Leaderboard

Your COVID vaccine doom porn reads exactly like the clowns that are all in on the "COVID is the worst tragedy to ever strike this earth" doom porn. COVID vax doomers and COVID doomers remind me of the old Communism/Fascism adage; both are so far to opposite sides they actually find themselves back to back in the same spot. I think you should maybe lay off the Epoch Times for a bit. The data I saw showed under 1,000 people had died after getting at least the first shot. However it's already come out that the data includes people who died in car accidents or other causes of death. It's not even remotely surprising either that some have died after getting a vaccine when you consider the massive effort to get the elderly vaccinated. It's not hard to imagine an 88 year old getting the vaccine and then dying 2 weeks later because guess what!? They're old! I've also noticed a hilarious trend of the Vax Doomers. They are often the first to jump and point out that the COVID death numbers make it hard to determine whether someone actually died of COVID or just with COVID, including pointing to examples of car accident deaths or overdoses being labeled as COVID if the person tested positive (which btw, I agree with the notion that our death numbers are likely flawed). But as soon as some data comes out showing deaths after vaccine, the data is all of a sudden gospel truth and proof that people are dropping dead from the jabs and only the jabs. Forgive me while I don't jump on your doom train, just like I didn't jump on the COVID fear porn train. Its amazing if you step back and take an objective look at things for more than a few minutes how often you find yourself in a nice middle ground.

ID to vote = RACIST! Vaccine passport ID = BRILLIANT!

Who said it is the most infectious diseases ever? For the record, the nine most infectious diseases are: Smallpox - Int he 20th century alone it killed 300 million humans. We have a vaccine. Influenza - We have a vaccine and update it every year to cover a spectrum of mutations. Rabies - We have a vaccine. Tuberculosis - We have a vaccine. Leprosy - We have a vaccine. Typhoid Fever - We have a vaccine. Bubonic Plague - We have a vaccine. Malaria - We have a vaccine. HIV/AIDS - We have a treatment, a vaccine is still in the works because this is a very odd virus. We have been working with Corona viruses for many many years. This is a simple mutation of a protein spike which was very fortunate for us. Also, science has advanced and thanks to emergency authorization this was one of the first uses of the mRNA approach.

To fully persuade me of your perspective, please share your opinion on abortion and euthanasia. Philosophical consistency is highly convincing.

PPL is just a proxy for some skills relevant to military flying. Maybe this argument is different based on component (AD vs Guard or reserve). AD probably can accept more risk that a student washes out, while a guard/reserve unit can't (a washout potentially means a position they can't fill for a year or two). So I can see why using a PPL on hiring applications could be important for the guard/reserve hiring boards. Is there a way to identify those skills/attributes without having applicants spend a huge chunk of change? Is there another way to measure drive, dedication, and commitment than obtaining a PPL? PPL doesn't reduce UPT training (aside from IFT), so is it just practice bleeding? Should a person who paid their way through college by working get more consideration than someone on scholarship (or going to/graduated from the academy)? Put another way, there are many AF pilots who have never touched a civilian airplane, and have done well in their military aviation careers. So what attributes/skills did they have that led to their selection and success, and what are the best ways to identify those skills and attributes?

Curious as to which religions take issue with vaccines? I know that Jehovah’s Witnesses and Seventh Day Adventist have well known restrictions. Or are we talking “personal” religion?

If anyone is interested in how poor third world countries completely mitigated Covid without vaccines, shutdowns, or quarantines while the US government and medical community ignored science, this is a pretty awesome fact based scientific video from Dr Ryan Cole. Hint: Vitamin D / Ivermectin https://youtu.be/wPbxOeYAC7s For those of you that rave about the vaccine safety, you apparently aren’t concerned about facial paralysis, young healthy people dropping dead within days, miscarriages, long term headaches, etc...I’d encourage you to check the reported deaths and negative side effects in VAERS (in the tens of thousands). There isn’t even a year of data on the safety or effectiveness in a large population (that’s why you are literally part of a medical experiment). I know, the next argument will be percentages despite the fact that covid has a .4% ish fatality rate for all of us under 60. I’d also encourage you to look at how COVID has hit the Air Force: https://www.af.mil/News/Article-Display/Article/2184415/air-force-update-for-covid-19/ 2 hospitalizations with 0 deaths in the AD USAF force.

Now that Mazepin has made a fool of himself 2 days in a row, can we get this punk out of there? Too bad Comrade Gene Hass needs the money he's gstting from his Mazepin's dad. Sent from my SM-N975U using Baseops Network mobile app

I’m not implying anything, just seeking to understand your views. I note that instead of answering, you assumed an implication to my question and then called it wrong. Ok. Since your original argument was based on moral superiority (“Being vaccinated shows I give half a fuck about others”) I thought you’d have consistency of thought or application. I don’t require convincing on the efficacy of vaccines writ large, nor do I need a reminder that in the military I’m going to follow orders. I’m pro vaccine and have a three page shot record. I’m merely curious at all the (inconsistent) moral posturing and discouragement of convincing good-faith debate... all of which is antithetical to a healthy society. Maybe I’m having a hard time forgetting the “experts” were unanimous in concluding we needed a war in Iraq to stop their WMD program. Look man, I’m not trying to be a dick but one thing I’ve learned is that if an idea is good, it will withstand intellectual scrutiny. And that lesson has made me generally distrustful of people who want to skip all debate and go straight to execution.

