Blue

My cynical opinion: The Air Force has a finite amount of procurement dollars, and trainers are their last priority. I think the only thing that got the T-7 over the finish line was that it provided a lifeline to Boeing's St Louis operation.

From the outside looking in, this does seem to make the most sense. They've decided: 1.) They want X number of pilots 2.) The T-6 fleet as currently funded can only support Y number of hours AETC leadership has been told to produce "X" pilots utilizing the available "Y" T-6 hours. End of story. If you can't do it, step aside, we'll find another General who can. Curious what a proper recapitalization of the T-6 fleet would look like. Is it a matter of needing to buy an entirely new aircraft (T-6C)? Or is there a path where enough sustainment funding of the current fleet (modifications, upgrades, overhauls, etc) would get you the hours needed to avoid all of the current flailing about with 141 schools and the like?

Reminds me of this article from Air and Space Smithsonian magazine from 10 years ago. What Couldn’t the F-4 Phantom Do? Specifically the below. At the time, thought I knew most of the lore about the Phantom, but had never heard they chased Titan rockets with it.

Funding for the pro-Ukraine propaganda machine in the US dried up. Not sure if that was due to USAID being axed, or something else. Either way, much like "no bucks, no Buck Rogers," when there is no funding for propaganda, you get no wailing from the US middle and upper classes about Ukraine.

Dementia, cancer, and all the other physical and mental ailments of old age are both sad and terrifying. I'm sure many of us have seen it play out in our own families, or others close to us. That said, I'm still anxiously awaiting some kind of explanation as to who exactly was running the country while Biden was tottering around, oblivious to his surroundings. The American people are owed that. Also, while I'm not holding my breath, I'd hope we'd eventually get some understanding of Jill Biden's state-of-mind through her husband's presidency. How she was able to come to terms with the allegiances to her party vs her allegiances to her husband and his health.

10 of the retired KC-10s were sold via a GSA auction that closed yesterday. Opening bid of $500k, and it seems like all of them were bought at $500,100. One example: 79-0434: https://gsaauctions.gov/auctions/preview/321151 Looks like all had engines included, but booms removed. Will be interesting to see where they end up.

I don't get it. What does that even mean? Things were going great until Boeing and LM started on the program? Who else did this person think was going to build these planes?

Yeah, this. The question of using the autopen is just one of many threads to start pulling. The real questions I'd hope to get insight on would be the reality of Joe Biden's mental state throughout his presidency, who exactly was making decisions on his behalf, and the extent of those decisions.

I still don't understand why people are getting spun into the ceiling about this e-mail request. The guidance I've seen and heard about is more or less along the lines of "we want to make sure there is a person at the other end of that e-mail address. That's all." This tweet summarizes it. The messaging has been chaotic, from the White House and from SecDef. However, at no time has anyone said anything about responses being tied to a RIF or anything else (that I've seen). Do people have a source for that? Or is it just people fear-mongering in the absence of information?

If you can't even spell the guys name right, it's very difficult to take you seriously.

All of the west has been awash in pro-Ukraine propaganda for years now. And it worked really well. Tons of money and supplies were sent to Ukraine over the past 3+ years, as a direct result of that propaganda campaign. Propaganda only goes so far though. Eventually, reality catches up. Most know this. Trump being elected is a direct product of this. Zelensky doesn't seem to get it, but maybe he's starting to learn his lesson.

Not being snarky, but what exactly is your point?

I'm not in the .gov world anymore, so I don't know what the messaging is. And it's hard to sift through everything out there on social media about the topic, because there is little differentiation between fact, hyperbole, and speculation. At first glance though, it really seems like your leadership is getting ahead of themselves here. Why are people being told "they're fired" before there is no-kidding paperwork in hand? All of this churn sounds like the fault of your direct leadership, and not DOGE, POTUS, etc.

The quoted NBC News article cites their source as "a U.S. official familiar with the matter." All of the reporting seems to trace back to a story in The Record, which is a site that reports on cybersecurity news. They state their sources as "three people familiar with the matter." Maybe it's true. But it's been very clear that most mainstream media is biased against Trump, and certainly biased against anything that shuts down the flow of money to Ukraine. In the past, so many news stories like this were ginned up from next-to-nothing, and the benefit of hindsight showed that so many of them were false. So, I can't summon any personal concern about a "story" from the MSM that cites the bullshit "sources familiar with the matter" and the like. I suppose it doesn't matter though. This story is running rampant through social media, with everyone piling on. "OMG, How can he do this!!11!!1 HE's an ElEment of PutiN! Fuck TruMP!!1!!" It's all just so fucking exhausting.

Yeah. Saying that the EOs intent was "only the Pres and AG can interpret the laws" is a shitty take. Didn't stop all of social media from running with it yesterday though. This was my interpretation as well. For all of the screaming about Trump, DOGE, firings, Ukraine, taxes, etc, a large portion of what is happening is a long overdue attempt at reigning in the federal bureaucracy. This EO is just another step in that direction, and I think it's a reasonable approach. I'm anxiously awaiting the implementation of the "Schedule F" EO, which is intended to put some guardrails around civil service employees working in policy-influencing positions. As can be expected, many in .gov land are not supportive.