gearhog
-
Posts
1,498 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
42
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Gallery
Blogs
Downloads
Wiki
Posts posted by gearhog
-
-
14 hours ago, Marco said:
Damn dude, so racist. Red dot!
-
False dichotomy.
The question of "brotherhood" or "camaraderie" is a question of infinite variables in people and personality that's constantly changing. There's a spectrum-wide range of mission, leadership, location, aircraft, ops temp, etc in either org. There's also an equally wide range of people in every unit, be it AD or AFR/ANG. Generally speaking, you'll find more good people than not and the quality of your relationships with your coworkers depends entirely on you, not the branch of service. There's no difference, and you'll only get anecdotal evidence based on limited experience with any answer to this.
-
1
-
-
Sounds like someone spiked your drink without you knowing.
It's a single variable on a very long and complex application process. Many disqualifying items stipulate "having a history of....". A one off event, to me, does not indicate you having a history of an underlying medical condition or even a behavioral issue. But it's subjective, I'm not a flt doc, and in my experience most flight docs wouldn't care.
However, there's a chance you face a bad flight doc on a bad day. What are you going to do? Not apply? Go for it.
Don't divulge. Don't lie.
-
2
-
1
-
-
8 hours ago, Duck said:
Anyone ever have issues getting medical clearance from the ANG? I was medically cleared to Palace Front, then approved Palace Front by AFPC, hired by a unit with a position number but then have been sitting around for the last 2 months because the NGB won’t sign my medical clearance. Apparently my Guard unit sent it to the State who sat on it for a while then realized it had to be approved by the NGB (food allergy waiver while on AD). They sent it back to the unit who scrambled and sent it up to the NGB where it has sat for the last month and a half. It’s almost like the ANG doesn’t really need pilots I guess. Lol
So what's the problem? That's just the Guard, man. Administrative processes are always measured in months, not days. Especially at NGB. Only 5 people work there, and they're all traditional working every other week, Tues-Thurs, 0900-1100 and 1300-1500.
-
Self-inflicted with a handgun. Good dude. Would have never imagined it.
-
2
-
-
16 hours ago, Disco_Nav963 said:
Jesus you're dense. His Ph.D. is in clinical psychology. All his refereed publications are in psychology. To the extent any of them touch on politics, it's on the personality traits of liberals and conservatives. He has no peer-reviewed publications in history, economics, or political theory. To the extent he has any formal education in those subjects it's a B.A. in Political Science... So did my high school soccer coach. His own statements show he is hardly "exceptionally educated" about those subjects, or Marxist thought in particular.
Of course there are Marxists in academia. There are also postmodernists/poststructuralists in academia, which is his real bête noire and what he means when he says "cultural Marxism." The two groups do not overlap. They believe very different things about basic epistemology. Saying "cultural Marxist" is like saying "Malthusian infertility medicine"; you're conflating two schools of thought or fields of study that not only don't overlap, but are actually fundamentally contradictory. Marx made specific claims about economics, politics, and history (claims that were severely wrong by the way) based on an underlying belief in epistemological realism—that is, that objective reality exists. Post-modern critical social theorists (like the gender extremists that hold gender is entirely socially constructed) believe the opposite. The targets of Peterson's ire disagree with Marx on epistemology, and they also don't care much about economics either.
But "cultural Marxism" sounds scary and taps into people's concerns about contemporary academia. Ultimately it's a meaningless pejorative like Neo-Conservative (which the Left stripped of its domestic policy meanings to use only to refer to a particular subset of foreign policy thought on the Right, because it conveniently sounds like Neo-Nazi), Neo-Liberal (which once had a particular meaning in international economics, but socialists have co-opted to attack liberals), or "Globalist." It appeals to people whose knowledge of political theory comes from owning but not actually reading/understanding Jonah Goldberg's "Liberal Fascism."
Dishonest oversimplification and claiming to speak as an expert about subjects outside your field is not what academics do. It's what hucksters do.He's a dishonest huckster because you believe you've found a semantical flaw in the phrase "cultural Marxism" that he uses in a few of his arguments?
He repeatedly admits he is open to the idea that there could be errors in his logic, and seeks to find intellectually honest debates to find "truth". You're simply dismissing the entirety of the man's ideas because you disagree with the way he placed two words together, yet you're providing no original alternatives to any of them... and it took you 4 paragraphs to do it, which reeks more of pseudo-intellectualism than anything he has said.
-
2
-
1
-
1
-
-
Has anyone had a GTC negatively affect their credit score?