Usually they aren't the only member of the faith. We call that mental illness. Or sometimes, in small numbers, a cult.

$100/hr for a wet Cessna 152 (lower end) $40/hr for the instructor, 20 hr min $100 for class 3 medical $160 for written $200-400 for the examiner A 2Lt takes home about $3560 take per month in basic pay (assuming no state income taxes). At the bare minimum (40 hours, 20 dual, 1hr checkride), that'll run $5360. About 1.5 months pay assuming no expenses besides rent (bah) or food (bas). At a more typical pace (65 hours and 35 hours dual), it's about 3.5 months pay. So doable, if you have a good job and no other debt, and nothing else going on in your life. Add one more months pay to get to 100 hours. If nothing else, LT pay only roughly doubled since you did your PPL, while hourly costs for an aircraft rental quadrupled. If you're working a min wage job (like a high school or college student summer job), assuming no other bills, 1200 hours of work (30 weeks full time work) to pay off the typical PPL in a C152. Add another 12.5 weeks (42.5 weeks total) of full time work to get to 100 hours. And again, this is without any other essential expenses like food, housing, and transportation. If you figure disposable income is 50% of take-home (which I'd say it's pretty generous), it's 2 years of work to fund that flight training, just to have an improved *chance* at getting picked up. Add about 25% if you're flying in something bigger like a C172, either for availability or weight (as in, if you weigh more than 170#, C152 probably isn't going to work out for you). All the PPL does is show that you have some aptitude for flying, and had the means to do flying in the civilian world. The AF gets the same info through IFT/IFS. Alternatively, you can do well on AFOQT and the TBAS, and your PCSM score will likely be high enough to be competitive without a significant amount of flight hours.

Isn’t someone’s faith/religion, by definition, “personal”?

I wouldn’t call myself a vax-doomer. I personally am very convinced the mRNA will be harmful long term (I hope it isn’t), but I couldn’t care less what the herd does to pursue immunity. More of a I’d like to finish my military career and be left alone by the “anti-vax-doomer SS” pushing to force me to violate my faith/integrity and advocating to keep people like me from working, traveling, etc. because they are so scared (happening in Israel of all places right now). Let me take vitamin D and Ivermectin knowing I’m 100% safe and Covid free, and I’m happy.

The 75-85% figure is right out of Fauci's ass. Most other prominent virologists have been saying 50% since the start. 50% is right in line with most other viruses and with most known traits of other Coronavirus variants.

I know some parents buy their kid a car, but Jeeezuz...

Tell me about it. I've driven it a few times now and had a hiccup on Saturday. Drove out to the beach and on the way back noticed a little smoke which I expected as I break in the motor. All of a sudden white smoke everywhere..my heart sank thinking I threw a rod. I immediately pulled over and shut the engine off. Popped the hood expecting to see disaster, turns out it was the radiator hose going into the engine intake. I'm using a racing coolant and it must have been the additive causing the excessive white smoke (it wasn't steam). I added coolant, tightened the hose (like I should have the first time), and drove it home no issues (except for changing my shorts when I got home).

when in doubt i default to liberty and the constitution.

That makes sense. However that’s in line with Tucker’s opinion (although his presentation was caustic). He criticized GOs by name who champion efforts to prioritize diversity at the expense of lethality. So I was confused why you were critical of Tucker while also agreeing with the meat of his point. It’s challenging to isolate ideas for discussion from the personalities & styles which present those ideas.

The majority of people and groups are trying to implement changes for the sake of being able to say they have done 'something'. Another large group of people are just parroting the first group because it's easier than making their own decisions. The dumb leading the lazy.

Yes. That's exactly right. I mean, I just finished Operation Varsity Blues on Netflix, so maybe that's coloring my opinion a little. But this is exactly how D1 college scholarships work almost all of the time. I see this in my own small town where our swim club has a hard time competing with nearby large city clubs because we don't have access to the facilities and professional coaches that they have.

There's always setbacks. Can't remember rebuilding an engine and not having one Did a full rebuild of everything forward of the firewall. Moment of truth, running pretty well...and quit. No restart, fuck! 3 hours later - did I put the fuel pump push rod in? The little things will get you!

I have no issues at all with considering prior experience. My point on this thing is that people who are able to afford PPL are usually from a more advantaged background financially. Holistically, if that means people are excluded from UPT selection because of the hand they were dealt, that’s too bad but national defense is more important than equal opportunities prior to selection. However, if there was something out there beyond a gut feeling that people of various backgrounds (gender, race, religion, etc) would produce better pilot and officer candidates, then I would say ensure that the accessions account for them. If it’s purely in the name of diversity for the politics du jour, GTFO. This view doesn’t account for onesie twosie cases of talents from non-typical backgrounds, but that’s tough to do at an institutional level.

