Muscle2002
-
Posts
362 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Gallery
Blogs
Downloads
Wiki
Posts posted by Muscle2002
-
-
11 hours ago, brabus said:
TPS is probably your only route to fly a fighter.
It is almost certain that he would only fly a fighter during the course and then go back to heavies for his test assignments.
-
1
-
-
7 hours ago, Jasonrockly said:
Is this method of selection still used where they send potential selected applicants out to interview and then to fly a few different aircraft? Or are people solely accepted by just the application and recommendation letters without even an interview?
Yes, this process is still followed with minor tweaks. Your Record of Performance, Flight Evaluation Folder, application statement and recommendations, interview, and in-flight performance at Edwards determine your overall score, with the first three determining if you are invited to the interview.
-
1 hour ago, ClearedHot said:
CSAF sets the tone and makes the rules on queep and I've seen CQ do NOTHING other than continue the status quo
That may be why there are rumors swirling around that Gen Berger will get the nod for CJCS because of his willingness to upset the apple cart in his approach to “Force Design.”
-
6 minutes ago, MCO said:
Your Army buddies also command as Captains. I don’t disagree with your logic but it’s not totally apples to apples. Without group command we potentially have GOs with 4 total years in command. We would need to change more than just getting rid of groups I thinks. Longer or more commands possibly.
Even now, we have GOs and senior O6s with less than four years of command time. I know a few who did a quick one-year squadron command tour, followed later with a one-year wing vice commander stint, and then wing command.
-
1
-
-
4 hours ago, dream big said:
I’ll never understand why they won’t. The older you get the harder it is to run, impact exercises take a toll on the joints. A bike or swim option would make sense in a service where most people will never have to run as part of their operational job. It makes sense so it will never happen.
The Marines allow members to substitute their PFT run with a rowing machine above age 45.
-
1
-
-
The DAF just released a new policy governing body composition effective April 2023. No more waist measurements. Now, it’s waist-to-height ratios. The first measurement will be non-retributive. Afterwards, not meeting the required ratio “will be considered a failure to meet standards and will require enrollment in a formal self-directed BCIP that may result in consideration for administrative action, including separation for continued failures.”
-
17 minutes ago, brabus said:
There’s been several statements recently from those on the wrong side of history that go something like, “let’s just all move on and let bygones be bygones, we only did/said things based on our understanding at the time. Let’s just forget about it all!”
Yeah, fuck you. I will not forget, and I hope everyone else doesn’t either. If you demonized others via words (or worse, actions) who called it correctly, but weren’t in line with your thinking at the time - you don’t get a pass because you are still a huge POS. This does not apply to those who remained respectful and maintained human decency despite differing viewpoints.
For instance, this tripe: https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2022/10/covid-response-forgiveness/671879/
I readily admit that I make mistakes and want to learn from them. However, a handful (or more) of people who got it wrong, rather than admitting as much, taking responsibility, and trying to correct it for the future, want their records cleared. These articles are meant to appear as a mea culpa, but they are not. They are merely another sleight-of-hand trick performed to dupe the masses.
Further, the article above is just another instance of virtue signaling. The author is trying to signal her side's moral superiority—note her exhortation to not gloat—by declaring a newfound erudition while advertising an outright revisionist narrative that does not just strain credulity but shatters it. While one cannot lay the blame for one person's actions at the feet of a movement, we all distinctly recall the diatribe coming people when anyone dared oppose. A generally unified front used "trusting the science" as a cudgel to beat actual scientists, critical thinkers, and others. To attempt to overlook numerous ethical failings—after all, when one takes actions counter to one's thoughts, it belies moral weakness—by simply sweeping them aside as the fruit of uncertainty is intellectually dishonest. That she does so under the guise of civility is ironic and disgusting.
The audacity to write, "But dwelling on the mistakes of history can lead to a repetitive doom loop as well. Let’s acknowledge that we made complicated choices in the face of deep uncertainty, and then try to work together to build back and move forward" is galling. For an apparent vanguard or thought-leader in the "trust the science" movement, it seems that they would welcome an intelligent, fact-based, civil discourse that offered ways to avoid the mistakes of the past. Yet, "trust the science" was always just a bumper-sticker moniker to short-circuit frontal lobe activity among the masses with docile compliance the aim.
-
6
-
-
Whoa, even mainstream sources (NPR) are backing away from the party line that held fast the last 2+ years. Apparently, it’s okay now to question how mortalities were counted, the riskiness of COVID, etc. 🙄 Before someone says, “But the science is different now,” I acknowledge that contextual factors have changed regarding the disease. However, non-scientific reasons are also driving the shift in attitudes, which undermines the credibility of the cult chant of “trust the science.”
