Jughead

FSUBadger already answered the question you asked the same way I would have. Additionally: I'm sure this varies from commander to commander, budget to budget, etc.--but be sure to look into getting your deductible reimbursed via the JAG office. Similar thing happened when I was at Altus (I happened to be out of town for the weekend, so I wasn't directly affected), the JAG paid everyone's deductible from a "public relations" fund that, evidently, wings have available to help avoid negative perceptions for small claims-type issues. YMMV. OK, perceptions of Altus won't likely change, but you may not be out the money you thought you were....

Only for >179 deployments, unfortunately. What really burns me is that they have plenty of open rooms on the Better People's Complex side, which would have completely avoided this issue, but we're not "eligible"....

Yep, already had that, thanks. Our situation boils down to 1.13.4, since we're deployed. I was looking for a definition that gave min standards in order to meet the 11-202 requirements. Good point--but, six out of six ACs were saying it, loudly, and I don't know of any of the individual crewdogs (roughly 120 people all told -- I'm an RJ guy) who disagreed the proposed lodging was a train wreck in progress. I say "was," because we said it loudly enough. Funny how lodging had "no rooms available, period," but when our CC talks to them and says his next phone call is to the (Non-)Services CC, suddenly they have rooms.... The 'Deid is such a shit show, thank god I'm almost home.... Thanks for the help. I'd still love to find that definition, if it's out there, for future reference.... Anyone?

Is it even legal? Can an individual waive rights that a law specifically gives him? Either way, the storage folks are douches.... Unfortunately, the Lt didn't make himself sound too bright, either: Hasn't Rainman opined on talking to the press...?

Agreed on that process. We're trying to be proactive, though, and avoid it altogether. I'm hoping to find something (which may not exist) that defines it--I can point to 11-202 all day, but if the attitude is "you should have had the opportunity to sleep there for 8 hours," then the back-and-forth starts.... I wish....

THREAD REVIVAL Anyone got a good reference to what defines "adequate crew rest facilities"? Closest I've come is AFI 34-246, para 1.13 (cited on p. 1 or 2 of this thread), which boils down to the final caveat, para 1.13.4, "The installation commander or the aircraft commander may waive aircrew lodging requirements on a temporary basis for reasons of military necessity." That reg mostly addresses normal billeting on normal bases. What about a deployed location? 11-202V3 is pretty specific on the time factors of proper crew rest--but is there a definition somewhere of minimum standards for quarters that are deemed to permit aircrew "an opportunity for at least 8 hours of uninterrupted sleep" (para 9.8), or the "Rest is defined as a condition that allows an individual the opportunity to sleep" (para 9.4.5)? If aircrew get forced into clearly inadequate ("clearly" to anyone who chooses to exercise common sense) quarters to the point that crew rest simply cannot happen, what can they point to if it's the *rest* that didn't (couldn't) happen, despite the appropriate number of hours elapsing?

Don't be ridiculous. There's no Class Six at Area 51....

What you want is to "transfer custodianship" of your IRA--taxes don't come into play (nothing gets sold & your account transfers intact). Vanguard (and any other company offering IRAs) will have the forms. Depending on your agreement w/ T. Rowe Price, they may charge you a fee ($75-ish seems to be the vogue) to execute; I recommend you pay that from funds outside the IRA (as you should any fees related to an IRA), otherwise you're effectively withdrawing money from the IRA that you can't put back in.

No, but I hope if ever I do that I'm on the same side! One of my favorite Gurkas storys below; it's almost certainly apocryphal--I can't find it on Snopes et al, but Google turns up several different versions. Oh, and many of the versions turn up on "joke" sites, so.... http://www.netfunny.com/rhf/jokes/88q3/11267.11.html

I was going to say "lucky dog!"; then I saw the pics.... SOME CRAZY BRITISH WOMAN BREASTFEEDS HER PUPPY

I did Rolling Thunder in 2007 (last part, Pentagon - Mall only), when I was TDY to Norfolk for JPME-II. Doing the whole ride is on my bucket list, but so far I haven't had the time to dedicate to it. I remember this guy from '07, but I didn't know what an institution he was/has become. , SSgt Chambers!

For anyone considering an inter-service transfer to the USCG: (not my poster; found it on another board)

Say, that's a great rack in the second picture! (oh, and, looks like she shot a great deer, too!)

