tk1313
-
Posts
373 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
7
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Gallery
Blogs
Downloads
Wiki
Posts posted by tk1313
-
-
2 hours ago, Kiloalpha said:
So, MEPS is bullshit. They get kicks out of making kids squirm. They'll tell you that they're gonna dig into your history, blah blah.
General guidance I received is to not tell them anything that you don't have to.
As an example, they asked me if I had ever been "suspended" during school. Well, I had study hall once for cracking a joke. Technically that included suspension. So, I put it down, trying to be the honest person.
Two hours later, after dealing with so much bs (poked and prodded). You'll finally sit down with a doc. He'll talk to you about what you put down and make a determination of whether it's disqualifying (criminal or academic). I explained what happened in my case, he laughed, crossed out my written explanation and said "Don't worry about it. In the future, don't bother putting it down".
In so many ways, MEPS is a joke. Save the stressing for your FC1.
Yeah, I've heard the whole "scare tactics" thing is to try to trick you into admitting something small, then using it against you if you don't bring it up in the future... So it's best to just play dumb, and fess up when it actually counts.
-
1 minute ago, Bobsan said:
Just don't be forgetting anything with more than a $300 fine or that involved drugs/alcohol or else it's not significant for the TS clearance, judging from the instructions on the form.
I don't have anything that is even more than $180, and definitely no drug/alcohol violations... Should I have just left that stuff out?
-
2 minutes ago, Bobsan said:
I don't think you need to disclose encounters with police unless you were arrested or convicted of a criminal offense. Refer to excerpt from form SF86 below, I doubt MEPS checks anywhere close to what a clearance investigator would. Similarly, for medical history, I wouldn't list any doc visits in which you weren't diagnosed with a condition or prescribed medication. And I don't mean the flu or cold medicine.
"- In the past seven (7) years have you been issued a summons, citation, or ticket to appear in court in a criminal proceeding against you? (Do not check if all the citations involved traffic infractions where the fine was less than $300 and did not include alcohol or drugs) - In the past seven (7) years have you been arrested by any police officer, sheriff, marshal or any other type of law enforcement official? - In the past seven (7) years have you been charged, convicted, or sentenced of a crime in any court? (Include all qualifying charges convictions or sentences in any Federal, state, local, military, or non-U.S. court, even if previously listed on this form). - In the past seven (7) years have you been or are you currently on probation or parole? - Are you currently on trial or awaiting a trial on criminal charges?"
I'm more worried about forgetting something that gets uncovered in a TS background investigation. It seems a lot of people have basically said "Don't admit to anything they can't prove." Seems like that's the common theme... In which case, I probably disclosed more than I should've, but nothing serious that would even be close to requiring a waiver.
-
15 minutes ago, Fug said:
Strong work by FOX Sports. NLF leadership may want to take notes.
A not-so-subtle way of saying, "Your move, Kaepernick! If your response is anything like your football skills, we plan to take a bigger chunk out of your reputation than your abysmal quarterbacking already has."
-
1
-
-
8 minutes ago, Bobsan said:
pawnman and tk, do you proactively offer to write a draft when you first ask someone for a LOR? There's an tough conflict between staying humble and writing praise about yourself.
I offered because I finished my TBAS about a week before an application was due. I definitely didn't sell myself short. Maybe it's because I have to do a lot of "self-evaluations" at my current job, but I never tend to leave paper evidence that I'm anything less than perfect.
-
2
-
-
Just had a quick question about the DD2807-2 you have to fill out for MEPS. There is a question that asks if you have or have any history of being arrested or other encounters with law enforcement. I'm guessing they left that part ambiguous as to try to elicit as much information as you remember. I know for the medical and criminal history I was trying to remember ANY time I've even spoken with a doctor or police officer. I put down as much as I can remember, but I'm wondering what they're actually going to be looking at. I am not so much concerned about my history as much as I am me forgetting about something that is a non-issue that I just put in the back of my mind.
So here's the scenario (not my scenario, but much more serious than mine, and a buddy said I could use it):
I was inside my mom's house as a juvenile when she was out of town. The neighbors knew she was out of town, got suspicious, and called the police. The police came, ordered me out of the house, and placed me in handcuffs until they could verify my story. Long story short, they verified my info and story with my mom, and told me that she instructed me to go home (to my dad's house) and that I was in big trouble. They laughed and said that it was better to be in trouble with her than the law, and that I would look back on this in months/years and laugh.Anyways, is that the type of story that should be disclosed to MEPS? Or is that something where you keep your mouth shut because it won't matter if they find it later anyways (since it wasn't a criminal activity)?
