Bigred
-
Posts
462 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
6
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Gallery
Blogs
Downloads
Wiki
Posts posted by Bigred
-
-
1 hour ago, hindsight2020 said:
Hold up, point of order: The upper and upper-middle classes self-isolate from military service all on their own, no compelling needed. So don't go putting that on us W2 serfs/transactional military members, and certainly not our progeny. As I've said before, the temerity of acussing veterans of sabotaging recruitment. Ingrates. The DoD can take their shameless victim blaming, roll it into a fag, and fox2 it up their own six.
To wit, New England isn't pulling their fair share of the blood spilling from where I sit, go lecture them about it. And I digress.
So your argument is; because people in the upper classes, whom most on this board have zero influence and interactions, don’t pull their share with the military than the rest of us shouldn’t as well?
I hold no illusions that there are parts of the DoD that suck. There are also parts that are awesome.
My concern is when I hear of current and former military actively discouraging people from joining. There’s nothing wrong with telling the truth, bluntly, to those that are interested. But tell both sides, the good and the bad, and let them decide.
-
This thread is wild and baffling. Military service is good for the person and it's good for the country.
I encourage my kids to join. I have three and I think one will. I told them the same thing my dad told me, do four years and if you're having fun keep going. Otherwise get out.
The more we isolate the military from all classes of the population the more we will see the political-mil issues we see today.
-
3
-
3
-
-
Be a good dude and take care of your bros.
-
47 minutes ago, di1630 said:
I have a friend in a foreign Air Force who’s moving to the US on exchange and wants to bring his European spec car. Any issues?
Sent from my iPhone using Baseops Network mobile appMy understanding is he can bring it for the duration of his time here, but he can’t sell it in the US. Aka, he’s gotta take it back with him or scrap it. I believe he’s exempt from the emissions requirements.
-
16 hours ago, Anon1 said:
Personally I dislike having landed in the community. It is currently overmanned at the FP level resulting in flying 10-15 hrs/month.
They also managed the block 6 to block 8 transition extremely poorly. Way behind timeline in terms of tail conversion but most FPs are block 8 only out of the school house. It's been an issue that you could see coming over the past 1-1.5 years yet there have been no moves to make a reverse 8 to 6 transition course or dual-qual out of the school house. As a result you've got tons of co-pilots that can only fly half the planes on station.
Top that off with planning 12 hrs to brief for 2 and fly a 2-3.0 tac flagpole line. If you get airborne.
If you want to hack the mission, the herk isn't it. At least not any more.
As an FP I have flow 5 actual missions this year and spent less than 20 days on the road.
If you want to pretend to be to be tactical despite the reality of the modern fight then go for it. If you want to pretend to be an airland bubba and take 2 days and 12 hrs to fly someplace it takes a c-17 1 day and 6 hours to get after it.
Perhaps my timing for entry into this community was bad, but it's left me uninspired. If you want to actually fly your ass off, see the world, and do something other than drop training bundles or army dudes once in a blue moon then I can't recommend.
U-2s are hiring, fyi.
-
13 hours ago, brabus said:
You’re wrong. You’d be amazed at how well mil people of all backgrounds can do in the civ world assuming they don’t shoot themselves in the foot with a deflated sense of value and skills.
He’s not. What you are saying tank drivers can do in the civilian world are the intangibles that pawnman listed; (self discipline, etc)
Tank drivers can do well in the civilian world, but it ain’t gonna be by driving a tank. My brother in law was Marine artillery and he had a helluva time finding a civilian employer who needed idf. He did get a good job working with the VA though, mainly due to him being a smart, hard working dude.
-
1
-
1
-
-
1 hour ago, Biff_T said:
It’s all about that E-Strange!!! Bonus points if he found some deployed.
What happens on deployment stays in deployment 🤫
-
1
-
-
The irony is I’ve read on this board the lamentations of the AF not preparing for the next fight. For as much as they eat crayons, the Marines are pretty brilliant in their force development, last time I checked heavy artillery doesn’t float, and armor floats even less.
Considerijg the AOR of a potential conflict, they need highly mobile forces supported from the air with a relatively mobile IDF capability. It would appear they are doing just that.
And yes, they Marines are wary of air support from the other branches. It’s just their culture.
