Leaderboard

Didn't take long for this thread to come off the rails...

I'll bite, even though I might have a few contrary opinions. The Air Force didn't drive me out with their micro or macro personnel decisions, management actions or culture changes. I chose to get out because I'm ready re-assert control of where I live and where I spend each night, plain and simple. Flying has been fun at times and monotonous at others, but in the end, the benefits of a flying career don't outweigh the costs for me personally. As far as the Air Force queep, I fully expect to find a new but different set of queep at whatever company eventually hires me. I don't believe the grass is really greener on any particular lawn, just different shades of green. The Air Force at least makes a rough attempt to establish a meritocracy, and gets it right a lot. (Flame on) There's a plethora of individual examples of the system not working, but in my decade in the Air Force, I never saw a suggestion for a better ranking system that truly made sense across the board. Objectively and subjectively grading people simultaneously is damn near impossible, but differentiation has to occur somehow. Unlike the civilian world, I wasn't looked down upon because I didn't go to an Ivy League college out of high school. I also never had to put up with the douche-bag son of the company president who's untouchable or the insufferable hot chick who's sleeping her way up the ladder. There's bullshit everywhere. The trick is to mentally rise above the mess and still perform. I finally saw the light on my path about a year ago when I was thinking about the book The Five Love Languages. Since BODN is a macho-centric forum, I'll spare everyone the intricate details, but if you really want to learn more about how you personally relate to others, read the book. My top three methods of connection required me to be in the presence of the other people who meant something to me. So I finally realized I would be an idiot to pursue a civilian aviation career or continue in the military, as I'm guaranteed to be absent from "home" and the people I care for at least half of my life in either pursuit. Why would I knowingly accept a situation where I know I personally don't thrive? So in the end I gave up my promotion and school slot and I'm punching. I'm studying for the GMAT now and I'll go to the highest tier business school that will admit me and then I'm moving back to my home state. I'll still be running just as hard as I was in uniform, just in different directions and I'll have the backing of a community that remains stable. I'll finally mentally stretch out and form real roots. Can't wait... In closing, I actually don't understand all of the "congratulations" people are passing around. I'm glad those who got VSP got what they wanted, but we haven't "accomplished" anything more than those who didn't get VSP. We got lucky. Lucky that big blue needs to downsize now and lucky that our names were picked from the hat. As much as I'm excited to control my own destiny again, I also can't shake the feeling that I'm quitting and leaving my country's service before my agreed-upon obligation is fulfilled. I will accomplish something someday (hopefully soon) that warrants a "congratulations" but I don't feel like accepting the VSP falls into that category. (again, flame on)

I don't know you and I don't know this colonel, but something strikes me as rather chickensh!t to call someone out by name in an anonymous forum and not give a reason why.

I haven't either. But when did the bro network become a bad thing? What's wrong with building relationships based on a common interest or background? Some call it networking. I live on a small base, but I know every academy grad from O-1 to O-6. A bunch of my friends are also pilots. And I have drinking buddies. And cigar aficionados.

The ISPs are the roads, the bridges, UPS, FedEx, Swift, JB Hunt, Old Dominion, every truck, every car, and for that matter, every vehicle. Not only do they get to decide how fast you get to your destination, but they also get to decide what route you're taking to get there. The fast/slow lanes would be like allowing your car to go to Walmart and Target at 70 mph, but God help anyone trying to build a new business. You would only be able to drive to the new store at 15 mph because the new store doesn't have enough capital to pay the fee. Killing net neutrality will make starting a new online business extremely difficult and stifles competition because it favors the behemoth corporations that already have your business. Edit: It also looks like the sarcasm was missed in my earlier post.

Your liberal-side is once again showing, Vertigo--unless you think that O'Keefe's exposure of ACORN and Maryland voting officials allowing O'Keefe to vote for Eric Holder (because he said he was Holder and wasn't required to produce an ID) is all taken out of context? I applaud what he and his team does with these videos...hell, hidden audio exposed Sterling and people don't seem to have a problem with that situation.

