Search the Community

Multiple decades, multiple platforms, communities, MAJCOMs, and GCCs. Have watched our support functions go down the drain across the board and the burden continue to be delegated to the ones on the pointy end that actually need the most support to do their jobs, take care of their families, and execute the Service’s core missions. But it wasn’t until leading hundreds of enlisted Airmen across scores of AFSCs that I truly felt the “what are we doing here” hit me in the deepest parts where I’d previously managed to keep alive that spark of pride of service. Showing up late, leaving early, doing the bare minimum and often not even that… some not even able to wear their uniforms, no interest in the actual mission (sometimes lip service and often complaining, but no motivation when given opportunities to participate)… an unhealthy focus on unearned awards, decs, inflated EPBs, and “good deals”… Get off the flight line for a tour or two into a job where enlisted outnumber officers by 100:1 and you’ll see. But at the same time I can’t blame “the enlisted”. It’s culture. It starts with accessions and boot camp, tech school, senior enlisted, and the officers that lead them. That is not to say a single officer can make the changes needed — despite higher leadership edicts and Dunning-Kruger-officer platitudinisms to the contrary. That may sound bitter, but I’m not passed over or at risk of not promoting again. It’s watching officer peers promote with half the motivation, half the understanding of the mission, half the time in service (when weekly input/output is considered), and embodying all of the same “enlisted” issues highlighted above, at senior grades, that is crushing… but they checked the boxes. It’s institutional, and maybe we should start there.

100%. A blatant and unconvincing appeal to authority when I don't really trust anything that some random captain has to say, let alone some dude on youtube that has poor enough sense to do the video in uniform. Far too many "experts" have never experienced a significant emergency themselves but are all to happy to leap to conclusions about an incident with a significant amount of assumptions that often turn out to be incorrect. For example, there was the United plane that went off the end at Jackson Hole. Many pilots that should know better immediately and with zero evidence publicly said that the pilots landed long and fast in bad weather. Turns out the brakes weren't wired correctly and gave good enough braking that crews didn't notice for a couple landings in nice weather, but as soon as they asked for max performance for a short runway in the snow, the brakes gave something like 50% of what they should have.

Concur. I'm suspect of the 550 German figure as Balkoski cites around ~2000 at Utah IIRC and Ambrose's book on D-Day placed the initial force around 7,500 or so. Nevertheless, Normandy is not to be missed and I hope to return one day for a more in-depth guided tour.

Yes it's the latter, non-T38 T6 FAIPS go from UPT T6s -> PIT -> FAIP tour -> straight to heavy FTU. No kind of T1 training exists for anyone anymore And everything is still the same for T38-trained T6 FAIPs going to fighters. Since IFF is going away, new ones will do UPT T6s -> FBF (combined T38 UPT & IFF) -> T6 PIT -> T6 FAIP tour -> short T38 spinup -> B-Course

They won't now which is some ways is great for long-term U.S. energy security because we can use these resources in the future. However, they will prime the pumps so to speak and get licensing approvals to use at their discretion now that the regulation is removed. These companies play long-ball. In the short-term they will seek to undo things Biden did: Banned future offshore drilling in certain areas: In early 2025, President Biden used executive authority to permanently withdraw over 625 million acres of federal waters from future oil and gas leasing. This withdrawal covers areas including the entire Atlantic and Pacific coasts, the Eastern Gulf of Mexico, and portions of Alaska's Northern Bering Sea. Strengthened environmental regulations: The administration implemented a rule in 2024 requiring new offshore leaseholders to submit archaeological reports before drilling, placing a burden on operators, especially small producers. Cancelled or blocked leases: The Biden administration has revoked mineral leases, opted against issuing permits on existing fossil fuel leases, and canceled some lease sales. This includes cancelling oil leases in an Alaskan wildlife refuge and blocking new drilling in millions of acres in the state. Paused new oil and gas leases on public lands: Early in his term, Biden suspended new oil and gas leases on public lands for 60 days to review the program. Paused new oil and gas leases on public lands: Early in his term, Biden suspended new oil and gas leases on public lands for 60 days to review the program.

