brabus

You are so full of shit. FHPs are NOT healthy, they're terrible. Our jets are broke, B-Course syllabi have been slashed multiple times with too much training kicked to a broken/underfunded CAF (not the FTU bros' fault, it's management's fault) and every year the new guy is less prepared for combat because he gets shafted on quality flying training. Us "old" guys can hang on because we have enough experience to fall back on; luckily when we were young everything hadn't completely imploded yet. I have seen entire squadrons who I would rate as below average - it's not the bros' fault, its the fact the squadron is full of young, inexperienced dudes who are trying their best, but big AF refuses to give them the tools required to succeed. WO's and the couple "real" IPs in the squadron slave to fight the uphill battle and get their guys ready, but even their 75 hr work weeks aren't enough because again, management has taken so much from them in terms of ability to provide adequate training. Those same squadrons are hemorrhaging experience at an astronomical rate for all the reasons mentioned elsewhere. Not an RPA guy, but I think it's fairly safe to say very few of them give a shit about leading the "community of the future." You managers might think that, but it's not true. Home more? Maybe they don't deploy to the extent that many of us do, but they're living in not very desirable locations, many doing a job they were involuntarily forced into, and from what I've read here, they do some fairly rough work schedules. RPAs provide a lot of capability in specific situations, but just because they do doesn't mean you have happy people operating them. These are statements of fact, not emotion. I cannot comprehend why you and other senior leadership refuse to see these simple facts and listen to your people who are the ones in the trenches. You don't like to think so, but the reality is your O-5 and below people out there in the CAF, MAF, AFSOC have much higher SA than you do on the day to day realities. That's not an insult, it's just how it is...some day I might be the old guy sitting somewhere, but if that day comes, I will rely on the guys below me to shoot me straight and provide recommendations...and I won't scoff them. That's a trait of good leadership I have seen growing up in this AF. You guys have a job to do which involves thinking on a strategic level. But it is extremely naive and a complete failure of leadership to ignore everything you get from the tactical level. Your flippant attitude towards anyone "below you" and how "we" could not possibly have any idea on what's good/bad in the AF because we don't have stars or whatever your metric for "credibility," is the primary reason we're all telling you to off and getting out. Many good dudes at the tactical level would stay and help solve the problems, but its clear senior leadership doesn't give a shit and will never listen to us, even when we're screaming the answer in your ear. You're right on one thing, there will most likely be a continuous supply of 20 yrs olds ready to sign anything to fly. But that makes this already hollow force just become worse and worse until some day we just hope we can keep up with the ability of Sudan's AF. Hyperbole a bit, but the point is valid.

Shack. It's not about money for a lot of people, it's about the horrendous level of bullshit/terrible family QoL that makes guys run. I know too many dudes who "would never fly for the airlines," and we're not driven there by the money, but ultimately by how the Air Force had mismanaged the shit out of their "work life," which directly impacted their "family life" in a negative way. It shouldn't be hard to kill bullshit deployments (especially 365s), it shouldn't be hard to knock off the queep/taskers that have zero utility to anyone, and it shouldn't be difficult to see that taking care of people on a personal level is extremely important. Keep people happy and they won't leave...it's simple.

At this point, forget anything new. Build the same raptor so we have more than 183 or whatever were at now. Even that plan is most likely a bridge too far at this point. Nice of them to talk about reniging on one of the dumbest procurement moves in decades, but I'm pessimistic these talks will ever lead to meaningful action.

PM sent.

Herk, thanks for the good info. Is it feasible for the load to jump outside real quick and do a control check with the pilots, then hop back in, shut the door, and go? I know you can't see all of the control surfaces/assess correct and full movement from the cockpit of every airplane, but it seems the way around that in a larger aircraft would be have the load, flying crew chief, etc. go outside and watch real quick as the pilots check every direction. Obviously this whole process is much easier for guys who can see all their flight controls from the cockpit. I remember years ago when the T-38 crashed at CBM, killed both pilots, all due to f'd up flight controls that could have been caught in a pre-takeoff check. Not long ago a civilian jet (Citation, etc.) crashed on takeoff and killed everyone because they didn't check the control lock was not installed (it was). There's at least one story of flight control cables being installed incorrectly in an Eagle; don't remember if the pilot survived or not. Bottom line, everyone please learn from these tragic events - I wish I could say this mishap was the first time a flight control related issue could have been found with a check prior to T/O, but it's not. It does not matter what you fly, put this in your habit patterns somewhere; it's smart and could save your life.

