alwyn2d
-
Posts
100 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Gallery
Blogs
Downloads
Wiki
Posts posted by alwyn2d
-
-
The difference being they filled the HARVEST HAWK program with guys with CAS experience. Multiple pilots from air-to-ground platforms, some FAC(A)s, have been in the program from the beginning to ensure it's done RIGHT. I agree the AF can learn a thing or two from that.
Since the AF is reducing the fighter fleet by at least 250 airframes over the next several years, I think we found our CAS experience. Either the C-130 mini gunship or a RPV. What would be your choice?
-
Backseatdriver
Well it looks like the USMC will bring this concept to the fight for their KC-130J crews because they are in the position to know the risk in not taking the risk in supporting their INFANTRYMAN with additional airborne firepower. Perhaps the AF can learn from the USMC for a change.
-
Is the AF getting the Harvest Hawk package like the USMC for their C-130s? It would be an added plus for the airlift fleet and bring more fight to the enemy.
Tac Air isn't needed as much when the largest enemy vehicle is a Toyota 4x4 in Afgan. Let the C-130s drop the Candy and see who picks it up. If it's the bad guys, fire them up.
Perhaps the CoS being an old AC-130 guy will find the funding. How much would one F-35 cost anyway? Bet you can get 5 Harvest Hawk packages for the price of one F-35. Are there any AF C-130 crews that would like to pickup that additional mission? Better than flying a RPV in getting kills.
-
White House aides insisted F-22 be removed from Obama speech venue
When President Obama spoke to troops at Alaska's Elmendorf Air Force Base last month, the unit there parked a shiny new F-22 fighter plane in the hanger. But according to multiple sources, White House aides demanded the plane be changed to an older F-15 fighter because they didn't want Obama speaking in front of the F-22, a controversial program he fought hard to end.
"White House aides actually made them remove the F-22-said they would not allow POTUS to be pictured with the F-22 in any way, shape, or form," one source close to the unit relayed.
Stephen Lee, a public affairs officer at Elmendorf, confirmed to The Cable that the F-22 was parked in the hanger and then was replaced by an F-15 at the White House's behest.
The airmen there took offense to the Obama aides' demand, sources told The Cable, seeing it as a slight to the folks who are operating the F-22 proudly every day. They also expressed bewilderment that the White House staff would even care so much as to make an issue out of the fact that the F-22 was placed in the hanger with the president.
A White House official, commenting on background basis, told The Cable that yes, there were discussions about which plane or planes would be in the hanger, but that they were not meant as an insult to the pilots and other personnel who work on the F-22. The official couldn't elaborate on why the White House aides felt it necessary to get involved in the matter in the first place.
The official pointed to Obama's speech to the troops that day, where he praised both the 90th Fighter Squadron, known as the "Dicemen," and the 525th Fighter Squadron, the "Bulldogs," both of which operate the F-22.
Even so, the Air Force personnel thought it odd the White House wanted to display the older plane rather than the more advanced plane that, in the eyes of its supporters, represents the latest and greatest in American aviation.
The Obama administration fought hard and successfully to cut off production of the F-22 at 187 planes, a number Defense Secretary Robert Gates endorsed but that was hundreds less than originally planned and about half of the 381 planes Air Force leadership lobbied hard for in the years preceding Obama's inauguration.
"It's one thing to be against further production; quite another to slight the folks who are flying them in the operational world," one source said, adding that "the F-15 pictured was put into service roughly around the same period when Obama graduated from college. It's vintage."
Weird...
When Sec of Def Cheney requested on several occasions to cancel the CV-22 program, do you think he would have an official photograph by a CV-22? You make a decision and live with the consequences, especially in politics.
-
Zrooster99
OverTQ
You Guys are half right. Want to guess which one? Retired or a Chief Warrant Officer.
-
Man, you really like to make a lot of assumptions, don't you? I'm a FGO, by the way.
It's about time the AF recognized the talents of a former Army aviator. The Thunderbirds had a former Army aviator in the 70s flying the #2 position. You guys are taking over. By the way, what is the rotation length for active C-130 crews down range?
-
Well, the Army O-6 should somehow (not saying it IS this way, just an idea) make use of an AMLO to know what can/can't be done with USAF fixed-wing assets. Worst case, the USAF mission commander should be able to tell the O-6 what can/can't be done.
