Jump to content


Supreme User
  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Everything posted by jazzdude

  1. Had a boss show me where I could find the generic memorandum of instruction for promotions (it's on mypers in the promotion section). Good read on what the boards are told to value when scoring. His take was to try and have your OPR touch on all of the points in the MOI if possible. They also added (in the last year) career fields expectations as well that outlines what each career field values at different points in your career. Also found on mypers in the promotion section. That being said, "job performance" can be nebulous like you mentioned.
  2. However the CC wants to do the notifications
  3. I mean, they added a loadmaster check in the C-17 before landing checklist that is literally there to ensure the pilots put the gear down, so he's also busy making sure we don't land with the gear up. Again...
  4. So kinda like a JPADS bundle that can fly further and go boom? And some stuff is similar to conventional airdrop, where we plan CDE (oh wait, we have to call it ADE) with a stupid large CEP because winds (which you may not be able to get a good forecast or observation in execution) significantly affect parachutes and where the stuff lands. Not saying it's a 1:1 comparison, but a lot of the concepts in airdrop seem similar to weapons employment concepts used by the CAF. Not saying I can do what you do (because I lack the appropriate training), but we do more than just "gear up, feet up, coll
  5. Maybe Lockheed is just better at burying those costs and indirectly passing it on to the government.
  6. This problem isn't just a MAF problem, or a TACC problem. Put in more general terms: Attacking an AOC or a COCOM headquarters severely impacts our ability to execute C2 of our forces. This is also a problem for the CAF, and the joint force at large. That's nothing new-headquarters/C2 have been a critical node that affects fighting capability throughout history. What's changed is that it used to be harder to attack headquarters/C2 because those functions tended to be further to the rear of a battlefield and harder to reach, limited only by their ability to communicate with the front lines.
  7. I mean, at one point in history someone asked "what if we put a bunch of miniguns on a cargo plane?"
  8. And then the fighter guys turnaround and complain about not being supported in things like ACE, or that mobility lacks a tactical mindset. Yeah, some dudes they carried away, we're probably not going to be on the day 1 push. But someone has to seize/set up that forward base for fighters to operate out of. Or for the army to stage out of. I'd rather have my community leaning forward to try and get better tactically (even if some of the ideas or reasonable are laughable at best), rather than take the mentality that our job is just to haul trash, collect per diem, and only expect to fly in a
  9. Fixed it for you :) In all seriousness, those investments are being made because AMC has to fund it to continue it's core mission, whether it's to comply with airspace requirements, or to address diminishing sources for replacement parts, in order to keep the jets flying. You'll also get other minor (cheap/easy) improvements that piggy back on a bigger effort like replacing the HUD. While RWR gear or being on the link would be great, that costs money, and AMC/big AF is spending that money elsewhere. The budget is essentially a zero sum game: if there's no money for an effort, well, unfortu
  10. It buys options for strike planning if this capacity pans out. But I'd bet the capability likely will sit on a shelf and crews spun up as required. That being said, cargo aircraft generally enjoy easier access/basing/overflight than bombers or fighters, and could help ease political concerns from other countries, again buying flexibility for planners. But COCOMs do this all the time (trade requirements and prioritization of missions). If something is important enough to move, it'll get a tail, particularly if it truly is a COCOM/CC priority. Look at Aeromedical Evacuation-often times prio
  11. There aren't enough tankers to meet everyone's needs, so yeah, stuff gets prioritized by big blue/TRANSCOM/COCOMs and requirements go unfilled, and operational missions generally get the priority over training or exercises. So yeah, if you don't meet the priority, go find someone else if you still want a tanker (your unit can always try for a business effort). Throwing spears at line tanker pilots does nothing to fix your problem; talk to your current ops or to your MAJCOM to fight better for your requirements. I've been in C-17 squadrons that wanted to do DACT with fighters to actually pra
  12. I'll admit there's a mindset problem in MAF, with a good amount of people just not caring. There's plenty of airline mentality in strat lift. There's no real excuse for that. We in MAF don't really get the deploy, reconstitute, train, exercise, deploy cycles. So there's no dedicated time to train for different fights built into our ops schedules, which is essentially continuous. AFSOC seems to do better than AMC despite a similar ops tempo, but they already have that culture ingrained into their ethos, and the ability to offload their slackers elsewhere. The hard part is that even if y
  13. So what do you propose to fix the problem? Not like crews can say no to deploying so they can go to a flag exercise instead. If we reduce the tanker demand in CENTCOM, that might free up time to train for the near peer fight. But that's on big AF to sell to the COCOMs; reducing sorry for operations now to prepare for the high end fight in the future. The challenge with tankers and strat lift is that the mission never ends, there's always someone somewhere in the world who needs gas operationally (to include coronets), or cargo moved. The demand is there, and it's insatiable. Plus, the
  14. It depends on what your goals are. If you want to fly for the military: - Specifically for JROTC, you'll want to compete for a Flight Academy scholarship. https://www.airuniversity.af.edu/Holm-Center/AFJROTC/Flight-Academy/ - Civil Air Patrol is the official civilian Air Force Auxiliary, and has cadet programs focused on aviation (as well as scholarships available). - Work and pay your own way through flight training. The summer hire program is more geared towards developing people for civilian (government service) jobs within the Air Force. If that's a path you're considering, it can
  15. VSP for 11X in general doesn't make sense. Any year groups in particular airframes overmanned? Seems like 11Rs in the 2010ish year groups or older might get offered VSP based on not being offered a pilot bonus this year. Unless not being offered the bonus fixes the glitch on it's own.
  16. There less of that than you would think. Sure, there's a training fence, but mainly because requirements could easily outstrip our ability to maintain basic currency. It's funny when the army mobility guys start talking about "yeah, well need 10 dedicated C-17s for two weeks to do our movement. We aren't going to preplan our retrograde and associated load plans, we're just going to fill up the jet as we deem stuff ready to retrograde in execution." It's almost as ridiculous (but not quite) as CFACC wanting to do ACE exercises in theater and having AMD bump cargo (making it late) to do un
  17. I mean, there's already more demand for C-17s than what we have, even write augmentation from contact airlift. Especially as the Army's equipment gets larger, requiring outsize lift capacity. Things like ACE only increase that demand (is a C-130 really going to be able to load up with whatever the fighters need at a safe distance from a TBM threat and fly to that forward location in a useful timeframe, as well as have to fuel reservers to make it back to the safe location and alternate if required?). The vast majority of the mobility mission is operating in permissive environments, and t
  18. ACE concept has bigger problems than mobility O-6s not delegating authority, especially if it's for more than a one-off resupply. Airlift capacity, logistic footprints to sustain not only the fighters but the airlift needed to sustain the fighters- we just plain run out of airlift. Also don't forget that other stuff from other services will be moving at the same time to support their part of the operation, so movement priority becomes critical. And none of this matters if the airlift gets killed like they do in mobility guardian
  19. C-17, but my info is a bit dated... You could maybe get the sim to practice ahead of a major exercise, but probably won't get a dedicated local trainers to prep on. You could piggyback on an existing local, but you probably won't have the same crew that's scheduled for the exercise. Local trainers usually have maybe one threat react, and plot/avoid a couple threats (radar or IR) on the low level portion of the sortie, and generally only if the pilot is doing fine on time control already. Not sure if this has gotten better, but usually you're cycling people through the seats, so you may onl
  20. Does putting your wingman between you and the threat so they soak up the threat count as a tactic? Hopefully it's gotten better since I left the community, but last LFE I did (planned 40 ship), we couldn't even get admin right. Stupid stuff like aircraft lighting, both en route and after fence in. And the planners screwed all the personnel airdrop jets on gas and recovery plan, planning us at the appropriate weight across the DZ, but not enough gas to get to the planned recovery bases. So some jets (like mine) said screw being the correct weight over the DZ, we're a dry pass so we'll carry
  21. Not if you start from Hawaii. Went through India and Africa to make it the US east coast. Interesting story, especially if you put yourself in the Captain's shoes and go "what would I have done in this situation?" Edit: I'm dumb, you're correct, westbound
  22. Along the same line of thought, is an amphibian needed, or would a pure seaplane suffice? Amphibian adds complexity, and landing on water with a gear hanging would basically guarantee the loss of the aircraft and the cargo it carries, and possibly the crew. You can usually recover an aircraft following a gear up landing on land, but a gear down landing on water is typically catastrophic. If anyone's interested, this is a pretty interesting seaplane story set in WW2: https://www.panam.org/the-long-way-home The book is a touch dry in the story telling, but tells the (true) story of a Pan Am f
  23. I was going to get excited, but then just saw it's a herk on pontoons. I'm not sure that repurposing the C-130 as a base airframe for an amphibian saves any development cost, and probably would really just be chucking money at LM. That being said, we must not allow an amphibious aircraft gap! https://www.businessinsider.com/worlds-largest-floatplane-takes-first-flight-in-china-spruce-goose-2020-8
  24. Absolutely. I'm wary of surveiling military social media as well, but fortunately the DOD is a slow bureaucracy and slow to change. This stuff is nothing new, it's just got easier to surveil as our lives have moved online, especially given the Patriot act being enacted. Activist political appointees are a symptom of electing bad politicians bent on special interests or personal gain rather than what is best for the country. Unfortunately, the 2 party system keeps pushing the parties towards their respective extremes to consolidate power while villifying the other side, and both sides ar
  • Create New...