Leaderboard

They're still waiting for the functionals at AFPC to return the phone calls.

He means go to college and blackout on some bitches tits when you aren't flying or studying.

Fly every day until you are done. Do not take any breaks. The more often you fly, the faster you learn. Make it your life. Preferably do it away from home, so there are no distractions. It will end up saving you money in the long run because it will take less hours to accomplish your goal.

Holy sh!t- a post from you that's only two lines! You feeling okay?

Happy Turkey day to all you fucks. My wife cooked the 12.5 turkey in 2 hours, should be interesting. I love AZ Thanksgiving, 81/sunny and possibly pool time! Is anyone doing anything interesting? I'm thankful for BQZip's mom.

F-16 units really appreciate and look for lots of glider time. I don't think any other communities care. YMMV.

For those who need a power starter the next morning.

+1. Frequency is key. I did a 141 program and got my license at 35 hours. It is probably a little more expensive going that route but my training was very similar to a college course. I had a syllabus and online training modules, so I knew exactly what I would be doing on each flight from day 1 and could show up well prepared for the flights.

Dude, I completely forgot about Wonderbread. I mean it has the word "wonder" in its title; it has to be legendary by default. Believe me, those guys have always been an inspiration. Flightsuit covered in coffee stains and powdered sugar, it instills confidence. 2

Enough of this "what does the F-35 bring to our tactical capes". Let's discuss the real issue: what can it do to revolutionize airshows?

What's the name of the mode AV8Bs use when they carry x2 GBU54s, spend 20 minutes on station without shooting (because it takes 10 minutes to tally and longer for clearance) then dump a -54 in the ocean before they land because STOVL requirements make them unable to land with x2 500 pounders...... and then they do that daily for 4 months until they run out of bombs and have to sail home? I want to know what that mode is called because I don't think we should equip the F35 with that function. Seriously, is the juice worth the squeeze WRT STOVL? In these times of fiscal austerity, and with a national strategic switch from 2 simultaneous to 1 major war at a time, I think the obvious answer is no. The Marines are notorious for caring only about the Marines and Marine CAPES.

I won't get into the amphib V/STOL argument right now (there are valid arguments on both sides, although in an era of fiscal austerity I have serious issues with paying for a "nice to have" capability for the navy's army's air force when other services are cutting their core capabilities especially when we aren't going to deploy an ESG into a region where it faces an air threat without a big deck CSG to provide overwatch), but if we're going to have an honest conversation about the land side of this we need to define "austere" base. As the OP identified, the main LIMFAC for austere bases is logistics, to include maintenance support. Do we as a military have a need to operate out of extremely austere bases? Absolutely, and we have the logistical ability to support operations from these bases (within reason) provided they possess a runway large enough to get a C-130 in and out (assuming the base is forward enough that we don't have reliable, secure, and regular surface transport for stuff like fuel and ammo). Of course, this raises the obvious question of, "If we can get a C-130 in and out why do we need V/STOL strike aircraft?" There is "austere base with limited available support that can support conventional fixed wing operations," and then there is the definition of "austere" that V/STOL proponents use, which refers to operating out of locations that are only capable of supporting V/STOL ops. Harriers have operated in combat out of austere bases that nominally couldn't support conventional fighters (more on this in the next paragraph) but the reality is that these were more or less publicity stunts to attempt to demonstrate V/STOL's relevance. During Desert Storm the Marines operated Harriers in a V/STOL manner out of an abandoned airbase (capable of STOVL only operations) in northern Saudi Arabia (it's popularly known as operating out of a soccer stadium due to them setting up admin support in a soccer stadium next to the airfield). Despite the Harriers being marginally closer to the FEBA, a similar number of USAF A-10s were able to generate more sorties carrying more ordnance with fewer logistical bottlenecks by operating from a forward airbase capable of supporting conventional fixed wing operations. The Marines tried a similar thing during the invasion of Iraq, and have done similar things in Afghanistan (setting up a FARP outside Marjah a year or two ago, for example, to support Harrier operations out of Kandahar). The dirty little secret with all of these is that while they netted some impressive sounding metrics for the USMC and V/STOL, the cost that wasn't counted was the logistical effort necessary to keep these bases supplied with fuel, ammo, and maintenance support...as one example, one of the things that the Marines tout as being a benefit of V/STOL ops is reducing the burden on tanking support required by setting up FARPs closer to the action. That's all well and good, but you'll forgive me if I find it hard to believe that it is smarter/safer (forget cheaper) to truck fuel tankers overland outside the wire to a FARP on a road or parking lot somewhere instead of adding a few jets to the tanking support requirements for the day. The fact is that fixed wing aircraft (including USMC Hornets) were able to operate in the same areas more effectively and efficiently than Harriers doing V/STOL in each of the instances listed above, and this was due largely to the logistical burdens imposed by operating out of V/STOL only capable locations, which is why I think it is important to define what we mean when we talk about "austere" bases. And all of the above ignores the very significant differences between the F-35 and Harrier: cost (if you think the raid earlier this year on VMA-211 was bad, imagine it with F-35s being the target...putting your hundred million dollar+ stealth fighter within range of any asshole with a mortar seems like a very poor cost-benefit tradeoff), LO maintenance, increased fuel requirements, the increased heat footprint of the F-35 compared to the Harrier...all of these things further count against it from operating out of an austere V/STOL only location. I should be clear, this isn't an attack on Marines operating fixed wing aircraft, or the MAGTF concept...I think both are vital components of the way the Marine Corps does business, but if we're going to assess an idea's value we need to be honest about all its limitations, and the idea of effectively operating F-35s out of a truly forward austere base where they can only operate V/STOL is a pipe dream.

Of course there's a need. Aaahhnalld has to fly something in the remake.

You aren't serious, are you? Yup, you are: https://www.andrews.a...sp?id=123298707 Not much different than this: https://www.saceliteguard.com/images/Light%20blue%20shirt%20with%20stars%20on%20scarf.jpg But not as cool as this: https://www.saceliteguard.com/images/Short%20sleeved%20blue%20shirt.jpg

I have a Draco and actually just had it out to the range last weekend. While obviously it is not as accurate as a rifle, for pistol ranges (5-15m) it is about on par in terms of accuracy; and considering we're talking a .30 caliber round (and 30 of them to boot!), there's sure a heckuva lot more firepower on target! What they are really useful for are how concealable the are. I can fit my Draco into most of the tactical backpacks I have. Now, why I would need it for is a matter of debate; but I have always subscribed to the philosophy of 'better to have and not need, then need and not have!' Now, one of these or a Draco converted into a SBR using an underfolder/sidefolding stock is really the best of all worlds. It can still be used as a pistol and a rifle, but at this point they lose their 'pistol' status in the eyes of the law and never can be returned as such. Cheers! M2