tac airlifter
-
Posts
1,800 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
89
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Gallery
Blogs
Downloads
Wiki
Posts posted by tac airlifter
-
-
I love eating tuna, enjoy talking about it with strangers on the internet, and love sharing stories about the tools guys in my class gave me.
Great first post! I see nothing wrong with your comments, perhaps if you expressed this to your class they'd be more amicable. Good luck at UPT.
-
1
-
-
Well f*cking said. 3 of my top 4 leaders I've personally served with were helo dudes so generally I hope for more former pave guys so cycle through, but jesus mary and joseph the things that were said in that auditorium made me damn near vomit.
Is that the kind of stuff he said? I've been hearing rumblings but I'm not around HRT right now.
-
Truth is unless your toting your M-16 through the mud, you're the support in this war.
I agree with most of your post, but I think this particular statement significantly downplays the role and usefulness of airpower. There are places in the world where the GWOT (or OCO for you new school types) consists of multiple air assets working together and killing terrorists with little or no US presence on the ground. In the past I know air advocates have made a similar mistake- assuming ground forces are outdated and any war can be prosecuted and won by air dominance alone. OIF/OEF proved just how wrong and ignorant this mindset was. Unfortunately I've now seen a trend in the opposite direction where Army guys are absolutely certain air is a support function only; but they are usually not read in on places we're at war where they aren't. In the end we are all just tools for violence, and depending on the particulars of the game you might want air/ground or air alone. Really can't imagine a scenario where you'd ever want ground alone without air support. Ergo, I don't think your generalization above is correct.
Edit to add "ergo" which is a fun word I enjoy using.
-
1
-
-
Rainman,
I am just trying to track what you are saying because I am not in the civilian world?
I'm Ron Burgundy?
-
1
-
-
Just how long do you think the jet is going to be grounded?What happens when the jet is un-grounded and no one is left to fly because they're all pulling short tours with your brilliant plan?
That's valid. Notice I specifically said "at some point it's in the collective interest of our force to use those qualified bodies in a manner which contributes and eases the load everyone else has been carrying." I'm not smart on this issue and I'll defer to guys who are. And beerman, maybe these dudes are already carrying their share of the short taskers and then some, I don't know and I'm not pretending to. My point is only that AT SOME POINT it doesn't make sense to have and entire community sitting when they could be flying or deploying. What that point is I don't know because as previously stated, I don't know the issue itself; whats' your opinion on how long they wait? Or do you think these guys should be waiting on broke aircraft indefinitely?
-
Did anyone ask why we're no longer allowed to wear black t-shirts and boots? I'm curious about the reasoning (bullshit) behind that change.
I was told at a meeting here at Hurlburt recently that the change was made so we (flight suit wearing types) match people wearing the ABU, who are wearing tan shirts and green boots because it "looks sharper with those colors and that pattern." Also was told eventual plan is to phase out tan boots downrange completely, and have green boots be the only color we wear. Follow up question- are we really taking care of our people by making every airmen shell out $ to trade out their entire stash of black shirts for tan ones just so we can look better aestetically? Answer: bullshit dodge about officers having plenty of money. Another fun comment about the switch from black boots to green "you guys weren't shining them and it looked awful, so you should be thanking us for the switch to green suede you don't have to shine." We're issued black boots that don't shine, by the way.
-
I'm glad we've started being a little less stingy with these things lately. They're certainly not something to throw around but early on in OEF/OIF there were a lot of awesome dudes doing awesome things and they didn't get the MOH when maybe they should have although certainly they didn't care whether or not they got it, tribute to how awesome those dudes are. Everyone who's been awarded it recently has fully deserved it.
I agree. Senior military leadership was ridiculously stingy with these awards for several years. Glad to see the reins loosened, and guys who deserve them can actually get them.
-
For example?
Project Liberty? Maybe picking up some of the short tours to Iraq being forced onto squadrons already heavily deployed? Maybe there are good reasons to have entire squadrons full of rated pilots sitting around waiting, but at some point it's in the collective interest of our force to use those qualified bodies in a manner which contributes and eases the load everyone else has been carrying.
-
2
-
-
I'm inclined to agree with the above. Otherwise they'll be able to keep everyone beyond our commitment simply by giving us orders to a new airframe. I don't necessarily want to get out, but I certainly don't want to be forced to stay in past my initial 10; and this seems to be a backdoor method of forcing members to stay.
-
Not sure, just wanted to keep it short and simple. Doesn't matter, not posted as of now.
Looks like they posted it. Well played.
-
You don't get a Form 8 out of UPT, so he wouldn't be previously qualified if he had tracked 38s.
Is this a -38 thing? I got a form 8 from T-44's. Maybe the Navy does it differently, but I just looked in my 942.
-
Hopefully this signals a switch from COIN to Offensive Counter-Terrorism so we can get the fuck out of there.
Concur! Enough digging wells and building girls schools; good on the dudes doing PRT duty, but COIN has not and will not win the fight alone (maybe ever). Past time to loosen the leash and focus on 'kill' instead of 'capture.'
to the fallen! -
I’d take any one of them to combat with me.
Except you aren't in combat sir, you are simply a REMF at OKAS. Those of us in combat will respectfully decline your offer to augment our warrior spirit with shameful frolicking.
-
8
-
-
Anyone have any good fiction recommendations in the military aviation genre besides Clancy? I'm enjoying our list, but starting to get burned out on history.
-
You're joking, right...? Take a looksy at their IADS and tell me how much tac airlifting you'll be doing?
The sexual tension with us and china has been a slow boil for decades; time to fuck and get it over with.
-
1
-
-
Here comes the war with China...
I'm in!
-
Dear shoes, thank you for finally un######ing the "wear your blues to fly commercial."
Dude, I quit wearing my blues on commercial flights 9 years ago. But it's nice I'm finally "legal" to blow off another gay rule.
-
Does that guy on the left have 2 really-deformed dicks?
I thought it was a chick with a gnarly calloused clit.
-
And they pointed out quite directly that no pilots were cut in this group, only nav's and non-rated officers.
Not ture, I personally know x2 11S who made the list of 157.
-
...Mark my words, the bar is their holy grail, and it's next to go.
I think you may be right. If that happens there will be a ledgendary bender at my squadron which has more hard booze than any bar I've ever seen.
Edit to add: probably an epic AF wide bender.
-
LOL
Those pictures would be a good response if I were a herbivore, but I'm not. I've yet to work with a fighter who has the level of SA that a gunship or Apache brings, although strike eagles often come close and they are the users #1 choice if we're forced to use fast movers. I'll pass on the rest of this debate because there is simply no way to have it on the internet as this is not an appropriate forum to share my experiences. Suffice to say I am firmly convinced that two average guys with great CRM will out-perform one above average guy 9 times out of 10; couple that with an aircraft who has more than 1+30 playtime (or 0+30 for -16s) and you've got a serious asset.
-
But think about it from the poor pilot's perspective. If they let you in the seat you'll want to talk on the radio and ask the them stupid questions and give them stupid advice and touch stuff.
You know you would, you damn navs are all alike when it comes to trying to contribute to the mission and what not.
The best part of a two seater would be the ability to bring commanders (especially ground commanders) up to see what is really happening on the ground.
Bringing ground CC's up is a huge benefit and has really helped how we integrate with their operations. Having their boss sit next to you and see his guys from our perspective has gone a long ways towards developing TTPs and trust in the relationship.
I'll also add that I've yet to see a single seat aircraft as capable as a multiseat aircraft. There is simply too much going on for one person to keep track; I've witnessed so many epic fails of dudes with one seat and one sensor and 1-3 radios thinking he can manage more than he can, or, whats worse, thinking what he has access to is the only piece that matters and needs managing. 2 seats is a minimum, and personally I'd prefer the other guy not be a pilot since pilots all like doing pilot stuff and that last thing we need is two people focusing on the same instruments. Back seater needs to be a CSO/WSO.
-
1
-
2
-
-
Some may say it's a lot of money for a fam program when we're going to send them to IFS in a year anyway. I dunno. Bottom line, it exists and I'm having fun.
Good on you bro, that's the best answer for anything we do.
-
missing the point again. Of course you want the best commander. The question is, how do you get to be a good one? In a flying squadron, it begins by being credible in the jet. Maybe not the best pilot in the world, but definitely credible or folks simply won't follow you. After that, the traits of a great unit commander are mostly intangible....good with people, fair, involved, etc. Exactly zero traits of a good unit commander require a masters degree to obtain.
Bingo, why is it so hard to grasp the concept we're putting forth? My CC doesn't have to be the best in the squadron, in fact, most likely he won't be as his attention rightfully should be focused elsewhere. But he shouldn't be UNQUALIFIED to fly the aircraft, which has been the case. And I expect that his FEF would show he was at least a decent stick as a younger fellow, otherwise how can he lead experts if he never was one? A good CC, like mine now, should make the guys under him want to be better and not damper their fighting spirit by downplaying its importance.
Additionally, that question is a tangent from the discussion at hand OverTQ, which is about why a line flyer and mid-career CGO needs to shift his focus onto the 'bigger picture.' You present a false dichotomy, the AF is not forced to choose between CC's who are great at being the boss vs great in the aircraft. Do you really think all the box checking we're lamenting makes a good CC? Excellence at queep means only one thing-- that person has spent a lot of time worrying about how to obtain the right move for their own career. This attribute does not turn you into the selfless warrior willing to hang it all on the line to support a soldier in need. I'd be doing a disservice to my guys if I didn't tell them to acknowledge the queep, I don't want my people to be passed over captains. But I encourgae guys to do the same 10 month joke masters program I did, and focus the majority of their effort on the skills that will allow them to save and take lives in combat.
My point is that guys on the line fighting the daily grind of the war need to be focused on that task and judged accordingly. Currently big blue seems more worried about ensuring captains check all the right boxes (not just AAD & PME, but also flt/CC, shop chief, volunteer shit, exercises, etc.... it's really a ton of shit on top of upgrades, TDYs and deployments) than ensuring captains bring their A-game when it's time to crush and destroy.
What's wrong with the Air Force?
in General Discussion
Posted
Holy shit dude, my only point originally is that airpower is fighting in some places where US ground forces are not. I'm not trying to dip into the 'supported vs. supporting' battle; obviously we are there only to support the dude on the ground in OEF/OIF and I'm proud of it. But there is no US dude on the ground in Libya and a few other spots (both historically and currently) so from a US perspective those wars are an air show and we should be proud of that too; it's cool we can help our bro's in OEF and also cool we can have an effect on our own elsewhere. The whole conversation turned towards the chaff after that, which is probably my fault and unfortunately my ignoring it didn't make it stop. Let's just leave this alone, not the point here at all and who gives a fuck anyway? Supported vs. supporting is an ego black hole, I care about killing the enemy and winning.
Back to the topic, our problem is twofold. First, leadership that cares about stuff other than the mission at the expense of the mission. I don't have an issue with uniform regs, except when they become elevated to the level of 3-1 knowledge. When the CC is coded UP on the orders but seems to know exactly how high my zipper should be zipped, he's a tool and unfit to command. Several people have expressed that essential truth in different ways. Secondly and perhaps more important, a broken promotion/evaluation system that frequently puts those types in charge; who then metastasize by promoting those who embrace their philosophy.