Being a junior Officer (Hueypilot812) you may not see the slowly changing of the AF mindset in supporting the Ground Commander (GC). But then again, you do see all by virtue of being an C-130 EP. Comes with that position :o). If you want to put a time frame on the changes, I would say around 2005. That's when the ILO/JET assignments started to be common place. We have AF Enlisted casualties in Army units for years now. I wouldn't be surprised that we lost more Airman in Army units then AF flight crewmembers in Iraq/Afgan.
Recently, AF Basic Training was increased to 8.5 weeks where at least a week is spent in a field environment with weapons (M-16). Then, the Sec AF and CoS were fired. And, the new CoS career in Special Ops is grounded in supporting the GC. That appointment wasn't made by mistake by Gates in kicking the fighter mafia to the curb. It sent out a powerful message to better support the (GC). More UAS and a new career field for non rated Officers hopefully dedicated in better supporting the GC mission. Next taking charge on the C-27J program and the new MC-12W mission in learning to better support the GC needs. The AF is even looking at acquiring 100 light attack aircraft for supporting the GC. Lastly, your new PT program. Oh, you guys are getting to look like Army more and more each day by being in better shape.
Change always comes slowly for junior Officers and never fast enough but over the last 5 years the AF has made more strides in serving the Army and its mission than ever before. You being prior Army, you understand it took from 1947 to 1983 before the Army created an Aviation Branch. Then the Warrant Officer aviators had to wait until 2004 before being branched aviation. I bet some lowly Army CW2 aviator in the 1950s ask why there wasn't an Aviation Branch in his time and why the wait.
Young AF Officers going through these recent policy changes now will make the necessary changes for the better in the future regarding Army support. I realize I'm not telling you anything new, just keep up with your PME and civilian education to be in a position to make those changes with future promotions. But, that will obviously take you out of the cockpit. I guess that's what an Officer is all about, making CHANGES. Change is in the air and even an old salt like me can see it. Just hang in there and take the point. You care in getting the job done RIGHT.
-
The Army's biggest problem is it is the Army and run by Infantry, Armor & Artillery Officers. They see the aviation Branch as someone who takes there funding. They do whine about crew rest, weather and other factors they have no understanding of. Everyone suffers because of this. The guard is in real need of a replacement for the C-23. Our stateside mission depends on it.
Army Aviation had a strong advocate in Gen. Cody, but he's gone. You only have to look to the defunc RAH-66 program to see how well the Army manages programs. After 14 billion dollars in R&D they decided that it didn't fit our needs. We used the money for the LUH and ARH. I flew the LUH and it is a POS. The ARH has been cancelled due to cost. Our KW pilots need a new airframe. They have to suffer because Army Aviation can't get their crap together.
The fix wing guys flying Oden have to deal with flying some pretty s*&ty aircraft. The Air Force might not have wanted the mission, but at least they got you guys new King Air 350's. I think they did that program of the shelve in record time. The Army fly's the same mission. Why don't we buy the same aircraft?
I can see why the AF doesn't want the Army involved in procurement. My rant foe the day.
Gen Cody was truly an exception to the rule. He had over 5000 flight hours in his career. I bet you have a few CW4/CW5 that have fewer hours. The Army CoS position will always be held by a non rated General Officer. That being the case, they will always look upon the aviation branch as sucking funding from their other needed programs. Especially, since the RAH-66 Comanche funding is all about depleted.
The Army just goes out of their way to be Army different regarding aviation. You guys not only wear two piece flight suits, you can't even wear your hard earn wings on the A2CU when flying. If you're going to be a pilot, at least look like one. Plus your aviation commanders have less flying experience than your squadron/company pilots. What's up with that? What a way to run a railroad. But, the Army are the true professional in helo operations, hands down. Perhaps in the near future they will pickup the AF CSAR mission as well. Sec Def Gates is hinting at this for the time being. AF may not like that but CSAR request for $15B for a new helo may put them out of business.
The AF could easily pick up the Army's fixed wing missions on the active duty and ANG/AFRes side. Hopefully, they will allow the Army pilots to transfer over to the AF if given the option. There's only 250-275 aircraft total. There is new leadership and mindset in the AF today on the General Officer level. That took effect when the last AF CoS and Sec AF were fired. The AF is recognizing the importance of the Army's tactical environment and the systems they need in their war on terror. From UAS, MC-12 and the C-27J. In addition, the AF is reviewing the need for at least 100 light tactical fixed wing aircraft. They see the writing on the wall and they best get with the program. As long as the AF CoS is a pilot, he/she will find ways to put 2Lts in pilot seats. This comes about on the AF CoS love of flying in the biggest and baddest AF in the World. Truly flying above the best.