I'll give it a go. Hopefully this post is pretty succinct. There's a lot of stuff I don't like/agree with about our USAF, but in reality I'm mainly getting out for two reasons: 1) I'm not the type of person that likes to stagnate in life, but if there was one word that I could use to describe my USAF "career", it would in fact be "stagnation". I can't honestly look at myself in the mirror and say that I'm okay with my sub-mediocre career and let the next 13 years of my life be wasted just to make it to retirement. 2) I want control of my life again. My biggest takeaway from my time in the military is that our time on this planet is in fact limited and it is precious, so don't waste it. As much as I actually am running for the exit, I am proud to have been a part of the operational arm of this organization and thankful that I was able to make direct contributions to some of the biggest events in our time... but I am definitely looking forward to the next chapter of my life.

Really? Conversation heard everywhere: "Where did you commission? The Academy. What squad were you in?" Instant bro club in a lot of places. And hot chick sleeping up the ladder? Seen it more than once. Just a lengthier process...and the liberal use of the word hot.

Black or red...

No, but if you have any expectation to be taken seriously in your complaints to any governmental official you need to have your facts squared away.

Well, he'd be really pissed off if his troops were dying from enemy-generated CAS/interdiction.

Anything that can loiter above 20K can deliver effective (granted, not Hawg awesome level) CAS. I want to know how the A-10s that weren't in theater at Day 0 are going to get to staging bases with limited tanker assets. Also, what bases are they going to be based at? The ones near the front will likely be unusable, and the ones far away severely limit time on station. How are they going to survive in an environment where US air dominance is not a given. Look, the Air Force at large is trying to figure out how to establish and maintain air superiority against a near competitor who will likely not give us six months of planning time the way Saddam did. US air dominance has been a planning assumption for 50+ years... I'm worried that assumption may not be valid any longer. Given both the budget and the threat, I don't see continued investment in a platform that requires air superiority as a good idea. We need platforms that can kick down the door, and I view going from awesome to just effective CAS as the price we have to pay due to budget limitations.

Multi-role my ass. Fuck the A-10, fuck the B-1.

While I enjoy these debates purely as an intellectual exercise, when witnessing them, I can't help but think the other side has won. Instead of the public being made aware of the progressive gutting/wearing out of our armed forces that's been taking place since the early nineties, all they witness is a pissing contest about exactly what sort of outdated and hollow force we'll have left (or they'll have left in their district). I know any of us would gladly take extraordinary risks and be willing to sacrifice our own safety without hesitation, it's what I signed up for anyway. That being said... I find it tremendously offensive when my life is unnecessarily put at greater risk due to inadequate resources like worn-out/outdated/inferior aircraft, all while much of the population is living large off entitlements and our defense spending rapidly races to below 3% of GDP. Soldiers in larger past conflicts, while often asked to do unbelievable things with completely inadequate resources we could hardly comprehend, at least knew the general public was sacrificing to support them as much as they possibly could. I need to start telling people, if you really want to "thank me" for my service, call your Rep/Senator and get us the resources we need to protect this country and your family against all eventualities.

Your CSAR argument is kinda moot though. CSAR is far more limited by he fact you are still using old worn out G model Hawks than what's running the RESCOURT package. The problem is the Air Force is trying to divest a heavily guard integrated Airplane. Same problem is happening in the Army with Apache. Nobody cares we are retiring the Kiowa what matters is we are taking away guard jobs moving Apache and there for voters are mad. I think that's why you didn't see anywhere near the screaming on the hill when the Navy retired Intruder or Tomcat or the AF retired the F-111. There wasn't a large angry population of Guard guys and all the other jobs attached that vote for their respective districts.

A C-17 FTU IP retired the other day. This was a pretty good list of things he learned in the USAF, which he showed at his retirement.

The Sandy conversation is the elephant in the room: I don't see how a CSAR package is survivable in a modern threat environment. CSAR-X will never happen, and I see nonconventional assisted recovery becoming the primary means of personnel recovery in a high-threat environment. What good is your RESCORT if the Jolly can't make it? On the other side, low intensity CAS is becoming a crowded market. These days, if it flies, it can probably have a multi-mode munition attached to it or built in to it. Most of these options are cheaper and can be employed faster than getting Hawg Flight on scene. This is the A-10's problem: it's increasingly unsurvivable on the high end of the air combat spectrum and there are a plethora of options at the low end. The Hawg is getting niche.

Just delete the "%C2%A0" at the end of his link. TLDR version of the story- James O'Keefe gives us another edited video to show things out of context and Americans being greedy to finance a film.

I'm waiting for the FY15 hireback program to come out when the realize they are in dire need of certain AFSCs that they eliminated with VSP/TERA. C-17 IPs supposedly are one such field.