I was recently scheduled for a sim, our RA purchased airline tickets using my GTC thru SATO. The Guard Bureau cancelled the sim due to end of FY lack of funds. My orders were cancelled, my sim was cancelled, and my airline tickets were cancelled 2 days prior. I had a bunch of SATO fees with no way to create an authorization or voucher without orders. Long story short, no one could figure out (or were willing to try) how to pay the pill in DTS with no orders, and Citi eventually suspends my card and says the charges are going to a collection agency and will be reflected on my credit score. So I pay it out of my own pocket, late, to avoid further headaches. Today, I get an email saying my score has changed, but I have zero debt any where, for any thing. The connection between Experian and USAA is down so I am unable to view the negative factors.
-
5 hours ago, Hacker said:
Well, it is called "the service". It isn't about you, me, or any of us.
But I think it should be, sometimes. Most of us volunteer to serve and expect that our efforts and sacrifices for the common good of the people and ideas we value will be somewhat apparent. We've probably all had experiences where our service, our rush to the aid of others, was so deeply satisfying that we wish we could have sacrificed more and wished for nothing in return. When it's not so apparent, say when training or doing administrative/bureaucratic jobs, you may be able to convince them that the fruits of their service exist, but you need to compensate them and accommodate a reasonable amount of their desires. However, when a person too often sees that their efforts and sacrifices are either squandered or even detrimental to what they believe they are serving, they stop believing that what they're doing is actual "Service", and no amount of finger wagging while repeating "Service before Self" is going to make them stick around.
-
1
-
-
19 hours ago, Cooter said:
Like Tac said, not defending just presenting the facts. It's a war, there's some risk, there's risk getting out of bed in the morning. If you are interested in FW/RW partnered advisor positions you can PM me as well with a .mil.
Cooter
I understand the necessity to correct the misconceptions, it's just that the corrections don't change the result. That result being: This is not something a Guard guy should feel compelled to accept.
-
21 minutes ago, Danger41 said:
Uhhh, wtf are you guys talking about?
Start here at 21:35, then watch the entire interview:
Then here:
Then checkout the Sam Harris and Joe Rogan Experience podcasts with Peterson, Weinstein, Dave Atilla, etc.
-
2 minutes ago, Homestar said:
I did the job as a non-vol 2012-2013. I’m not going to defend it.
My point is that the threat of a 365 right now is way overblown by fear mongers here.
That's a vague accusation. Either the threat exists or it doesn't. You acknowledge that it exists, you're just disputing your interpretation of an unspecified individual's statement of how great the threat is. Hardly qualifies an argument that the whole board is sucking it's own c^&*,
-
2
-
-
10 hours ago, Cooter said:
I have one of my squadrons that flies 99.9% of their sorties AFG unilateral and the others are just as capable, we partner as needed but usually for dynamic mission sets not safety related. Green on blue is always a concern but that doesn't mean people are walking around jocked up all the time (mostly).
As stated, it's better to have the facts from people in the know instead or running around screaming fire.
Cooter
P.S. I've got FW/RW positions open if anyone is interested!
I'm in a Guard unit that my be tagged for an AFG air advisor tasking in 2019. I'm having a hard time understanding your post because I don't know what positions your speaking from or about. I may be wrong, but your post and Homestar's post seem to be defending the assignment.
Are you saying it's a good deal for a guard guy, or bad, but not that bad...?
-
I'm hopeful that this PC culture is about to experience a massive backlash. If the momentum the "intellectual dark web" movement is gaining with people like Sam Harris, Eric Weinstein, Jordan Peterson, Dave Rubin, etc, is any indication, we'll soon be able to relax a little.
-
2
-
-
1 hour ago, M2 said:
Did Grover just drop a "F" bomb?
What in the actual F? I clearly heard him say "F'n" the first couple times I watched it, then I could not hear it again. Bizarre
-
3 hours ago, tac airlifter said:
You don’t know what you’re talking about.
First, Afghan aviation will not fall apart as soon as we leave. It’ll be super unsafe, but they will find a way.
Second, INs are no longer tasked for the deployment.
Third, the requirement is going from 6 x C130 guys to 3, and forecast to hit zero soon. I know of no C130 non-vols.
Fourth, copy there is a green on blue threat and thank you for the history lesson. However your characterization of the environment is misinformed despite the events of 7 years ago.
