How about we send a message to our airmen that job performance counts? After all, what good is education unless it leads to individuals being better at their jobs?

Because it makes too much sense. "Leadership" will never go for it.

Tree Holer--I hope you are kidding

I don't think he is. A few weeks ago at night the BO (-135) kept extending the boom for "ready for contact" so I kept moving in from pre-contact (sorry, astern...gay), then he'd get on the radio and tell me to return to pre-contact. This happened with everyone in the flight at least twice. WTF dude! Then my favorite radio pile-on is, "Viper 3, cleared to contact." No fucking shit, I just finished and this is EMCON 2. And yes, I got asked for my 5 digit tail number over IC at night with my lineup card buried at the bottom of a stack of mission materials. Unfortunately I have seen this act on many occassions, so I think 3 holer is right on...a lot of tanker crews either have no idea what EMCON 2 means or they're just sloppy and don't give a shit.

That said, thanks to all the awesome tanker crews I have worked with who followed EMCON 2 and actually did things to help us out (i.e. get out of the wx without me having to ask, being flexible with dragging us to where I wanted...yes, I've had crews refuse to leave the track, even though its in the middle of our airspace). Don't want to make it sound like all my tanking experience has been bad, because it has not.

There was no driving need to actually use it (as opposed to ways it could have been used) and the COCOM didn't request it, so the AF didn't send it. Its not about whether or not it could have been used, it was all about the COCOM not needing to use it. Practice, not theory.

2. I enjoy a good light grey/Raptor bashing session, but in all seriousness, the Raptor is an awesome asset and it's ridiculous we only have the number we do. I think Beerman has great points as to how it could have been employed in Libya, but the point is it wasn't needed there. It's never good logic to use something just because we can, we should use something because we need to use it/it makes sense. The Raptor brings unique capabilities to the A/G fight when it comes to double-digits and clear advantages in the A/A realm, both in employment as well as SA enhancements to other players, but Libya was not that A/A or A/G environment. No reason to bring in Raptors when Vipers and Mudhens make more sense for THIS situation.

I'd prefer not to say shit, but if it had to be one or the other, how about I pass the refueling order and we call it good? You already know the flight callsign from check-in, then when I say, "request 1 to pre-contact, refueling order 3,2,4" we're done talking...now the BO has the refueling order of Viper flight and once on the ground, whoever needs to do it can contact Viper XX's squadron and find out from the SARMs which tail Viper 1, 2, 3, and 4 were in. Seeing the tail number may or may not work...and like Ramathorn pointed out, the BO is not going to see a tail number on a Viper. Maybe it works for 99% of A-10s, but it works for about 2% of Vipers...I'd imagine more aircraft than not do not have a tail number that can be read by the BO.

Bottom line, I've got shit going on within my cockpit and on other radios that I don't want to waste time trying to give the BO every tail in the flight, especially with a year tacked onto the front. However, giving the order will take 1.69 sec and I'd rather do that then waste a whole lot more time giving 5 digit tail numbers.

Not a doc, but does the finger bother you right now...i.e. any pain, discomfort, etc? You say you have full "grip strength" (sts), so it seems if the finger doesn't actually hurt you, avoidance for now anyways might be the best idea. What I gather here is you have full use of it, just with a curve on the top joint. Wait till you have wings on your chest and are "safer" from the AF drop kicking your dreams over a finger. Just an opinion based on what I've seen over the years happen to other dudes.

A quote from the report: "Had Haney not been distracted by trying to breathe, he would have recognized the unusual attitude..." + a pilot proving in the sim the difficulty of using the EOS/inadvertently putting control inputs in = Fuck you to the AIB!

I wish I wasn't surprised by the absolute pieces of shit the AF lets "lead" these days...nonetheless this just makes my blood boil. I wish I could even just put the board president in a sim, wrap my hands around his neck and choke the fuck out of him and then tell him to perform all the CAPs flawlessly while flying under NVGs...fucking asshole. Rant over. to Bong.

Another step closer to becoming droids ourselves, so much for diversity...guess that comes in different programming.

Don't worry, they fix it in the next tape.

I think a simple no was the best response. He was probably completely expecting you to just give in and got the opposite. Playing the reg game just doesn't seem to work as well as the simple "no Chief" and then go on your way.

I'm with Hoss on all this. Don't burn time as a new LT doing this bullshit...focus your time on tactics, job in the squadron, etc. My viewpoint is you could do the "in before the buzzer" masters, but life only gets busier as you get older. I think starting as a just pinned on Capt gives you the balance you're looking for. Also, everyone has to make the choice of whether they're going to get a "real masters" or check the container. Ask yourself, are you doing this for the AF or are you no shit getting a legit masters that you want to use when you get out of the AF? Neither way is wrong, but realize the latter is going to take up a shitload more of your time. The way I see it, your masters work should NEVER take away from your flying, etc. The only thing I lose out on with masters currently is TV time, a bike ride, the gym once in a while, etc. It sucks, but the point is my time lost doing this bullshit degree is not affecting my job. So, give some thought to how you want to proceed once you decided to start the masters gig.

