Leaderboard

We do, when there is a 🎈 balloon...

Who needs a Raptor when you have a Mudhen...

As much as this story sounds plausible, my inner misogynist thinks this chick may be reconstructing history in the debrief after she gets crushed industry wide for being lame. I know it’s highly unlikely for a female to not accept the consequences of her actions, but it’s possible.

Between Biden and Trump, I'd rather have Trump. In a normal world, I'd never consider voting for Trump but Biden and his crew of flunkies have got to go. I knew a retarded dog who was more self aware than Biden.

All of the things you've mentioned related to preserving medical job opportunities, vacation, etc. make me confident in the following statement: Regarding vacation, I can only speak for what I've seen and heard in the fighter world, but it is quite commom depending on your CC, DO, or WO. You're in an upgrade: don't take leave. You have to projo a TDY: don't take leave. We have an inspection to prep for, there is a base exercise, etc..dont take leave. I know a lot of bros that have lost leave due to these very things (myself included). I also know a few dudes that said, "F that noise my parents have never met their grandchildren so I'm taking leave to go see them." They were taken out of the upgrade, set as the lowest priority, or screwed in their next assignment. All this because they didn't show enough "commitment" based on when they took leave, or that they took it at all during the above events. My point is, this is not how the guard operates. This mindset of screwing over ppl for living their lives because it causes the bobs a minor inconvenience is one of many reasons if I could do it all over again I would never go AD. I'd go straight to the guard. You can still do TFI if you want to dip your toes in to see what active duty life is like.

Ah, okay. Well quit medicine then. Sounds gay.

confirmed. Cat 5 to USAFA poor cadets

agree. what random "friend" calls the FAA... sounds fishy

Sure, but there’s a difference between voting for someone and going to his rallies as well as voting for him. I’ll vote for Trump because I agreed with a lot (definitely not all) of his policies (even though I personally dislike him) when he was president, and I agree with very few of Biden’s and also think he has major cognitive issues…but I’ll never go to a Trump rally, even it was within a 30 min drive. So I think the rallies are a reflection of the differences in enthusiasm for the candidates, which is what the vast majority of the polls have been saying for a while. Now Trump still had far more people at campaign events in 2020 compared to Biden, but that was also in the height of Covid… which today very few people seem concerned. The vast majority of the polls also show that Trump is doing quite a bit better with minorities compared to 2016 and 2020. Add in the fact that Biden’s approval numbers have been in the upper 30s/low 40s for quite a long time…which no president in recent times have been reelected with such low approval numbers 6 months out from the election, and I think the nod today definitely goes to Trump. I think it will once again come down to turnout, and don’t underestimate the Dem turnout machine. I wouldn’t be surprised if either one when given how divided the country is, but if I had to put money on one today, it would be Trump.

After being paid to fly, some of us will pay to fly.

another victim of Danger41 bullying 🥲

https://tinyurl.com/29u5ntox

Might should've put this in the history thread but I'm drunk so I'll put it here. No doubt the Herk made it's mark in Viet Nam.

Cops need to understand the the risk of death is not a hazard of the job to be mitigated at all costs. Sometimes death is the job. The military has understood this forever, it's the entire concept of "service." At some point the combination of bad training, low staffing, and low resources created a mindset that cops should be held to the same standard as the rest of the population. I think that's silly. If a cop sees someone with a gun, there's no acceptable excuse for killing that person unless they are actively using that weapon against the officers or bystanders. Just holding one isn't enough. Neither is waving it around, if the cops are the only ones at risk. And if somebody is in their own home, and there's no evidence that they are already committing a violent crime, cops shouldn't even have their hands on their guns. The entire paradigm needs to change.

Yeah. It's a fine line. If you're a cop, you have to go into basically almost every situation having a plan to kill/neautralize the person/persons you're dealing with because it happens. It happens rarely but almost on a daily basis over the whole of the US. On the flip side, you have a duty to not execute people without showing hostile intent. One way to do that is to not put yourself in those situations like this guy did. He was rightfully not standing in the doorway to catch a round through the door but why the urgency to get right up on the situation? It's monday morning qb'ng but its warranted if you are carrying a gun for the govt and are expected to uphold the constitution and all that jazz. There was no call of a gun, no actual violence observed and you don't even know if you're at the right place. Take a breath and get some distance. Race will get brought up in this of course, it had zero bearing and any person standing there in this poor kids shoes, whether white, black, brown, purple haired, or 90 years old would have been aerated by this officer. I would imagine he feels horrible and wishes he could do it over again but he's alive and breathing while the kid died at his feet.

