FourFans

In the school's "safe zone"

So you stand against the law, but not enough to suffer discomfort (whatever consequence is currently tied that law) to see it repealed. Dr. King has some words of wisdom in that arena. Stating the specific law you're fighting against would make this a much more productive discussion as the root morality of that law should be the topic of debate. Clearly you think the law immoral (from your perspective) and wish it repealed, yet elected officials (past or present) disagree. Is that on the mark? P.S. In my opinion, your statement on "inalienable rights" and how we are born into those rights is the modern entitlement generation's interpretation of a concept our founding father's laid down...not the founding father's original interpretation. The father's meant it from a core of duty and responsibility, "millennials" (the attitude, not the birthdate) mean it as their birthright, not something to be earned and upheld. They want to fight FROM that right, not FOR it. Our modern interpretation of those "inalienable rights" is what will bring America to its knees because it breeds entitlement, not responsibility. P.P.S. I think the draft should only exist during times of crisis and absolute need (i.e. not now). Draftees would universally lower our fighting edge. I agree that if the whole nation feels the pain of the conflict and has to pay the price (WWII) the quality of the nation improves. What that price is forced on them (Vietnam), resentment takes deep root and nothing good comes from it.

Been reading Heinlein again, eh? Sound logic and good thinking that will take an existential threat to play out in CONUS before "we" get there.

Truer words were never spoken.

FIFY

Huggy's chances are looking better. http://www.military.com/daily-news/2017/10/24/air-force-working-implementation-trumps-pilot-recall-order.html?ESRC=airforce-a_171025.nl

Yes

Because the stop loss has already started, just not by that term yet.

"What does conventional conflict look like with a nuclear element?" - CSAF Sir, conventional war with a nuclear element looks like nuclear war. If I bring a gun to a knife fight, is it still a knife fight? Brilliant. If NK uses a nuclear weapon, I'm fairly confident that NCA will drop orders to make sections of that country into glass-floored self-lighting parking lots, and the commanders of NORTHCOM and STRATCOM won't have much of a say in it. Where is Buck Turgidson when you need him?

Is anyone else seeing this as preparatory fire? A bunch of 15-17 year pilots start considering retirement or separation because it will provide better money, quality of life, stability...better everything...so they consider hopping the fence to the airlines. USAF targets retirement with every weapon possible to make retirement look less attractive. (this is where we are now) Fast forward 1-3 years - If the pilot stays, USAF says 'good choice, enjoy this critical yet entirely purposeless useless staff job'. If he leaves, they say 'I told you so' and involuntarily recall him...to that same useless staff job. All the while the USAF gets to continue complaining it has a shortage of pilots...only now it's a shortage of pilots actually in cockpits. This is another step in fixing the hole in the damn before they fix the source of the pilots. Shrewd. Completely vacant of integrity or morale leadership, but shrewd. No way the SECDEF would simply drop this on the CSAF without a backroom discussion first. CSAF is simply damage controlling to maintain the image that he's on the side of the pilots. This was no surprise.

Concur! Sadly, in a world where people are too lazy to even type out the words "too long, didn't read", very few will take up the charge of self education, though your recommendations are spot on. The laziness of an America that would rather debate their opinions rather than learn facts, analyze them, and put their opinions to the test...possibly even changing them...this is one of the root causes of our problem. If cowards went out into the world and discover that their situation isn't really as bad as they thought, they wouldn't go on murderous rampages. Alas, we live in a world where it's all about 'me', and when that world all about 'me' turns depressing, it's everyone else's fault, so I'll kill as many of them as I can before I go out in a blaze of glory...which often actually ends in a tragic homicide/suicide. You want to change this world right now? Parent your kids. Seriously. If fathers in America simply stood up and fathered their children, events like this wouldn't happen. I'm not saying it's easy. It isn't. But nothing worth doing ever is. Here's a challenge: If you are a father, put the device down, and engage with the those hearts and minds you created...they're watching everything you do and don't do, and they'll respond in kind. Teach them your beliefs. Give them a foundation on which to stand when the world turns ugly, and they'll be able to stand. Raise men and women, not teenagers who never grew up. ...standing by for the TL, DR response.