True. I did that during covid with Novavax, which had a mini Gamestop short vs hedges fight brew up the day I was doing tax stuff and saw the price jump. I sold and made some beer money. Pure luck on that. Lithium is going big in our backyard via the Smackover Formation which some believe will lead to a 2nd "oil boom" like event for southern AR. But the moment these things occur, jumping in right away usually means buying too high. That and AR has yet to negotiate a deal on royalties, etc. with any of the prime players. So I'll just try to pay attention to Gov Sanders investment portfolio because no way does she not get rich off this thing. And the support companies that really put the infrastructure down are definitely ones to take a look at.

Cutting the F-35 buys in this bill bothers me a lot more than anything about the E-7. Maybe it's because across the 4 red flags I've done, the E-3s GAB'd every vul except 3 so I struggle to understand what airborne C2 could even provide me. But slowing production of our most advanced fighter on the promise of some silver bullet dominance platform that is just boeing renderings at this point feels like we're falling into the same trap that netted us 20% as many B-2s and F-22s as we should have right now. We've got 400 F-35s out of a planned order of 1,763. Less than a quarter of the way there and we're cutting F-35 production already for future promises from a company that can't produce a single engine trainer plane on time or a narrow body airliner without band-aid fixes. Long story short: if something doesn't change we are fucked. If we can't tighten the turn circle on making new stuff we at least need to have the patience to produce the stuff we've already developed in significant numbers.

Nope, we’re thinking of the exact same scenarios. I understand how to get sensors in range to accomplish jobs while staying within ALR if it’s aggressive enough. You keep referencing WW3; does your scenario stop short of the point where multiple orbits have been attacked with nuclear weapons? If America has built an asymmetric (but vulnerable) advantage in space and is using it to attack, only economic interests are stopping a nuclear-armed dictator from letting them fly. Personally, I don’t believe in nuclear winter or EMP that much and plan on fighting after the exchange. I hope we still have something PMC with a chair in it or else I’ll be relegated to third string KP duty. China also believes in non-LO airplanes; that’s why they keep building them. They also have a luxury we don’t: they can actually build stuff on timelines and deliver capabilities before they’re OBE. The real issue with the E-7 is that regardless of funding we still wouldn’t deliver one (and it’s just one) for 2 more years still even though it’s a 20 year old existing jet.

Allegedly if the NFA 200$ stamp becomes 0$, the registration can be challenged in court since it's technically a registration for who paid the tax. Or at least that's the R cop-out justification for not fighting the parliamentarians move; I don't believe it'll work & think they're all liars. i think we got played (again) by R leadership who included SHORT not for 2A reasons but rather a throw-away COA they could dump as fake "concession" to show compromise.

I hope FL doesn’t end up on the short end of this stick. The last thing any state needs is a bunch of dumbass NYC-ers moving their way.

Curiosity killing the cat here. Do T-6 FAIPs go onto heavies now, or is it where they could track T-38s after their FAIP tour? Civilian here, just pure curiosity as to how assignments work currently out of USAF UPT.

Gotcha would need to be a new additive program I could see this as part of a new way forward if the AF wasn’t hell bent on divesting everything but the T-7 and outsourcing basic flight instruction Mil IPs, standardized instruction not at existing UPT bases, make it a Total Force program, AD with Guard/Reserves, 3 x bases at desirable locations, Golden Apple tours for retention, good long tour orders to get ARC support, better GA training aircraft, etc… Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Yeah, persistent presence missions I agree will mostly be filled by unmanned systems but I’ll still argue for the need for some manned capabilities, particularly for dynamic/short term missions, what exactly that looks like is not my call but I see an overlapping of effects required in major future conflicts, a sensor-shooter-node in the link of systems, being optionally manned gives you the best of both worlds IMO.

"At a distance of approximately 2,300 kilometers, the Air Force struck an Iranian refueling aircraft a short time ago at Mashhad airport in eastern Iran. The Air Force is working to achieve air superiority throughout Iran. This is the farthest strike since the operation began."

