Jump to content

R-Dub

Supreme User
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    81

  • Joined

  • Last visited

 Content Type 

Posts posted by R-Dub

    Latest Movies

    in Squadron Bar

    Posted

    6 hours ago, M2 said:

    And while my smoking hot wife wasn't with me, the brunette sitting next to me was a pleasant travel companion both conversationally and visually!

    Pics or it didn’t happen!

    ?s on ADSC (Active Duty Service Commitment)

    in General Discussion

    Posted

    10 hours ago, brabus said:

    Are you getting out regardless of how the deployment shakes out? If so, why not immediately establish a DOS now?

    In short, no.  I want to see what my next assignment is first.

    9 hours ago, HossHarris said:

    I think 3-day opt is only an option for 365s. If you get tapped for a 180 (or other deployment short of a 365) without a conflicting DOS you are fucked. 

     

    Read up up on the separations afi. It's painful legalese. Once you have a potential plan of action in mind, go talk to the separations people at your mpf. They're good at poking holes in your plans. 

    I'm working on the best interpretations of the AFI that I can, hence the question.  I think talking with the MPF is probably a good idea.

    3 hours ago, Herk Driver said:


    Unless the memo referenced above conflicts then that is not accurate. You can submit a separation package upon notification of the deployment and the DOS will take priority over the deployment. Had this happen to a guy in my squadron several years ago but that memo came out after that.

    Hoss gives you some good advice above and the other question above still stands...are you getting out anyway regardless of what happens with the deployment? If so, establish a DOS now and avoid all of this.


    Sent from my iPhone using Baseops Network Forums

    Herein lies the problem.  My UDM, CC, and my WG/CCE buddy all have a slightly different interpretation to the AFI.  Seems like there's more confusion on this topic than I had thought.

    ?s on ADSC (Active Duty Service Commitment)

    in General Discussion

    Posted

    Quick question to the masses.  My ADSC ends in mid-December.  I'm being notified that I may be hot for a deployment with an in-place date in October.  The deployment extends past the end of my ADSC.  I have not submitted a DOS.  If I do get tagged with the deployment, can I then submit a DOS as the deployment would extend past my current ADSC?  I can find a reference for retirement processing (AFI 36-3203, Table 2.1), but I'm not having any luck with separations.

     Thoughts?

    Single Seat or Strike Eagle?

    in General Discussion

    Posted · Edited by R-Dub

    37 minutes ago, Kenny Powers said:

    Yeah, MEZ pen probably won't be an issue...I mean, you just avoid the SAMs, right???

    I'll stick with my block 50.

    Compelling argument...

     

    Don't get me wrong.  If the choice was proceed with or without SEAD with a Blk 50 squadron ready to fight, the choice is easy.  I always wanted the support.  Libya circa 2011 illustrated very effective F-16/F-15E SEAD/DEAD integration.  Like I said, the bros flying the jet are doing great work.  I have no doubt they will continue to do great work in the Viper.

     

    With that said, if the Blk 50s aren't there, aren't able to support, or are not in enough quantity to be effective, the war goes on.  It can't be a surprise to you that platforms perform deep interdiction/MEZ pen routinely without SEAD support (both in training and with a significant amount of recent historical precendence).  Even with it, the F-16 is not the only asset in the inventory to provide that capability.  

     

    But this thread isn't about how great the F-16 and F-15E were in the past.  I'm confident the F-16 will be the next fighter on the chopping block to sacrifice for F-35 production, just like the A-10.  The F-15E will not (at least in the near term).  I know what I would put on my dream sheet if I was concerned about the next twenty years.  

    • Upvote 1

    Single Seat or Strike Eagle?

    in General Discussion

    Posted · Edited by R-Dub

    5 hours ago, lazlo said:

    I've flown both, and each have their own pros/cons.  The Strike Eagle crew can be a great capability enhancer when both pilot and WSO are working well together. Some crews just gelled. Flying in silence and being on the same page was awesome, and reflected on mission success. The flip side is a crew can also easily drain each other's SA and things go terrible. It is also my understanding that the new WSOs showing up from a program with fewer flight hours/requirements, as opposed to the old Navy WSO/NFO program, and are struggling a bit and taking much longer to reach the level of proficiency required to perform.

