Leaderboard

And the guy that stopped a terrorist attack only got promoted to SSgt! Seems fair.

Currently reading "Colonel Roosevelt" by Edmund Morris. Colonel was Theodore Roosevelt's preferred title after he left the White House and the book is about that part of his life. This excerpt is from a speech in Paris in 1910 you have probably heard but I think it is worth repeating. It is not the critic who counts; not the man who points out how the strong man stumbles, or where the doer of deeds could have done them better. The credit belongs to the man who is actually in the arena, whose face is marred by dust and sweat and blood; who strives valiantly; who errs, who comes short again and again, because there is no effort without error and shortcoming; but who does actually strive to do the deeds; who knows great enthusiasms, the great devotions; who spends himself in a worthy cause; who at the best knows in the end the triumph of high achievement, and who at the worst, if he fails, at least fails while daring greatly, so that his place shall never be with those cold and timid souls who neither know victory nor defeat. - Theodore Roosevelt.

Sousaphone players come in as SMSgts.

Three years on and you are still very much missed, Rich. We raise a glass in your honor, brother!

Not a bad song, performance or message. Though the keyboard guy reminds me of the Dana Carvey skit when he made fun of musicans who always had the "I have to take a crap look on their face". Message kind of becomes hollow when you dig a little deeper and realize she entered the AF 4 months ago, is 19 years old and is already a TSgt. Once again, the AF shows that the appearance of doing the mission is more important than actually doing the mission.

The first step in reaching parity is replacing that radome with a cockpit.

You gotta make friends with the C-17 bros. The DFACs didn't have Rip-its, but I never lacked for them during my stay.

Absolutely. My point isn't that flying is devoid of any leadership, but that the idea that what makes one a great leader at the tactical level necessarily translates to being great at the organizational level, is flawed. Look at Welsh. Seemingly a great leader at the wing-and-below level (according to others, I was not around in those days), but not making a huge dent at the top. Sure, I'd love to have AF leaders from the squadron up who are shit-hot in the jet and organizational wizards. I'd choose that guy ten out of ten. But wherever they are, we can't seem to find them. And the military system of job-jumping and hole-filling doesn't lend itself to identifying and positioning those officers who have the skills and experience to manage massive organizations. There's a reason airlines aren't run by pilots and sports teams aren't run by the best athletes. Of course, we like to argue that the military is too different to the civilian world to compare, but the pilots that lead the AF have to deal with cyber, maintenance, acquisitions, space, finance, etc. All areas which they are not tactical experts. I think a squadron commander of a flying squadron should be a flying expert, because the squadron is narrowly focused on that task, and it matters to the majority of the people under him/her. I'd rather have my Group/Wing and above leadership allow me to focus on being a flying expert while they deal with the actual purpose of their position.

quick update on Rucker drops, since no one there has been posting them recently - this is from a convo I had last week with a Rucker IP. Drops favor 60s over Hueys (last class had something like 5 60s and 3 Hueys) these days. Expect 5 ish FAIP drops in a year (which typically go to those who ask for them), and CV-22s will be starting to drop again at Rucker (unknown amount, but my guess would be near the same number of FAIP drops, give or take, from historical averages when they were dropping before).

What a surprise, convenience on the part of AFPC trumps actual unit, mission, and personnel welfare.

Suposidly the CSAF signed a memo guaranteeing us a manned aircraft after this assignment. We were suppose to have said memo in hand with all the details in it "later this week". It's been 2 months. No one has any idea about the details of this assignment, 3 years? 4 years etc. MPF has no idea (more than usual) how our training and orders should be written, TDY, PCS TDY en route, PCS then TDY, I leave for the B course in a few weeks. I'll happily take my assignment and move on, UPT was a awesome expierence, and knowing the outcome I would do it all over. I however will not believe they will sending us back to manned aircraft until I'm strapped in an actual cockpit.

Well friends, I rolled out the new design today. It still needs a little bit of work, but I think it is leaps and bounds above the old site. I will start to incorporate more and more of these great pics as time goes on. Thanks for your help!

The crew dogs turned away from the chow hall for pockets on their shorts are the leaders of today. While it may have been a painful/rediculous experience for some it may also have served a purpose. Everyone has a part to play, even if it is showing others what not to do. So I say thanks Deid leadership of last decade for showing us how not to lead.

CSAF Gen Robinson's 2017 Sight Picture: "5 Groups. Group B/E XYZ, Group B/E XYZ... Viper 11, Border South 2, Work North Immediately!"

I don't think USAFA needs to motivate cadets to choose a pilot AFSC. As a matter of fact there are more that choose rated than get slots. I also think IFT is still doing most of what it was designed for. Those that go there and discover: A. they don't actually enjoy flying B. don't have the aptitude for it C. Can't handle the training will leave (or be forced to leave) before UPT. I don't believe that the little extra "hand holding" during IFT is going to have an overall detrimental effect on the UPT grad rates.

If I was a CSO stud in your class, and we were competing against each other for the one job we both wanted, I'd be ecstatic that you were trying to knock out your masters in training.

B-1: Expect 6-9 months. Again, classes, and sims with contract guys (all retired B-1 guys), followed by hitting the flightline. You don't do too much in they way of sims after getting on the flightline. Overall, the academic phase is fairly easy, short days with time for self-study and such. I encourage you to use the CPT ("cockpit familiarization trainer", or stripped down sim) early and often to figure out where the buttons are and what they do. After you go to your gaining squadron, MQT is advertised as 6 rides, each with its own focus (defensive tactics, guided weapons, stand-off weapons, flex targeting, unguided weapons, and dissimiliar air combat training). The pace for an MQT student will be reasonably laid back as long as you keep the snack bar stocked and the taps filled with beer. MQT culminates in a verification, where you get a day one scenario, spend a week planning for it (both the B-1 mission and the package assets), and execute in the sim. The grand finale is debriefing the scenario to the squadron, including WG/CC, OG/CC, SQ/CC, and the rest of your bros. Study hard, ask questions when you have them. Its rare to have an instructor tell you "go look it up" instead of helping with a question. Even when someone told me to look it up, they came with me to show me which TO it was in, and to translate the engineer-speak so much of our TO seems to be written in.

That's what really sucks about having a fixed # of droids drop regardless of class size Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk