Truman08

Seller seems to be in financial trouble, not to get into the specifics of the matter, and are offering the home with at what is currently left on the loan. As the loan and home are only 3 years old, the remaining principal balance is within $1K of what the home appraised at, based on the rough math I’ve discussed with the lender. We’d be walking into their existing loan at a 3% rate, with 3.5 years already paid off. Can’t see a downside here other than the additional time it’ll take to close. Appears as though the seller assumes the majority of the risk here as long as I qualify for the loan. There’s also the issue for the seller on if their VA benefits will be tied to the loan and should their credit also be tied to it.

Anybody ever heard of/dealt with the assumption of a VA loan? I’ve been house hunting for a while and came across a seller who has owned a brand new home for three years, has a quick military move, and is looking for somebody to assume their VA loan. I’ve been trying to get smart on the process should it go forward, but it sounds like it rarely ever happens so not many people know a ton about the process.

And you believe that? I’ve heard a lot of promises from 4-Stars and most vanish like a fart in the wind as soon as leadership changes out.

https://youtu.be/KBlDpfXbZ9A

Interesting take based on open-source information https://www.wsj.com/articles/north-korea-decoders-offer-dire-warnings-about-nuclear-program-1507195803

Couldn't agree with you more. The 99% part I was referring to was the willful disregard for following T.O. I'm still of the mindset, as Prozac eluded to, as long as no metal was bent and everybody came home with 10 fingers/toes, just open up discussion about what happened. We've used both programs for years to start up "there i was" stories during our Hangar Fly sessions. That said, when it comes to the information taken from these two programs, I don't trust Big AF and the MAF leadership. I've seen far too many dudes get taken out just so an example can be made of them without the CC having to potentially sacrifice their career over the incident. That may be an issue at the Sq level depending on who your CC is, but I feel like upper level leadership gets word of things that are reported through ASAP/MFOQA and go on a witch hunt.

I'm not defending Johns by any means, but if you're referring to crews getting taken down via data points derived from MFOQA, from the one instance I heard of involving a C-17 crew in the AOR, gross negliance and failure to maintain simple principals of basic flight discipline led to them getting taken down. That said, ASAP reports and info derived from MFOQA data should not be punitive (in 99% of the instances).

Holy run-on sentences

Just my $0.02, but from what I understand from the two first "hiring" boards, both tanker and receiver experience was required. That would lend itself to KC-10 experience over 135. That said, word is the next hiring will open itself to the rest of the MAF, not necessarily requiring both sets of experience. Again, maybe somebody directly involved at the FTU or IOT&E can chime in but that's what I've heard.

I'm not sure the status of delivery but word on the street is the -46 cancelled on coming to the Altus Airshow last minute. Odd considering Altus is one of the first bases to have a Squadron, you'd think they'd want to show it off a bit at one of the home station units. There's also a ton of dudes in Type 1 training right now. I don't believe they've made it from Florida to Washington for the difference training yet (still -767 initial training) but I wonder if that'll hold any of them up.

Loyd, you can't triple stamp a double stamp.

Since the pilot shortage/rention problem has been brought to light, in terms of rated boards convening, have the instructions to those sitting on the board changed at all? If not, then it's highly doubtful anything will change in the interim no matter what an 11X record looks like, good or negative indicators. Unless Big AF is stressing the promotion of rated officers in critically manned career fields, nothing is going to change. The board members will continue to look at all records the same and grade accordingly, allegedly. ( This may have already been brought up in another forum but I was too lazy to look for it. )

I thought there was value added for a CGO, stepping out of the flying aspect of the AF and learning how the rest of the AF operates, and learning certain aspects of the FRLM in order to handle different personalities you may encounter during your time in a leadership role. That said, having to watch video clips and being tested on how well you can pick up on different leadership traits WRT the FRLM was little/no value added. They ram that stuff down your throats the entire time you're there.

Three