-
1 hour ago, neptune said:
Is it common place to be asked to write the first draft of your own letter of recommendation?
I have asked a former F-16 pilot, a former airline pilot, and a current experimental pilot/aviation lab director (all of whom I have worked closely with) to write me letters of recommendation, and they all agreed! That is great. However, two of them said they would like me to write the first draft, and send it to them. They will then make any changes they would like, and approve/sign it.
This is a tricky situation, since now I have to write two completely separate letters of recommendation for myself, and make sure neither of them sound similar.
I just wanted to see if this is common place, and if anyone has any tips on this process. Thanks!
Exactly what @pawnman said. Luckily, one of the guys I sent my draft to ended up completely re-writing the letter... And to this day, I'm pretty sure that's the best letter of recommendation that has ever existed. I figure I owe him a bottle of Johnnie Walker Blue.
-
1
-
-
It depends on the unit. If that's something they want you to bring up a little, they'll most likely let you know. In the meantime, get that PPL... that will help you get into a higher bracket and makes your whole packet way more competitive... also, you get the option of skipping IFT/IFS
Sent from my SM-G935V using Baseops Network Forums mobile app -
One of the most intelligent military minds to have ever lived.
-
4
-
-
I don't know if you took the BAT or TBAS. But if it's the former, you will have to take the TBAS anyway.
PCSM 2.0 relies VERY HEAVILY on flight hours... I don't want you to think that you have to post your scores here, but just look at the 201+ hours column. If that column is 80s/90s, it depends on what unit you're applying to as to how much they hold that against you.
Hope that helps even a little, and good luck!
-
12 hours ago, Prozac said:
Don't put words in my mouth bro. It's entirely possible to think the Dems are a bunch of pussified apologists AND be extremely weary of a Donald Trump presidency.
Eh, I'm optimistic for now. It hasn't even been two weeks. Call me naïve, but it is what it is. I'm sure he'll piss me off sooner or later... In the mean time, I'm sure we can find millions of Americans willing to take every decision he makes and turn it into something about him being Hitler or Satan...
-
33 minutes ago, 17D_guy said:
Every time a Republican excuses something Trump does with "but Obama did it too/first/last/etc." Reagan loses another memory cell.
And... If you look a couple posts up you can see me doing exactly that. Sorry ghost of Reagan, I just thought since Obama blamed Bush for everything that went wrong during his presidency, I could blame Obama for everything wrong that Trump will do during his presidency... SH!T... Just did it again.
-
1
-
-
1 hour ago, Prozac said:
The point is Obama is no longer president. The election is over and Hillary is back to giving speeches, probably at exorbitant rates. Yet Republicans continue to lash out against them. For s sake, the POTUS thinks the only way he could've possibly lost the popular vote is because the largest voter fraud conspiracy in the history of the U.S. has taken place. It seems the only coherent conservative strategy these days is to be against whatever liberals are for. That is pathetic. This used to be a party run by statesmen with real, achievable policy goals, and the intention of constructively governing. Now it's put a president in power who'd rather listen to Sean Hannity and Bill O'Reilly than his daily intelligence brief. Just step back and think about that for a minute. The man would rather be consumed by outlandish conspiracy theories than deal with the real day to day crises that regularly come up. And the most outlandish conspiracy theorist of them all now sits at the head of the NSC. Quit whining about Obama. His term is up. Forget Hillary. She lost. Trump won and we should all be watching him like hawks. It may not be end times, but if you are not at least slightly disturbed by a man with Trump's disposition and character in the White House then you are looking in the wrong direction.
