Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted

How did you not know RATM and Tom Morello were far left?

Did you know Tom is black? Because people also stop listening to RATM when they learn he’s black.

  • Like 1
Posted
How did you not know RATM and Tom Morello were far left?

Did you know Tom is black? Because people also stop listening to RATM when they learn he’s black.

“Some of those that work forces, are the same that burn crosses”

Referring to police as KKK members seems pretty obviously “left”. Honestly the song is 30 years old...you’re just finding this out now
  • Upvote 1
Posted
46 minutes ago, busdriver said:

Their entire body of work is blatantly marxist and anti western. Also, musically amazing.



Sent from my SM-T380 using Tapatalk
 

Love those riffs...

Being a leftist wealth distribution spokesman has yielded Tom Morello a net worth of $30M (according to a quick search of the interwebs) thanks to capitalism and free speech.  Let the irony flow through you.

  • Like 4
Posted
On 3/25/2021 at 7:20 PM, billy pilgrim said:

thanks to capitalism and free speech.  Let the irony flow through you.

The joy of the market valuing his contributions to music without discriminating against him for his poorly thought out ideas.

  • Like 1
Posted
On 3/23/2021 at 2:42 PM, ToHoldShort said:

An F-22 pilot on why he felt discriminated against in the Air Force - YouTube

Video with 60 minutes, seems like there is more to this

Surprised that no one has pointed out to this crowd that in addition to getting an USAFA appointment, UPT slot, T-38 track, Raptor assignment, and admission to Harvard, his wife is a smoking hot fitness model/actress/influencer or some shit from Australia.

I'm sympathetic to his concerns, but yeah.....hard to feel sorry for this guy.

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1
Posted

Tucker Carslon goes after DOD and USAF claiming they have gone woke.

If you don't want to watch the start at 9:00 and watch what he said about Lt Gen Webb, AETC and the way we select pilots.  Sounds like having a PPL will soon loose any weight in the PMSV.

 

Posted

GD he has a punchable face.

And “doughy moron” for a guy that’s ran 2 MAJCOM’s and had the audacity to say that getting a PPL is an indicator of having a more advantaged upbringing? What a moron.

*White privilege trigger warning* I understand the SJW type initiatives if that’s what the people you’re trying to recruit are thinking about now. But recruiting to fly for the services had never been an issue. With that luxury, why not stack the deck to get the best candidates*? I’m also not ignorant to the fact that there are probably some diamonds in the rough out there (look at WW2 fighter aces from rural backgrounds with minimal education), but these upper level policies are about the whole and not the individual. 
 

And the diversity thing is always pumped up as different perspectives to find better answers etc. That’s the opposite of what you want at the tactical level. You want people that are brilliant at the basics and then can leverage those attributes accounted for in recruiting in the non-standard scenarios. If you’re really recruiting for an eventual diverse senior officer corps, that’s a different story. Maybe it’s just a chicken/egg thing.

 

*How the AF determines best candidates is slightly flawed, IMO. There needs to be much more consideration placed on athletic skill and not just academic. In my experience, gifted athletes with average intelligence compared to superior intellectuals with poor athletic ability are much better pilots. 

  • Upvote 2
Posted
48 minutes ago, Danger41 said:

...PPL....

....why not stack the deck to get the best candidates*

I'm not going to watch the stupid video.  Based on comments thus far, the good general did a piss poor job of advocating for getting rid of PPL advantage.

Logical argument for PPL: someone who's already a pilot obviously can already fly, that means they have a higher likelihood of getting through UPT.  Safer bet.

Argument against: Everyone knows the policy, and prospective applicants who can afford it will spend the money to pad their resume (partial PPL, or all the way).  Couple problems: just getting a PPL isn't all that hard given enough time, I would contend that being an experienced pilot vs a brand new minted PPL are very different things.  The former should absolutely be given "credit" the latter is the USAF allowing the public (applicant) to fund it's screening program.  

 

Posted
2 hours ago, Danger41 said:

GD he has a punchable face.

And “doughy moron” for a guy that’s ran 2 MAJCOM’s and had the audacity to say that getting a PPL is an indicator of having a more advantaged upbringing? What a moron.