My favorite documentary: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=071KqJu7WVo ETA: Finally got the damn vid to embed....

Absolutely on the second two points. Isn't the first, however, situation-dependent? I've yet to retire, so my info is second-hand. Talking to folks who've been there, though, the advice I've gotten divides it into three broad categories: You want to no-kidding take a well-earned break, travel the world or sit on your couch & drink beer as suits you--take terminal; You have a job lined that you want to start ASAP and which aligns well with your "last day"--take terminal (banking two paychecks for the duration!); HOWEVER, if you don't have the job lined up, or the job starts after your actual retirement date, and you don't want (or cannot afford) to take time off, or you otherwise need to maximize the dollars--work to your actual retirement date (same amount of pay as if you'd taken terminal) and sell the leave (while less valuable than a "full" day's pay on AD and/or on terminal, it's still additional money that you wouldn't otherwise see). (#3 assumes you have 60 or fewer days to sell, which I think is the max; over 60, take that amount as terminal & sell the 60) The counter to #3 is using the terminal time to job hunt w/ the security of continuing income; I think that would boil down to individual tolerances.

Huggy, not "the" ACC source, but 11-2MC-12V3 has essentially the same wording in it (at least, the version that was current ~1 year ago did). Since your home wing also owns the MC-12, that should at least get your foot in the door. I don't know what the ACC-level source is. FWIW, the 11-2RC-135 has the same thing, so there's certainly some consistency within ACC....

Interesting compare/contrast. Two quotes from that thread I thought I'd share here.... 1) Have truer words ever been spoken? 2) Fun w/ inter-Service bashing. Even as a bashee, this is funny....

This just in: Turkish Airlines is shopping around for a new ad agency....

You should be glad he did. Employers love improper credentials even more than they love single engine time....

Interesting survey--thanks for the additional pointer. I see where they indicated (in the survey) the 120 Vh restriction--but that's contradicted on their main web page: (note, no mention of Vh on the web page, but even the 75% cruise number is faster, so....) And their description of the prop doesn't sound "ground adjustable" to me: By derating the engine, they could "easily" comply with the max speed, and by putting a different prop on comply w/ the fixed-prop--but, at what cost to performance, cost, overall design, etc? If this thing lives up to half the marketing on the website, it'll be impressive; I hope they don't compromise too much to ensure LSA status....

Holy Crap, are you right--I do want one!! Hell, I already have a French airplane, so this would fit right in.... Unfortunately, it looks like they are even further behind on any actual production models than is Icon. Also, I don't see any indication on their website of an intent to market in the US--that may represent certification issues, which may or may not be overcome.... Note there's a difference between LSA as defined in Europe vs by the FAA--by my read, this aircraft would NOT qualify as an LSA under FAA rules (too fast, variable pitch prop; it seems to meet all the others with room to spare). As for the A5's trailer, I actually regard that as a plus--you can park the thing in your garage and tow it to wherever you want to take off, or you can park it at the airport/lake, as you choose; at the lake, you can pull it in & out of the water at any boat ramp for temp storage or transport. This Akoya looks like it could probably be trailered in much the same way, but I don't see any mention of that on their website. I'll definitely be watching this one--thanks for the pointer!

Pilot-in-Command. You fly with it, too--it's just a bit easier to figure out who's the PIC in a single-seater....

Middle name "Lee"...?

Huggy, sounds like you may have some insider info. Can you shed any light on the "real" release date for the A5? I've been watching that for nearly 4 years now, with a serious eye toward buying, but the delivery dates keep getting pushed back. Their website now has 2015 positions and implies the earliest deliveries (the "ICON 100") will be in 2013. If memory serves, 4Q09 was their original stated delivery date. Is this just routine snags on the way to bringing a new product to market, or are there deeper problems? PS: Your PM inbox is full again. Price of being the popular kid!

Several members of my crew & I are considering the ITT-sponsored "Deep Sea Fishing Trip" from Doha. Anyone tried it? Cost is around $130 bucks, so we want to make sure it's worth it.... Due to our flying schedule, we need to plan pretty carefully any downtown trips, we can't "just go".... ETA: Also, any recommendations for/against any of the other ITT trips, or advice on places to go in Doha on our own, will be welcome!