAVELOW pilots in the community, all had flown the sim and while they were impressed, not one thought it was the answer. The community is very torn, with many feeling like this thing is being forced down their throats (STS). Sometimes change is good and my initial opinion was that the Osprey was going to be a good thing for SOF. Three years later and I have come to realize it is not.
Ultimately, barring another crash, the USMC and SOF will get the Osprey and no doubt the great military folks that are out there will find a way to make it work. I just hope we don't lose too many of them in the process.
-
So lets throw a bad aircraft into combat to validate your hunch...brilliant.Getting the V-22 in service could result in other designs, as I mentioned above. You took the stance that if we moved on with a new design, we'd kill lots of folks doing so. We lost folks designing a new category of aircraft with the V-22, but operational experience and the lessons learned from the first tilt-rotors would probably mitigate any severe dangers in devloping a new design.
And yet not one bit of time in SOF, but you want to tell me what is the best aircraft to use based on comments from a friend who flew the test bird. I don't care how much time you have in Dust-off and Lear jets, when it comes to SOF, you have no clue. I am clicking past 14 years as a military pilot with a few thousand hours of my own, and most of it in SOF, and I do understand the mission. I find it absolutely fascinating when someone with ZERO experience in the community wants to tell us what is best.I flew for an assault helicopter battalion as well as a medical evac company in the Army for several years. I'm clicking past 8 years as a military pilot having both FW and RW time, so it's interesting that you're pitching me as a newbie who doesn't have a clue.You might not be a Lt Co-pilot but you sure act like one.
-
You missed the point, I said the V-22 is the wrong aircraft for SOF, not the tilt rotor concept.All the naysayer crap I see reminds me of the same doubts when jets, helicopters and other "new" forms of aircraft appeared on the scene.
How many good people have to die in the process of developing a V-23. That approach might have made sense in WW II, but it is absolutely absurd to take that approach in 2004.How the critics were so wrong....The V-22 will mature, if it's given the chance. Send it to the battlefield, and that additional experience will result in the V-22B, V-22C and so on, gradually improving the design. Services will also develop tilt-rotor specific techniques for using the V-22 in battle, independent of procedures used by airplanes or helicopters. And eventually, the V-22 will yield to a V-23 which will incorporate all those things the V-22 didn't have due to technology limits.
We "might" need it someday? Does your C-21 squadron have access to 3-1, if so you might want to take a look.However, while some of you scramble about defending the F/A-22 (I'll admit, we might need it one day, so I'm not advocating we kill that program), you want to kill a program that supports SOF and Marine troops, who ARE presently engaged in combat operations in multiple theaters around the world.
I am always in favor of thinking outside the container and trying new things. In fact, I spent three years at the WIC encouraging the SOF community to do just that. However, when one service brings a new system that makes all of the other services change their tactics, training, and equipment, then maybe it is not the answer. It is not just fast rope that everyone will have to change. Most of the current SOF equipment does not fit inside.Issues like how to fast-rope from the aircraft exist. However, the complaint from reply #2 doesn't fully explain the situation. The problem is the SOF guys can't fast-rope from the V-22 like they can from a helicopter. So, they will have to develop new tilt-rotor specific procedures.
I tell you what. I am at maxwell too, I'll meet you at the club Friday afternoon and I'll put my 7+ years in AFSOC against your time in little white jets any day and we will see who is uniformed.Anyway, I'll step down from my soapbox for a while. Sorry bout the lengthy posting, I'm just tired of the uninformed making judgements about things they know little about. -
Back flying, more problems....surprise. I have heard the aero/flight control engineers are extremely confident they have solved the vortex ring state problem. Many problems/issues remain;
1. Severe brownout problem, up to three times the downwash of current rotary wing systems.
2. Fastrope operations restricted due to downwash problems.
3. Can't hold most current SOF team vehicles.
4. Can't hold SOF team boats.
5. SOF is having problems with avionics because the USMC is controlling the development and they see much of the USAF gear as gold plating.
6. Can't pressurize...although supporters say it would have made a huge difference during Operation Anaconda.
7. No weapons....another stink-bomb waiting to happen. Will they add aerial gunners like current rotary wing assets or go with a pilot controlled chin gun.
Still very political...stay away.
-
AirGuardian, why all the no-caffine stuff in the middle of this stupid exercise? A thankless job, but we were cursing you late yesterday afternoon when our only source of caffine was Lipton Iced Tea.
Remind me again why I stopped flying to come to ACSC?
-
Glad to see the AETC IPs are teaching what the guys in the field will need. Embracing technology has nothing to do with it. GPS is a great tool, but it is not the end all be all. The foundation built in UPT might save someone in combat. There are times GPS isn't there or is not accurate enough to put weapons on target with, especially on the fly. Get the most out of technology but be able to fall back on basic skills when the computer goes tango uniform.Embrace technology or get left behind.
Does NAS Whiting have an ILS?this topic is "Approaches at UPT" -
Wow, how things and attitudes have changed. I remember a mission over Afghanistan when my GPS went figure merit 9, my recovery base was 500-2 with blowing sand and all they had to get back in was a portable TACAN.Doesn't the T-38C have a GPS? If it does then you really don't need a TACAN unless the field you're going to only has TACAN approaches ( mil fields should have an ILS approach).Are we raising a generation of GPS aviators? It is a great tool, but you still need to know how to find your way from point A to point B without a gods-eye view and a computer.
By the way not all mil fields have an ILS, especially in combat.
-
Make sure the theology degree is accredited. I had a friend in my old squadron who got a masters degree in theology and it turns out it was not recognized by the Air Force. He ended up getting passed over to LtCol.
Good Luck!
-
The SOF community is a bit more active. AC-130's shoot live ammo on nearly every training mission, as do MH-53's. The only real limitation is usually getting range time. Aerial gunnery is viewed as a perishable skill so AFSOC and SOCOM place considerable effort and money on maintaining the capability.
On the fighter side, I can't imagine there being a big difference for strafe between TP and HEI, other than what it looks like at impact. Perhaps some minor ballistics that can be compensated for by the mission computer. In the old days you were limited to 100 rounds per training sortie. There was a switch you could bribe the crew chief to reset for you.
I am guessing the big difference is with MKs and GBUs. The jet must feel different when you pitch a few thousand pounds of Tritonal and steel off your wing.
If you want to have the best chance outside combat to drop live bombs, apply to the Weapons School. Fighter and bomber guys going through the Weapons School usually get to drop several types of live rounds while going through the course.
-
The offical boarded program ended a few years ago. Still happens from time to time.
-
When you get to your squadron, shut your pie hole, just listen. Stay in the books and if you know your poop, you will be far better off in the end.
-
Merits to both term and whole life arguments. Those that argue for term and invest the difference assume the person will have the discipline to follow up and invest.
When I was younger it was tough to look at the extra few bucks in my pockets and decide between beer or an investment.
While they may not be the cheapest organization out there, thanks to First Command (formerly USPA), after 15 years I have a very nice nest egg. I started with $300 per month from my first paycheck and never missed it. Another technique is to raise it everytime your flight pay goes up.
Whatever you do, do something. Start now and stay with it.
Good Luck
[ 01 February 2004, 13:45: Message edited by: Clearedhot ]
-
Yes I am late to the fight, because I don't spend me entire life on a message board. Doesn't change tha fact that your comments were dead wrong.
Great insult, did you get that from a Steve Martin movie? I don't know what your problem is, but I'll bet it's hard to pronounce.As far as the rest of your snips from the MWS discussion - way to show up with guns blazing to a fire that's not even smoldering any more. "The jerk stored called...and they're out of you!" -
AirGuardian
Student like yourself seminar 1, no way I would stay at ACSC to instruct. Got picked up for SAW, so I am going to Quantico for another year of school. Hoping for a brief stint on the airstaff then back to fly. 7 June can't get here fast enough...
USAF Weapons School (WIC) info
in General Discussion
Posted
Actually the AFSOC AC-130, MH-53, and MC-130 courses, syllabus and instructors fall under the 57th Wing at Nellis. Collectively they are called the SOF division, and are offically known as the 14th Weapons Squadron, a tenant unit at Hurlburt.
The KC-135 and C-17 courses, syllabus, and instrcutors are not a part of the USAF Weapons School. They belong to AMC and thier students interact with the USAF Weapons School WUGs only during CORE academics and the Mission Employment exercise at the end of the course.