Jump to content

Herk Driver

Supreme User
  • Posts

    1,307
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    10

Everything posted by Herk Driver

  1. Did you apply last year? Posted from the NEW Baseops.net App!
  2. It is a fine line...your oath is to the Constitution and to defend it against "all enemies, foreign and domestic" Posted from the NEW Baseops.net App!
  3. Congress gave us 5 years to get to the number. The AF chose to do all the cuts in one (now two) years. Posted from the NEW Baseops.net App!
  4. Personal opinion, Yes. But, either way, that was not the original question asked. We are in plenty of countries with no SOFA and there are other options...we just haven't pursued them all yet. I think that where there is the political will that we will find a way to swack the dudes that we want to swack. Posted from the NEW Baseops.net App!
  5. Not to mention RPA strikes in Yemen or Pak or other countries without declared hostilities. The current policy about tracking down those that wish to do us harm and killing them does NOT have a SOFA caveat. Posted from the NEW Baseops.net App!
  6. I guess that would depend on whether a Dr diagnosed you with that condition or not. Certainly it would require more tests and most Flt Docs I know would DNIF you until getting those results back, if you were symptomatic. Posted from the NEW Baseops.net App!
  7. The FY1998 NDAA authorized an increase from $12k to $25k per year for pilots agreeing to stay through 14 years of aviation service. The AF was initially paying $22k per year for long term contracts. The FY2000 NDAA authorized changes to pay through the grade of O-6 and thru 25 years of aviation service. Additionally, it pushed the services to increase to $25k instead of only allowing it. Of course the payments through 25 years only lasted a few years and now it is back to what you have seen for the last couple of years. Source: https://www.fas.org/man/docs/fy01/usaf/afmilpers.pdf Posted from the NEW Baseops.net App!
  8. For a 6-hour program (including commercials) that spans the time period between the beginning of WWI and the end of WWII, what did you really expect? They glossed over the Holocaust? They completely skipped the war in North Africa, among other things. For a program covering 30-ish years (in 6 hours), they did about as good as could be expected. The ship and aircraft inaccuracies are missed by the average American...
  9. The more things change, the more they stay the same. Exact same thing happened in 04 in a Cadillac in Ops Town (directly across from the pax terminal). Doors came off within a week. Walls never went but someone finally realized that the majority of "art" was being completed by our transient friends. Never ceases to amaze me how we try to deal with this "problem." Posted from the NEW Baseops.net App!
  10. Last info I had was that Sheppard and San Antonio still had one back in 2012. (I realize that is a little dated) Posted from the NEW Baseops.net App!
  11. Chizz, H or J? Not to get too deep into this but I think this will make a big difference, if anyone is paying attention. After the last VSP debacle, I would hope that we figured out we couldn't let out all the IPs. I think we will make the same mistakes again. I hope I am wrong. Posted from the NEW Baseops.net App!
  12. That's not much of a catch. Edit: to fix stupidity
  13. All of that was before the McNamara reforms in the 1960s. The process has not changed much since. Posted from the NEW Baseops.net App!
  14. Maybe he doesn't test well :) Posted from the NEW Baseops.net App!
  15. Nsplayr already got the terminal part...ordinary leave can be approved by supervisors. Posted from the NEW Baseops.net App!
  16. ^^BRAC is dead in the water...USAF is asking this year for authorization to conduct a BRAC in FY17, IIRC. That has been denied in the HASC markup as well. Compensation won't get touched until the current study is concluded and then maybe not. Time will tell. Posted from the NEW Baseops.net App!
  17. This year, yes. Posted from the NEW Baseops.net App!
  18. I think the guidance says that 80% IDE and 70% SDE selects minimum. This ensures that you don't push selects to the last look by loading up candidates into classes. It also (in theory) ensures that you don't end up with only 1 candidate per DT. (at least in the long run). Maybe I read it wrong...I will re-read it tomorrow. Another change is that USAF will not expect officers to have AADs for promotion until the O-6 board. DTs are directed to not consider AADs when identifying Sq/CCs or DE unless AADs are a pre-req for the program. Nothing yet on promotion boards, but this is a step in the right direction.
  19. I am sure Liquid has seen it...I got a look today...Guidance is out to DTs that attempts to fix the reduced number of seats for candidates. Also, specific guidance about AADs and correspondence PME for selects and selection criteria for certain post-school jobs. I have not seen anything that addresses this at the Wing/CC level (i.e. PRF level), but the DT part of the guidance is out and should start to make a difference. Haven't looked far enough to see what can and cannot be posted as it is multiple pages.
  20. And that won't change just because you had a protocol officer help you. Posted from the NEW Baseops.net App!
  21. Yes, because protocol did not support every event and frankly there are very few squadron events that have protocol issues. So between the book and the shirt we could make sure that we were not doing anything embarrassing. Funny thing was that when protocol did have the time and you asked a question it was almost a wag answer anyway. Additionally, many of the issues are in the PDG or an AFI these days. Posted from the NEW Baseops.net App!
  22. Isn't that what a continuity book is for? Posted from the NEW Baseops.net App!
  23. Yes, in order to drive the pin-on time down to below 10 years. Edit to add: there have been 2 O-4 boards in the same calendar year before.
  24. Agreed and being surprised that part of it was true is a normal response, however credibility drops when one makes it sound like this is the first one has heard of it not being first come, first serve. Maybe I misread the intent...I just don't think you can have it both ways; either way just an observation Posted from the NEW Baseops.net App!
  25. Didn't the original message say that it was not first come, first serve? Posted from the NEW Baseops.net App!
×
×
  • Create New...