The point is Obama is no longer president. The election is over and Hillary is back to giving speeches, probably at exorbitant rates. Yet
RepublicansDemocrats continue to lash out at everyone who is against them. For fvcks sake, thePOTUSDemocrats think the only wayhethey could've possibly lost thepopularelectoral college vote is because the largest voterfraudinfluence conspiracy in the history of the U.S. has taken place. It seems the only coherentconservativeliberal strategy these days is to be against whateverliberalsconservatives are for. That is pathetic. This used to be a party run by statesmen with real, achievable policy goals, and the intention of constructively governing. Now it'sputsuffering the backlash of a departing presidentin powerwho'd ratherlisten to Sean Hannity and Bill O'Reillygive Iran ransom money, free terrorists, and offer would-be ISIS fighters jobs than listen to his daily intelligence brief. Just step back and think about that for a minute. The man would rather beconsumed by outlandish conspiracy theoriesgiving our enemies billions of dollars, freedom, and jobs than deal with thereal day to day crises that regularly come upfact that bad guys aren't going to stop burning people alive if we let them serve us lattes. And the most outlandishconspiracy theoristpolitical failures of them all now sitat the head of the NSCon the sidelines ready to curse the Russians everytime Trump makes a move. Quit whining,aboutObama.HisYour term is up. Forget Hillary. She lost. Trump won and we should all be watching him like hawks. Itmay not beis not the end of times, but if you are not at least slightlydisturbed bywilling to give a man with Trump's disposition and character a chance in the White House, then you arelooking in the wrong directionjust asking to be miserable for the next 4-8 years, regardless of whether it turns out to be the best 4/8 years in the history of the US, or the worst.
Neither one of these paragraphs is accurate. You're too polarized if you think Republicans are the only ones to blame for Trump winning. Yeah, yeah.. Republicans are evil fascists and Democrats are the epitome of good will and love. I should check my straight white male privilege and all that other good stuff..-
2
-
2
-
-
1 hour ago, Prozac said:
David Frum, the author of the Atlantic article is a well known and respected conservative thinker. He was no friend to the Obama administration and has been highly critical of Hillary Clinton. Neither of those two individuals is president right now though. I find it curious how those who defend the Trump administration are so quick to point out that Trumps actions are simply an extension of the precedent set by the previous administration. Obama was highly criticised for what his critics described as an overreach of executive power. A lot of that criticism had merit. So why are Republicans suddenly ok with their guy doing the same thing? Is this the new Republican party? Abandon your principals to put a man who is a Republican only in name into office and hopefully advance your congressional agenda on his coattails? That seems to me to be a potentially treacherous strategy. Isn't it more consistent to be equally critical of the Trump administration for committing the same transgressions as his predecessors, regardless of party affiliation? Democrats could be equally chided for their (unsurprising) adoption of an obstructionist strategy after bashing Republicans for doing the same thing for the past eight years.
I don't care if he's Reagan's long lost son... his article is nonsensical. It contradicts itself at all the major talking points. I'm not blindly supporting Trump, and I'm not a big fan of a lazy Congress. But this author has some deep-seated issues that he obviously took care of with a good old internet rant... And he used the oldest argument in the book:
-
1
-
-
1 hour ago, Prozac said:
@ViperMan Challenge accepted.
I like 1984 just as much as the next guy, but that article made some ludicrous assumptions...
"The media have grown noticeably more friendly to Trump as well. The proposed merger of AT&T and Time Warner was delayed for more than a year, during which Time Warner’s CNN unit worked ever harder to meet Trump’s definition of fairness."
-Yes, let me know when that happens and I might take the article more seriously...
"Opponents of the regime are not murdered or imprisoned, although many are harassed with building inspections and tax audits."
-Obama wrote the book on that one..."And congressional oversight might well be performed even less diligently during the Trump administration."
-Again, are we going to ignore the lack of congressional oversight under Obama?"They owe this chance solely to Trump’s ability to deliver a crucial margin of votes in a handful of states—Wisconsin, Michigan, and Pennsylvania—which has provided a party that cannot win the national popular vote a fleeting opportunity to act as a decisive national majority."
-Saw that one coming a mile away... I know this is a new concept, but we're not giving out participation trophies for this contest.
"Trump versus Clinton was not 2016’s only contest between an overbearing man and a restrained woman."
-Reading from the playbook I see... Hypocrisy is bashing political polarization then making the above statement a few paragraphs later..."Republicans in Congress have long advocated reforms to expedite the firing of underperforming civil servants."
-As a government worker, I read that "Mean Republicans want people who don't show up for 3 months without notice to be fired earlier than 3 months... And to also not pull a paycheck for the time they didn't show up to work."