    I'm currently in the single best job in the USAF where I'm current/qualified in the Eagle and the Viper.  Complete disclosure, I was a Strike Eagle baby growing up.  

    I agree completely with a lot of this sentiment.  There are some sorties, both training and combat, that I'll never forget because of the leathality present with a formation of F-15Es with sound crew coord.  However, having a bad day with a bad WSO/poor crew coord is miserable.  The crew construct really is a force multiplier; for the good and the bad.  A good crew is way better than the equivalent effort of two people.  Having a bad crew day makes me feel like I need more than double the effort just to make ends meet.

    5 hours ago, lazlo said:

    The Viper is awesome, doing everything I used to do and flying the jet at the same time. The same SA draining example mentioned above can still apply, it just moves out to your element/formation level instead of within the cockpit. (experiences have been few and far between) I do miss the big radar and more bombs, but I wouldn't trade it.  Call me a wuzzo WSO hater, but single-seat is awesome.

    I wish I could articulate how obvious it is to immediately distinguish the difference between the designed mission set of these two aircraft on your first Viper sortie.  The Viper with a GE motor on a cold day truly is a rocket ship.  I've taken a single-bag jet on a sub-freezing morning with a GE-100 to FL300 on an unrestricted climb.  It's a ton of fun!

     

    2 hours ago, Longhorn15 said:

    The Strike Eagle is awesome, and flying with a WSO is nothing like having an IP with you in the jet at UPT.  Having a WSO is invaluable when doing DT or CAS, which just so happens to be what we've been doing for the last 15 years.  

    For the initial Libya strikes F-15Es nearly overflew Aviano (F-16 base) on their way down from the UK, while the Vipers sat on the ground. 

    When the COCOM wanted jets in Turkey as a show of force to the Russians last fall, who did they send...Vipers?  Nope.  Strike Eagles again.

    If you get a choice, choose wisely.

    I've never taken the Viper to combat.  Having said that, I'm not sure I would ever want to.  The jet is a nightmare from a human factors or avionics perspective.  The RADAR is a joke.  The ability to utilize sensors is still a slave to a 1970s construct that has been completely debunked and remains a complete liability to the airframe.  Many of the current DT efforts are an attempt to bring the jet to a level that is, in many ways, equivalent with F-15E Suite 5, let alone Suite 9.  Except for Auto ICAS.  I wish the F-15C/D/E could get that, if only for risk reduction.  In many ways, the Viper jet is a true testament to the dudes flying the jet.  There's a ton of compensation required to employ it effectively, and the bros have done an amazing job over the last 25 years making that jet as lethal as it has been.  

    Having said that, there's a reason the USAF is spending $10B to maintain the F-15 fleet through 2050 and replacing the Viper.  Pick the jet you would take to war.  That's a pretty easy choice for the current COCOMs.  Good luck on your decision.

     

    • Upvote 2

    What's wrong with the Air Force?

    in General Discussion

    Posted · Edited by R-Dub

    1 hour ago, di1630 said:

    $12B could have bought a few more F-22s I think.

    http://www.cnn.com/2016/09/02/politics/us-air-force-f-15-upgrades/index.html

    You're correct in your assessment of only a few jets.  

    http://www.rand.org/content/dam/rand/pubs/monographs/2010/RAND_MG797.pdf

    1 hour ago, Muscle2002 said:

    The article doesn't mention the fact that the upgrades are for both C-models and E-models as they move to a common OFP. So while the author focuses on air-to-air, there are key capabilities coming with the improved hardware and software for the air-to-ground role.