-
1
-
-
2 hours ago, FlyingGasAttendant said:
Hey guys, I was guided to this website by a friend. I'm an instructor pilot in a legacy tanker looking to leave the MAF. I was hoping you guys could point me in the right direction for a crossflow that isn't going to be detrimental to my career. The days of 90% selected to major are over, and I go up for the board soon. At my base we had good pilots with no blemishes in their flying or personnel records get passed over.
No mechanical crossflow opportunities in 11M besides the KC-46, and no offense to any of the KC-46 guys but I don't want to go to the KC-46. I know a handful of people that have gone over and regretted it. The B-2 once in awhile takes tanker guys but I heard they are shutting down the pipeline here shortly, and they seem to be looking for guys younger than my YG, and I was informed that the U-2 is slated for retirement in 2026. It seems like all avenues are closing besides white jets, which I am currently leaning towards. I expect to be on the next VML and want to make the right decision.
I realize I am asking to have my cake and eat it to, but I'm sure something out there exists. Thank you.Apply to the U2. It’s worth it.
-
1 hour ago, Bergman said:
That sounds like an awesome deal. Need any retired tanker guys to give it a go?? Hahaha
It’s absolutely a great deal. I wish more dudes would apply and take advantage of it. Flying in the suit is actually enjoyable once you get used to it, the view up high is incredible, and being able to go f-off in a 38 for a 1.3 every now and again is icing on the cake.
-
1
-
-
3 minutes ago, Danger41 said:
Assuming one gets hired, what is the typical training progression? T-38 then U-2 or vice versa? T-38 in house or at PIT?
T-38 then U-2. Expect 3-ish months from checking in to 38 qual. Then 6-8 months for U-2 qual. All done in-house.
-
1
-
-
57 minutes ago, Skitzo said:
Right, but how do you operationalize that? I think it would require a huge shift in BMT, we’d have to get Airmen in aircraft, flying, in simulators etc. That would be extremely resource intensive.
In my sq/cc tour to Africa I got to see the USN, Army and the USAF all in new light and have to say that I don’t think any one service does it “better.”
Sent from my iPhone using TapatalkEven more difficult than resource, it’s be a culturally intensive shift for the Air Force. I actually think that’d be the more difficult hurdle.
-
16 minutes ago, dream big said:
I wonder how much of that is engrained in their culture “Every Marine is a rifleman”; not to mention all officers go through the basic infantry school. I’m not advocating that non rated go through pilot training but there has got to be some middle ground. More ops focused Wing Kings that drive all groups towards common operational objectives would be a start.
It totally is. They get the kick in the junk of essentially ‘mission first’ from the very get go. As buddies of mine put it ‘the rifleman is the focus and has the support of the entire Corps’
As much as it’d stroke our egos even more, imagine how the AF would run if we had something similar ‘the pilot is the focus and has the support of the entire Air Force’.
-
2
-
1
-
-
On 6/8/2023 at 3:34 PM, Skitzo said:
No more CVs at Hurby soon.
Sent from my iPhone using TapatalkJust Cannon, OCONUS, and the FTU? Or is there a new CONUS base opening?
-
4 hours ago, StrikeOut312 said:
Concur. I think the AF is trying with the base-of-preference tied to the bonus, it’s just too late—and I don’t know how well it’ll work out.
I’d be intrigued by a one year bonus. I’m even intrigued by the possibility of sticking around as a free agent. But Guard/Reserve with a line number addresses the .mil flying and padding the bank account. Or so the old guys on here tell us…
I’m really interested to see what happens in a few years when situations develop like Osprey dudes taking the bonus and choose OCONUS/Hurlburt to avoid Cannon.
-
1
-
-
27 minutes ago, brabus said:
Imagine signing a 12 yr bonus…I’d rather drag my balls through 69 miles of broken glass covered in hot sauce.
I don’t understand the rational behind that. 12 years would put an initial eligible dude on the hook till 21-22 years, if I’m understanding it correctly.
-
5 hours ago, Pooter said:
being on a boat… some level of queep…
Just replace that ‘p’ with and ‘r’ and you’ll figure out what Navy life is like
-
2
-
-
12 hours ago, Standby said:
Let us not forget that you can also enlist and die (assuming you were to complete basic and whatever MOS/AFSC training was required in time) at the age of 17…
You can only join at 17 if your parents approve and sign paperwork.
