Spur38

10 for 10 on the scale and being born in Hawaii pretty much sums it up.......

Yeah! What's the big deal? Hasn't Tim Martins already done this?

For patches try: www.embroidery.com.tw or email:Sing sing@mail.embroidery.com.tw I have dealt with them previously for unit patches and they do a fantastic job at a very reasonable price. If you have a picture or a representation they will duplicate it.....really great to work with!

Very good move CPT E! Much better since you converted back to O-3 from WO and your chances remaining a flying Army Aviator as an RLO would definitely be in jepoardy. As a retired ARNG guy we've had a lot of pilots come over the other way from AF, Marines and Navy. The mix of that experience and aviation backgrounds is really good for military aviation in general. The only down side is learning the service acronyms! Good luck to you!

:beer:

Spaceman: Check out the story on "Secret Pete" in the last Smithsonian "Air & Space" mag. and his thermo cooling efforts for the Unlimited Race Airplanes for the Reno Air Races....Up your alley! Cheers

That's an Italian Patch isn't it?

Very good read....don't know why the Pentagon got their panties in a wad, Owen (pseudonym) was very protective about the content, even to the extent of having a Special Ops Attorney review it. Worth the Kindle price!

Air Shows: We do them for ourselves, and the kids that get hooked like we did. Not Ma and Pa Kettle... they pay for it but we pay 'em back so they keep their ability to go to Walmart in peace...

HeloDude, on 29 August 2012 - 09:27 AM, said: So pardon my ignorance...I'm taking it you didn't have a single commissioned officer (non Warrant) in this unit you had authority over? Correct, no LTs or CPTs. The units were all WO aviators. In Army aviation the Warrants are the "technical experts". Unfortunately for Army aviators as a LT or CPT you generally get to the flying proficency level of being a PIC (AC) and then moved to a staff position of some sort. Not all, but most. LTs and CPTs can continue and be promoted to MAJ or as a CPT command a unit but its a small percentage. The WOs on the other hand will stay in Aviation slots and continue to "specialize" as aviators. SO its really a career chioce. Do you want to reamain in the cockpit or aspire to be a LTC, COL or GO? Every AVN SQDN is commanded by a rated LTC or COL but you rarely ever see an Army Aviator MAJ, LTC or COL with more than 3,000 hours throughout a 20 yr career. Generally, WOs who stick with it will amass much more flight time and are always the most experienced aviators within the unit. In the Guard however you see many former LTs, CPT, MAJs and a few LTCs or COLs who will "revert" back to being WOs so they can stay in the saddle.....another interesting point is that once an aviator is promoted to COL, in a non-operational aviation position cannot perform cockpit duties (AR 95-1) unless flying with an IP at one set of the controls. So if one wants to continue to fly, instruct or have an extensive aviation career the WO program is the way to go.

C-12s or CW5s?

Not so......As an CW5 OSA Detachment Commander, I had full UCMJ authority, pen to paper and was able to promote or shit can anyone who couldn't cut the mustard to include Commanding OEF/OIF for the C-12 Avn Task Force......

Army Warrant's do "Command" CW5s

Keep your ego in your flight bag the first time you take the controls...a humbling experience, at first attempt to fly/hover it!

Waiting for clearance at KLAS: N12345: "Ground, N12345, Signature, IFR to RNO with Xray ready to taxi" GND: "Roger 12345 taxi via Alpha to runway 25R. N12345 Readback... Interupt by G-5 female pilot: "Ground this is Grumman N456 requesting imediate taxi before N12345" GND: Negative Grumman 456, in sequence please" Grumman 456: "Negative ground! You don't understand!. We have an Industry CEO and potential buyer on board this aircraft and demonstrating, we need imediate taxi!" GND: "Grumman 456, is that a brand new aircraft?" Grumman 456: Why yes it is! Can we taxi now"? GND" Wow! A brand new aircraft and it already has a crack in the front seat" Hold your position for taxiing aircraft!" Lots of laughter in the background, moments of silence on the radio and no response from the Grumman......

Don't miss "Unbroken"!

We are all anxiously awaiting # 5000! Make it a good one! We all appreciate your past words, serious professional guidance, humorous, mostly sober, topical and "telling lt like it is"!

A few more....