Your terminology invalidated your arguments. Only grandparents and M2 spout phrases like that.

Thanks for the assist.

Any society that would give up a little liberty to gain a little security will deserve neither and lose both. (paraphrasing Benjamin Franklin) Unfortunately, modern America has a very short memory. Historically, when suppressions of vices and liberties are emplaced in the name of social responsibility, dictators rise to take the reigns of the socialist movement, and tragedy ensues. On the flip side, you never hear about these mass attacks occurring in places like Switzerland, where virtually the whole population is part of the militia and owns an automatic rifle. American society doesn't need more fences to keep the wolves away, it needs more people with a sheepdog mentality, along with the abolishment of entitlement, such as "it's the federal government's responsibility to protect me from everything".

Revival. I'm a bit surprised I haven't seen more discussion here about the mounting Russian threat. https://www.wsj.com/articles/russia-targets-soldier-smartphones-western-officials-say-1507109402 I'm not shocked that the average American doesn't care, it's all too far away and the media isn't selling it. I can attest that Eastern Europe and the Baltics are justly concerned however. If Russia advances, NATO won't even be a speed bump. US, UK, and German airpower will be the only immediate response that's even remotely effective. These guys are evolving modern combat employment faster than anyone on the planet.

Concur. Sounds a lot like a Stoner or an M-60. Either way, a lot of firepower for someone to sneak into a hotel room, especially someone not known as a gun guy. Appears to be a lone wolf gone crazy, but it doesn't smell right. Prayers and condolences to the victims and their families.

and a good ride for anyone who only wants female offspring

Not if you ask 603rd or the CAOC's AMD judging by the number of times I heard: "We've got the waiver already approved for you..." when I never asked for it. I can see both sides of this argument, but I don't understand why they picked this particular target right now. Like putting a JDAM on the outhouse of a SAM site. Maybe it's been on the chopping block for a while, but as a priority seems right up there with rolling up sleeves.

Have you seen ops in Africa? What you're referring to is how we used to roll...specifically in A-stan and in hi-vis theaters. That's not how we roll in conflicts that the US media doesn't see or care about. If it makes it to CNN, there will be an F-16, F-22, or F-35 (heaven help us) dropping ordinance. Iraq, Syria, and A-stan are catalysts, not the intended theaters. At least that's how I hope the LAAR concept is being developed. Ok...so it's all REALLY a program to get rid of the A-10, but hopefully there is also a sincere purpose and mission for the airframe we're pursuing. ...or perhaps I'm just an idealist who refuses to quit...

Yeah, it's in the retire-and-go-fly-for-the-airlines memo right under to the it's-unwise-to-stay-in-AD-past-20 paragraph. The USAF doesn't care about O-5's as pilots. If they did, they'd care about getting pilots to make O-5. There is non-committed/previously expired bonus eligible text in the PSDM. But if a qualified pilot is past 20 and has no ADSC, I would seriously question their sanity for taking a bonus and staying instead of getting out.

There is nothing good about an FEB. I've been party to a couple. There has to be a whole lot of documentation, wrecked career(s), maybe a wrecked airplane, and a lot of painful waiting (months, if not years) while squadron mates stew in speculation and sideline quarterbacking. While FEBs do expose a lot of ground truth, they also open the door for a lot of opinion, personal and professional bias, hearsay, and straight up misinformation to enter in to the "judgment" process. Often the FEB is the second or third major investigative event in a string that can politely be described as 'forcible body cavity examinations' for the crew member(s) involved. One of the FEBs I saw was completely overturned by the convening official because the panel's judgments missed the mark so badly. Just another perspective. FF

Any words on the cost of the 3.5 motors plus install? It could majorly improve capability across the force if it's cost effective. Those performance numbers sound similar to the J. I'd be curious to see the TOLD numbers. Using line crews as test pilots. I cringed at that. Especially after the recent Marine KC-130 crash. Fly safe fellas. FF

U-28 guys get kinda touchy about their weight.

I wonder how deep Big Blue is going to bury the data about the number of pilots turning down continuation. That'd be a great slide for the AMC/A1 road show.