SuperWSO

I was in the initial bunch in 2011 that was passed over on their 1 above for Lt Col and separated in 6 months. The board came out around April and I was out effective 1 Nov 11. It wasn't tied to the fiscal year and there was zero flexibility on timing. The only good news was I found out 30 days before I was scheduled to PCS. I'm also one of the guys who landed a job in the ANG and got promoted. PM me if you have any questions on the process.

Tulsa, your second paragraph captures the problem. You didn't make the news because you figured out the problem and broke the mishap chain. Nobody has an accurate count of how many times the A-10 or the B-1 got it right. It doesn't matter how many bridges you built...

THIS explains all those Russians in Ukraine. Their SATNAV was broken. "Re-calculating..."

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fXSLcYQHqFQ Edit: me no good embed video.

We trust you with aircraft, we trust you with weapons, we trust you with the nations secrets, but I can't trust you to manage a six pack of Budweiser. Thats clearly beyond your pay grade.

Saw this and was surprised it wasn't already here. You can check out the full article, but the money quote has to be in the last paragraph. I believe there was a problem with the flow of information in that career field, but I don't think that "commander down" was the direction that they had trouble with.

Found a good article today that addresses some of the points we were discussing here recently. Obama Needs to Find His Inner Cold Warrior

The difference between us and Canada is that we have been promoting/ensuring world peace since WWII because we can. Canada provides an assist from time to time because that's all they can accomplish with the military they have. Same for every other nation that provides UN troops. They help out at the level they are able. If you haven't noticed the capability differential between us and Canada, I can't help you. Restating: We maintained a degree of world order and stability from 1945 to 200X (people here will debate the exact date/administration when we stopped trying). Now we don't because we "can't afford 4% GDP for defense. Note this years downhill trend in Libya, Syria, Iraq, South China Sea, Nigeria, Egypt, Pakistan, North Korea, Ukraine, etc.

The first quote I was responding to was... So if we don't continue to provide security, that would mean we are staying home. Thats not a straw man, thats the definition of isolationism. Oil was not my main point - My point is that our defense budget works a little like an insurance policy. When everything is going great, all you see is the cost of the insurance/defense budget. Its hard to compare the costs to that of a theoretical accident. Once shit happens, its very easy to go back and determine that deterrent is cheaper than having to build up to fight a war. Oil is always the relevant commodity in the middle east. Free flow of goods through sea lanes is a bigger issue in the Pacific, and especially now with China asserting control over the South China Sea. In the past, US policy would have been to assert our rights to operate in international waters (Gulf of Sidra?) Our current policy seems to be to leave it to the Chinese to work it out with Japan, Viet Nam, the Phillipines and any other interested parties. As I said before, if we leave it to China to provide a solution, I don't think we will be happy with the answer.

So your jet is solar powered? I don't work for Shell or Exxon, but let's be honest, the green economy hadn't really set us free. Even if we are "energy independent" for the sake of argument, most of our international trading partners aren't. My point, and the point I think Chuck alluded to is that isolationism sounds great but has never worked historically. Rome, the British Empire and the US following WW II all maintained order in their time. Things usually go downhill when a superpower can't or WONT fill that role.

Chuck, I typically agree with your posts, but I've seen this line of discussion from a number of officers. "We cannot afford to be the worlds police." I understand the sentiment, but it fails to ask the cost when peace breaks down. We rely on the free flow of world trade to support our economy. The news is already starting to ask if events in Iraq will effect gas prices. Its important because "every $10 increase in the price of oil shaves 0.5 percent of global growth." When global security breaks down, it comes with a cost. I believe that the cost of ceding our leadership and security role will exceed what we save on decreased military spending. Beyond that, I am not sure I trust another nation to enforce a world order that would still be favorable to our way of life.

Naw, they're hot but they make your next clearance update difficult. Most of the English speaking world is on our team, so reading the other guys literature requires language skills.

Thread bump. For any of the old guys here, I just signed up for AWC and I am pondering the electives. These days, you have an option to take a language course through DLI. Does anyone have any experience going the language route? I don't have any particular background with foreign language since taking Spanish in High School. I have a couple reasons for being interested in taking Russian. So what has your experience been?

CCshaming.com - someone suggest it to SECAF.

And we are all aware how much the current administration and AF leadership loves nukes. All aware of the huge potential target set for nuclear cruise missiles. The numerous historical uses of nuclear cruise missiles. I'll take JASSM capability over ALCM.

This and the arguments about operating in the Pacific. Unless something has changed, the B-1 carries twice as many JASSM as the BUFF and 30% more than the B-2. Although it wouldn't take long to fix, its also the first platform to field the JASSM-ER.

DMS = Diminishing Manufacturing Source. I think that was the justification for the VSD replacement and possibly the new INS. When absolutely no one makes an Atari any more, you can get the playstation, but we usually get the PS3. When I was at the 337th, we were working the block D to Block E mod. One of the problems the AF ran into was that, by the time the SPO got done wringing out the PowerPC chips they wanted in the new ACUs, that version was no longer available. The new part had twice as much memory and ran faster, but it hadn't been tested. The AF finally had to press the "I believe" button and take the currently available part because they were stuck in a too slow testing spiral.

We had also asked for it to do the conversion from voltages to actual units that would be useful - basically remove all the charts in the cits manual. That was initially too hard, but I think they were working towards incorporating that. If its like a lot of the other upgrades, the initial funding gets the hardware (however limited) on the jet. Subsequent block upgrades incorporate the actual capabilities - provide no additional hardware is required. Just had an Ellsworth jet do 3 low approaches here. I had to go out and watch, along with about 10 other people. Its been since 2002, but the ANG still misses the B-1.

The system is called CITS (Central Integrated Test System). The original replacement proposal was form fit function. I believe the contractor was shamed into providing a capability that was closer to what one would expect. I've been out of the cockpit for years and the new system is coming online now, so I'll defer to someone current.

Source? What are you basing your claim on?

Yes. The form/fit/function replacement frequently made me want to scream. "Yes we are replacing your 1970s TI calculator display capable of 3 lines of monochrome text with a giant fucking flatscreen. The flatscreen can only show 3 lines of orange text." Working acquisitions and test will expose you to the reasons why we are going broke and don't have more capability to show for it.

You were on a roll until you got to "trust the SPO". Those guys frequently need to be reminded they work for the warfighter, not Boeing or (insert your prime contractor here).

Duh, he can't do any of those things. They all require hands, which we said were in his pocket. You can't turn the key with your hands in your pocket. Case closed!

One of the Wing/CCs I admire most takes time to talk to the CGOs and Airmen, without the boss looking over their shoulder. The first ticket to success (mentioned above) is to make sure you get the view from the trenches. The second step, that no one has mentioned is to make sure you never ever punish someone at one of these sessions for what they say or do. Verbal corrections work, but I know of an O7 who would show up at the Nellis club to hang out with the guys, and drop paperwork on them Monday for conduct/opinions he felt were unprofessional. He single handedly turned that bar into a ghost town (2004-2006 timeframe).

Wow, front row seat. I'm amazed they didn't fly dependants out.