SurelySerious

Good point; I guess that taking away Sq/CC judgement over the years is more what I was getting at.

Which is equally as disturbing.

This is probably one of the better and well-spoken descriptions of UAV operating. Interview with a US Air Force drone pilot: it is, oddly, war at a very intimate level I could read the article the first time I visited, but the second time it wanted a log in. YMMV.

1) The troll made a sweeping generalization about analog vs digital, which is not the same as mechanical vs quartz. Analog watches can be quartz or mechanical. Breitling makes chronomtre certified watches based on quartz movement that will be more accurate over time than an everyday quartz based digital watch (barring radio update, the time keeping equivalent to GPS-updated INS guidance). 2) As Jarhead pointed out, chronometre is a specific category of accurate timepieces, which is why I was so specific with my example to counter the troll. 3) Omega and Rolex make analog chronometre certified watches that are self-winding mechanical. Accurate mechanical analog watches are out there, it's just that the trend is $$$ required, hence the rise of radio compensated watches with inexpensive quartz innards. 4) I don't know what other people do, but I use my watch for rough TLAR timing and as a backup... and the jet for the real thing. I think that about covers it.

You're right, definitely need those milliseconds of resolution for the HAVEQUICK delay check. And don't forget your air sample for maintenance. BTW: discernible decimals of precision and accuracy are not the same. A Breitling analog chronometer is far more accurate than your $6.90 Cascio wrist computer.

Mike Tyson as a cartoon crime solver, and Norm MacDonald as a pigeon.

Shack.

And then promptly losing it in the Gulf of Mexico before your 6-9 DHA interviews.

Every squadron is a "core group." It may only cover up so many things about location, the AFSOC problem. Everyone sees it differently. I would not take Cannon over any of the ACC bases because the RPA mission doesn't change that much from ACC to AFSOC in a way that I view as beneficial; AFSOC focus is typically counter terror/COIN vs major conflict, even though both ACC and AFSOC both end up doing the CT/COIN because of AFG.

Yeah, pretty much the same. Many of the ACC sqs end up supporting the same customers so the differences blur even more. AFSOC just has a location with a reputation for poor quality of life.

Agree, but it goes for actual problem vs trying to treat symptoms.

You don't, but you should. That way performance comparisons are easier and don't require some super secret code. The expectations and responsibilities of maintenance, intel, and even mobility vs fighter (one could argue) career fields are so different that we wind up with absurd discriminators like Christmas parties, volunteer hours, and AAD that mean nothing.

I can't get rid of the tiny bits of paper and a slight hint of oil. But this whole thing reminds me of Sean Penn's progression in the movie.

Of course, I forgot how mentally stable people would be obsessing over a tongue-in-cheek conversation from 3 years ago. But wrt American citizens going to fight for ISIS: go for it, but going into a known combat zone to join a group in said combat and known to be targeted by the US, I wouldn't expect the bombs to discriminate between me and the next guy. Technique only. Kind of a sidetrack, has anyone seen The Falcon and the Snowman?

I thought he was all about personal liberty? Decisions have consequences.

And while pilots in FTU or "eyeballing" all the upgrades might not be leading 69 troops, as you know preparing for flights/upgrades, flying, and properly assessing performance takes a significant amount of time/work. It's just a different type.

What's the PRI on this, 6 months? Maybe a little longer?

You mean direct feedback? You should try it sometime. It's amazing how much more effective a fighting force is when the expectations are clear and improper performance is corrected.

It's not that I don't understand your idea, I just disagree. Edit: you can't handle a simple Border Patrol question and you want to ask for someone's identity just to post on a forum? Really?

Right, because a username and password are stopping the Chinese. Heck, scoobs is probably just some high school hacker anyway. If the discussion can't happen in the open, take it to the vault. 2 on historical perspective and Steve Davies, etc. Plus, this can provide a lot of information for prospective candidates with no military affiliation (like the whole accessions forum). Attitude adjustment, probably; "exclusivity" and a dressing room curtain, no.

Who set the requirements, and who designed/built it? I'm sure LM could make it worthwhile to the shareholders on a gov't contract. But seriously, we've sent some and need to send more.

Definitely not discounting the value in our humanitarian efforts, purely because we can help people or because it looks good, either way, but the leadership cover-my-ass reaction to this threat our people will be facing was classic.

No, it's good; we'll issue an FCIF telling you not to get Ebola. Whew, glad the risk is mitigated.