Take the emotions out of this. Nobody is saying these guys were idiots. We all have survived multiple screw ups that could very well had ended the other way; we all screw up. Two of my good friends weren't idiots idiots either, were great dudes and above average pilots, but in the end, complacency kills. I sure as shit have made many a mistake and missed a flight control check (and many other things), but it was due to task saturation/distraction, not due to "the T.O. doesn't say I have to, so I won't" or "it was good last flight, nothing could possibly happen/a part fail in between flights." I think its a dangerous mindset to say, "what could have possibly happened since I last looked?" or "it's not in the checklist, so it." That is absolutely the wrong approach to teach people (especially young, impressionable people). This was not one of those unidentified, obscure things nobody thought of until a mishap occurred; it is absolutely something that applies to every aircraft, and again, should be taught to everyone who learns to fly, military or civilian. This is not shitting on people, it is highlighting the extreme importance of the "simple things." Scoff simple things (consciously or subconsciously) and it can end very badly...there's tons of accident reports that point to that, and as you mentioned, we're all vulnerable 100% of the time to making simple mistakes that end tragically.

Whether in a 152, viper, or C-5, it makes sense to do a flight control check EVERY time before taking the runway for takeoff. Who cares what a T.O. does or does not say, or how many times that day you've already done it. This should be flying airplanes 101 taught when getting your private or at IFS. Frankly I'm surprised to hear it is/was common practice to not do this. Regardless of what you fly, take the 6-9 sec to do one prior to rolling onto the runway. Its basic airmanship and obviously could very well save yours and maybe others lives.

They will deal sometimes; it happens. FWIW, after talking to random bros across the world this week, there were multiple Viper assignments this VML (a few Koreas, Luke, Holloman, Nellis, TFI Guard). That's just the few I talked to, so while VMLs can be shitty and others great, sometimes it's not as terrible as it may seem from one corner of the world. Sometimes there are shitty leaders who don't fight for their people either, and the "little guys" gets ed because of it. All that to say, if you're a WIC bound guy, they will find a way to keep you around in the community because you're going to be #1 or #2 on your base's VML rack and stack. If you think you're WIC material, but the rack and stack/assignment doesn't reflect that, I suggest asking for honest feedback from your patches at a minimum. They won't bullshit you; and at minimum it'll provide you a good vector for your future as a pilot, etc.

He hasnt heard the update, but its not a daily conversation topic, so not surprising he hasnt. I'm with you on how much it sucks they fill PIT before they help out test thats nearing 50% manned in vipers. Not a joke, and I'm sure there are more. I would talk to sq/cc and ask him to talk to OG. The OG can call the porch and inquire/push for you to get one of the 7 day opt vipers, if he feels you should be pushed for. I had a buddy years ago who had an IFF assisnment for months and one day it turned into a viper...because so many 7 day opts occured. He didnt even ask to get it changed. Have you expressed interest in WIC to your WO, SQ/CC? I suggest you ask both for honest feedback to have an accurate view of your current flying and officer abilities. Sometimes that feedback may be very different than your self assessment. Not saying it is, but its worth finding out. Even if you dont hear what you want, use it as a way to focus how specifically to better yourself on the pilot and officer side.

There's also a 7 day opt'd Luke out there, and I'm sure several more similar 7 day opts exist. That's not happening; your bro has old, inaccurate gouge. I understand your overall general point and agree VMLs can widely differ with everyone getting a Viper on one and only a couple dudes getting a Viper on the next (thanks to A1 failures non-stop), but in the end, it is a valid statement that if an individual is recognized as a WIC probable, there will be a way to keep that guy in the Viper, including VML slips. Only shenanigans to the level of TAMI make that a sometimes false statement. Your standard VML pendulum swing does not. But, that does not mean said individuals cannot "bloom later" and go to WIC as an "older dude" in the ARC. It's possible and is done here and there.

Dont let this take the winds out of your sails. Work hard in 38s and have a good attitude. Try to look at it positively as a way to learn to teach. if you cant teach well, you wont make it through WIC, if you even get selected to go at all (you wont get pushed, ARC or otherwise, if youre a shitty IP). All is not lost, just the possible path changed, remember that. Add: i have a couple good friends who were in similar shoes and went as Majors in the guard. So, that should show you the door is not closed.