-
I have no idea, but seeing as though MD will be the first ANG unit with them, it might wind up there. Who knows.
Yes, it is nice to receive new airframes, but no, the USAF leadership didn't really want this mission. They DID, however, want to prevent the Army from being in control of a fixed-wing flying program. Regarding the tactical airlift, look at how the USAF leadership employs the tac airlifters it has now. Landing in the dirt isn't quite as common as it should be, and airdrops could be more frequent. But the USAF leadership doesn't want to risk bending airplanes to help out the Army, which is why the Army turned to civilian operators like Blackwater for many airdrop/LZ missions. 98% of all tac airlift missions in theater begin and end on a 10,000'+ paved runway.
It has more to do with budgets and manning, and less to do with Gates coming to the USAF's defense. Honestly, Gates has kept the C-27 alive because once the Army backed out due to funding, I can guarantee you the USAF senior leadership would have loved to have just killed the entire program.
It's only their bread and butter because of public law. Look at the Navy and Marines...both have complete FW and RW assets. Only the Army and AF argue and fight over this nonsense. And honestly, do you REALLY think that AF senior leadership would do any better at the RW mission? The Army has helos because they are organic and necessary components of their force structure. The Army couldn't function the way it does without having their own aviation assets.
What's your reasoning for this? The Army has certain fixed-wing assets because the USAF can't or won't fill those mission needs, such as battlefield ISR, OSA requirements and in this case, "real" tactical airlift. The Army has C-23 Sherpas that they have utilized to the max. Those airplanes flew the missions that couldn't or wouldn't get fulfilled through AFCENT. The USAF has traditionally been focused on the strategic level...it has always regarded missions like COIN, tac airlift and other niche missions as irritations.
Your suggestion sounds fine on paper, but in reality, if the Army sent its C-12s, C-23s and RC-12s to the USAF, Big Blue would likely retire most if not all of those airframes and just do away with the mission so it could allocate funds somewhere else that it deems higher priority...leaving the Army short.
That's pretty f'king retarded to say something like that. "if they can meet AF standards"? I'm sure you, as a USAF pilot, could easily go jump in an Army helo and fly the hell out of it, right? Because after all, Army pilots are a step above cave men, correct? I'd be willing to bet that you would be challenged to learn how to fly helicopters and employ them in the manner the Army does.
On second thought, maybe you feel Army aviators aren't as savvy as USAF pilots because they lack the micromanaged volumes of regulations the USAF has to govern flying operations. The Army operates much like the Navy does...it's a big boy program...here are a few basic rules and regs, the rest is up to you to apply common sense...f'k up and we'll hammer your nuts. Not like the USAF where every little move you make in the cockpit has a rule attached to it.
I'm sure the Army aviators on here are reading that quote wondering if you'd be able to "meet Army standards".
It's not if the AF wants the mission, if directed and in this case by the Sec Def, it best be done. He fired the last CoS AF for not carrying out his directives. It really pisses me off, when the Army always complaining about AF support as if the AF doesn't give a damn about the ground commander's mission. Army aviators hear the same crap from the non rated Army officers in mission support. Damn aviators, just can't get the job done. I bet there wasn't one Army aviation general officer that agreed with the C-27J transfer. But, the Army CoS did. Must be non rated.
Believe me, it was absolutely necessary for the Army Air Force to separate from the Army in 1947. You talk about stringent AF regs, why do you think they came about? Back in the 30-40s the Army lost hundreds if not thousands of aircrew members due to poor equipment/funding/training in PEACE TIME. The Army ground commanders did not have a clue on the dangers of aviation or their use. If you're Infantry and tired lay down. Tired in an aircraft, your life's in jeopardy. USAF regs are written in blood to save lives and assets including Army lives.
Meeting the AF standards are quite easy. If you're an Army RLO aviator, a interservice transfer is possible if the fixed wing assets are transferred. For the Warrant Officer aviators, they must have a 4 yr degree without exception and approx 40% of the WO do not. And, the WO must attend AF OTS before the age of 35 to earn their commission. If the WO aviators are unable to meet these standards, they will not have the option in transferring. If the Army aviators do not wish to transfer in the numbers needed, the AF will just plus up on SUPT. Don't think this transfer will ever happen but it would open up more pilot seats for our 2nd Lts.