Finally, I know the anecdote of an ate-up active duty commander doing room inspections on some AGR mission hackers minding their own business is emotionally appealing. But consider the possibility said AGR dudes were such disgusting slobs they attracted rodents by their poor hygiene. I wasn’t there. But I did see an AD commander on his hands and knees scrubbing piss stains off the floor of an AGR members room to clean it before another AGR guy occupied it the next morning. Two sides to every story.
I don’t blame anyone who passes on an adviser gig, especially in the AGR. I’d recommend against using your third hand years old info to argue facts with a guy currently doing the task in question.
God bless ya for doing what you're doing, but for clarification, you're arguing with a guy who is making the case it sucks.
Are you saying it's a good deal or are you just saying your facts for substantiating that it is a shit deal are better than his facts for substantiating its a shit deal?
-
Say you're tagged as an Afghan Air Advisor. You go. You make the best of it and give it your best effort. You even build friendships with good people. Then this is the result:
Worth it?
-
1
-
1
-
-
8 hours ago, Eli said:
Not entirely true. C130 units are getting tagged with Afghan Air Advisor. We sent three people. Our leadership lucked out that they were volunteers, two of them anyway, one had an ADSC so they voluntold him. It's not just a 179. You have to learn Army, so that is another couple of months.
Had leadership had to make a list and start asking -those who said no would have been shown the door. My estimate is we would have lost 20-30% of instructors across each crew position.
I'm in a guard unit.
Heard a nasty rumor a Herc unit may be getting tagged for this in 2019. I guarantee every traditional IP's hand is spring loaded to smash the "F this I'm out" button like a contestant on Family Feud.
-
1
-
-
29 minutes ago, snoopyeast said:
2019 should be interesting.
Damn. His resignation letter speaks volumes. Concerning.
-
3
-
-
2 hours ago, TreeA10 said:
I've been out for a while, wtf is green dot?
Instead of telling people to do the right thing and intervene when someone does dumb shit, we are supposed to use the words “red dot!” when we speak to indicate something bad is happening. Then we say, or be, or do a “green dot” something or other that is supposed to mean being proactive in doing the right thing.
It’s idiotic and makes you want to choke someone.
-
16 minutes ago, Lord Ratner said:
You answer this question below. My broader point was that I'm not against things that make the company more efficient (financially successful) because the more successful the company is, the less likely I am to get furloughed. PBS is just one way a company can become more efficient. And, it gives me more control over my schedule. Win win.
Not sure what you are getting at with the apple.
I said "our 30-year captains" which was dumb, because I didn't say where I work. I meant AA captains. But the point stands for other examples. Unions prevent us from being able to go to another airline without a massive financial penalty. Pros and cons.
Roger. But I would counter that if PBS makes a weak company strong, larger more important problems lie elsewhere. Looking at the historical data, fundamentally strong companies have not required PBS to grow and increase profitability.
Let's say, for argument's sake, PBS gives a pilot more control over his schedule. You're also saying PBS is also more efficient for the company. That has to mean more productivity per unit of labor. In other words, employees are required to work more. So yes, if I were to concede (which I'm not 😄 ) a pilot may have somewhat greater control, but it would be over more required work.
The apple was a poor analogy to the monthly schedule. I'm abandoning it.
28 minutes ago, HuggyU2 said:When I was furloughed by my airline... both times... they were line bidding. So I’d say your theory is false.
A strong airline needs to be profitable. Efficiency aids that profitability. If we only need 1000 pilots to meet flying within the limits of the collective bargaining agreement, I don’t believe we should have 1200 pilots. That doesn’t help.
From what I’ve seen, the bigger problem in this industry are Captains that just don’t give a shit. They are wasteful. And they do nothing to engage with the people that get me my salary. They just don’t get it.
As above, line bidding was likely not the cause of the furlough. Just because a company failed during line bidding doesn't mean it's a fantastic business model under PBS. You're right about the number of pilots. Why not require an even fewer number of pilots to fly a schedule every month that will max out thier FAR work/rest limits for the benefit of the company? Blaming fellow pilots for the woes of the industry? That's a conversation better had on your union message board. Just kidding! Don't ever do that!
-
6 hours ago, Lord Ratner said:
Yeah, I'd like to do less work for more pay. But I'd also like to have this job for 32ish years without getting furloughed. Some of the old guys talk about the way it used to be as though it didn't have anything to do with the collapse of the entire industry.
Yeah, PBS is good for the company. But it's also good for the pilots. Those two don't have to be mutually exclusive. I'd rather have my time off and QoL provided by simple contractual language rather than through conflicts and loopholes. Hopefully we get that in the upcoming negotiations.
