raimius

Question: how often has a large conflict been stopped/contained by a large initial strike? It seems the popular psychology is that the bigger the hit, the more anger and demand for a strong response occurs. I'm not sure taking out x-hundred targets on day 1 will give pause. (Granted, if you are going to fight, taking out a lot of enemy capability at the start is a good move.)

Weapons School isn't about weapons? Man, we must really suck at naming things! Here I thought it was about realizing our fighter pilots weren't trained well enough to maintain the 10:1 kill ratio from Korea, and trying to fix that.

I'm not sure his dismissal of tactical fighters and air superiority is well thought out. Having long-range strike in quantity is a good idea though.

Hey man, two things happening at once gets really tough! You wouldn't expect that to happen in a million years. Also, is shooting through the door not how we are supposed to open them? ..... Lots of new airmen with drive but not the training...

They Shall Not Grow Old is extremely well done, and quite intense. It's not a good film for the weak stomached...NOT one to take the kids to. (Which should be obvious, given the topic.) Definitely recommend.

Second Captenant? I don't know what they were thinking. Why does the AF have to try to be different and make "uniform" items unique?...and thus harder to find.

There is that break-even dollar value, but I'd argue that reducing the causes of the "F you" part would be more cost effective than paying pilots more than Delta or United can offer.

CY17 Staff tour 70+46+92 = 162? Hard to trust the bean counters when they can't add on their own slide shows...

I have a tough time believing that designating units on a temporary basis is as effective as having units whose primary mission and OT&E functions are dedicated to making it work. When the taskings are more numerous than the units or the rescue missions go sideways, is designated really as good? Corporate knowledge does count for something. ...and yeah, I don't think people here are questioning the line-AFSOC dude's willingness to do rescue. It's more about the organizational side and resource allocation.

AF decided to just make more LTs to replace the Majors leaving. Who needs experience when you can just make more copilot's/wingmen? /Sarcasm

🍺

Well, it is a big fan to keep the pilot cool. If it stops, the pilot starts sweating immediately! Hueys aren't bad. The missions can get a bit boring--they tend to be "national insurance policy" types. Low probability of action, but too important to not have a plan in place. That said, we do get some cool oddball stuff and the occasional civil SAR...and drive the helo equivalent of a sixty-four and a half mustang--not fancy, but a classic that makes you drive it.

The period of 300+ saves a deployment has passed for the HH-60 dudes, unless we kick off another 100k+ troop conflict. I can't give you tons of specific info, as I'm a Huey guy and usually get 2nd hand info on CSAR stuff. Hueys are fun, but have trouble really doing the mission set well... need a bigger helo for some of the stuff people want. The MH-139 (Huey replacement) contract was awarded and not protested, so that should be coming online in the next decade or so. Global Strike is really pushing more offensive capabilities than were traditionally done in the missile complexes. There is a lot of potential in that, but also some thrash in tactics and training. So, some crews are TDY quite often.

People who want to become pilots is a far smaller issue than pilots who want to stay in the AF. Mid level experience is the shortage. The AF is trying to outgrow the retention issue by making more pilots, but already maxed out mx, training bases, etc.

Removing $10K+ from investments incurs noticeable tax penalties. I don't normally have that kind of cash on hand (cash is good for emergencies, but loses buying power over time), and interest rates (assuming excellent credit) are low enough that paying cash is likely to incur a 3-10% opportunity cost in lost investment gains (per year!). This is not a case where I could not pay cash. It's a case where a ~3% loan is likely to work in my interest. If you invest moderately aggressively, your money compounds quickly. An officer with limited expenses should be able to save enough to buy a house with cash, if they want to, within a decade. Whether paying cash is in their best interest is something they need to examine...same with any other loan... ...AKA, invest your money rather than pay off your 0.5% cadet loan. You make more money that way.

With inflation and loan rates being potentially equal to each other, you aren't losing any buying power. You'll probably do better putting the money in the market and taking the loan at ~3%. (The market is admittedly a gamble, but taking the historical averages into account, it's not a bad bet.)

Exactly that reason.

That's quite surprising. I'd have figured they were both plotting a protest revenge.

Ha, the Lakota can't always lift 3 passengers from tight LZs. Whoever thought it would be good for FLAT IRON and some of the multi-pax missions elsewhere...I don't know how they got conned to badly... I don't know if the MH-139 is the best platform for the mission, but it is more capable than the N model (even though flying the classic is fun). ...now I'm just wondering what will happen with the inevitable protests.

Flying helicopters is freaking fun...when you get to do it. I'm seeing a few of the 1st assignment guys already planning an exit...kind of sad, but they are seeing the issues with the AF, and now the airlines are actually poaching helo dudes.

It used to be "make it to a runway or taxiway via ELP or eject.". T-6 students were told they would likely be booted from UPT if they made an off field landing. IMO, if you fly something, you should practice engine out procedures...and if you only have one...

...and we wonder why people don't trust the Air Force.