I completely understand the distaste for trump, but holy shit, if one votes a second time for this disaster admin, they’re brain dead.

Today, May 3rd in perhaps one of the tone def actions taken by the Biden administration (and that is saying something), the U.S. Department of Education announced an investigation of Emory University over...."Anti-Muslim discrimination." Seriously, if you voted for this clown, punch yourself in the gonads, repeatedly. Weeks of campus protests calling for genocide and the destruction of Israel...this is the response.

No, it's a recognition that we aren't going to have a test, so we have to have an age. If we have a test, a lot of the guys who really want to stay past 65 would have been kicked out by 55. No one wants to open that can of worms. Air guardian has an interesting perspective from his particular operation. But the passenger airliners do not go to outfields once every few years, you simply don't need someone with 30 or 40 years of experience to safely operate. That doesn't mean they can't safely operate, but this argument that you need decades of experience to do this job is just laughable. It's a cookie cutter operation even at some of the "challenging" airfields. Yeah, I don't want to send a 23-year-old brand new Captain off to Guatemala on his own, but no one was arguing for that. In the passenger carriers the biggest threat is a compound emergency that requires very quick decision making. Considering most 65-year-olds have never even had an engine failure, longevity does not contribute to that. A focus on training, and mental quickness is what will separate pilots after about 10 years of experience. Like tac airlifter pointed out, slowing down and asking for clarification alleviates the majority of passenger carrier mishaps. You don't need 30 years of experience to do that. If we really want to start down the cognitive testing route, the 60 plus crowd is not going to like it when they start showing the cognitive decline curve on a chart on CNN every time there's a mishap. At a certain point the people in the back of the plane are going to ask why their pilot is lower on the curve. Yes, initially there will be a threshold set based on the average 65-year-old, but that threshold will be a lower score than the average 55-year-old or 40-year-old or 35-year-old. Once you start quantifying something that costs billions of dollars when it goes wrong, people will ask "why are we settling for less than the best?" No one cares when a few rich people die in a business jet, which is why everybody 65 and older can continue to fly in that career. This is a "problem" that does not need to be solved.

You apparently haven't been paying attention to what's actually happening in China. They have none of these advantages anymore. The one thing they had going for them was being the world's workshop...but that was economics planned by central committee. It came at many costs, one of them being technological innovation, and it's over. They are in the process of a demographic collapse thanks to 40 years of the one child policy. Even if they implemented a national breeding campaign, it would take 30-40 years for them to reap the economic benefits...and they haven't. The wage 'advantage' is no more. Mexican labor is cheaper by almost three times now. Mexican production quality is ALSO better. China may be able to make things, but they can't do it cheaply anymore (their middle class wages have skyrocketed) and they can't produce anything of high quality. What's more, they never had a national unity advantage. Everything their government does it to control their people, not dominate the world. We don't have to do anything to beat the Chinese economically besides wait. Militarily, all we'd have to do is close the Strait of Malacca and watch them starve in the dark, as they import so much food and energy. Oh-by-the-way guess what kind of weapons we just leant to the Australians in Darwin: Cruise missiles that can hit ships in the strait of malacca from over the horizon. As for national debt? You think we're hurting? Go google Chinese hyper financialization. The dollar may or may not remain the reserve currency, but the Yuan will NOT be taking it's place in our lifetime. Yes, the Chinese are great at long term intellectual planning, but NONE of their execution has followed any of that planning. They are screwed and all we have to do is not save them. Multiple historians, demographers, and geopolitical analysts have reached the above conclusions. Ray Dalio would be one exception, but reading his work it's clear his love of china is underpinned by strong emotional ties that clearly color his analysis. But even he doesn't paint a very rosy picture for them, specifically because of their economics and debt. Don't listen to the rhetoric, look at the details and facts.