tac airlifter

Good housing answer, thanks. The FY14 arrival was briefed yesterday by mid level HQ folks, guess its still undecided. We've heard rumors of a PCS freeze in 1 month if sequestration is still unresolved; can you speak to the validity of that rumor in reference to how it affects a new SQ standing up at CVS?

i have no idea if it will be configured differently, I just meant the transfer of ownership.

In other news; I heard the AFSOC MC12 will arrive at CVS FY14. Looks like more missions headed that way. Any ideas when the new base housing will be built?

Could you clarify this statement? Because it sounds like you're a UPT IP who thinks the bottom students "earned" a U28..... And if that's the case you have no idea what U28s do and you're an idiot who has hurt the war effort.

Yes, and "grievous morale issues" has always been a top concern among Air Force leadership.

You've got it all wrong bro. I'm busy. I come to BO to have interesting discussions with people whose opinions I value. You think its all anonymous internet posting, it isn't; these communities are small. I don't care what you fly or if you fly, but why waste my time talking with random people? You say it's all about the logical value of the points themselves; I recall being like that myself as a college student. But nowadays I'm uninterested in summoning the energy to debate unqualified opinions. Your tautological approach to debate tires me. Nsplayr was also pleonastic, but at least he is personally credible and is down range now doing great shit as we speak. Until I hear more about you, I'm uninterested in discussing the numerous flaws in your rationale.

Getting back to WTF territory we can all agree on........ Man fucks cow after claiming flirtatious enchantment, passes out during nuptials: https://metro.co.uk/2010/06/14/man-forced-to-marry-cow-faints-at-wedding-387781/ ETA: yes I know its a few years old.

You'd be wrong and the entirety of military history would be against you. Generals leading wars need not be current tactical experts, however, having that background is essential in knowing what can and cannot be done. Business comparisons sometimes work on a micro scale but always fall short on the macro. Besides that, you're entirely sidestepping the point: with current unofficial requirements for specific academic pedigrees we're rendering unqualified a large mass of people who have already proven themselves in combat, while simultaneously allowing only those with hardly any tactical experience through. There hasn't been a single successful military managed this way in all of history, and we seem to have stumbled into this practice rather than methodically reasoning our way here. Your whole discussion is tangential. If you want to be taken seriously, you need to offer something about your qualifications other than "it doesn't mater, I'm an officer."

Why do you think they were disrupting the flow of traffic? Seems to be an assumption on your part. You're also willful ignoring the role the police played in impeding the flow of traffic. Also 100% incorrect if you think the demonstrators were given ample time to go elsewhere; they specifically asked to relocate to a non-disruptive area and were told to go home. That's my issue here: they were basically told there was no option to protest. I don't even want to discus the whole idea of free people asking for a permit to exercise rights. This is one of those agree to disagree things since different folks view the same events but reach different conclusions. I posted this because for some of us, "SOP" behavior from police is a total WTF regardless of political affiliation.

Hard to say who is using them though. I know reports are Assad regime, but strong potential it's al Nusra front. Either way the civilians are suffering. Think this will lead to an escalation or fizzle out like the last time someone used chemical agents but source was indeterminable?

Bus driver, you're correct that deployment count doesn't equal tactical prowess; I was speaking more with my current small corner of the AF in mind and there are some unique things going on here. But I don't know how anyone can truly be superior at tactics without having at least put them into practice a few times. And no, being superior at tactics isn't a prerequisite for strategic excellence, but as you mentioned its at least a fundamental that must be fully understood. Overall I think this article is correct; both the army & USAF are prohibiting people with demonstrated tactical success who are capable of higher level thinking from competition to higher ranks because they lack a certain academic pedigree.... One that is impossible to obtain when stuck in the daily grind. We're essentially disqualifying a large pool of highly qualified individuals, and the solution lies in changing our paradigm of qualification.

What pathway were they blocking exactly, since they weren't charged with that? I know if the cops want to fuck with us, they'll find a "legal" way to fuck with us; it's the reality of having thousands of laws no one can possibly keep track of. Besides, the protestors offered to relocate somewhere acceptable and were told "go home or be arrested." And really man, resisting arrest for standing there with his hands out and not moving? And choking him out & dropping him to the ground? Appropriate?

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?

https://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.