Jump to content

Boomer6

Supreme User
  • Posts

    535
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    9

Everything posted by Boomer6

  1. A new member for less than an hour with 6 posts, and 3 of them back-to-back. If only there was an edit function where you could add to your last post without creating a new one that says basically the same thing as the last two...
  2. I agree 100% that pressure from on high is a factor. However, I've seen FAIPs of all ppl refuse to fold to this pressure and uphold the standard. If an Lt hoping for a fighter has the intestinal fortitude to do the right thing then I have little sympathy for O3-5s worried about their next assignment. These are officers we're talking about, not jr enlisted, they need to act like it. I agree UPT line IPs are younger/less experienced than ever. Which is why PIT has a large share of blame as well. PIT won't wash out IPs coming to their sq that have no business instructing young IPs, much less hold the line on UIPs they're sending to UPT. I have zero issue blaming leadership/congress/etc. for terrible priorities on retention and procurement. With that being said, how many times have I read dudes on here bitching about all these senior leaders that refuse to fall on their swords to make a point to leadership for the sake of their service, Wg, Sq, etc. Yet here we are making excuses for officers folding to pressure on grading standards. Hard to expect the Bobs to suddenly grow a backbone if it's never been required they have one in the first place.
  3. Oh yes, because the FTUs haven't been doing more with less, to include less experienced IPs/studs, just like PIT/UPT. I guess whining about the can being kicked from UPT/IFF to the FTUs is somehow unwarranted. UPT/IFF IPs aren't responsible for the retention/iron situation, but they're directly responsible for letting studs pass that shouldn't. Or, at the very least, not holding to the CTS. Those UPT IPs that don't hold the line, where do they get their training again..? The system and it's leaders bear plenty of blame, but that doesn't give the lowly line IPs acting as the quality control experts the right to allow a subpar product and then claim absolution.
  4. You don't say.. Here I was thinking you just like to crack open a thesaurus when you started typing a post.
  5. These guys are standard AF generals. I've yet to meet a single general in the AF that the bros actually claim as part of their community. Usually said general takes command and the bros are like, "he flew X back in the day so hopefully he'll be good." Fast-forward to his first speech/memo/CC call...the bros: "were fucked.."
  6. Item number 69 on the list of reasons I tell the youngins to go guard at all costs.
  7. How A Fighter Pilot Became the First Active Duty Service Member to Win Miss America They giving out fighter slots before UPT now or foxnews proving how icompetent they are..
  8. I don't think it's on pause, I think they just moved production to china..
  9. I know it's not impossible, but the amount of documention and work required to get it done needs to change. Our security shouldn't be a jobs program, period. The ppl that need to be shown the door are well past the 3 year point. They're protected by the system, sometimes lazy sups, and sometimes the good ol' boy network. No argument about idiots on both sides. The big three are meat cleavers to the soft underbelly of DoD, but the GS bureaucracy is death by 1,000 cuts. Google claims 1.5 million GS workers, with an average pay of $70K/year. If 10% of them are worthless/actively standing in the way of progress (like at the puzzle palace) then that's $10.5 billion a year were wasting on these leeches..
  10. As a general gameplan, the idea of cleaning house of worthless GS employees sounds like a great idea. Not a commentary on anything musk is saying. However, the amount of virtually un-fireable parasites sucking the blood of the DoD is disgusting. The stories I've heard from bros working in that world and the crap I've personally witnessed makes me sick. A reform of the GS sector is well overdue. Lockheed and Boeing are famous for bending over the DoD, but the shit bag GSers are the undiagnosed clap.
  11. Nope. It's a mutually beneficial relationship. I don't see the US walking away from the US-Japan Security Treaty, especially because we don't want them developing nukes to deter china. I think the point others are alluding to is NATO has the appearance of an abusive relationship, and we're the ones getting abused.
  12. The Philippines and Japan don't really have any options in that regard. We're the only power in the region capable of pushing back on china's claims in the SCS, which violate their sovereignty. Their sovereignty rights are THE incentive to opposing chinese expansion, and they can't do that without us. Korea is in the same boat, but moreso with nK. Their options are to either rely on US, and our nuclear umbrella, or start building nukes themselves to defend against Kim.