"Presidents from Jimmy Carter onward have balanced this unique exemption with a unique act of disclosure: the voluntary publication of their income-tax returns."
-I'm actually impressed the author found something positive related to Jimmy Carter than reflects poorly on Trump..."McDonnell then set up meetings between the favor seeker and state officials who were in a position to help him. A jury had even accepted that the “quid” was indeed “pro” the “quo”—an evidentiary burden that has often protected accused bribe-takers in the past."
-Oh, so we're talking 'quid pro quo' now? Pretty bold to ignore the *cough* e-mails *cough* mentioning those words verbatim, but with much more serious implications..."The oft-debated question “Is Donald Trump a fascist?” is not easy to answer."
-I was actually anticipating that one as well...
Perhaps this is the wrong question. Perhaps the better question about Trump is not “What is he?” but “What will he do to us?”
-Didn't this article begin by denouncing Trump for fear mongering? Strange..."By all early indications, the Trump presidency will corrode public integrity and the rule of law—and also do untold damage to American global leadership, the Western alliance, and democratic norms around the world. The damage has already begun, and it will not be soon or easily undone. Yet exactly how much damage is allowed to be done is an open question—the most important near-term question in American politics. It is also an intensely personal one, for its answer will be determined by the answer to another question: What will you do? And you? And you?"
-Rally the troops! Less than 2 weeks is more than enough time to draw rash conclusions and gather "evidence" to successfully accuse, convict, and topple the dictator Trump!"We are living through the most dangerous challenge to the free government of the United States that anyone alive has encountered. What happens next is up to you and me. Don’t be afraid. This moment of danger can also be your finest hour as a citizen and an American."
-Ooo, a resistance! Can't wait to see the type of fighting the anti-gun crowd uses to win.-
2
-
-
7 hours ago, nsplayr said:
Well my in-laws are making ends meet because of social security, so that's directly benefiting them as well as me. Were it not for that check, based on my father in law's 30+ year career at a steel mill that went bankrupt and severely reduced his pension, they'd probably be living with us. So thank you to FDR and Uncle Sam for that.
Re: TSP advice, you receive no match as a mil member unless you opt in to the new retirement plan. If that is the case, then absolutely save, at MINIMUM, the amount that will afford you the max employer match. Like the card says, 20% (or higher) of total pre-tax pay is an even better goal, and one I live by.
Re: safety net - yep, I strongly support smartly run government programs that provide a safety net for citizens who fall on hard times. This is a widely popular position to have. Saying it's every man for himself sounds pretty noble until life kicks you or someone you love square in the dick.
I completely agree with the concept of social security... I just think (my opinion only) we'll see it slowly transition from a program used to prop-up good Americans who have worked hard for most or all of their life to just another welfare program for individuals who gamed the system by avoiding work their entire lives -- ran by a group of politicians that use it as just another source of income cut from workers paychecks. The problem isn't social security itself, but the new ideals it seems we're taking on. It's NEVER an individuals fault for not having a job. Everything is blamed on the "system"... You've got generational welfare where it's basically squatters rights, and people who actually need low-income housing are put on a waiting list. Some people who are already living in the housing think it's their right to have government funded housing while they spend most of their lives applying for, then subsequently intentionally tanking, job interviews in order to keep the money coming in without actually having to put in any additional effort. Now saying that this type of person is the majority (or even close) would be a massive stretch, but nevertheless "one bad apple spoils the bunch" applies. Make it much more appealing/beneficial to actually work a minimum wage job than it is to live off welfare (as an able-bodied person), and we'll be taking a step in the right direction as far as the future of Social Security is concerned.
In summary (to avoid my ramblings): Social Security = GOOD; Where Social Security funds are trending = BAD. I actually have a similar case with my father-in-law... He has worked (and still works) 50+ years installing commercial aircraft radar and other miscellaneous avionics. He's most likely going to need to pull from Social Security due to the buyouts/bankruptcies, etc. (honestly don't know the particulars, but he has become less wealthy with the passing of time). He was even injured a couple times, and told me horror stories about the unemployment office... But that's a whole other topic...
-
Thanks, bud! My fault, probably should've been more subtle with the original post.
-
2 minutes ago, genie90 said:
Or maybe almost a month... Did you get hired by a unit or are you still searching?