Scientists debate how lethal COVID is. Some say it's now less risky than flu
-
1
-
-
49 minutes ago, archer said:
Hello, long time lurker here, and I'd love to pick your guys' brains if you have a second. My background is a fighter test guy with approximately 1300 hours TT approaching my commitment in about a year. Almost all of my hours are single-seat, PIC. I got IDE this year, but am leaning towards turning that down and going part time guard/reserve (most likely non-flying) and transitioning to the airlines. The task of actually making the majors, though, sounds hard, as I don't have an ATP.
1) Should I just pony up 20k over the next year to blow through the 150-200 hours I need to hit 1500? That would get me my ATP mins, which is basically the only thing that I don't have for the majors. I don't know of many airlines that do a military conversion other than FedEx, and it doesn't seem like I have the personal recs to make that a high Pk thing.
2) Should I consider the regionals? This seems like such a step backwards, but it would get me my hours I guess
3) Should I just try to stay active duty and fly for another year? Test guys don't get as many hours as they should, and my family is tired of living out in the desert
I've got 7 days to make a decision to stay in the AF or turn down school, and I'd love to hear what your thoughts are.
PM sent.
-
22 hours ago, kaputt said:
Who knew?
I’m surprised the general wrote the above in today’s Air Force. After all, in the spirit of inclusion and calling everyone a warrior, is it okay to say that non-flyers will never be CSAF? I sense many shoe clerks were triggered.
-
1
-
-
World War II nose art is generally forbidden because some think it objectifies others or celebrates violence. Is not the emblem below equally problematic because it reduces people to simply a set of sexual proclivities?
-
1
-
-
1 hour ago, LookieRookie said:
Did he say that because he washed out of F-15 RTU and thinks himself a “carnivore?”
It's notable that he doesn't list the F-15 as an aircraft flown in his biography but lists his 6-9 month stint at the RTU.
-
On 11/25/2021 at 10:25 AM, ClearedHot said:
The situation at AFSOC is horrible but NO ONE CARES. The system encourages what has happened and the internal AFSOC politics made it even worse. There was a big purge of AFSOC O-6s a few years ago but nothing really came of it other than some very talented people ran for the door. You would think Big Blue leadership would pay attention when the sitting Group Commanders of your two premier AFSOC Wings bail at the same time. Both were on the Wing/CC list and they said nope...adios. Wait until the CAT 5 hits AFSOC....the current guy is horrible, so convinced he is right he do anything to preserve his legacy including getting rid of all the AC-130's...sadly this is not a joke. The incoming dude is pure hate, a vindictive cult of personality who will salt the earth behind him. Both have lined up their DOJ's (inside joke), and puppets who will continue to do their bidding to perpetuate the evil. I still talk to many folks on the inside and there is one overriding theme from all of them...dark dread. It will take AFSOC a generation to overcome, if it ever does.
The White House just announced the President's nominations for the next USSTRATCOM/CC, USAFE/CC, and AFSOC/CC.
https://www.defense.gov/News/Releases/Release/Article/3056641/general-officer-announcements/
-
1
-
1
-
6
-
-
1 hour ago, Pooter said:
That's at least movement in the right direction.
We need to require rank and year-group stratifications that go #1-to-end. This way, everyone knows exactly where they stand in relation to others of the same rank and their immediate peers.
The SCOD OPRs and highly constrained strats (Department of the Air Force Grade, Command Position, and Duty Position are only allowable; no more percentages) go a long way in clarifying relative performance. However, I think most raters will choose NOT to stratify someone as #6/12 Capts, for example, so that they can then use #2/20 IPs as the secondary strat—the current guidance requires a DAF Grade strat to use a Duty Position strat. My guess: raters will use the typical fluff if they cannot give a "good" strat, leaving both the member and board guessing where the person fell compared to their peers for the rating period.
-
I found the attached on AFPC's public website as I was trying to find some info for a mentee (not related to promotion non-selection, thankfully). There are a handful of helpful inputs; however, this document contradicts itself many times and may reflect what's wrong with the Air Force.
I especially take umbrage with the part mentioning that officers should advocate for themselves to receive strats, awards, or be pushed for jobs. AFPC thinks it is wrong for officers to believe the system will take care of them. In one sense, they are correct. A system cannot take of someone, but leaders can. I don't think it's too much to expect leaders to build, teach, or lead those in their charge.
Take a look. I'm interested to see what others think.
-
1
-
-
On 3/31/2022 at 12:12 AM, Magnum said:
Viper SEFE. Never given a Q3 to a US pilot. I've seen only 2 Q3's in my 19 years - both FTU students. Q1 no hits is by far the norm. Probably because our community is made of pretty awesome pilots...
I’ve worked Stan/Eval in DT, having seen FEFs of nearly every MDS type. Before TPS, I was a SEFE and Chief of Stan/Eval in a fighter FTU.
My take: Q1 no hits is the norm in the CAF. Elsewhere, Q3’s are more common but so are EQs. I know there are phenomenal pilots in the CAF too, but just like we don’t give Q3s or Q2s for being unqualified, I think we think no one is Exceptionally Qualified.