Truth is your only chance is go to the ARC, then hopefully go to WIC out of there. Many guard Majs have gone throuh and done well. I try to not talk in absolutes, but on this one, theres zero chance on AD. Better you know the facts and dont get a sugar coated half truth.

I have never personally seen an 11F patch be an exec in the last 7 years; I'm sure there's an exception somewhere, but overall I don't think crap like that happens in the CAF for the most part. Most dudes do two assignments as a patch (SQ/WG level, then OT/teach WIC/another CAF assignment for the most part) then they're off to school/staff or the guard/airlines...you can guess which one of those two categories a metric shit ton fall into.

Kenny's point is huge. I've been gone from home a cumulative 4 years out of 9 years of marriage...and I'm pretty sure that's average at best, there are many dudes who have been gone a lot more than that. Flying is awesome and I love my job, but it's not easy on the family. I *think* the ANG is better than the picture I painted, but spending YEARS (cumulative) away from family is reality over a career, regardless if you're AD or ARC. UPT is only the beginning, and almost laughably low stress/easy once you get a few years in the future and compare that to UPT. It's a great life/job for many, but not for all; make your decision being the most informed possible.

Recommend Vanguard - easy for a dude who doesn't know/want to learn a bunch regarding investing, low expense ratios, and good performing funds overall. Way better than USAA.

Incorrect, the AF is dumping a lot of effort into service life extension programs (SLEP) for 4th gen, because even "they" realize we need a lot of 4th gen around to supplement 5th gen because we'll never get to an all 5th gen force, at least in the next 30 years. We're doing it right now, and have been for months...in a shit hole country. The high end threat is real and is all over; you don't need to start WWIII with China or Russia to fly in more than AAA and IR threats.

Unless you have an I/Q form 8 in your FEF for the T-38, you were never officially qual'd in it, despite logging primary time (which is not directly related to aircraft qual).

4TH Gen fighters will be around through 2045, so we're not planning for a f22/f35 only force. Who knows what 6 Gen will end up looking like at this point.

Interesting article. However, it still reeks of the standard anti-stealth/f35 article that loves to point out a spoon rest can detect LO platforms, but chooses to ignore the multitude of capabilities these aircraft (22 and 35) have besides a low dB (and ignores the current benefits of LO we still enjoy). These are not niche aircraft like the 117, as the author incorrectly implies. Even the haters of the air dominance mafia who loathe the 15C as a single mission aircraft still should recognize the 22 is not a single role fighter in the sense the 15C is, despite the fact it's primary "traditional" missions are escort and DCA. LO still provides a useful capability, and I would agree with the author if our last two fighters were niche like the 117, but they're not, and on top of that they are far better than the air frames they're designed to replace (this does not include the claim the 35 replaces the a10).

No f8 in iff for at least the last 10 yrs as far as I know, but I heard it was such a thing in the past.

Is it for sure? There are several TDYs that are not allowed to be accompanied. I don't know about altus, but I know about others that aren't, which the AF essentially responds with "not our problem, maybe your wife and kids should live with her parents."

Can Altus be an accompanied TDY? If so, what moto said applies. If it can only be unaccompanied, there's a whole world of asspain ahead.

RUMINT is more often than you'd think. There's such a lack of fighter representation at UPT bases (i.e. line IPs are rarely fighter dudes), the AF started sending fighters XC to UPT bases for grad days so people have the chance to see a fighter, talk to a fighter pilot, etc. At least when I went through UPT, the majority of T-38 IPs were fighter guys, now they're mostly bomber and other (i.e. went through T-38s at UPT, got a C-X, now back teaching T-38s). Obviously these dudes are perfectly capable of teaching phase III, but have zero fighter experience to talk smartly to the young dudes when they're making their dream list.

For one, the FTUs are at max capacity; we cannot train b-coursers fast enough to meet what the CAF needs; so, there's only as many F-Xs as the FTUs can support. Secondly, I don't know the makeup of this class, but it's fairly likely there were at least a couple dudes who shouldn't being flying fighters, CAF shortage or not. For that reason alone, it was a good move to give the non-fighter aircraft option to ENJJPT. As far as getting "good deal heavies" that T-1 dudes "fight for," I honestly don't know what the right answer is.