It was SUPT until 5-6 ish years ago. I don’t know when Doss started but you did that before UPT if you didn’t have a PPL. That was referred to as IFS, and 2018/19? it changed from IFS (initial flight screening) to IFT (Initial Flight Training) from what I told it was the same but changed from a screening program to a “training” program. 2018/19 is when the SUPT most of us know started its change to the disaster we have now. I’m not super smart on the timeline, but I believe UPT next was a small and short program at Randolf/Austin, T-6 only, straight to a FTU. I think it only produced 20-40 grads. 2021 ish started the 2.0/2.5 and several other syllabus re writes. 22-24 The T-1 started sunsetting, and heavy folks started doing T-1 sim only programs. 2024 the T-1 sim only program sunset. They were not the regular T-1 sims, and while I’ve never been in one, from what I was told tbeh sucked. 2025 -IPT/FUPT. IPT is the training program at civilian schools to get studs a PPL/Inst/multi rating. The “legacy” syllabus being referred to was similar to the 2.0/2.5 but had changes in when checkrides and how the mission phase was executed. (Honestly it might be the 2.5 syllabus, I can’t remember which was which, I started ram dumping that info when I left AD) it’s 20 ish more hours in the T-6 than FUPT. I believe the “legacy” syllabus is still being executed at several UPT bases. To sum that up. legacy = Doss IFT (or PPL) + trans/nav-inst/form/mission in the T-6. FUPT = civilian school, FAA grading standards, time building CFI instructors, FAA checkride PPL/inst Multi, and then 50 hours in the T-6 with no real dedicated nav/inst rides. That being said the “legacy” being referred to is totally different than what most of us went though, and is really only a year or so old.

At some point in the late teens IFS renamed to IFT, becoming more of a training program and less of a wash program. Some point around 2018 the bobs started experimenting, UPT Next, UPT 2.0 UPT 2.5. I’ve lost count. I did a short stint at UPT the last few years before getting out. I believe we had 4 different syllabi (T-6) in a 2 year time period. Bobs are flailing. it’s the same classic Air Force leadership bs. I was in the room when the question was asked about FTU/ops units having capacity to absorb 1500 students a year, and if this really saving any time/money as these studs are going to need more training at the FTUs/ops units. The response, and this is as direct of quote as I can remember “that’s not my problem” And whoever brought up the bobs not wanting to see data that shows the problem, it’s 100% correct. When the issues were brought up with the SGTO class the answer was to try and blame the IPs for trying to sabotage the program.

oh and Leard wants to cut instrument approaches from the T-6 FUPT checkride because “sps have instrument ratings.” The waiver was signed and then pulled because the 14th didn’t have a real chance to non/concur on it. All the GOs in AETC decided to do it without SME input. Anyone from the MAF have personal experience with him? He seems to only want data that confirms his decisions. CBM isn’t doing SGTOs because this is going to scale with no way to fail and TexanWorld at CBM is sounding the alarm. Feedback from CBM is the students are being short changed.

Quick, everyone short Tesla for a week, then buy it again low. They'll hug it out on Thursday, I hear.

Gonna hang it up next year and make it an even 30. 23 years AD and 7 in the Reserves. I've always said that when the bullshit outweighs the benefits, I'd vote with my feet. Apparently I have a higher tolerance for the bullshit than I ever imagined. Like some have said, it all comes down to what right looks like for you. It wasn't right for me to take a pay-cut and alot of time away from home for a couple of years to get the ultimate benefits that the airlines offer. I loved what I did-- flying the A-10 and being in a position to teach young pilots has always appealed to me. I executed my career MY way, to the detriment of promotions on AD-- did a great staff gig in Europe but refused to go to ACC or the Pentagon. Got passed over for O-6 on AD but picked up immediately once I joined the Reserves-- best thing that ever happened to me. I would have been tossed around like a barracks bunny on a Saturday night as a full-bird on AD. Had to wait to pin-on with the Reserves, but got a great opportunity out of it that worked out well for my family. Through it all, I was able to do what I loved and provided great opportunities for my family. And now my beautiful bride has decided that she doesn't want to leave our current location and so that means it's time to hang it up. Assuming I don't get myself fired in the next 8 months, I'll have had a chance in this seat for far longer than is normal for a command tour. I enjoy being in the trenches and leading from the front, and I found a way to do that. It cost me some opportunities, but kept me true to what I valued most career-wise. I deployed six times, flew on some pretty high-end real-world missions, earned a WIC patch, got to command a couple of outstanding organizations, fly the A-10 longer than the eleven-year old version of me who started this dream could have ever imagined, but most importantly, got to coach my kids' sports teams for 12 years and help my wife start a number of successful businesses. But I never felt like I had to sacrifice who I was and what I truly believed in to further my career. Maybe that's why I tolerated more BS than I thought I could. Hell, it's only a lot of work if you do it. Turns out you can still be a fighter pilot in today's Air Force. Then again, I've joked that I'm not really in the military-- I'm in the AF. And I'm not really in the AF, I'm a Hog Driver. Don't use these stories as a recipe or a map-- what worked for me and others won't necessarily work for you. There's nothing wrong with getting out-- if you're doing it for the right reasons. And there's nothing wrong with staying in-- if you're doing it for the right reasons. Just make sure the right reasons are still with you when you hang up that smart-looking uniform for the last time. Now the hard part: I have to figure out what I want to be when I grow up.