    Exactly right.  The 2010 RAND analysis estimated $20B (FY08) to get 75 F-22s.  This already ignores the current $1.2B software development and other developmental efforts currently on-going with the aircraft.  Not sure where CNN gets $12B for the F-15 efforts (the last I was aware was $10B was approved in FY15 for EPAWSS, common OFP, SLEP, and others), but you get ~450 aircraft (F-15C/D/E) good through 2048.  

     

    I personally agreed with this decision when it came out due to the cost/benefit and return for the US tax payer, IMHBAO.

     

    Edit: I don't spell so good...

    ADS-B in Military Aircraft

    in General Discussion

    Posted

    Based on the preliminary information, it might very well have prevented the F-16 mid-air.

    What in the preliminary report makes you say that ADS-B would have made a difference in this instance? As you've heard, there isn't a push for fighter ADS-B yet. Maybe Congress gets involved and SAF/AQ and the SPOs have to change their tune, but if it was 1 Jan 2020, this accident could have still happened. That Cessna is not that likely to get ADS-B out because there's simply no need for it on the shear overwhelming preponderance of flights for your typical Cessna-150 sortie.

    Invest that $500 in ADS-B.

    I was in an industry briefing recently where they showed the number of work days left, the number of qualified avionics shops, and the number of GA aircraft that will need ADS-B installs. If their data is accurate, it is starting to get ugly now.

    I've been hearing this for years now! Those estimates are always incredibly over-inflated! I'm willing to bet a large percentage of GA don't convert to ADS-B out for years after the mandate because they simply won't have a dire need. Just like this incident, the airspace/aircraft utility won't require it. There's plenty of people who will wait to see how the roll-out of the reg change works and waits for the cost/"swamped avionics shops" to normalize. I know I'm in no particular rush.

    Only my $0.02. Take it for what it's worth.

    ADS-B in Military Aircraft

    in General Discussion

    Posted

    Not sure ADS-B is going to solve all of the potential terminal area accidents like this midair. This accident happened in airspace that won't mandate ADS-B in 2020, and most Cessna 150s probably won't have ADS-B upgrades more often than those that do. I know I'm preaching to the choir, but more technology isn't going to make flying low/near congested airspace fail safe or without some inherent risk (although the risk is significantly less). Keep your nuggets on a swivel, all!

    Questions on TPS (Test Pilot School)

    in General Discussion

    Posted

    ...words...

    Bro, here's some totally unsubstantiated rumors on the selection process that I and some of the other dudes from my class have heard about the process. Alibi: I have absolutely no idea how the selection board actually works or what the criteria actually is outside the scope of my own application process or those of my bros/classmates. This is strictly RUMINT:

    - My understanding of the selection process is that "no news is bad news." The only way you would know if your waivers were actually approved is if you received an invite to the CCEP. If you never received explicit notification that your waiver requests were approved, then they probably weren't.

    - speaking of waivers... AFI 99-107 went through a revision in 2013 that restricted the maximum TIS for pilot applicants. I was told during my CCEP interview that this was because the average pilot applicant was generally already a major select with a school slot. That means that TPS grads were barely getting their 2 years TOS at their first CTF before they went to school, staff, then back to a CTF to be the DO. In order to get a little more experience under their belt, AFTC/AFMC simply reduced the TOS requirement. This will obviously reduce the number of eligibles for each application cycle, but apparently there's still more elligible applicants than number of available slots, so it's not a problem for AFTC.

    - Because of the previous, the RUMINT is that the TIS waiver is pretty difficult to get right now. I've heard of people getting it in the past, but I don't think anyone currently at the school needed/received one. I know there's a pretty old dude in either 15B/16A, but I don't know the specifics.

    - The answer is always no if you don't apply. I would apply again.

    Good luck!

    Pilot watches

    in General Discussion

    Posted

    Just curious, is any aviator allowed to partake in this program, or is it only pilots? I know the form says pilot but I don't know if other aircrew is included as well.

    The last Strike Eagle order that delivered this past spring had a bunch of WSOs/aircrew temporarily out of the cockpit/ALOs on it. No issues with Omega.

×
×
  • Create New...