Leaderboard

AFSOC is good at what it does operating in a low threat environment, but they’d be useless for CSAR in a near-peer war. ACs, MCs, Ospreys, U-28s, etc will all be a burning wreckage trying to get anywhere near an environment where fighters are being lost once the SAMs and AAMs start flying. AFSOC would ruin the RQS. A jack of all trades and master of none isn’t what you want trying to do a specialized mission. The reason our CSAR is so competent is because they don’t try and train to a plethora of mission sets, nor should they. The AF way of doing PR is much better than other branches, and the fact that training for the worst day of some dude’s life is their sole purpose is a major reason. Find one of the Navy exchanges and talk to them about the difference between the two. Also, look at some of the dumb shit the army has accomplished trying to recover people in Afghanistan. Everything from crashing their helicopters to unknowingly leaving individuals behind. AF CSAR hasn’t lost relevancy to people doing the job. The morons allocating funds who don’t see value in it because no one is currently dying or punching out is the issue.

I was in one of the last UPT classes with the white helmets 86-87.. Part of UPT tradition was we designed a class patch, and also a class Helmet design. Nobody flew with a plain white helmet.

ORM check box. Makes their plan look better on paper, they're still going to do what they were planning to do originally.

Saw this trailer today

The robot recovery vehicle is misguided, putting up throw away air vehicles in the hope that one makes it to the survivor ignores half of the exposure time (egress). This is engi-nerds building toys. There are folks working to build the support for what is really needed for near-peer CSAR, but as tac airlifter said money is always a finite resource.

I don’t see a -60 being any more survivable than the other airframes you listed is all I’m saying.

I’m guessing there was a theme, but what a shitty choice of fonts. If one of the studs formatted these slides, he/she needs to just skip the FTU and go direct to a junior exec job in the ops squadron. He needs to learn what the AF truly values in its pilots.

Really? There isn’t? Because anybody that can look at a map and the power point slide depicting coverage circles of the Iraq/ISIS AO in 16-17 could see CSAR was about as in its ass as it could be and nobody seemed to have any give a crap in fixing that. You had the Italians pulling down an entire portion of the region and a whole other chunk taken care of by the Marines. I can only imagine how great the coverage is gonna be once double digit SAMs and Red Air are present in the problem. Probably a good idea to review the spins because I’ve seen plenty of them where a 60G or guys jumping out of a 130 weren’t going to be the plan of action. Fact of the matter is it’s easier and arguably safer when your enemy isn’t ISIS crazies to rescue you post capture or do what we did in previous conflicts get you after it’s over. We have people that do that for a living too, and fortunately we’ve invested a ton of money in them even if we haven’t in CSAR.

Not true, they were ready and willing to take it all (sts). Bottom line, the GA made a better decision than the -60 drivers on this one.

I hear versions of this often about a lot of AF mission sets. Money is a finite resource and priorities shift as situations change. That’s just life, and all communities must adapt to changing realities or be left behind.

Does anyone who's taken it know the structure of the boldface test? Is it like a blank version of the paper they provided us and you have to write every single item, bold or not, or are the terms listed and you just need to put the boldface part?

F-35 aggressors help train to problems of TODAY, not just 10 years from now. The training gap is even more significant for 5th gen and this move greatly closes that gap.

Most of the higher levels of AF leadership come from the CAF. It is my oppinion that building partner relationships is one of the weaker competencies of the CAF community. I say that having worked on two combined staffs as a CAF background myself. CAF leaders simply dont get the international exposure early in their career and by the time they hit the operational levels they are programmed to believe the USAF can go it alone. I can't count the number of times I've done a combined RED FLAG and listened to bemoaning that our PN Air Forces were going to hold us back, limit our TTPs, or otherwise detract from the exercise. There is no excitement to build those relationships. Simply put, I'm not sure this priority will change in the near future. (Disclaimer: I'm not saying this is everyone in the CAF, there are exceptions. This is just my perception of a generalization as a whole.)

2 cents from a non fighter, former drone, current AFSOC guy, so take it for what it’s worth. The drone technology just isn’t there yet. For what we would invest we (aviators as a whole) would get much better and relevant training allocating that money towards more flight hours, glass cockpits, simulators, red air, exercises, new aircraft, aircraft upgrades, etc. Our current fleet of drones can’t even defend itself, and have a hard enough time staying at the right spot/altitude in the stack. I think 5th Gen drone advisories are something our grandchildren might face/fly, but in today’s world and current budget we have higher priorities.

I was a snacko and I became a DG WIC grad. What's your point? That snacko is below some people? But only people coming from other AFSCs? Those are the people who need the humility lesson that comes with being a snacko. I'm a patch and deployed as an exec. Was it demeaning to make the general's coffee every morning? Sent from my iPhone using Baseops Network Forums

Well below slightly below average.

Damn dude I’m not the one who gave you the “P” chill out compare records all you want... but you come off as a huge tool every time you stroke your own record-cock on here