*White privilege trigger warning* I understand the SJW type initiatives if that’s what the people you’re trying to recruit are thinking about now. But recruiting to fly for the services had never been an issue. With that luxury, why not stack the deck to get the best candidates*? I’m also not ignorant to the fact that there are probably some diamonds in the rough out there (look at WW2 fighter aces from rural backgrounds with minimal education), but these upper level policies are about the whole and not the individual. 
 

And the diversity thing is always pumped up as different perspectives to find better answers etc. That’s the opposite of what you want at the tactical level. You want people that are brilliant at the basics and then can leverage those attributes accounted for in recruiting in the non-standard scenarios. If you’re really recruiting for an eventual diverse senior officer corps, that’s a different story. Maybe it’s just a chicken/egg thing.

 

*How the AF determines best candidates is slightly flawed, IMO. There needs to be much more consideration placed on athletic skill and not just academic. In my experience, gifted athletes with average intelligence compared to superior intellectuals with poor athletic ability are much better pilots. 

I’m confused by your post.  Are you for or against the new policy of ignoring flying experience as a factor used in selecting USAF pilots?

Posted

So, there's an effort to remove a PPL from consideration for selection?  Seems stupid.

I didn't get a slot in college (selection rate went to shit), so I competed for a slot on AD.  I knew a PPL was going to be huge, so I figured it out.  If I can find a way to get for a PPL, anyone can. 

I just looked it up, but back in 95 a 2nd Lt made $1636.20 a month.  BAH barely covered apt rent.  I found a local flight school and paid for my PPL, $2250 at the time, by nearly maxing out a credit card.  I paid what I could each month.  I then bought a block of 50 hrs for $1250 (yes, $25/hr wet, a huge bargain these days, but in a Traumahawk) and got my hours up over a 100 (the next big PCSM milestone). 

Lastly, in my UPT class, we didn't do FSP as it was cancelled a few months before attending and the AF didn't fire up the paid for PPL program yet.  A few folks that didn't have a PPL struggled.  Some made it, some didn't.

But maybe that's the problem here; people can't figure shit out anymore and need systems to change and make it easier for them.  Compare two people for a slot.  One is just existing, but doing good school. The other is busting their ass, working extra to pay for a PPL.  It's not that hard of a call.

  • Like 1
Posted
GD he has a punchable face.
And “doughy moron” for a guy that’s ran 2 MAJCOM’s and had the audacity to say that getting a PPL is an indicator of having a more advantaged upbringing? What a moron.
*White privilege trigger warning* I understand the SJW type initiatives if that’s what the people you’re trying to recruit are thinking about now. But recruiting to fly for the services had never been an issue. With that luxury, why not stack the deck to get the best candidates*? I’m also not ignorant to the fact that there are probably some diamonds in the rough out there (look at WW2 fighter aces from rural backgrounds with minimal education), but these upper level policies are about the whole and not the individual. 
 
And the diversity thing is always pumped up as different perspectives to find better answers etc. That’s the opposite of what you want at the tactical level. You want people that are brilliant at the basics and then can leverage those attributes accounted for in recruiting in the non-standard scenarios. If you’re really recruiting for an eventual diverse senior officer corps, that’s a different story. Maybe it’s just a chicken/egg thing.
 
*How the AF determines best candidates is slightly flawed, IMO. There needs to be much more consideration placed on athletic skill and not just academic. In my experience, gifted athletes with average intelligence compared to superior intellectuals with poor athletic ability are much better pilots. 


What's a PPL run these days? $15K? Plus the free time to fly and study? In addition to participating in organized athletics (which also involves time and cost). That's a huge hurdle to overcome to increase your chances, especially if you're trying to remain competitive in other selection factors (grades, athletics, community service). That being said, the AF is trying to help bring more people who may not be able to afford a PPL into the selection pool (including minorities/women) with scholarships for PPLs: https://www.airuniversity.af.edu/Holm-Center/AFJROTC/Flight-Academy/

Plus, generally UPT studs who have (only) a PPL are generally indistinguishable from those who don't by the end of the first T-6 contact checkride. My hunch is that having a PPL decreases your odds of washing out (initial solo is one of the big milestones), mainly because having previous flying experience makes the learning early on a bit easier on average and making that individual a safer investment for the AF.

One problem in modeling (like figuring out who to select for UPT) is once you identify a maximum in the model (like maximizing UPT graduation rate based on selection factors), the question becomes "is that a local maximum, or absolute maximum." In other words, just because I find a peak in the model, doesn't mean I've necessarily found the best solution in the solution space.

You may also have potentially competing goals (minimizing UPT washout vs producing the most skilled pilots). Maybe selecting athletes produces a handful of "great" tactical pilots, but if there's a higher washout rate, is it worth the cost? Or is it better to select to minimize washout rates and accept "average" or "acceptable" pilots (if the minimums weren't good enough, they'd be higher...)?

For better or for worse, pilots run the AF. If we select pilots to only focus on being the best tactically, it hurts our ability to groom operational and strategic level planners with tactical experience (unless the AF were to allow non-pilots to fill those higher level roles). At the same time, focusing solely on the operational and strategic levels may leave us unable to win at the tactical level to achieve those operational/strategic goals. So we need a mix of pilots with different skills, backgrounds, and career desires. And since the AF is run by pilots, it acts as the greatest filter into who is allowed to lead within the AF, so it gets a lot of scrutiny.
  • Like 1
  • Upvote 3
Posted (edited)
10 hours ago, HercDude said:

Surprised that no one has pointed out to this crowd that in addition to getting an USAFA appointment, UPT slot, T-38 track, Raptor assignment, and admission to Harvard, his wife is a smoking hot fitness model/actress/influencer or some shit from Australia.

I'm sympathetic to his concerns, but yeah.....hard to feel sorry for this guy.

Notice the operative verb used over and over was feel, I felt this I felt that.  He had no specific instances of racial discrimination, intimidation or reprisal to cite.  He referenced his feedback received at different moments in his career and his interpretation of them as more evidence than the AF and the people in it in his community were aligned mostly against him based on his race, but he moved up.

If the institution / some of the people in it are so bad/racist/unfair, how the hell did he get where he is in the AF?

When you look around you think everyone or most are  X derogatory thing, maybe you are the problem and not the institution / people in it...

IDK, more context is necessary here but at first blanch he seems like a high performing type A who made it into a community of other high performing type A's and like every operational community, it has only so many upper level slots / prestigious vertical upward paths, not all will make it thru their filters.  Like him, I have zero evidence to reference beyond my hunch but 40 something years of life and 20 years in the AF lend me to this suspicion.  

Edited by Clark Griswold
  • Like 1
Posted

Anyone have any data on this raptor pilot? Heard a rumor that he was a terrible pilot. Was on CAP and probation because of his abilities. And that he got removed from a formal training program for his abilities or lack there of.

Any truth?

It’s pretty damning on him if so. This whole 60min thing seems like a witch hunt if so.

Posted
5 hours ago, ClearedHot said:

Tucker Carslon goes after DOD and USAF claiming they have gone woke.

If you don't want to watch the start at 9:00 and watch what he said about Lt Gen Webb, AETC and the way we select pilots.  Sounds like having a PPL will soon loose any weight in the PMSV.

Sigh.  That clip really just seemed like another newscaster being incendiary for the sake of being incendiary.  Whatever brings in the ratings, I suppose.

The whole thing is tiresome though.  The Air Force has decided that they need to appease the woke mob, and the associated Drive for Diversity, regardless of reason or logic.  I honestly don't understand the background and chain-of-events that resulted in the current state of affairs, but regardless, here we are.  I think everyone in any kind of position of power has seen the writing on the wall, and understands you're gonna get on the Woke Express, or you're gonna get left behind.  Thus, you get Lt Gen Webb's comments.

None of it really matters though, because the DoD doesn't really care about promoting diversity.  They just care about the appearance of promoting diversity.  Like anything else, just follow the money.  If anyone really gave a shit about increasing the diversity of Air Force pilots, there is a pretty easy path.  Take a small pile of money, and start installing tutors and AF JROTC programs in schools that have the diversity you're looking for.  Put resources behind helping kids succeed in school.  Take the kids that show promise, and put more resources behind them, like funding their PPL.  Stand up the same programs in colleges.  Tutors to help people succeed, and PPLs for those who show promise.  FFS, it's Learning to Fly An Airplane.  The vary nature of it tends to attract the hopes and dreams of kids and young adults.  You'll have no shortage of people wanting to give it a try.