Regarding AF CSAR mission, that may be on the chopping block based on funding not available for new airframes.
-
The Army Chief of Staff made this decision not the Sec Def. The Army is a little busy right now and would not be able to man the MC-12 and C-27 so the C-27 mission went to the ANG.
The Army guard is in desperate need of the C-27 and I see more making it to the ARNG.
I think you'll see the Army fixed wing fleet move to the Air Force when the Air Force gives up all of its rotary wing assets. They are already trying to pilfer the Army med mission in OEF so why not just transfer those assets to the Army. Never going to happen on either side.
If the Army CoS gave up the C-27J, perhaps he'll be willing to transfer the other fixed wing assets but not likely. He must be non rated officer. AF needs pilot seats especially on the fixed wing side.
Sec Def stopped the purchase of the HH-47s for the AF. AF rescue mission is under review. Gates has stated he wanted to see if there a more inexpensive way of rescuing aircrew members other than with a dedicated mission. Question, how much is a crew member worth dollar wise. We would like to say any amount, but we don't have an unlimited budget. Gates still has his hand in the cookie jar on that decision.
-
Now, that the ANG has the C-27J mission in total, where is the C-27J School House? I have no idea if the AF senior leadership truly wanted this mission, but it's great in receiving new airframes regardless of size. Nice decision on the part of Sec Def Gates, who made it possible. He cut the legs from under the Army on this one.
Since the AF likes to play down and dirty by playing Army with new PT standards and JET/ILO assignments nowadays, why not transfer all of the Army's fixed wing aircraft to the AF as well. That will be an additional 250-275 airframes. Possibly another 800-900 pilot positions. Let the Army specialize in helos, that's their bread and butter anyway. If the Army pilots want tactical fixed wing aircraft, join the Air Force if they can meet AF standards. The AF need all the fixed wing airframes they can get their hands on, as our force structure is dwindling on a daily basis.
-
Does the 23d FTS have their full compliment of TH-1H at Ft Rucker for training? Or are they using a mix of UH-1H and TH-1H? I assume they are training on the TH-1H by now.
Have any recent grads been awarded UAS assignments out of Ft Rucker? If not, I assume their possible assignments are HH-1H, HH-60, CV-22, or FAIP.
How long is HH/UH-1N training at Kirtland AFB? Since students leave Ft Rucker with over 100hrs in the Huey, is it just a few months?
By the way, what is the difference between the UH-1H and the HH-1H models?
What is the mission of the CV-22 anyway? Will the 160th SOAR in the near future replace it? Seems like the Army wants to serve their own. They are upgrading their CH-47s and arming their Blackhawks.
Is there a possibility the USAF may loose the CSAR mission? If that's the case, will the AF be out of the helo business for the most part. Of course, the AF will still need their helos to fly Generals around Wash DC. Also, can't forget the silo missile crew members, don't want them to be late for roll call.
-
Jacob
One point I would like to clarify. The HH-53 school house closed in the spring of '07. Helo assignments out of Ft Rucker are restricted to the HH-60, HH-1H and now the CV-22. First assignment instructor pilot (FAIP) assignments at Ft Rucker are a possibility in the UH-1 and the TH-1H in the future.
-
1) Your pay may decrease somewhat from CW2 to 2Lt depending on the regs.
2) All your federal military time counts towards retirement.
Three other points that must be mentioned. (all regs subject to change)
1) As an aviation Army Warrant Officer you MUST be AF commissioned by your 35th birthday as a 2nd Lt. Your Army Warrant Officer commission does not count. AF does not recognize the Army's Warrant Officer commission since the AF does not have Warrant Officers in their ranks. You can obtain an AF commission by attending OTS or thru ROTC.
2) You must have a 4 yr degree without exception since 1962.
3) If accepted into the AF as a LT, you'll have the option of attending fixed wing flight training with an additional 10 yr commitment as well. Need not attend flight school if you only want to fly helos. Flying a F-22A at super cruise is almost as good as flying low level in a helo or hovering.
The route you're mentioning has been done by 100s of ex Army aviation warrants. AF isn't a bad way to go. Aim higher.
-
1) If I am a warrant officer in the army and rated to fly rotor, would I apply for UPT boards or as a rated officer?
Yes. If you wish to fly AF helos, you need not go thru SUPT once competing your AF commissioning source (AMS or OTS). Commitment time is less as well. If you attend SUPT for a fixed wing assignment, your commitment is 10 years.
