SurelySerious

AISR would be a good way to work it.

Yeah, it was probably just a pattern local.

The next day. Jeez man, nice way to stick with the sinking ship. http://www.f-16.net/f-16-news-article2167.html

Pretty bad assumption...the CSAF being the most obvious counterpoint.

Lighten up.

Checks. Reference his "we're not losing jets like Nam" comments as well.

24?

Similarly enjoyed the flying-the-nukes OG spending an hour of our time saying, "it's not my fault, there's nothing I could have done, and I'm not sure why I'm talking to you."

I'm getting that same error and it appears I do not have TFA enabled.

Pretty sure we're all well aware of that. I was simply making the movie reference.

"I almost orphaned him today. I've never even seen him."

Pretty much. Now they sign off on a metric shit ton of interdiction/dynamic targeting using the facade of CAS procedures. And the rest of the DT has gone back to largely centralized control/centralized execution. Progress.

Understandable and applicable. Any chance your staff office is the place to lodge the concern that continuing to decrease the general airmanship and tactical exposure/experience/training prior to getting to the ops unit is a failing path?

High Angle Strafe, but really it's irrelevant. My larger point is that what we should be expecting from fighter guys, bomber guys, UAV guys, and A-10 guys (apart from certain advanced skills/quals) is the same wrt Brief/Stack/Mark. ALSA Bulletin 2013-2 has a good article articulating this. http://www.dtic.mil/dtic/tr/fulltext/u2/a579983.pdf If the AF isn't providing adequate training to provide the product at the end of MQT (and really, they're missing the mark in UAVs to an extent I'd argue in the name of faster production), that's a different issue.

You act as if there wouldn't be platform specific training to learn the mechanics for this other airframe. In the same manner I wouldn't expect a U-28 guy to know how to HAS if we just "plug-and-play" him into an A-10. You've got a valid beef with one guy, but outside of your single data point I don't think you're nearly as aware of the mission set and expectations as you think you are.

What you're really asking is, why not enlisted pilots?

So Baba Rand had a "Pilot Retention" Forum or something to that effect the other day. Luckily I couldn't attend, so I'll paraphrase second-hand info. Having worked under his command enough times to know his bullshit, it's probably from accurate accounts. Roughly: none of your complaints are valid because you're not flying over Hanoi losing 11 BUFFs a day. He brushed off anything brought up as a non-issue, and his message was suck it up your life is good. Nice.

Hotdog on a bun?

It can't possibly be taking them that long to find his individual result and change it and line it out. I kid. Good article.

If you ignore the likely mass casualties from all the artillery and ballistic missiles to the south, it's an untapped market. Millions of people with no car or phone...and no money, but ignore that.

Maybe, but you only get one shot at it...I also can't fathom not taking it.

I think more accurately it's: [insert service here] wants the funding associated with space "corps." Probably just a jaded view, though.

I haven't seen it mentioned yet: First to Fly by Flood is an interesting recount of the Lafayette Escadrille. Lots of personal stories and vivid details.

They really started at an extreme there.

Solid "who gives a ?" going on.