The most recent order I know of for the Aerospace was $2500/watch, so doubt anybody will get a price lower than that.

I'm so glad we're shit-canning 100% tried and true LOX for this bullshit OBOGS. Less MX is not worth this....then again neither are 69,000 new plasma TVs per year, but what do I know.

On a parallel topic...my opinion is always take the month's advanced pay you get when PCSing (in addition to DLA, etc). It's an interest free loan from the government and is auto-deducted out of your paycheck. Use it smartly and there's no reason not to take it. Even investing in a CD at 1% will make you a profit, which you can then use to pay for moving expenses of course.

Mr. Lim outside the gate at Osan. Your only compraint will be it rook to good and rast too rong.

2. His jacket is about 6.9 million times better than that piece of shit the AF is handing out these days. I think I paid about $240 for mine, including the zip-in liner, etc. Well worth it.

Next we will all have dress shoes with those flashing red lights in the back

Dammit Guinea, how many times do we have to say don't give the shoes ideas! I can see it now, flashing shoes mandatory dusk-dawn, but not during daylight, so you actually have to carry a 2nd pair of shoes with you if your workday spans both daylight and night. Shit, now I just gave them an idea...ah fuck.

some SSgt walking down the hall with a reflective belt in. his. blues....please tell me this is not becoming a trend across the AF?!

Seen disco belts inside on blues and ABUs, multiple times at multiple bases. It is a trend...start your drinking!

Closer, here's a question for you: Do you want to be the guy who stands up in front of the room filled with fighter, bomber and rescue guys and says, "Hi, I'm Capt XXXX, the tanker patch." Now that was some funny shit. On the other side though in all seriousness, doing what you can to be the best (in a good way, not in a back stabbing/pole smoking way) and provide the most contribution to your community is a good thing. It's retarded there's a "W"IC for tankers, but whatever, it exists and maybe that's just another way you can increase your ability to contribute to the community. On a second example, I have meet a tanker patch (haha, really?) who was a smart dude who worked well for us and even "pushed the rope" in planning to better support the vuls. Even something as simple as suggesting track movement, splitting 4 ships to different tankers, etc. are not ideas you typically get from a tanker guy, so good on him. I'll still laugh at the idea of tanker WIC, but that doesn't mean I don't think it's a good idea to better yourself as a pilot...the course is probably a good thing, it's just that it shouldn't be part of WIC. Whatever, back to my coffee.

at some point you are going to mess up and not pay it off month to month, that's what the credit card companies count on.

No, people aren't perfect and will make mistakes, but I'm going on 6 yrs with not a cent of interest paid to a CC company. If you can't control your spending, don't get a CC, but if you can pay it off every month and on time, there are benefits to CCs. I don't agree with the "No CC ever for any reason" line of thinking...provided you're not one of those people with a spending/late payment problem. Just an opinion.

My thought on the loan in question is do not take it if you're going to blow it on crap you don't need (and that includes a $25-30K car...been there, done that - not the financially smart decision). However, a low interest rate loan can be a good thing if you use it wisely. Hell, you could put the thing in a super low risk CD for 2.5% and pay your interest AND make profit. Will it be a lot of profit...no, but that's still an example of doing something smart with the loan. Just saying, there are good reasons to take the loan, but there's also a lot of bad reasons. Be smart about it and figure out which side of the fence you're on. I know too many dudes who spent $25K on an awesome European trip or an M3.

I'm not sure how you made that leap. Home boy said it will do CAS just as well as a Viper or Strike Eagle. I think it's an honest question, at that point, to define how well those two actually do CAS. I didn't say anything about Iraq, Afghanistan, DOC statements, or dicks.

Sounded like you were implying Vipers or Beagles can't do CAS well. My bad if you weren't.

how are you defining "longer and further." Longer and further than what?

In time and range. Seriously, are you really that confused? It can support a longer vul period/time on station than a viper or beagle, as those are the two real platforms it is replacing. I don't know or really care if it can out stay a Hog, it's a stupid idea to replace the Hog with it. That, I agree with.

CAS in Iraq or Afghanistan can and is done by any airframe that can sling a JDAM. What we need a solution for is "real" CAS on a linear battlefield where things might shoot back a bit more. The F-35 doesn't cut it.

