HU&W

Politics favors detailed integration, even when no ground forces exist.

Crap. Praying for their families.

Yep. Ever since Tony sold to Bright Mountain Media, let's just say the blog's quality has declined a little.

I've been a supporter of light strike for a long time, but as time goes on, I'm starting to see more and more holes in the idea. The real question that's bugging me is, why do we need it? What strategic or tactical need does it fulfill that's not covered by our current menu of options, or would it be creating a new role for itself? For us, it would fall somewhere between the MQ-9 and the A-10 as a CAS aircraft on the persistence/survivability/armament scale. Sure, a gap exists between those aircraft now, but it could be as easily filled by upgrading the MQ-9 as creating a whole new aircraft to address its shortcomings. I do think it definitely could fill a broader strategic role of Kinetic FID like we did for the Afghans. For conventional missions, however, what does it bring to the fight that an existing asset (or a slightly upgraded existing asset) doesn't?

So, like a semi-official planned gathering?

Fascinating argument. It would be interesting to run his argument with SCLs instead of max capacities. Of course, the amount of boom you bring to the fight isn't everything, but it is something.

Yes

You've been assesses five penalty shots for posting those videos. Beverage of choice. That sock puppet was slightly below average compared to most intel briefings.

Easy, buy a bunch of A-29's and colocate them with MQ-9's. Make it a light attack wing. Dual qual your 11x cadre in both planes. Profit.

Mentioned again in a speech yesterday. “So we have all the operational data from that test and so this is the next iteration, which is OK we got the data – industry what do you got?” Goldfein told an audience at a Feb. 23 Center for Strategic & International Studies event. “What do you got that’s shovel ready? I’m not interested in something that requires a lot of research and development here. I’m looking for something that I can get at right now commercial, off-the-shelf, low cost that can operate in an uncontested environment and can deliver the capabilities that we need.”

Yes, the IG can get results. But for most cases it's more in an assistive or ombudsman way. They're not your attorney and they don't work for you, but they can help facilitate making things right.

Why not just combine copilots with the center controllers. Give them datalinks. It wouldn't be all that hard to build/send operational missions for each aircraft under their control. Still have a PIC onboard to monitor systems and handle emergencies/abnormalities/terminal control.

Except doctors. We're conditioned to accept that we can't recruit/retain them (by specialty) without extremely large bonuses.

Paragon machines seem to last the longest with heavy use.

Sometimes we learn our lieutenant lessons a little later in our careers.

Good point. Why's it so hard to build modernized versions of stuff we figured out 30-50 years ago?

Here's the text of the actual presidential memorandum. It's credible, even if the media commentary isn't. https://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2017/01/28/presidential-memorandum-organization-national-security-council-and Also, to NS, there's more to national security than just intel and military. Think DIME. The memo specifically addresses your question as to when intel/mil wouldn't be needed.

This showed up on my feed today.

This. AR opens the door to high/hot/heavy, just like it does for us. It could be a game changer for access to regional airports.

Were you the Nav in my IFS class that turned to his instructor to tell her he wasn't feeling well? The first words out of his mouth were a half gallon of vomit. I felt so bad for that lady.

Not going to happen. Follow the sun is dead. The best thing about Shaw being one of the bases is that it was also on the other list with Tyndall, Eglin, and Vandenburg. Now the second base will definitely be one of those three (not Shaw). The worst thing that could have happened would have been Mountain Home and Shaw.

3 pilots in a bone? Do you guys have a jumpseat or something?

I'm loving some of the ideas being presented by individual congressmen to limit the power and increase the transparency of government. One in particular that's caught my attention is being pushed by Mia Love from Utah. It involves setting rules that all legislation be single subject, with clear titles, effectively preventing sneaky riders. Do you see any potential of a caucus forming around such an idea, or is the current paradigm too deeply entrenched in the culture of both sides of the aisle?

The restaurant and storage guys had employees and would keep up with things in the evenings. The R&D guy eventually became an IMA and treated his reserve time like a vacation from work.

As a TR, you have tons of freedom. I've personally known one that owned a few restaurants, one who was the VP of an R&D firm, and one who owned a large self-storage business. All three were married to their work and had to make arrangements for balancing it with military life.