tac airlifter

Copy bro, thanks. I had zero SA on how anything went down in Libya. But my schedule now has me available for Syria!

I don't follow what you mean, but I didn't pay any attention to Libya.

I'm not sure how much a no fly zone would help the immediate situation. Seems the regime is mostly using tanks and troops with limited air assets to kill the civilians.

Valid question. If I could go back in time, I'd have started my masters after my first year and second deployment in my ops squadron, taken one class at a time and spent the left over time studying and being sharp at flying. I could have still easily had it complete at 03 + 6 months. Instead, I spent my entire first assignment (5 years) being really good at my job and deploying a bunch, only to cram the masters in while training on a new platform and deploying in a far more complex environment; and I finished 1 week after my board met. I did fine, got a DP, had the other boxes checked, etc. but it was more painful than it needed to be and I could have been just as good at flying and still gotten it done had I been better at time managment. But the lesson I'd pass onto you would be: use your judgement to decide when you've estabilished a knowledge foundation in your platform. Once you're on solid ground and can spare about 5 hours a week, start your masters and take it slow. Be the guy who can always volunteer for a a TDY and is still awesome at your job, and take 3 years to do the masters if thats what you need. NEVER be the young guy asking for a day off the flying schedule to write a paper, you'll lose a respect you can never get back. But also use some strategy and don't be the guy who is cramming for his masters 6 months before his board meets like I did. There is a middle ground, you're a smart dude (or you wouldn't be doing this) and I'm sure you can find it. It won't hurt you to not have a masters as an LT, but if you can get it done while simultaneously being shit hot you'll impress people. Good on you for asking, and I hope this advice was helpful.

Outstanding.

Neither Jews nor Christians think Jesus was a prophet.

What gives is that "shoe" is a mentality, not an AFSC, and plenty of our senior leaders who've been exec-ing and schooling their whole career and have barely above 2000 hours as an 06 are shoes to their core. And they resent with passionate shame ops dudes like myself.

Hopefully that cunt will choke on a donut.

Why are you being such a dick?

ah, copy. Disregard rant.

Holy shit I hope you aren't trying to imply an MQ-1 w/ x1 AGM-114 is anywhere close to a DAP or AH-6 at CAS. Don't believe the hype bro. When you add up the cost/benefit analysis wrt UAVs in VI/CAS/SCAR/DA etc. you'll find them far far behind manned assets in every aspect. Steady stare or intel gathering w/ strike capability? Very useful. Dynamic engagement, comm intensive situation? Look elsewhere.

100% true, and I'll add that AV-8's also don't land with that single bomb if they don't drop. Too heavy, so they have to dump their GBU-12 (or -38) in the ocean. I'm unfamiliar with F-35 STOVL told, can they land with the same load they took off with or are we wasting more munitions in the ocean on EVERY sortie?

Yes, that's what will happen; resources/people will be diverted from OEF for CAR et al. So it would be reasonable to expect the LRA is a bigger national security threat than the HQ/AQ networks our special dudes are fighting there. Except they aren't. So again, why are we diverting resources from a higher priority threat? It's really rhetorical at this point and I copy you're in favor of it. But to me it doesn't make sense, I want to kill the dudes plotting to attack my family before I get my war on elsewhere. I'll let the reader decide, chow hall just opened so I'm out. Later man.

There are a finite number of people available and they are burned out, this further tasks them. Personal opinion only. Still not apparent to me. And the "100" number is a bit misleading since a minimum of x5 that number are going for support and logistics. All of which comes from somewhere else. And since we're all maxed on hours and doing 1:1 dwell, to plus up here we subtract somewhere else.

You're smarter than this response indicates. I know AQAP wasn't the point of sending troops to Uganda. My point exactly. We should be utilizing scant resources to win fights with enemies intent on doing us harm before we start some shit with a random group indifferent to our national interests. Apparently that isn't apparent to me, hence the disagreeing nature of my response. Copy, although the PI ops are in fact happening ISO fighting an AQ offshoot so not the best example. If the LRA in Uganda is threatening our interests, please explain how. You got me there. I saw an opportunity to point out the absurdity of the GWOT--> OCO name change and took it. Nothing has changed except the acronym on my OPR. You can support POTUS policies while still joining in my amusement at the irony of our Nobel Peace prize winning CINC who ran on a "change" platform who has, in fact, changed nothing but the name of our wars.

Fuck the DoS. Those pussies should stay in their lane. Good thing we have people willing to sacrafice and go out there to kick ass.

Copy, Nigeria is sort of western Africa. Hence "Nigeria I see a possible connection." As for the LRA, the group specifically named in and around Uganda-- there's no connection to AQAP, and I'm qualified to make that statement. And since we're no longer in a "global war on terrorism" per POTUS direction, it seems odd to me we'd start some shit with a terrorist group which has never been a threat to us. If we're going to get into a brawl with every terrorist group out there just for being terrorist assholes (which I'm fine with BTW) then let's continue the Bush policy and I'll call it the GWOT again. If you think they are a threat or may be in the future ergo they should be struck now, then by all means let's have POTUS explain why we should implement preemptive war and I'll bask in the irony. If we want to focus our limited resources on the threat, lets go kill al shabab in Somalia and finish off AQAP/AQEA... you know I'm game. I'm all for killing people bad guys simply because they're bad, once we can afford to divert our resources and attention away from dudes actually trying to kill my wife and kids.

Terrorism is real in several places, but western africa is not at the top of our list. Nigeria I see the possible connection, but Uganda? It's a waste of resources. Additionally, the group specifically named is the LRA; they practice a mystic brand of animism & christianity. Not at all in danger of linking w/ AQAP and certainly no threat to the US.

Thanks, I didn't know that. Is that an internal payload or with external mounts? I recall seeing a picture of one with hard points. Thought it was a joke at the time. Any idea of how much they can carry or is that privledged info?

Forgive my ignorance; is there an A/G mod of F-22 out there? I thought it was an air to air player only. And BQ, having been all over the third world, including present location, there are plenty of >7K runways. I've never seen STOL used, or been somewhere it was required. Anything is possile in the future, but cost exceeds benefit for that capability in my opinion.

Yup. Someone needs to go fuck them up. I'm game.

Maybe you did horrible on your checkride and they are helping you out with another chance.

Great post man, thanks. I'm totally ignorant of the entire funding process so that helped. Seems like everywhere I look good people are gaming the rules to get the mission accomplished inside a bureaucracy.

His point is still valid.

Valid, but in a squadron full of CSO's some bright dude will find a way & share it with the rest of us non-brainiacs. Thats why we have R&D.