PirateAF

Thanks for filling in this thread with more GH/Beale info gentlemen!! I'm trying to figure out my next assignment and knowing that going to the GH would most likely be a one-way track makes my decision easier. From everything I've read about the "deuce", I don't think I'm ready to submit myself to the harsh extremes that you U-2 pilots go through, but my hat's off to you for what you do. It sounds incredible.

It doesn't really bother me that folks don't know what a C-17 is. We get to "fly, fight, and win" - and we get paid to do it! I'm sure folks in finance roll their eyes when I ask what a Form 123ABC is. M2, Great find of a vid - I didn't know the Global Hawk was air-refuelable. (Hopefully some GH dude doesn't take offense to my ignorance!)

Well it seems that AMC has been taking note of some of the opinions on this board...our demonstration flight this weekend has been CNX'd, and it would appear that all C-17 demos have been put on hold until further notice.

I enjoyed the video until the slow part...then too much fist pumping, marshalling signals, whatever between ground crews and pilots. Decent music though...a huge improvement over TIB.

Boeing does have a process called MFOQA - Military Flight Observation Quality Assurance, or something like that. They can download our FDRs quite easily - I believe that is how they (working in concert with AMC) came up with the "stabilized approach" FCIF that was released earlier this year.

Sandlapper - thanks for the info, I had no idea the ACC demo pilots underwent such a process. You definitely have a point that they do have much more oversight than we do, however, FWIW the pilot flying the airshow demo in the C-17 does have the co-pilot and the safety observer on the flight deck. Not the same level of feedback as a video tape review, but we do treat it seriously. Moosepilot - Agree that this conversation is limited until the board releases their findings. Curious - IAC competition pilot? (rodeo?)

I just "upgraded" to Demo Team and it was a very serious affair. Sq/CC and Gp/CC certification sit-downs and multiple practice sorties. And unlike the other airframe fly-by profiles recently mentioned, the C-17 demo includes a max effort climb, a high speed pass (300 IAS with FAA waiver), a slow speed fully configured pass (120 IAS), a 360 45 degree bank turn, and an assault landing to a reverse taxi. I know compared to the Blue Angels or the Thunderhawks it seems pretty tame - it's a blast to fly though.

Audio w/ slideshow of yesterday's memorial service. http://www.adn.com/2010/08/02/v-swf/1392779/c-17-crash-victims-honored.html Alaska daily news write-up of memorial service. http://www.adn.com/2010/08/02/1392479/elmendorf-memorial-recalls-c-17.html Here's a toast...

Yes - Spirit of the Aleutians.

Same site as above has picture of smoke rising from a wooded area.

Wow...here's the link from Alaska Daily News... http://www.adn.com/2010/07/28/1385727/cargo-plane-reported-down-on-base.html

My friends, there is hope. Leaders who understand what is and what is not important DO exist. Although this is unconfirmed, it seems Manas leadership does not put up with the shoe-nazi patrols. Morale at Manas seems higher than at the other SWA locations.

I've always thought that certain words should only be verbalized by the controller first, and then acknowledged by the pilot second. For example, when we're holding short, it's "Reach ###, ready for departure"...or just "Reach ###, ready". I hear a lot of pilots say "ready for take-off" and I think that "take-off" and "landing" should be always be verbalized by the controller first, in order to avoid miscommunciation. Same thing for check in with departure, it's "Reach ###, 2100 climbing 3000", not "2100 for 3000" as that can easily be misconstrued. Same for descent...just some random thoughts on Comm...

Whatever.

No...it's because people feel that we are "entitled"...the next "Gucci" airframe since the KC-10s are more deployed these days than the 130s. I reckon it's the same community hazing that the fighter community would apply if someone landed an F-22 gear up. It's just annoying that the community in general gets ridiculed because of the actions of one pilot.

At least they put the f'n gear down.

Yes - this is the epitome of the AF SNAP. The fighter references in the other posts I sadly didn't comprehend but this is a great list of the general qualities that we can all agree on. We've got a guy or two at the squadron that I like to call CP/IPs...still a copilot but thinks that they have the right to GK ACs and above on minutia. And, with all due respect to the original posted list, going to church and encouraging others to do the same is not a SNAP quality. There's nothing sensitive or new age about faith.

Same here - SOS in correspondence while deployed and it took up maybe 10-15 hours total. The key is the practice quizzes. Don't know if they're still part of the course. Actually somewhat enjoyed SOS in residence...I hear now they're removed flickerball AND the written exam. Maybe big blue is starting to smarten up...maybe not. I'm seeing that more and more of my buds are staying on as free agents so that if they get the assignment/career direction that they've been waiting for, they keep going. But with their ADSC up, they can punch whenever they please. If you don't like your current AD situation, I promise you that the ANG/USAFR will not require you to jump through queep hoops.

The kind that keeps you on the ground.

You want a peek inside the life of a KC-10 pilot? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1q_WDX2Ilhc (disclaimed: I'm sure this has been posted on baseops before)

Oops - it appears I had bad info...based on the latest link provided by Crog he's at McGuire (and not Kirtland)... Anyone run into this guy? USAFPilot - have you ever thought about writing a mission statement? (aka Jerry McGuire) Nice post.

Not that I agree with TIB - it does seem to embody the whole concept of Fraud, Waste, and Abuse... However, in my search to ensure that JuanRamos is not in my neck of the woods (it appears he's at Kirtland) I did stumble on a forum that had many more defenders of TIB - and most of these defenders didn't mock/belittle the operators in the AF. Supposedly, the defenders of TIB indicate that they are financed by civilian sponsors. I did like that JuanRamos indicated that TIB runs on a "shoe" string budget.

This CGOC virus is spreading - today received mass email that: 1) Was sent out by some other CGO on behalf of the usual CGO email spammer (they're updating their TTPs!) 2) Also called out the OG and the MXG for not showing up to their events - email advertising upcoming event as a CRUD tutorial. We're in the middle of the usual "do more with less" and everyone is out hacking the mish...pisses me off. edited for OPSEC :)

I might be wrong but I don't believe that some "interview required" billets are posted on AMS - ie. the 89th at Andrews.

I guess we've been invaded! This is what should have been your only reply to your ridiculous "tease"... Kalkos - thanks for an hour of entertainment. Glad we could lift your spirits...back to reality unfortunately, eh?