-
35 minutes ago, Chicken said:
So speaking of that.. a number of jobs on USA Jobs has the requirement below. I've called MPF, retirement/separations and of course they're super helpful. They have no idea what this is. Is this a letter I draft up saying I'm getting out on X date signed by my commander or what? Is this the same statement of service when you're getting a VA loan?
Are you an active duty service member? Active Duty Service Members are required to submit a statement of service printed on command letterhead and signed by the command. The statement of service must provide the branch of service, rate/rank, all dates of service, the expected date of discharge and anticipated character of service (Honorable, General, etc.).
Doesn't the DD214 have all of this information?
-
8 hours ago, Prozac said:
Wouldn’t mind reading that. Have a non-paywall link by chance?
Try this link: The Dark Century
-
1
-
1
-
-
9 hours ago, ClearedHot said:
100%
Not to derail the thread but the post WWII period is one of the "safest" in human history. The video below illustrates the staggering impact of World War. We tend to view things through our "USA" lens, if you take a slightly more worldly view you can see some horrific things that happen when there are world wars. One small example, when Japan invaded China in WWII the Chinese Nationalist opened the dike at the Yellow River hoping it would slow the advance of the Japanese Army. In doing so they knowingly sacrificed 500,000 Chinese civilians. Yes there has been chaos and conflict and the news instantaneously beams it to our homes, but in relation to times past, the post WWII world order has been very favorable to the human race.
David Brooks' opinion piece in today's New York Times is worth a read.
"Today, across left and right, millions of Americans see U.S. efforts abroad as little more than imperialism, “endless wars” and domination. They don’t believe in the postwar project and refuse to provide popular support for it.
The real problem is in the seedbeds of democracy, the institutions that are supposed to mold a citizenry and make us qualified to practice democracy. To restore those seedbeds, we first have to relearn the wisdom of the founders: We are not as virtuous as we think we are. Americans are no better than anyone else. Democracy is not natural; it is an artificial accomplishment that takes enormous work."
https://www.nytimes.com/2022/02/17/opinion/liberalism-democracy-russia-ukraine.html
-
1
-
1
-
-
25 minutes ago, ecugringo said:
My neighbors when I lived in CO moved from the Bay area. They all said they were tired of the homeless issues and how $$$ CA was. But their Facebook page was full of AOC, Sanders etc.....CO is basically CA at this point.
I think the following has been posted elsewhere on BO, but I will repost. The audio and visual are out-of-synch.
-
2
-
-
1 hour ago, Blue said:
Per multiple news sources, https://www.covidtests.gov/ is now live, allowing Americans to order up to four at-home Covid tests per household.
President Biden has ordered 500 million tests, with a follow-on order for another 500 million.
So, it sounds like the intent is to more or less flood the country with at-home tests. Couple thoughts:
- All of the testing will drive the case counts into the stratosphere.
- With all of the tests out there, will mandates start to include proof of a negative test in order to work/dine out/etc?
Our tax dollars at work in this morass of fraud, waste, and abuse. I could have countenanced them supplying tests in early autumn, ahead of the expected winter surge (omicron variant or otherwise), but this seems like too little too late and just a blatant play to score political points.
-
1
-
1
-
-
3 hours ago, Guardian said:
If everyone got the VAX and wore their masks Covid 19 would cease to exist.
Change my mind.The science does not support such an assertion.
Do you mean KN95 masks and face shields—after all, viral particles can enter the body through tear ducts as has been noted earlier. Also, with rampant spread in animal populations, there are now virus refugia where the virus can “hide,” mutate, and potentially re-enter the human population at some point in the future.
This coronavirus, like many others that preceded it, will likely be endemic despite efforts to “control” it.
-
17 minutes ago, budderbar said:
I never thought you could until my spouse (GS) got issued a tablet, however it is limited to Secret and cannot save anything to the tablet itself basically a virtual desktop portal. Not sure how common it is but she works on staff of a senior official .
We have a similar setup on the JS. It's decent for staying aware of events via email while teleworking but otherwise terrible for doing any real work. We cannot even access our remote drives or desktops.
-
2 hours ago, tac airlifter said:
That link says households with vaccinated people spread C19 at 25%, and unvaccinated households at 38%. That’s only a 13% difference. Add to that observation there was no discussion of how severe symptoms were (if any at all), and it’s quite clear this is not a “pandemic of the unvaccinated.” Frankly it’s not a pandemic at all, COVID is over as a threat. Now we’re talking about mandatory boosters? This is insane.
-
1
-
Good Riddance, Mark Milley.
in General Discussion
Posted
In theory, the problem you described of transnational problem sets was addressed by Gen Durnford's efforts to change the law and make CJCS the global integrator. However, while the title sounds great in practice, the CJCS still has next-to-no authority and can only advise. The real global integrator is SecDef since he issues EXORDs that dictate how forces are allocated during the force management process.