2) When applying to air guard units, would I still need to be under the age limit of 30 for UPT or since I would be rated would that not matter?
No. If you're an rated Warrant Officer aviator the max age is 34. If not, 30 without waivers. The age of 34 is based on the max age of attending OTS for AF active duty/AF Reserves. AF Guard may be different since they have their own Officer commissioning program, AMS.
3) How would an air guard unit look at someone with army helo experience? Would this help or hinder the application process?
Great. There are thousands of ex Army pilots that made the decision to aim higher vs lower.
One of the reasons why the AF does not recognize the commissioned Warrant Officer rank is because the AF does not have any Warrant Officers in their ranks. The last appointed AF Warrant Officer was in 1959. The last AF Warrant retired in 1992 after being selected for CW5 in the reserves. He never pinned it on.
Do remember the AF is the most selective service in selecting pilot applicants. They turn down applicants with Master degees on many ocassions. Where as the Army will select applicants with a GED and a few college credits. The AF Guard/Res have their way of doing things but their selection standards are higher than the Army's.
-
brabus
The Warrant Officer rank is NOT a "sort of enlisted title". They're full fledge Officers that are due the respect of any officer. From being saluted by all enlisted ranks from E-1 thru E-9 to being members of the O'clubs, if O'clubs are still around. They are specialist in their given career field and Army aviation couldn't function without them.
-
TalonLM
If you decide to go Army Aviation, you have some important decisions to make regarding your flying career. In the Army, Warrant Officer Pilots are their professional pilot force. They are the Examiners, IPs, Safety Officers, Mx Officers and everyday pilots in the unit. They fly their entire career. The commissioned officers ie LT and above, fly for 2-3 yrs then start their staff tours. Many Army commissioned officer aviators do not even reach the position of aircraft commander, always logging co pilot time.
Commissioned officers provide the leadership in the aviation units and the Warrant Officers provide the flying expertise. The Army is the only service that runs their aviation organization this way. In fact, every year there are a number of Army Commissioned Officers that take a reduction in rank to Warrant Officer to continue their flying career without regrets.
I recommend for you to participate in asking questions on this army aviation discussion board.
http://forums.military.com/eve/forums/a/frm/f/3241924461
It will give you a better idea on the aviation career paths of Warrant and Commisssioned Officers. In the Army, the aviation warrant officers call their commissioned officer counterparts (2nd Lt and above) RLOs. Stands for Real Live Officers.
With your previous enlisted time you may want to go Warrant to stay in the cockpit until retirement. If you elect to go the commissioned aviator route I can almost assure you that your last five years in the Army will not be in the cockpit. That's a disadvantage if you wish to have a commercial flying career after retirement.
The Army aircraft fleet does include fixed wing aircraft as well. About 8% of the fleet is starch wing. Mainly C-12, C-21 and a few Gulf Streams C-20, C-37. Once again, piloted by the Warrant Officers for the most part.
I went from being an Army aviator to an AF pilot back in the 70s. Both flying careers were great, and believe me two very different mindsets.
Aviators in the Army are not on the top of the heap, it's the Infantry. As an Army aviator, your sole existence is in support of the Groud Commander. The Army takes great pride in parking their helos in the field with their ground counterparts. You get to set up field tents, pull security, wear war paint and two piece flight suits that look like BDUs.
Best of luck in your career change. And, army aviation isn't a bad way to go, just different. Thanks for your service, check six and happy landings.
-
Active Duty AF would be pretty much be out of the question. That would require an interservice transfer and the requirements are very restrictive. Check out the AF web site for the details.
http://www.afpc.randolph.af.mil/specfly/Tr...er/interser.htm. You may have to cut and paste this site.
Your best bet would be the AF Guard/Reserves as you stated. Plently of ex-Army flyers that have seen the light and made the transition. In order to fly in the AF, you need not wear 2 piece flight suits or war paint :). If you're going to fly, at least look like a pilot for crying out loud.
Seems like the Army is a good training ground for the AF. And remember the AF is rich in History, Aviation bonuses (active duty only), Per Diem and Crew Rest.
-
Active Duty AF would be pretty much be out of the question. That would require an interservice transfer and the requirements are very restrictive. Check out the AF web site for the details.
http://www.afpc.randolph.af.mil/specfly/Tr...er/interser.htm.