What's a PPL run these days? $15K? Plus the free time to fly and study? In addition to participating in organized athletics (which also involves time and cost). That's a huge hurdle to overcome to increase your chances, especially if you're trying to remain competitive in other selection factors (grades, athletics, community service). That being said, the AF is trying to help bring more people who may not be able to afford a PPL into the selection pool (including minorities/women) with scholarships for PPLs: https://www.airuniversity.af.edu/Holm-Center/AFJROTC/Flight-Academy/ Plus, generally UPT studs who have (only) a PPL are generally indistinguishable from those who don't by the end of the first T-6 contact checkride. My hunch is that having a PPL decreases your odds of washing out (initial solo is one of the big milestones), mainly because having previous flying experience makes the learning early on a bit easier on average and making that individual a safer investment for the AF. One problem in modeling (like figuring out who to select for UPT) is once you identify a maximum in the model (like maximizing UPT graduation rate based on selection factors), the question becomes "is that a local maximum, or absolute maximum." In other words, just because I find a peak in the model, doesn't mean I've necessarily found the best solution in the solution space. You may also have potentially competing goals (minimizing UPT washout vs producing the most skilled pilots). Maybe selecting athletes produces a handful of "great" tactical pilots, but if there's a higher washout rate, is it worth the cost? Or is it better to select to minimize washout rates and accept "average" or "acceptable" pilots (if the minimums weren't good enough, they'd be higher...)? For better or for worse, pilots run the AF. If we select pilots to only focus on being the best tactically, it hurts our ability to groom operational and strategic level planners with tactical experience (unless the AF were to allow non-pilots to fill those higher level roles). At the same time, focusing solely on the operational and strategic levels may leave us unable to win at the tactical level to achieve those operational/strategic goals. So we need a mix of pilots with different skills, backgrounds, and career desires. And since the AF is run by pilots, it acts as the greatest filter into who is allowed to lead within the AF, so it gets a lot of scrutiny.

194th is planning on April for now...stand by for notifications

My old 911 isn't even close to as fast as modern cars with a scant 325rwhp, but man does it feel faster!

Check Next President thread and take your pick.

Familiar with the WTI accident - task saturated and misprioritized tasks, not really an inability to fly formation in of itself. I saw similar stuff in some young guys in the Viper before I left. Haven’t seen it in the F-35, but I think we’re just starting to see new guys who aren’t necessarily the top of their UPT class. We expect the overall quality will decline, but for now the young guys are doing pretty well.

Sending emails is just one example. Another is doing your DTS voucher instead of being able to have the squadron CSS just handle it, because we’ve got this great new system that “simplified” and made a task “more efficient “ so that we could get rid of the CSS, thereby taking more time away from you the actual producer of things in the Air Force. That’s his main argument: You’re now finance and IT and every other support agency as we have complained about ad nauseam on the forum.

There’s extremism in the military. It’s usually hidden due to obviously the punitive actions that could be dealt if displayed. I’m somewhat shocked at the amount of senior ranking people I know who come out as full-flagged racist once they retire.

Southern heritage/pride of what?... Could just as easily fly their state flag to show a heritage connection without the drama/baggage of flying a confederate flag used in open rebellion against the US

But it's not.... It's hard to dismiss when it's GS13s & 14s and plenty of active duty in roles of responsibilities... Are you going to ban it? Probably can't. But man, it's not great to be dismissive about it.

What you just said equates to "My own feelings are too loud to allow the introduction and analysis of facts. Look someone else understands some other facts that sound like they support me. By the way someone who has nothing to do with any of this died, so I'm right." If you were physically present, I'd slap you in the face, hard. Ask anyone here who knows me, they'll affirm that fact. Sometimes that's the only response to upset and end hysteria. I'm guessing you've never experienced such physical violence in your life. Perhaps you should seek is out. Like fight club, it might turn the volume down on these other stressors in your life. You emotions are important, that's true. These instructors are at higher risk than the rest of us, also true. Facts, however, provide context. These young (not 55 of older), hopefully fit, instructors or MORE at risk of dying from lung or heart disease or a freak car crash than they are from contracting COVID, even at their heighten exposure rate. If unique cases exist with at risk family members, those should be handled individually. We don't set guidelines based on the exceptions. Yes, we obviously test new inbounds. This is a risk mitigation measure...thereby lowering the risk you so ardently fear. The question remains: what are the COVID positive rates in the community that's so at risk? If the answer is nil, or virtually nil, the risk mitigation measures have worked...and the risk is being managed correctly. The sky is not falling. Stop carrying on like a petulant child who doesn't like being told he's wrong. That is exactly what the media, politicians, and the violent left/right side of our society would love for you to do and to get others to do. I am on your side, and I'm telling you that you're letting fear win. Stop it. No one else can do this for you. Stand up straight, identify and face the fear that's obviously assaulting you, then look at facts placed within appropriate context in relation to that fear, and respond with courage by telling your fear to sod off.

Do you have just two pilots in your airframe and no one else? If so I can understand someone’s decision to not want to fly with a member of the opposite sex without other crew member witnesses around. Or was their a religious perspective that wouldn’t allow him to work hand in hand with a female? Not saying I agree to either but I can understand both.