However, all of that takes money, resources, and not to mention the leadership to promote a course of action that is going to take a couple of years to start generating winged pilots.  And because the Air Force only wants to show the appearance of caring about diversity, you'll never get any appreciable resources and leadership behind it.  You'll just see the endless calls for "More diversity in the ranks!!!" from the woke mob, and replies of "But, we're trying!!" from the DoD.  And people like Tucker Carlson will make more breathless news clips that get passed round the interwebs.  The clip above has been out for a little more than 24 hours, and already has almost 700k views and 10k comments.  Not too bad for folks like #Tucker.

  • Upvote 1
Posted

None of it really matters though, because the DoD doesn't really care about promoting diversity.  They just care about the appearance of promoting diversity.  Like anything else, just follow the money.  If anyone really gave a shit about increasing the diversity of Air Force pilots, there is a pretty easy path.  Take a small pile of money, and start installing tutors and AF JROTC programs in schools that have the diversity you're looking for.  Put resources behind helping kids succeed in school.  Take the kids that show promise, and put more resources behind them, like funding their PPL.  Stand up the same programs in colleges.  Tutors to help people succeed, and PPLs for those who show promise.  FFS, it's Learning to Fly An Airplane.  The vary nature of it tends to attract the hopes and dreams of kids and young adults.  You'll have no shortage of people wanting to give it a try.


You mean like this?
https://www.airuniversity.af.edu/Holm-Center/AFJROTC/Flight-Academy/

https://www.maxwell.af.mil/News/Display/Article/2483043/hq-afjrotc-announces-2021-flight-academy-scholarship-winners/

230 PPL training program scholarships given out this year for AFJROTC cadets (from 1340 applicants, so about a 1 in 6 chance). Includes flying training, transportation to/from training, room and board, so pretty much a funded TDY flying training for cadets. Not solely funded by the AF, but the AF is leading the initiative.

Posted
2 hours ago, jazzdude said:

Plus, generally UPT studs who have (only) a PPL are generally indistinguishable from those who don't by the end of the first T-6 contact checkride.

I’d agree with this. 

When I went to UPT IFT was a PPL. Making a PPL part of the selection does limit the type of person that is competitive for a UPT slot. Kind of like you need to have a rich mom and dad to get onto the sailing team at Stanford. 

  • Like 1
  • Upvote 1
Posted
15 minutes ago, Homestar said:

I’d agree with this. 

When I went to UPT IFT was a PPL. Making a PPL part of the selection does limit the type of person that is competitive for a UPT slot. Kind of like you need to have a rich mom and dad to get onto the sailing team at Stanford. 

Isn't this like saying athletic scholarships are biased because high schools with well-funded athletic programs tend to be in richer areas, so poor kids don't have the same access to weight rooms, facilities, trainers, etc?

If we want to target results, seems like a PPL is a clear indicator that someone can succeed in learning to fly an aircraft.  

Hell...if we want to argue along racial lines, requiring a degree is hampering the ability of minorities to succeed if you look at the statistics...rich people send their kids to universities more often than poor people.  Enlisted aviator program?  Waivers for degrees if you fit into a "diverse" background?

Posted
3 hours ago, tac airlifter said:

I’m confused by your post.  Are you for or against the new policy of ignoring flying experience as a factor used in selecting USAF pilots?

I have no issues at all with considering prior experience. My point on this thing is that people who are able to afford PPL are usually from a more advantaged background financially. Holistically, if that means people are excluded from UPT selection because of the hand they were dealt, that’s too bad but national defense is more important than equal opportunities prior to selection. However, if there was something out there beyond a gut feeling that people of various backgrounds (gender, race, religion, etc) would produce better pilot and officer candidates, then I would say ensure that the accessions account for them. If it’s purely in the name of diversity for the politics du jour, GTFO. This view doesn’t account for onesie twosie cases of talents from non-typical backgrounds, but that’s tough to do at an institutional level.

  • Like 1
Posted
3 hours ago, Guardian said:

Anyone have any data on this raptor pilot? 

I don't know anything about the guy personally, but I do remember seeing him on the USAFA website recently. Looks like he's literally the one Academy grad (out of 69,000) who was highlighted as exceptional in their literature this month. Another example of the system keeping him down?

https://www.usafa.org/Service/Spotlight-March2021

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...