Great attitude.
I wasn't being serious, just having some fun. I apologize if I sounded like a douchebag. Recently hired, but I've been aware of that board for awhile.
-
10 hours ago, Kiloalpha said:
We're all busy misinterpreting US
immigrationlaw and protestingat our nearest airports. Why aren't you doing it too?FIFY. Gonna be a long 8 years for the protestors...
On a lighter note... This graffiti is pretty funny
-
4
-
-
10 minutes ago, 345BS Desperados said:
The 345th Bomb Squadron at Dyess AFB, TX is having a rated/non-rated hiring board to select new applicants to join the “Desperados.” Applications will be accepted through 1 Feb 2017 and interviews for those invited will be held on 4/5 March 2017, during our UTA weekend. This board will be to hire both off the street and rated Pilots and Weapon Systems Officers.
Attached you will find the requirements to help you assemble your application package. Questions can be sent to 345BS.Hiring@gmail.com.
Good luck to all that apply!
One day turn-around time. Brutal.
-
32 minutes ago, HAWDINGL said:
100% tracking until the last one...
Wasn't Social Security supposed to be the "Social Insurance" plan? Instead it turned into a piggy bank and a government run retirement plan (Ponzi scheme)
As Reagan said... "The more the plans fail, the more the planners plan."
Everything else was very sound advice.
I've noticed the SNCO's push the TSP on our younger airmen now. However, when I ask them what they invested it in they have no idea. I think un-allocated funds go into the G-fund until you tell them where to go... one step at a time.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk"Social Security"... Slowly turning into just another paycheck deduction that you'll never see benefit anyone outside of politics.
As far as TSP goes, everyone I talked to told me I need to put aside the max the government will match (5%)... As for the investment, for me it's 50% C, 30% S, 20% I
Someone I trust, who has made a lot of money by evaluating the market, told me to keep it that way until further directed. I took the advice. -
2 hours ago, Danger41 said:
I would look at the recent ENJJPT drop. All those dudes flew 38's, but they didn't all end up in fighters/bombers. When I went through there, we had guys that were all about fighters at the start and changed their minds throughout the course. Our Flight Commander found good assignments for them and it worked out. That was many moons ago, however. I know of a couple prior U-28 cso's that wanted to come back as pilots but were forced into fighters.
My unsolicited advice to studs now that don't want fighters would be to still do your best to earn some kind of leverage (minimal) but also don't take words of mouth too seriously. I remember the word on the street going through was that the Eagle community was so terrible and everyone was out to get you etc. I was freaked when I showed up to Klamath and it turned out to be totally awesome and the instructors were totally there to help out.
Long story short is regardless of what you fly, you're going to have a great time with great people.
As someone bound for Klamath/Tyndall eventually, that's very good to hear.
-
I might have asked a question which has already been answered. Seems the only -38 to bomber will be a non-rec'd to fighter... Otherwise the bomber pipeline seems to be trending towards T-1 rather than T-38. Wonder how they'll handle the "Now that I'm in T-38's, I don't want to do this type of flying" crowd? Think they'll say "Suck it up - Needs of the air force" or allow that person to go transfer to T-1's, then on to the airframe they get?
-
1 hour ago, 08Dawg said:
Buffs are about to start dropping on the Tone side, per AFPC. Our next IQT class has both a T-1 FAIP and a newbie.
What about BONE?
Writing the first draft of your own letters of recommendation?
in Pilot Selection Process
Posted
I have to do this now :)
Listen to Eminem's Lose Yourself 2X, then Rap God 1X, then shadow box in the mirror for 5 minutes... Then break out the agility ladder from high school football and do various drills for another 5 minutes. Next, watch your favorite GoPro cockpit footage video (make sure there is cool music playing in the background and tons of high-G maneuvers to pump you up). Next, do as many pushups as you can in 1 minute with more cool music playing in the background. After that, pull yourself to your feet and wipe the sweat from your brow while simultaneously drinking half a bottle of cold Gatorade with the other first firmly planted into your hip bone--once roughly half of the bottle is empty, briskly slam the bottle down onto counter top, making sure that at least some of it splashes out of the bottle. FINALLY, sit down and write the best letter of recommendation for yourself. You won't be disappointed in the results. :)