I am biased, but as a dude that's done both I would choose the 46 every single time. Feel free to DM with specific questions, but to keep it short: KC-135: Simpler, storied, better bases IMO (Mildenhall, Kadena, nice TFIs), you can go do other things outside of the 135 if you want. Obviously with older jets there comes old jet problems. KC-46: Nicer jet, very automated. Ops tempo is very much picking up. Once you go KC-46s you are there for life, so if you're interested in special programs (U-2, 89th, GD, etc) forget about it. Not happening. Current bases are McConnell, Travis, McGuire, Altus, Seymour and Pease, with others on the way. Constant changes going on in the pubs. If airlines are your goal it's very easy to do so. Like most of the MAF, we very rarely have people stay past their commitment, so take that with what you will. The 767 type rating was a thing when the program first came online but it's been dead for awhile.

I call bullshit. Zero percent chance a helo driver passes on a lifetime of threesomes, even if it's a couple legs short.

At the bro level, we have been talking a lot about what could replace the C-40 and C-32 as they start to get long in the tooth. Apparently, Boeing originally had an idea for a 787-300 that the Japanese wanted for short dense inter-island flying and it would have been the basis for the 787 BBJ as well. The real big issue is the foot print of a 787, be it a fictional -3 or a real -8/9/10, is way bigger than a 757 or 737. We are talking an extra 70 feet of wing let alone PCN issues. Airport flexibility goes way down, hell, we already sank a C-32 into the pavement at MDW because of a PCN being wrong in the Giant. A 787 wouldn't even be able to land at MDW, let alone park. I fear the MAX9 or 10 is really the only replacement for the C-32 and it simplifies crewing because it's a shared type. But it will come with a performance and capability hit. Best to bring it online right as we change administrations so there isn't any growing pain...like that'll ever happen.

I watched as I am in the market form a small carbine and it looks like it comes up short. As he mentions there are numerous MP-5 knockoff coming so I will likely wait.

I would exert political pressure on that ally (Israel) to knock it off in Gaza. They have more than retaliated for Oct 7 and gone orders of magnitude past that. The stated position of the houthis is that they are attacking Israeli ships "in support of their muslim brethren in gaza." Which I actually believe because so far the only time the houthis have stopped shooting was during the short lived Israeli-Palestinian cease-fire. I would immediately stop any talks of a Gaza riviera developed by us and Israel. The gaza riviera is a bad idea of biblical proportions that will have Israel cemented as a permanent pariah state, with us as the enablers. Of course all of this assumes im king for a day and not completely beholden to AIPAC like the current admin and most of the left are. edit: The other biggest problem with the gaza riviera plan is that it's the stumbling block preventing any meaningful negotiations from happening to get back the remaining hostages. Think about it from the perspective of hamas. Once you give up the hostages you've given up your last card, then israel is free to completely bulldoze the place. So what incentive do you have to negotiate a cease fire and return hostages if the only thing looming on the horizon afterward is complete displacement?

It is good for a single squadron guard base airspace, but hardly one of the largest complexes in the US and I think it'll show itself to be inadequate for the EX. I think the MOA is only like 40 miles wide which will be a problem and unless they can move some of the jetways the high altitude is too short for a long look. Just off the top of the nugget of airspaces I've used that I'm pretty sure are considerably larger: the UTTR, NTTR, San Diego west coast complex, Edwards, basically the entire East Coast from Boston to Orlando, Berry Goldwater, Holloman, Gulf Coast, Hawaii, and Alaska. And many of those airspaces are multiple times larger than Alpena and just the one's I've used, I'm sure there are more. Overall the Alpena complex is great for A-10s, ok for F-16s, but hardly what the EX needs.