Leaderboard

I would suggest putting this through the OODA Loop and cascading effects, as well as sending an ALCON letter starting with the BLUF. After those wickets the answer will be obvious, V/R, Congressman

Meh, fuck 'em. If he's pissed enough, maybe they'll kick you out and you'll be happier at the airlines 5 years sooner. An OG getting butt hurt about something like this, and the fact you're fearful of reprisal, is messed up. Totally believable, but just plain wrong. SMH. We need better O-6s and above.

We had a Commander's Call today and the 71 OG spoke briefly on the T-38 assignments topic. He said the AF had to cut 40 F-16 slots. It wasn't specifically clarified but I presume that was for FY18 classes. He said it was due to the F-16 training units at Holloman not coming online as fast as the AF expected. With the reduced F-16 drops future T-38 classes could expect to see more drops from AFSOC and the ISR communities. U-28s, EC-130s, RC-135s, MC-130s, and CV-22s were specifically mentioned.

Hopefully nobody in that class learns the brutal lesson of "I wish I would've tried a little harder" during the great fighter giveaway of 2017...

ACC "IS" terrible about helping the CSAR guys and for some reason (Stockholm Syndrome), the senior CSAR guys remain loyal to their ACC puppet masters. On MULTIPLE occasions ACC used CSAR TOA to pay for other things, how do you think the CAR folks ended up with the oldest C-130s in the Air Force? Another HUGE issue that is always pushed under the rug is the amount of CSAR capability that is in the reserve and guard (50+%). I am not saying the guard and reserve doesn't pull their weight because in this community they most certainly do, but the active component ends up eating a lot of deployed alert because of activation limitations. When you have a low density high demand capability, putting 50% in the guard or reserve causes some second and third order effects. I would disagree with your assessment that AFSOC does not care about "ACC" assets, the minute they become AFSOC assets they will most certainly care as long as the TOA is moved over with them. The HC-130J (long overdue), has about 90% commonality with the MC-130J, but the last 10% is all the special sauce that is equally applicable to SOF or CSAR missions, ACC could care less if you get those capabilities which is a terrible shame. The politics of this potential move are complex and it is not being driven solely by the services or altruism on the part of AFSOC. The genesis was an effort by OSD to save money, SOF is almost always in the same places (and more), as the conventional folks and they have executed many of the recent CSAR events, why not find some synergy. The main sticking point form the CSAR rotor types is the deal would almost certainly drive a reduction in the CRH buy, which I personally think is a good thing. Why in the hell are we buying a 140kt helicopter to conduct long-range CSAR in today's world...seriously? If I were king for a day I would move CSAR to AFSOC (that comes with some doctrinal changes and direction to SOCOM). I would put some of the CSAR forces back in the active component (75%-25%). All 29 HC-130Js (if they get 29, reading the latest NDAA USAF is trying to cut the buy to 26...yeah ACC loves you guys), would be modified to MC-130J configuration (MCTF, SMP, RFCM). CRH buy would be curtailed to 100ish and 30 CV-22s would be added to AFSOC with at least two CSAR units becoming CV-22 equipped.

When big Air Force wants more pilots, the bar generally goes down

Is anyone else a little concerned about the vague language describing the restrictions in HR 3999? The way it's written seems that it could be construed to prohibit any aftermarket part that improves the functionality, if it improves rate of fire, of any semiauto rifle. This isn't just bump stocks and gat cranks. Lots of things can improve your rate of fire.

This comes up every couple years at the HAF level. New COMACC means time to talk about it again. Shit wasn't really that different the last time we were in AFSOC, I have no reason to suspect it would be different if they flicked us back again. The AO/Bro level at AFSOC staff absolutely thinks the mission and dudes would be better supported by Hurbie. I have no idea what the GOs think, but this is absolutely about curtailing the HH-60W buy, getting more CV-22s, and absorbing the HC-130Js and GA billets. At the core of it, ACC Rescue assets exist to provide the CFACC a capability to meet his PR requirements. I'm not sure how that is an AFSOC mission. I personally don't give a shit. Just support the mission appropriately or tell the pink bodies in the pointy nosed jets what risk is being accepted on their behalf.

Part of my concern is the rumor floating around the punch bowl is that the HH-60W purchase is going to be reduced so they can buy an additional 12-18 CVs. My concern is that AFSOC doesn’t actually want the mission and you “customers” won’t be as much of a priority as a secondary mission set. This move also causes problems for the guard/reserve side of the house from what I understand. The more this discussion continues, the more I wonder if this discussion is occurring because ACC doesn’t want the mission either.

1

She also mandated that we stop doing a bunch of additional duties, yet we're still tracking every computer and signing people up to vote in the units...

You guys didn't carry a tube of beer for just such an ocassion?

That's the same BS argument used when gay marriage was being debated "People will marry their dogs, or their toasters". When someone wants to discuss reasonable, common sense, gun control measures, it's disingenuous to reframe it as a discussion about abolishing firearms.