MooseBoost
-
Posts
13 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Gallery
Blogs
Downloads
Wiki
Posts posted by MooseBoost
-
-
Part of TERA was that anyone with 19+ years was automatically eligible regardless of their AFSC. That is an easy one… if someone didn't hit 20 yrs until Dec and they put in for TERA it just means they can retire at 19 yrs and 8 months on 1 Aug. As an O-5 they could have stayed in past 20 so that is a no-brainer to approve those which is probably why it happened so fast.
Yeah, that sounds right, he has another 2 or 3 months on AD, so it'll be something like 19.5 years when he retires
-
How many years did he have? Lt Cols that were not twice passed over were not suppose to be eligible. If he is twice passed over then he has more than 20 and TERA is not the right word. SERB is.
I asked him to clarify if it was TERA or SERB, he said TERA, but he has a little over 19 years in...maybe he was confused? I don't mean to add confusion to this RUMINT mill.
-
Update: that LtCol in my SQ was approved for TERA..
-
I'll ask him what he was approved for, he was really surprised he got it so fast, less than 24hr turnaround apparently. '
And I'm not sure exactly what 18thAF/CC said, but he was talking to a bunch of Capt's in that new virtual GRACC tour they do in lieu of a TDY, our guy came out of the session (all online) and was talking about how that was 18AF/CC's biggest personnel concern.
Its all RUMINT as far as i'm concerned, but I thought they warrant passing out to BODN. How are the rest of the squadrons looking at this? Any ATP/Airline talks? Ops normal? Just wondering
-
We have a LtCol who applied for and was approved for TERA (I believe), he's been getting calls all day from other O-5s all over the base about how he was able too. The amount of ATP and Airline talk going on at the squadron at ALL levels, copilots to evaluators, has been impressive the last few days. Had an EP joke today about how the next GK session will be about the best way to get your ATP and invite Airline recruiters to the squadron for interviews. This whole thing is a shit-show of immense scale! Any word on official release of 131? I'm curious if my '10 year group in 11Ms will be FSB eligible or not.
From the talk around the squadron it sound like 6 - 9 IP/EPs are going to make a run for VSP/Palace Chase/Get the hell out. Also overheard (from a virtual GRACC) the 18AF/CC saying his biggest concern was 11Ms running to the airlines, I wonder how long that took to reach his level?
-
1
-
-
http://fearoflanding.com/accidents/sequence-of-events-in-the-cockpit-on-asiana-flight-214/
Link to an article with the NTSB video regarding the asiana crash. Poor/improper use of automation to blame, not too surprising.
-
If anyone is interested, there is a mil only link to the "C-17A Mishap Primer" floating around (put together by McChord), it includes plenty of relevant non-privileged (but FOUO) information including the 4-engine flameout and plenty of other mishaps you may or may not have heard about in the C-17. It doesn't have some of the more recent mishaps; but overall it does a great job of showing a smattering of significant incidents that have happened in the community. I will personally comment that from what I've seen, many of these mishaps and/or near-accidents are fairly well protected against with new training, pubs, and regs (not that any of those things prevent pilot error/buffoonery, but it at least provides a greater safety margin). PM me if you want the link, again, this can be accessed on a mil network only.
-
Story time!
Situation:
At ETAR,
#1 for takeoff is holding on the runway, painting storms off the departure end.
We're holding short of the runway, turned at an angle so we can get a paint as well.
We talk on button 10 and see the same thing, storms right off the departure end; so, obviously, we both decide not to take off.
AMCC calls asking for the reason we are delaying, both aircraft call back saying "holding due to storms/weather off departure end of the runway," AMCC replies "Standby."
--5 minutes later--
AMCC calls back stating "I called tower, they have no issue giving you takeoff clearance, please depart as soon as possible to avoid any further delay"
#1 for departure, "Negative, there is weather we can't fly through in our flight path," AMCC "Sir, tower says they will give you takeoff clearance, there is no reason to delay any further"
Our jet's aircraft commander (old, crusty, & OGV) "AMCC, are you a pilot? Have you been trained in what our capabilities are? Do you realize that we must make decisions based off of what our on-board equipment tells us, and it is telling us WE CANNOT TAKEOFF...don't direct aircrew what to do when you have no authority, may I have you initials?"
and we got no reply after that...
Needless to say, I think both crews were pretty pissed off about AMCC trying to over-ride us...the retardation of AMCC (and TACC at times) is astounding
-
Don't remember which post someone asked about the C-5 wingtip strike in, but just came across this on reddit....looks like the entire radar came off with it too...
-
Can't claim I took or even found these, got'em off reddit, thought baseops might be interested in how f***ed up the interior is from the accident
-
Safety report is out...got the brief a few days ago...they're damn lucky they walked away from that.
Is the KC-10 going to be cut?
in General Discussion
Posted
I'll just thrown in for the KC-10, gotta say I was impressed when a KC-10 flew 6 hours, gave us 100k of gas, and flew 6 more hours to land recently, I'm 99% sure a -135 wouldn't have been able to do that...