And before someone calls me anti-union (I am), I'm a volunteer in mine. It's the way it is, so I will do my best to support it. But unions are also why our 30-year captains can only look at Delta's profit sharing with a longing gaze instead of jump ship and reap the benefits. Everything has a cost.If there is a correlation between line bidding and being vulnerable to furlough, how would you reconcile that the big airlines which have furloughed and/or declared bankruptcy use PBS while airlines which have never furloughed use line bidding?
I believe a company's financial health has more to do with it's business model, strategic plan, and quality of management than the different methods by which the same flying schedule is executed. If the company has an apple at the beginning of the month, is it better for them to turn their back, peel it, slice it, and distribute the different pieces among the pilots... or is it better for them to simply hand the apple to the pilots? Opinions vary depending somewhat on your idea of fairness.
Now things have changed, but many pilots who have been in the industry a while are not looking at Delta captains with a longing gaze as they remember, circa 2005, when thousands of Delta captains had multi-million dollar retirement accounts wiped out for pennies on the dollar.
-
32 minutes ago, HuggyU2 said:
I'm still scratching my head at your post. "More productivity" is a bad thing for my company??? I wasn't a Business major, but I'm all for "productivity".. But hey, if you think hiring 2000 more pilots below you will fix your woes and increase your pay through quicker upgrade times, then I don't know what more I can say.
Having extra pilots hired below you is worth very little. If/when the recession comes, they will all get furloughed... just like I was after 9/11.
Don't blame PBS for your ills... blame the negotiating committee that gave you the contract that you have. If your company is more productive, you should reap the benefits. If that's not happening, your union has to fix it.
I won't waste my time trying to convince you that PBS is good for your pilot group because I don't know enough about alternatives. But I find PBS works quite well for me: I am able to specify what I need (unlike line bidding), and I generally get it.
As for line bidding... three days ago, I flew LAX-HNL with an Alaska Airlines Captain in the jumpseat. He said they just left PBS and are going to line bidding. He wasn't impressed, and went through a number of reason why it was inferior. He had a shitload more experience in this industry than I do, and I simply listened and took notes.
More productivity is good for the company because labor is the biggest single operating expense. If the company wants to reduce cost, they increase the productivity per unit of labor. But a cost still exists, so who's paying it and how? The employees are paying it with a different resource: time. That's because the company would like to keep their pilots in the seat more hours of the day, more days of the month, while reducing the employee opportunities for absenteeism.
Of course, there are lots of people who are fine with flying their ass of for a big paycheck. And I'm sure there's no shortage of stories of PBS pilots who worked 3 days a month. But let's face facts, that's not the status quo.
You're right that the unions committees and the voting memberships are responsible for the details of the scheduling section of the contract and the specifics very greatly from airline to airline. However, the two distinct categories of schedule management, line bidding and PBS, remain very different. PBS came into being during a period when pilots were a dime a dozen and the economy was poor and sold to the membership as a mutually beneficial plan to mitigate the threat of the company folding. As I understand it, every airline that does not already have PBS recently opened the last round of negotiations with "We want PBS" and their unions said "Absolutely a non-starter."
Why? Because the union committees studied every other airline contract in the industry upside down and inside out and determined they have leverage and it's a regression in work rules. That is, if the membership values seniority rules and schedule flexibility above sacrificing personal time for productivity. And of course, not everyone does. There are good things about PBS, but when you compare the sum totals of the benefits of drawbacks of each system, there's a reason why the most financially stable airlines over the last couple of decades do not have PBS.
-
Congrats on your retirement.
I'm a few months behind you, and also trying to cover all the bases.
-
4 hours ago, joe1234 said:
See, that's the beauty of being a part timer. The military is far more attractive as a side piece than as a wife.
When you get tired of the Air Force's shit, just ghost it for a few weeks until a nice TDY drops down.
Until you get burned a few times by having the TDY cancelled last minute by the Guard Bureau (after you've taken military leave) due to lack of funds, cancelled by the Sq due lack of interest from other crewmembers, or cancelled by MX for broken aircraft. Then you sit around the Sq all week trying to recoup a fraction of your lost airline pay by logging doubles doing CBTs and OPRs if the network is up. I sure hope I don't sound bitter.
-
1
-
2
-
Does AD or ANG/AFR have the best “community”?
in General Discussion
Posted
I had to google "chidi". I'm guessing it's a reference to a broadcast network TV sitcom that you watch?
I guess that's still a thing. Anyway, sick burn, bro. 😂