  13. Do you understand that the ppl you're engaging with on here actually have at a minimum a college education, decades of military service, and many with time at the Pentagon seeing behind the curtain? In other words, these aren't the ppl of Walmart with a cart full of mtn dew and ding dongs questioning why the gubment' is spending money on things they don't understand. This isn't a black and white issue. It's evolved since the start of the war and our policy needs to evolve as well. Just because it made sense to throw billions in resources/cash previously doesn't mean we're locked into that gameplan in perpetuity. People questioning the sense of continued support by us, especially when it exceeds those on the continent that are actually being threatened, have a valid concern.
  14. Yeah, the mudhen dudes deserved the silver star just coming back to land in a Patriot MEZ.
  15. As a ridiculous example of this I witnessed a 1LT (product of an AETC UPT experiment) do MCUG at an exercise...it went about like you'd expect. No hate for the dude, seemed like a good bro/pilot, but FFS.
  16. Sounds like something I would expect from the bobs at Luke.
  17. It'd be interesting to see stats on guard/reserve ran B-Courses v. AD. I'd like to think the former hooks/washes out/generally holds the line better over AD but who knows. Either way B-courses have definitely been kicking the can to ops units to some extent To your scheduling point, why isn't the wpns officer throwing the upgrade IPs? Where I grew up the patch decided who flew with dudes on an upgrade. Are DOs/CCs now directing how the upgrade program is ran and getting into the weeds of scheduling?
  18. Canes gonna be Canes.. Miami players fighting
  19. UPT and PIT as a whole are complicit in 'fixing' the AF's retention problem with new accessions. The result of this complicity is realized in what we all know is UPT/PIT studs making it through that shouldn't. B-Courses and Ops squadrons see this as a failure of IPs to hold the line, which at best leads to a reduction in lethality, and at worst an increase in mishaps. I'm not saying IPs at UPT/PIT are solely responsible, but the enterprise as a whole owns part of the problem and it's 2nd/3rd order effects. PIT pushes some ppl through that are unsafe. They pass ppl that are staying at PIT and then spend months getting them through MQT before they're safe enough to fly with PIT students. This bends the squadron over even more, but their other option is to wash out/FEB a pilot that didnt have an issue in their previous airframe. This isn't 100% of studs, but there is enough of it at PIT/UPT that the increased scoffing from the CAF is, to some extent, earned. I'm not saying all UPT/PIT DOs/CCs for the last x years should be burned at the stake. The decline has been insidious and the external pressures play a huge factor. On the -38 side IPs know there's a better chance they'll get a 5th gen follow-on than a stud getting washed out. If they hook him, the timeline is going to suffer, if the timeline gets any worse they're going to have to go back to flying local weekend sorties in 100 deg heat, and none of it matters because the stud in question is gonna drop a KC-135 anyways. The stud is gonna drop KC-135s because B-Courses can't keep up with the increased production, to include the extra sorties required for the lower quality product from UPT/IFF. Yeah that's right, IFF owns this too. The IPs showing up at UPT/IFF now were a product of the lowered standards caused by increased production pressure. They saw their bros/possibly themselves skate by and think that's how the sausage is supposed to be made. If anyone figures out a way to get the entire AETC enterprise to grade IAW the CTS, and find some bobs that will back their IPs up, maybe the icecream cone gets cleaned. TL;Dr version:
  20. I've never seen a policy letter on the UPT side that alludes to this, but that doesn't mean it doesn't exist. I think your best bet is to contact Randolph stan/eval and see if they have data. It's possible they have a policy on this. If not, you'd probably have to ask them to gather MAS (MAAS?) data for all army guys that went through T-6s and/or Rucker. MAS is basically the overall pilot score each stud receives. If you can get AETC to send you those scores for prior army guys and ask them to tell you where it falls on the bell curve you could draw some conclusions from that. That data is definitely available from our GTIMS (UPT flt record/grades software if you're unfamiliar), but will require someone to sort through to find the prior army guys. Knowing the AF it's probably going to take a colonel making a formal request just to get the ball rolling. If you get a general to make the request maybe you can get the data prior to the end of FY25.
  21. Man, if only we'd have bought a bunch of gripens or some re-imagined 1960s interceptors to combat china's new tech.
×
×
  • Create New...