Jump to content

Leaderboard

Popular Content

Showing content with the highest reputation on 01/01/2015 in all areas

  1. I think all those dudes willing to speak out about this got fired.
    2 points
  2. The dynamics will change and I'm in it for the long haul. Might be 2,3,5+ years but I'm betting oil goes up eventually and if it goes lower, I'll buy more.
    1 point
  3. How long has Raptor been IOC? Still doesn't have JHMCS despite it being our premiere air dominance platform. My point is this needling and sharpshooting of any detail in the program viewed as a "serious flaw" is either ignorant of the rest of the aircraft in the inventories problem or just dredging up crap to dredge up crap. It's like screaming "new F-35 can't fly inverted" because they were still on the ground taxi phase of testing. It's not true but it makes a good headline. Now if there was something like Guns removed and plugged due to catastrophic failures in testing... Or the redesign hat was needed on the tail hook of the C model after landing tests that would be a worthy article. But that's the problem, so many people and sources are jumping on anything they think they can spin as negatives of the program that any real big deal issues get lost in the noise. I fly the E model Apache... It's currently 5 years behind the D model as far as software and avionics but nobody is screaming it's an inferior platform. Because that gets fixed in late 16 with lot 4. Till then we wait.
    1 point
  4. Requirements creep has already strangled this program. Adding yet another one is not what the program needs.
    1 point
  5. The 90-day chunk manday reduction pertains to a specific subset of manday orders and only draws down the payment of the Reserve annuity, not a civil service one I believe. 57 is a magic number only in that it is the civilian MRA for those hired after whatever the year is (I don't have it in front of me). Have you tried working an ART to 60? LOL I say that again, in half jest at it is clear I've already made my feelings towards the proposition of flying military rickety jets until age 57-60 known. You're unlikely to reduce a reserve retirement payout date 10 years brother; the policy change was made effective circa 2008 if I recall when the memo hit my old squadron way back when. Still, good thought process. I don't know the answer to the medical portion. I'd have to dig into that one.
    1 point
  6. Kenny, Your personal case study is vastly different than the scenario I was alluding to, that is, the proposition of sticking out an ART job until 57 in lieu of an active duty retirement or an airline job. With 16 years of Active Duty service, you are in a much different position and thus the opportunity cost of qualifying all that credit service time towards a FERS annuity with a mere 5 years is not terrible at all. Considering that same AD time will qualify you for a very decent Reserve retirement, your only opportunity cost is the lost seniority of 5 years and the impact that would have in your lifestyle at home as an airline pilot. That's more of a personal contention QOL-wise and only you can figure out what's best for you and your family. Another option you might want to entertain, is the proposition of tooth-n-nail your way into an active duty annuity via troughing. I've seen it done by several Reservists. Hard to do, but you can't help but slow-clap for the guy when he hits sanctuary as a trougher. The Reserves will fight you every step of the way to ensure you don't get there, but it's not impossible. Many furloughed 9/11 era pilots have done it; trough their asses off, keeping the now almost decade old seniority number at legacy while making every manday USERRA exempt (i.e. doesn't count against the 5 year cumulative limit), get to the brass ring, get paid right meow and bam! Recalled to the mainline job with 10 years seniority. Again, like I said before, fvking #winning. THAT option would be more lucrative than just vesting your AD years with the requisite 5 years of civil service (via ART or otherwise). Either way, you're in a good place, you'll get paid for those AD years one way or another. Good luck to you in whatever lifestyle choice you end up making. I'm very much a QOL over money guy too, so I completely relate to why a 16 year guy would pull chocks even though economically it would be much more lucrative to stay the course. Life's too short to be miserable for the latter 2/3rds of a military so-called career. Happy New Year to you and your loved ones and everybody stay safe out there on the friendly and unfriendly skies alike! :cheers:
    1 point
  7. Thought: I wonder if it would be possible to mount the GAU-22 gun pod on the A model F-35. It would increase weight/drag/RCS and such but it would definitely make for a more effective ground attack configuration. Double the ammo and rate of fire, and two separate guns for maintenance redundancy in case one fails in the middle of a TIC. Any commander who has the balls to sign off on that one would have my vote to be the next 5-Star General of the Air Force! Oh well I'm just dreaming. Better just plan on dropping JDAMs from 35,000 feet with altitude hold on...
    1 point
  8. Second thought: Why just load one GAU-22 when you can load 20?! Then that commander could be the next 6-star General of the Air Force and then F-35s could fly at 70,000 feet and drop 2 JDAMs with altitude AND attitude hold on...troll
    -2 points
×
×
  • Create New...