-
Insider baseball says it was held up above HAF level, aka, OSD, due to conflicts amongst DODI, FM instructions, and the new NDAA. I have no idea what the bonus will look like but I’ll be the first to admit I was bitching about HAF dragging their feet and it appears they are waiting like the rest of the us.
All that said, who knows when it’ll actually be released.
-
4 hours ago, brabus said:
Apples and oranges. They don’t lack precision flying ability, they lack SA without all the data fed to them on a display (or make poor decisions as it pertains to safety of flight/general airmanship). VMFA and I are on the same page now - they need to be challenged so they learn how to maintain SA when toys go down and make good decisions without a FL/IP telling them what to do. This problem is a direct correlation to cutting air-under-ass time throughout the pipeline and letting them skate by with unchallenging/benign flying.
Ah, I see your point now. I’m agreement with all of that.
-
2 hours ago, Biff_T said:
In the early days of the -53 a loop was part of the FCF profile. At least according some of the sim instructors in Milton.
-
12 hours ago, brabus said:
I do however maintain general airmanship/SA when the toys go away is worse nowadays.
I’d say that validates his point.
In my opinion, something like form landings in UPT seem less about necessity out in the CAF than it was about teaching precision. That precision transfers over to other aspects of flying, especially when it becomes almost second nature.
Do you absolutely need to learn form landings? No, but if it’s not flown it should be replaced with something that also demands a high degree of precision.
-
1
-
-
14 hours ago, hindsight2020 said:
Quite a bit apparently. Suggest you do your yearly FCIF review in earnest. Because that 4.4G under 5k limitation has quite a bit to do about wings falling off than you appear to be aware of.
I’m aware of that FCIF and it’s sort of my point, that G limit is now an ops limit.
I’m not arguing that the -38 is perfect for upt, I fully agree that a new trainer is warranted. I just don’t see the thing as a flying death trap.
Unforgiving? Absolutely. Dangerous? Far from it.
-
1 hour ago, hindsight2020 said:
With the other two contenders of consequence both being COTS. That's the real criminality here.
I pretty much threw out my T-7 swag already. With a first retirement eligible date of mid-late 2020s, I'm settled in the fact I'm gonna retire in my grandfather's ol timey ride. That is if it doesn't kill me first, or cost me a second divorce. The weef already got smart on the airline "trade", she's now on the "100% you're just taking a gratuitous risk now" camp.
Jest aside, it's not hyperbole when I say I have more than one former co-worker who lateral'd back to the T-6 or went back to a heavy, citing these concerns. Though I never had any interest in the 121 thing, it does not escape me that the income vs bodily risk ratio went lopsided a while ago for me as a multi-thousand hour in type grey beard in this enterprise. The consideration does weigh on me at times.
What I'm also confident on, is had we gone T-50 or T-100, we'd have tails on ramp last summer. It was the height of malfeasance what Boeing did with that shtick of unserious underbidding. Not so much that they threw the number, but that the AF entertained it with a straight face.
I still carry the memory of Stuck with me. Human factors notwithstanding, he didn't have to die that day. These are losses squarely in the camp of the right side of the MTBF curve, aka the bathtub model. To say nothing of the fact we've exceeded Northrop's projected airframe life by thousands of hours and multiple decades, pacer classic potato or not. It doesn't have to be this way.
And as much as it pains me to say this, there will be more losses stemming from *aging-structures (*term in engineering grad school for this issue) related failures, mark my words. Acceptable as it may be to HAF, it needs to be said anyways. Because for those of us who are in the community, nothing could be more personal, AVF platitudes be damned. Boeing has blood on their hands as far as I'm concerned.
Everybody stay safe out there.
I’ve yet to see wings fall off or engines explode. The jet isn’t difficult to fly if you respect the airspeed and op limits.
Look at any dynamic aircraft over the last 50 years and you’ll see a bunch of mishaps, and the majority of those are attributable to pilot error. Structural issues, if found to be contributing, are remedied.
I’ve only been flying the -38 for a year, but what am I missing here?
Words of wisdom for new LT's?
in General Discussion
Posted
I know you didn’t tag me but I’ll chime in as I was in a heavies.
New LTs are expected to learn the aircraft and maybe be an assistant to some flight commander/skeds/etc. Realistically you won’t get much leadership opportunities as a LT, and even as a younger Captain, because a lot of ops squadrons don’t have a huge amount of enlisted. Heavies do have loads, booms, etc, so you will have plenty of exposure but you won’t be directing leading them.