raimius

First, saying we do something terribly, but better than the other guy does not win you many points. Second, we don't know if we cut the bottom, top, or middle. We don't know how to measure this! Having the skills to write a strong "C" on your OPR is a poor indicator of talent and skill in both your primary AFSC and leadership abilities. On the E side, everybody is a winner as well. It's amazing that all our children are above average! Until we figure out how to measure our talent pool, we won't have more than a hazy idea of who we want to keep and who should go. Third, what do you consider "extreme stress on the system?" Is that too few people to fill nominal billets, too few people to operate normally, or too few to win the war? From the ground level, I sometimes wonder. Fourth, throwing money at people won't retain your best talent. Some may be great, but bonuses tend to attract those who either already want/plan to stay or those who don't see better options. Heck, I barely read anything on personnel/talent management and I realize this! More money is nice and all, but pay is not the top reason most people decide to stay or leave. Finally, I have GREAT pride in parts of the Air Force. Those parts would be the airmen doing their jobs with care and precision, getting the mission done regardless of the enemy or other obstacles. The personnel system looks more detached, disconnected, and arbitrary just about every time I read about it. Why should I take pride in a system that is so inefficient and reactionary? If that sounded like a bit of a rant, you are right. I know I see things at the micro level, but I'm not an idiot, nor are the people I work with. Your cheery picture does not fit the reality that they and I are experiencing.

Sam Jackson with a lisp was rather odd. I did like Firth's line just before the rampage!

A stand-alone non-mil network for pubs, T.O.s, etc. works pretty well. We also wound up having to use some commercial internet for things like iOS and Foreflight updates. We wound up with 3 different non-mil networks at one point. So, you might want to be careful, as problems increase as the complexity does.

Not sure we'd want to set the precedent, but under the Geneva convention, can't unlawful combatants be tried (and executed)?

Kinda like all the hubbub about camo patterns. Lots of hate and envy when we should be talking about what works and is efficient. If you work in an office environment, you should probably wear blues (as much as I hate them, due to material and cut). If you work in the field, you should probably wear an infantry type uniform in effective camo (what the ABU should have been but isn't). If you work in an industrial environment...probably just wear the infantry type stuff, if it works (keeps logistics easier). If you fly, wear a flight suit...you know, the thing purpose built for the task! If you do work in multiple environments, pick what works best. ...besides, pilots don't think they're better than everyone else because of the flight suit. They'd still think they're better, even in a leisure suit. ;)

Sounds rather similar to the Air France sequence. I wonder what the data recorders will indicate.

Certainly a well written and thought provoking piece! I suspect there are plenty of people out there who can come up with improvements, but I fear they are either not offering their solutions or they don't have enough "mass" of advocacy to actually change things. ...or we just keep "fixing" things until they are so screwed up by new issues that we "fix" them by going back to the old systems.

As much as I hate the "blame the pilot" game, there plenty of times where the flight crew were the primary link in the crash. ...even when your instruments go wonky, you have got to figure out that pulling back on the controls for 1 minute-plus is going to cause a stall.

AFE reg, and varies by airframe, if I recall correctly.

Which is odd, considering USAF H-1s have had mini-gun set-ups since the 20th SOS was flying F/P models in Vietnam and elsewhere.

2

I haven't kept up on the drops from Rucker, but a lot of CV-22s lately have been from fixed-wing tracks. As far as I know, all the TH-1Hs are at Rucker.

Seems like the *not-SBR set-up in an AR-15 would benefit from something other than .223rem. I think it might be logical in .300blk, as that cartridge is better suited to 9-10in barrels. Still, seems like a range toy for most people (not that I'm opposed).

DoD wide-- -Ground combat/utility uniform -Non-ejection seat aircrew uniform -Ejection seat aircrew uniform Services get to add however many pieces and styles of flair they feel appropriate.... "Distinctive" uniforms get to be service dress, mess dress, etc...you know, stuff you wear in a business-casual to formal environment.

Here's to him being found alive and well.

That's the one! Thanks. Stract, yes, that was what reminded me of this.

A while back, I seem to recall reading a "noise complaint" letter from a guy who lived under a low-level route. The basic premise was "you guys aren't training right--you need to be lower and faster!" Anyone know the letter I'm talking about? If so, can you post it or direct me to it? Apparently my search skills are not as good as I thought. Thanks.

Yep.

Probably some Doppler effect and aspect changes from the prop to the viewer. RIP.

True. Also consider the fit with your ear-cups. I had a set of straight-legged glasses that would give me a headache about 20min into a flight due to both the front and back of the legs being compressed...it sucked! Normal legs didn't do the same thing, so I switched back.

Was that supposed to be humorous or was it intentionally patronizing and condescending? "You don't have it that bad! At least you aren't a golf ball!" Is that supposed to help people?

And/or don't have any clue about firearms aside from their issued weapons!