busdriver

What a great pity it would have been if he'd remained in captivity with his subjects. Someone would have risked all to go get him.

Flooding

You ain't kidding, it's an EM dog.

If anything the "standard" military "lingo" makes communicating with other nations possible. I flew with British Apaches for a month with no problems, only to have one of their pilots joke over the radio about a bbq we were hosting that night and I couldn't understand a word she said. Mind you I had flown in formation with this same pilot multiple times, but when she tried to use "conversational" English I was lost.

Does anyone else smell that?...... Smells like nerd.

Guard/Reserve are your best bet. Your "friend" wouldn't have enough time left before retirement to make it really worthwhile for the functional at AFPC, but stranger things have happened I suppose. Call the helo functional and ask, name and number should be on the AFPC secure site. Also, 60_Driver is a prior A-10 guy that went to the Alaska Guard to fly helos.

Not a Catch-22 fan eh?

Col Sargeant? What about Major Major?

We may be pound our heads against the wall frustrated with the speed of our old and under funded networks, but that doesn't mean the threat isn't real. EDIT: Caveat, this post was not based on any real world knowledge. This is purely Tom Clancyesque speculation. EDIT2: I should know better

Sounds to me like he's saying they're gonna be putting GCS's in locations other than the current launch and recovery points. Whether you think that warrants any level of resistance training.....

Jesus, that is some old and very bad blood. I really hope the 71st has taken that lesson to heart by now.

I'd have to guess they're referring to the odd full procedure approaches in places not serviced by "vectors to final for XXX approach." But what do I know, I'd rather fly special VFR in .25nm vis than fly an instrument approach.

I'm gonna side with Kuma on this. Unless it happens on base let the civil side of things decide the punishment.

Don't just think WSO in the back, think Iraqi trainee in the back, think Afghan trainee in the back, etc. Assuming the AF isn't fucking this up, a major part of doing this correctly would be training host nation personnel and eventually "giving" them the aircraft.

Solid "2" on this. Randy was an IP at Rucker when I went through. RIP brother

OK rant switch on/ Who's the asshole that thought that horizontal shoulder holsters result in flagging of people? Why is this asshole in the military and allowed to touch a firearm? Does this asshole think that firearms go off on their own? He probably thinks having people clear their weapons every ten feet also makes the base safer. /Rant off I don't know, when I was there this past summer, I carried with a paddle holster and a riggers belt. I hate the way the shoulder rigs flap around without being tied to a belt like they're supposed to be.

I have a great idea, let's throw shit at one another like a bunch of fucking monkeys. In this thread we've discovered that the tail number requirement is stupid due the billing being done to the wing not the aircraft itself, and that info came from a tanker guy no less. The system says we have to pass you guys tail numbers, fine I've got a co-pilot no big deal, doesn't change the fact that we've invented a process that makes everyone's lives more difficult for no good reason. Do we drive on with a stupid system, or do we fix the process to make it better? Don't get me started on comm in tanking....

A Toast.....

He's struggling to maintain power. Autocratic leaders will do crazy stupid things to maintain their power. Saying "he's our son of a bitch" and backing him regardless is a bad move in my opinion, didn't work in south Vietnam either. That said, I think this is just a saber rattling load of shit.

If I had to guess, all three aircraft the Merlin and S-92 offered in the CSAR-X competition could meet that requirement. Comparing the three is extremely difficult without actually seeing the offerings, and no one outside of the source selection team have seen all three. For what it's worth, I'm pretty sure the Osprey could meet that spec as well. EDIT: Changed after reading the rest of the spec, not just range and hover performance. But still just idle speculation. If Sikorsky can come up with a 60 that can do what is being asked without adding the external drop tanks, I'd be very surprised.

stract, unless the 60 gets much more powerful engines that are also much more fuel efficient and the empty weight drops significantly I don't see how a mike model with appropriate mods can meet that spec.

Careful guys, they didn't say the CV-22 would replace the 60, it won't the Air Force cannot afford to buy that many. There is nothing good in that article for Air Force 60 drivers. This is what I was talking about with regard to returning to AFSOC/SOCOM. Unless I'm completely out to left field, I read that as plus up the CV-22 fleet a bit and add a CSAR mission to their DOC statement. This is what having SOF as a mission gains you, they get to fund one community and support multiple mission sets. So when he said: not forcing USAF to give up the CSAR mission; he did not say: keep tactical helos in the USAF inventory.

Maybe you can convince the Army they need something bigger, and we can dream up a joint helo buy?

Bronze Start w/ Valor is a different animal. That said, I don't like it either. If the Bronze Star has become the MSM for combat service, why not just award an MSM?

I know what you're saying and agree. However, never happen. They'd pull the probes off and poof, the Huey replacement question is answered.