Your best bet would be the AF Guard/Reserves as you stated. Plently of ex-Army flyers that have seen the light and made the transition. In order to fly in the AF, you need not wear 2 piece flight suits or war paint :). If you're going to fly, at least look like a pilot for crying out loud.
Seems like the Army is a good training ground for the AF. And remember the AF is rich in History, Aviation bonuses (active duty only), Per Diem and Crew Rest.
-
-
Jared
Congrats on being selected for WOFT. As stated above, fixed wing is extremely competitive on the active duty side of the house. Majority of the fixed wing slots are given to the Army Guard/Reserves. Since you're going active duty take a look at this website, https://www.hrc.army.mil/site/active/opwod/fxwing.htm. Read it thoroughly, all your stars must be lined up in perfect order to be selected for fixed wing transition. Helicopters make up 92% of their a/c and most of the fixed wing a/c belong to the Guard/Reserves. You'll soon find out that an Army fixed wing assignment is much sought after. Besides providing commercial aviation advantages, it also could keep you from living in the field environment and sleeping in tents and using outhouses .
Now I have a suggestion that you may want to take advantage of depending on your age. If you want to serve on active duty until retirement, you may want to transfer to the AF after servicing your initial army active duty commitment. In the AF, they have less helicopters than the Army has fixed wing. If you decide to go that route on active duty, you must meet these two big hurdles. Firstly, you must have a 4 yr accredited college degree. Secondly, must not be older than 35 in attending AF Officer Training School (OTS). Even though you will hold an Army Warrant Officer Commission as a CW2, the AF will require you to attend OTS (12 weeks - Maxwell AFB, Al) and being commissioned as a 2Lt. The AF does not have warrant officer serving in their ranks since 1992.
I was a flying Army Warrant and then transfer to the AF after completing college. IF you want fixed wing, definitely go AF after your Army tour. No comparison in regard to quality of life, a/c selection and career advancement. The biggest difference between the two services is that the AF is run/commanded by Pilots from top to bottom. Pilots calll the shots everytime. You'll find out in the Army, the non flyers run their show and always will. And, that's the way it should be.
If you want to serve your country as an aviator, the Army is a great start. But, the AF can use your talents if you wish to cross over. Just, remember those two hurdles and fly safe.
By the way, I salute you on joining our exclusive flying club and serving our nation.
-
With 5 yrs remaining in Army green, AF policy could change many times between now and then. As it stands now, here is what's required. Firstly, as you know, you must have a 4 yr degree without fail. No exceptions since 1962. Secondly, you must attend OTS for AF commissioning purposes. A 12 week charm course at Maxwell AFB, Montgomery Alabama, approximately 90 miles north of Ft Rucker. The max age for OTS is 34 yrs old as of today. Being selected for OTS will be your hardest hurtle. There are approx 100-150 AF pilot slots per year for OTS. That averages 2 or 3 per state per year. That's why the AF can be very selective. They could meet their numbers by requiring Ph.Ds if they wanted.
In regard to your AF flying career, you will more than likely able to select fixed wing a/c since they out number helicopters 20 to 1. You should be able to stay in a flying billet since you'll be able to retire at 20 yrs with only 13 yrs of AF service. If your goal is only 20 yrs, you'll retire as a Major and there will be little chance of command opportunities. In the AF, most pilot command positions start at the Lt Col level. AF pilot cmdrs are well groomed in the art of flying. They will have been IPs, Flt examiners, Safety officers and some of the best sticks in the squadron. And when it comes to going in harms way, the sq cmdr are expected to lead from the front, not like your army cmdrs.
If you're able to make the transfer, you'll find out quite quickly that the AF is extremely serious about the flying profession. AF may seem like a laid back operation but not in the flying business. The AF has an exchange program with the Navy/Marines for pilot training and the naval service always complains on how rigid and demanding the AF program is. The AF will always be run by rated personnel. You'll never see non rated officers calling the shots. Doesn't happen in the AF. No two piece flt suits, no WAR paint and it's quite ok to strut around in your flt suit. AF is rich in history, aviation bonuses, per diem and crew rest :)
I made the transfer back in the 70s, and it was the best decision for me. Each service has its pecking order and in the AF, aviators are on the top of the heep. Why not, we are the tip of the sword.
USAF C-130J Harvest Hawk
in General Discussion
Posted · Edited by alwyn2d
Let the F-15C stay in the clouds. But, there are quite a few F-16s heading to the bone yard. Wonder if they would rather be station at Creech in a trailer or in the cockpit of a HC-130W? Time will tell.