Completely agree. That's why I said "Iraq/Afghanistan" CAS, purposely not being inclusive of all CAS scenarios.

the night vision of the JSF will be as good as the goggs we currently have

It'll be far better...at least according to the engineers, so yes, checks in the mail, but...

you've got to specify which variant you're talking about

Yeah, wasn't talking about the STOVL variant specifically...I do not know what differences there are in payload based on the model. But, I do know the A model carries quite a nice payload and has a shitload of gas.

And define how well the vipers and streaks do CAS...

I find it interesting that some people seem to think measuring dicks in an Iraq/Afghanistan CAS war is somehow a measurement of the usefulness of an asset. I'm by no means claiming to be as good at CAS as a Hog or AC dude, but seriously, it isn't cosmic. There's far more than CAS on DOC statements...shocking, I know.

It will have more gas but nobody knows what that really means yet.

It means a longer loiter time/vul time coverage and further combat radius. It's not rocket science.

Stop it, if they don't pay, they won't expect it, it just may take a bit for that to happen.

2. Let it die, it's only a matter of time before enough people complain about how unfair it is that the AF forces them to pay 10 grand to get a masters if they want to be promoted. Then it'll degenerate into allegations that someone got promoted over someone else because they're single and have more money than the other dude with 5 kids. It'll happen...and then this horse shit masters req will go away.

The F-35 has a single 25mm cannon that carries less than 200 rounds and 2 bombs internally. How effective do you think that'll be in a CAS roll?

It carries an inferior payload even compared to the Viper

The problem is you're thinking internal carriage only. You can load it up far more than a Viper when using external hardpoints. Which in your example is no problem in a CAS war like we fight today. IADS takedown, deep strike through an IADS, etc. it'll only carry 2x2000 LB bombs (or more of other weapons out there), but anything not requiring LO will allow the F-35 to carry a pretty hefty payload for a fighter. But I do agree with you on the 200 rds of gun...that just sucks.

Name one way that it does deliver

Tons of ways, none of which will be talked about here. Open source media, reports, and etc. is not a smart way to base opinions on things like this.

At RF, yes the assets are denied. That makes you better, which is good. At the show, however, they are not denied. They're required.

Completely agree. BUT, there are some shows they are apparently "desired" and not "required."

Uh, not so fast...it depends. On a lot. And those scenarios you described as "some" I would descibe as "very few."

Also agree. They are definitely the "very few," but I was just saying the situation I talked about absolutely will happen in those "few" situations.

Either way, I don't disagree with anything you said, just bottom line of the topic is I think it's wrong to think ONLY RPAs will take down an IADs. As if the IADs will be completely dismantled prior to any manned fighters going in. I think a day like that is well into the future and manned fighters will still have quite a while before they won't have to worry about contending with IADs because UCAVs went in first and smoked everything.

I know you haven't been part of a night one strike package so you haven't had an up close and personal look at exactly how we do this "who/what goes first" act but be advised, it is not manned airplanes...

I'm aware. Hence why "can we get CALCM's to target X,Y,Z?" is one of the first questions asked in MPC, and of course naturally we get denied 99% of the time. Oh well, always worth asking. My comments had absolutely zero to do with CALCMs, TLAMs, HARPY, etc.

And yes, as I'm sure you're aware, the AF is willing to not wait on the aforementioned and go straight up manned fighters out the door night one into an IADs. Definitely not in every scenario, but they certainly will in some.

I heard the complaints direct from guys flying and working on both projects about how tough it is to upgrade vs legacy fighter.

You upgrade one system, due to the fusion, you gotta change a lot of things

I'll buy the fact about the fusion problem. Things being more complicated to replace, update, etc. is just something that goes along with getting more advanced stuff. Yes it's easier to slap a new radar into a legacy fighter, but there's good reason why we need new planes and not just constant upgrades. Not to say I don't want an AESA radar right now, but you can only upgrade so much on a 20+ yr old fighter. The increased PITA of sensor fusion, etc. upgrades is worth having those things to begin with.

Instead of getting A/A upgrades, they spend money on A/G upgrades

Just because money is spent on A/G upgrades does not mean the jet is suffering A/A. The Raptor is doing just fine in the A/A realm.

You really think they are going to send a manned fighter into complex IADs if a RPA can do it instead?

Yes. Do you think complex IADs aren't trained against by manned fighters today? Do you really think the AF won't send manned aircraft flying through multiple MEZs to get the job done? Additionall, the operative phrase in you statement being "a RPA can do it instead." I'm not blind, maybe in 20 years, but for now the job simply cannot be done via RPAs alone. Not now, not anytime in the near future. Yes technology continues to evolve and maybe we'll have a RPA only solution to that problem down the road, but there is nothing on the shelf that solves this problem without manned assets.