Billy and his widow..... Supposed "Public Servants"

Thunder: Please review: implement and report back to us!

www.sncorp.com for info.....

She turned "DADT", joined the Army, went to flight school and was awarded the MOH in the epic box office hit "Courage Under Fire"

Could be a Thai "Sheman" and they adopted.

The Light Air Support Competition – The Facts On Dec. 22, 2011, the United States Air Force awarded a contract for aircraft, training and support for its Light Air Support (LAS) program to Sparks, Nev.-based Sierra Nevada Corporation (SNC). In the Request For Proposal, the U.S. Air Force specifically sought a non-developmental, in-production light air support aircraft. The airplane to be provided under the contract is the Embraer A-29 Super Tucano. The other main contender for this contract, Hawker Beechcraft, of Wichita, Kan., and its prototype aircraft, the AT-6, was disqualified by the Air Force in November 2011. As the Government Accountability Office (GAO) stated, the USAF “conducted discussions with those offerors in the competitive range from April 8 until September 23, 2011. After reviewing HBDC’s responses to issues raised during discussions, the Air Force concluded that HBDC had not adequately corrected deficiencies in its proposal.” Since contract award, Hawker Beechcraft has been fighting the USAF decision – first to the GAO and now in the US Court of Federal Claims – and waging a misinformation campaign about the winning aircraft. CLAIM: Hawker Beechcraft says the U.S. Air Force made a “fundamentally flawed decision” in awarding the LAS contract to SNC and the A-29 Super Tucano. FACT: The Air Force selected a proven platform in the A-29 Super Tucano that is currently in service with six air forces worldwide. The AT-6, on the other hand, is a developmental aircraft, with no planes currently flying in any air force in the world. The U.S. Air Force disqualified Hawker Beechcraft from the LAS competition because its plane was too risky. According to the GAO, the Air Force concluded that, “multiple deficiencies and significant weaknesses found in [Hawker Beechcraft’s] proposal make it technically unacceptable and results in unacceptable mission capability risk.” CLAIM: Hawker Beechcraft says that awarding the LAS contract to SNC results in the loss of 1,400 U.S. jobs FACT: Only two prototype AT-6 aircraft are in existence. The AT-6 is not currently in production and does not support any U.S. manufacturing jobs. SNC’s fulfillment of the LAS contract will support approximately the same number of U.S. jobs as Hawker Beechcraft says they would have. Specifically, 50 + new high tech jobs will be created in Jacksonville, Fla., where the A-29 Super Tucano will be made and another 1,200-plus jobs across the U.S. will be supported as a result of the LAS contract. CLAIM: The Super Tucano will be manufactured by “Brazilian labor and flown to the U.S.” FACT: The A-29 Super Tucano will be built in America. Embraer will make the plane at a new production facility in Jacksonville, Fla. Over 88 percent of the dollar value of the A-29 Super Tucano comes from components supplied by U.S. companies or countries that qualify under the Buy America Act. No new jobs are being created in Brazil as a result of this contract. CLAIM: The Super Tucano “costs over 25% more” than the Hawker Beechcraft AT-6. FACT: Hawker Beechcraft has no insight into the bid provided to the U.S. Air Force by SNC and therefore has no credible basis from which to make such a statement. Unlike the AT-6, the A-29 Super Tucano has more than seven years of real-world combat and training experience behind it. This means that its operational costs are known and that all costly development issues related to weapons load, maneuverability and operations have already been worked out. CLAIM: Hawker Beechcraft says it has delivered 740 AT-6 aircraft. FACT: Hawker Beechcraft has neither sold nor delivered a single AT-6 aircraft. The company is deliberately confusing its T-6 trainer with the still-in-development AT-6. The U.S. Air Force specifically sought a non-developmental, in-production light attack aircraft for its LAS program. The AT-6 remains today a prototype aircraft. Hawker Beechcraft has been attempting to rework its trainer with a larger engine, intelligence/surveillance/reconnaissance (ISR) technology, and weapons in order to meet the LAS requirements. Meanwhile, more than 150 A-29 Super Tucanos are in use around the world today performing ISR and security missions. This fact is undisputed. CLAIM: The AT-6 performs better on key combat criteria. FACT: Only the A-29 Super Tucano has actually flown in combat. More significantly, only the A-29 was built from the ground up to perform counterinsurgency and light air support operations. The A-29 is larger in size allowing