tac airlifter

As would I in a theoretical world. That said, the only people I've seen with actual strategic mastery are those who've obtained tactical prowess first. And you simply can't do that without deploying. A lot.

They have the right to assembly on a public sidewalk. They offered to relocate and were told to go home. If 2 people with signs were really a traffic hazard, don't you think 6 police cars only exacerbated the supposed hazard? And labeling behavior "SOP" doesn't make it right. Do you really think that is an appropriate way for cops to deal with citizens? And what law did they break?

http://danaloeschradio.com/ Gotta love the throat choke takedown for no reason at the end.

I happen to know a number of badass army dudes with a decade long track record of ballsy and successful operations. The problem isn't a lack of competant and qualified people, the problem is a system which views a front line SF team leader with dozens of deployments as less capable of higher rank than a never deployed staff officer with a masters from Harvard. Very similar to our AF problems.

Interesting to note the hypocrisy as well; progressives weren't advocating that a homosexual first sergeant profess loudly his personal disdain for gay marriage a year ago..... No, no, they all thought it was a foul that he was forced to lie about himself just for a job. But now a heterosexual first sergeant must really and truly believe in the rules he administers, it's not enough to just do so competently, he needs to be a true believer or the thought police come after him. This isn't about equality, never was. This is about power eradicating other points of view. You can't argue with hypocrites, they'll always have a reason why it's ok to justify their way of operating. There will be more of this stuff, anytime I hear talk about tolerance it's always a cover for "give me power so I can be intolerant towards other beliefs."

I've also had bosses grab a few hours rest while ops were on standby, but I've never had one leave the JOC and play Xbox when there was a potential for anything to happen. Also, WTF is Reggie Love even doing at the WH when an op of this scale is happening?

I'm not using it to fly, but I am using it to help various people get various ratings.

I'm not an army guy, but I have these talks with our partners on exercises and deployments and they echo the same thing: institutionalized Peter principal on a mass scale. Just finished "bleeding talent" by Tim Kane, focuses on the army but it can all be said of the AF as well. And although I don't think it will change, there's always value in an eloquently stated truth.

Radio, why did you assume our comments were specific to CAS events? If you think an airstrike is "non text book" when it happens outside of CAS then there are text books you haven't read. Your notion that you surely would have heard of these things with FEBs and court martials and school house lessons is patently ridiculous. Bottom line, RPAs are a great tool for some missions & their capabilities will and are slowly improving. But they won't be taking over every job for manned aircraft anytime soon because they aren't reliable enough; anyone pushing contrariwise has no real world experience.

Sounds like there's a lot you haven't heard about.

Good discussion so far! I prefer these threads than BODN politics nonsense, so thanks for the thoughtful reply. No, I'm no longer an airlift guy, that was a previous life. I've been a manned tactical ISR guy the past 5 years, so I'm pretty qualified to say no, "any ISR mission currently undertaken by a manned platform" will be soon accomplished by RPAs is false. We are an order of magnitude in technological development away from that. I appreciate RPAs, so don't take this as a dick measuring thing; but they are not even close to performing at a level required to take away manned ISR. We can agree to disagree here, because the examples I'd cite to prove my point aren't for a public forum. Moving on..... "once safety is assured" may be a long damn time. And whats the difference between a single pilot monitoring the computer and a single pilot? To keep a pilot there doesn't prove your point at all. I see no advantage to RPA passenger planes. right, they are. So, one might even say 'major things will have to change before the technology is ready for prime time." I always hear R&D guys talk about what is imminently about to happen, because they deal in a world of capability. In ops, we realize a technical theoretical potential isn't a true capability until you have proven it & can reliably replicate it. These 'evolutions in capability' that you gloss over are major issues that have resulted in mission fail on numerous occasions. Technical issues, but also user issues like the ability to keep crosshairs on target. copy, so how's that RQ-4 working out compared to the U2 lately? Again, a plane that doesn't exist and another one that sucks as examples really proves my point (namely, that this isn't ready to take over manned aircraft) instead of yours. current developments aren't operational capabilities. I never said RPAs were shitty planes and not worth our effort, quite the opposite. But you're right that I'm right... This has a long ways to go before its ready for prime time. Your assertion that NAS approval is the only thing preventing this technology from spreading like herpes to every corner of the world is false. The technological problems, the cost versus benefit, etc are preventing this from exploding. they already have clearance to fly in mixed airspace deployed, and yet your assertions aren't even on the AO way ahead slides, so agree to disagree. Again, this is a good discussion so please don't think I'm being an asshole; I prefer discussions and wouldn't waste my time with an argument here. But frankly I disagree with your POV. There are numerous other issues I haven't touched on holding RPAs back, like the massive footprint and personnel requirement to support a single orbit. T overall I think there is a bright future for this relevant and important technology, I just don't think it's so bright that it will plume out the pilot career.

Name me a single mission that will go to RPA's once civilian airspace is approved. Loiter time and high definition sensors are the two great advantages to RPAs. Disadvantages are numerous but include terrible radios, difficulty conducting debriefs, lack of anti-icing capability, permissive environment only operations, etc. Often times they work great for single specific missions, but often times they also shoot without clearance through the middle of an air stack while failing to place their crosshairs on the correct target. I am absolutely not knocking the crews, they are doing the best they can with the tools they are provided. However, I did not fully appreciate what a nightmare the RPA enterprise was until I went to Clovis and worked closely with the squadrons and saw their physical workstation. Major things will have to change before that technology is ready for primetime.

Will be more than 15 by the time all is said & done; it may actually affect the new SQs ability to be operational on time.

Exactly how I feel about you pretending to be a pilot.

Pallets of street justice & kinetics you can't talk about? You must have done the super spec ops C17 fighter pilot upgrade, sorry for questioning you Dr. Badass.

Tankers actually support objectives being actioned regularly, airlift/AD rarely plays a direct support role in fighting (at least how you guys do it). Both are important, but it's folly to assume you're always more relevant. Thats true for all of us. OP, hope you get something that makes you happy.

Hoptimum by Sierra Nevada. A 10.4% IPA, definitely my new favorite of their offerings.

Did you read your own link?

Yes, in this case some dudes snuck onto the runway at an austere location and placed an IED. Lucky it didn't kill everyone on board. There's a lot of crazy shit that has gone down in the past 10 years of war, you might not have heard every story.

Also BIP'd the -130 that crashed outside ORBI. And I've seen several random helo's BIP'd. Cheaper, easier, faster.

I'm glad to hear this attitude from so many safety officers. One of my greatest frustrations flying in the Air Force has been the secrecy surrounding safety investigation results.I have never once walked into my safety office, shut the door and successfully been allowed to access and read a safety report. I find it incredibly frustrating that I have easier access to top-secret information than the results of a safety investigation. Mostly the issue is manning, as our safety offices rarely have anybody qualified; this means we are dependent on Wing safety representatives who are not forthcoming or accountable to SQs.

meaning what?

Agreed, location = QOL for my family when I'm deployed; a happy family is the only way I can sustain the 1000+ days deployed I've already accumulated. And a shitty assignment location is the most likely thing to make me punch, despite how much I enjoy the fight. Keeping CVS open and a sole location for numerous AFSOC platforms is a national scandal with a direct negative impact on our ability to prosecute the mission by driving away talent.

Nope.

Better than most of the reviews I found online; well done & thanks for the write up!