it to make full use of the 1,600-hp engine without power limitations due to torque. It sits higher off the ground and has a broader stance, increasing stability on unprepared airfields. The A-29’s longer tail section increases longitudinal stability and provides exceptional accuracy for the delivery of weapons. Only the A-29 delivery system is specifically designed with the five NATO hard points for external stores, translating into maximum operational flexibility for the war fighters in the theater. The AT-6 carries no munitions in its native configuration. This is a critical difference. The A-29 also is munitions-certified with over 130 operational external load configurations. The AT-6 is not yet munitions-certified. CLAIM: The U.S. Air Force decision process did not include a hands-on evaluation of the A-29’s flight handling characteristics. FACT: Both the A-29 Super Tucano and the AT-6 were subject to a rigorous fly-off / flight evaluation in New Mexico in January 2011. The U.S. Air Force identified serious technical deficiencies with the AT-6 which ultimately led to the aircraft’s disqualification from the LAS competition in November 2011. CLAIM: The logistic support system for the AT-6 airframe and mission systems is in place and paid for today. FACT: The AT-6 is a developmental aircraft. With only two prototypes in existence, it has never been in production. Hawker Beechcraft is once again claiming elements of its T-6 program as part of the AT-6 offering. Only the A-29 Super Tucano, with more than 150 aircraft in service in six air forces around the world, has an established logistical / mission support system in place. CLAIM: Hawker Beechcraft is an American company. FACT: Hawker Beechcraft is jointly owned by Onex, a Canadian private equity firm, and by Goldman Sachs, the investment bank that in 2008 received a $10 billion bailout from the U.S. government. The Hawker brand was invented in the United Kingdom by British Aerospace and even touts itself as one of “Britain’s best-known performance brands.” The AT-6 is based on a design licensed from the Swiss company Pilatus. CLAIM: We should be creating jobs in America, not outsourcing them to other countries. FACT: Since 2007, Hawker Beechcraft has been shifting production and employment from their headquarters in Kansas to Chihuahua, Mexico. According to recent news articles (e.g., Aviation Week Nov. 4, 2011 and the Wall Street Journal Jan. 31, 2012), Hawker Beechcraft is now carrying $2.4 billion in debt with $1.4 billion of it coming due in the next 24 months. These financial and competitive pressures seem to be driving the move to Mexico and the resulting layoff of thousands of U.S. workers. During this process, Hawker Beechcraft has extolled the talents of the company’s Mexican workforce. In a February 2011 Hawker Beechcraft press release announcing the opening of the company’s second facility in Mexico, Hawker CEO Bill Boisture said: “We have seen a high level of quality and craftsmanship from the country’s skilled workforce and have great confidence in their ability to assume additional responsibilities in the manufacturing process.” Hawker has a third facility planned for Mexico. Sierra Nevada Corporation and its team member Embraer are both financially and technically very strong and growing companies that are investing in the U.S. SNC is the Top Woman-Owned Federal Contractor in the U.S. and is ranked among America’s fastest growing private companies. Founded in 1963, SNC employs over 2,100 people in 31 locations in 16 states. It is also continuing to create new jobs in the U.S., while supporting thousands of American jobs through its significant outsourcing efforts in the U.S. SNC is privately held and 100 percent U.S.-owned. Embraer has been in the U.S. for more than 30 years and currently employs 800 people at U.S. locations in Ft. Lauderdale and Melbourne, Fla.; Nashville, Tenn.; Mesa, Ariz.; Minneapolis, Minn.; and Windsor Locks, Conn. Embraer recently shifted global operations for its Business Jet business from Brazil to Melbourne, Fla., marking a major investment in the United States. A new production facility, recently opened in Melbourne, is creating 200 engineering and technical jobs in an area hard-hit by the winding down of the Space Shuttle program. The opening of the Jacksonville, Fla. manufacturing facility for the A-29 Super Tucano will mark a similarly significant U.S. investment. CLAIM: Embraer is owned by the Brazilian government. FACT: Embraer is a publicly traded company listed on the New York Stock Exchange (NYSE: ERJ). The Brazilian government has no ability to interfere with the company’s provision of aircraft under the LAS contract.

Try FlightCtrl HD at the Apple store....hours and hours of mindless fun!!! Makes you appreciate ATC....