17D_guy

Jack Reacher was ok. Lots of the "Tom Cruise Run" and dude is starting to show the age in close ups. 80's schloky fights, bad guys, dialogue and plot. Really a retro film. C+

Isn't there already an award for Fighter Pilots? I could have sworn I neg-replied on one when I was doing my tour in a CAG pit.

Saw "The Accountant." If you liked Affleck's other movies (The Town, Argo) you'll probably like this as well. Concise story without trying to build some mythos and/or franchise that a lot of the movies go for these days. Well shot, with interesting visuals and not too much shaky cam bullshit. Good character and story arc with little to no pandering and it swerves away from getting cliche in a lot of parts. Nothing really surprising, or hard to figure out if you even pay a little attention. Solid B/B+.

Yes, they are going to plus up the CSS'. 3A's AFSC has been recreated to be exactly what it was before Skeltor destroyed the AFSC & Sq CSS. So, basically it's going back to what it was when I joined in 1999. However, there are still a lot more programs now than then. I'm particularly concerned with moving UDM to the CSS.

So, I need to get on here and eat crow. I bitched at length, and repeatedly, about not having Cyber people leading Cyber in my beloved AF. Well, I've had the please of interacting with the new 24 AF CC. He's a zipper suited sun god Viper driver. He's fucking awesome, link to bio - https://www.24af.af.mil/About-Us/Biographies/Display/Article/804882/major-general-christopher-weggeman He's applying his experience as an Viper driver to our cyber stuff and it's just...a breath of fresh air. It's fantastic in every way imaginable. No micro-managing, no "meet the deadline or else" BS, he cares what our cyber-operators are executing and will call BS, to 4-stars, if something/one attempts to impede that to turn a checkmark green. He also actually comes off as really liking this stuff beyond a "help make another star" attitude, or a time sink to retirement. The attitude on staff is... I don't even know how to describe it, beyond pretty darn good. I hope that AF doesn't screw this one up and move him out in a year or less. We really need some stability at the top, and I think he's the guy to right us. Shit, if he could run it until we move to Vigilance Command, it might work out very well. News flash: Space Operations ain't. Also someone makes jalapeno popcorn in the "heritage room"... how has this not moved out to the AF as a whole. That stuff is fantastic. P.S. - the vice is a good dude too - https://www.24af.af.mil/About-Us/Biographies/Display/Article/809210/brigadier-general-mitchel-h-butikofer

55th's had a bunch of deaths this year. Rough one. Toast to the man.

" My desire to stay in the cockpit meant that further promotion passed me by like a ship in the night but I am not bitter. As I approach 18 years of service I have only worn the shackles of a desk job once - in the job I am currently in and even now I still hold a cockpit for a couple of weeks of the month" What a novel idea...

What do you mean? Europe has never had a problem with right-wing nationalism before.

British politics are the best.

Unreasonable: no Inarticulate: no sarcastic: yes, no.. maybe humorous: yes Well, the last conservative Vice President did tell someone to go fuck themselves in the Senate Chamber. The pig fornication thing does have some legs. Trump's said enough unreasonable, inarticulate, non-sarcastic and funny/not-funny stuff he's in his own little world. The parrot-faced former-Brit a political satirist, so is Ann. She's also used that dirty f-word from time to time, but she puts in the "--" so I guess that shouldn't really count? She's also funny. But, I grew up watching this, perhaps my sense of humor's a little skewed -

I haven't seen an Ann Coulter or Trump response. But I'm sure they'd be reasoned, articulated responses with no sarcasm or humor intended.

Update -

I thought the demographic breakdown was interesting - https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-36616028

Lots of ways to address this question. But the short answer is: sure it's been discussed, but as BuddaSixFour has pointed out, highly skilled technical organizations have spent trillions of dollars developing software and it's still buggy. The gov't and/or one of it's contractors isn't going to do better. There's always a new hack that people can't plan for. And that's a good thing. This cyber stuff moves too fast for development the USAF way. Look at the problems w/ the F35 software and that's a very specific set of design parameters. Now imagine that for everyone's different set of desktop boxes and the USAF/DoD directing the fix. We'd lose a few GDPs worth of cash w/ nothing to show. Also, there's already products out there that provide serious security (ex. SE Linux) w/ NSA contributions. On our 2 normal networks Win7/10 is fine. Properly administrated they're fantastic operating systems. Are they currently properly administrated, no. Is that my cyber-bro's fault, partially. But, at the end of the day all this tech stuff is cool.. but it's the bag-o-meat sitting at the keyboard that's going to screw it up. We all hate the stupid LARPing CBT we have to do annually, but it's at least made people ask me if something was stupid.

Thanks. I do need to add that the tech-advisor thing will have to be closely structured and monitored. As in - no previous federal service at or above a certain level 2 year max stint before a "cooling off" period ensure no single company/org is sourcing a lot of individuals easily fire-able, moveable, and easy for an individual to quit I think the last one would be mitigated by the fact that there's no career to ruin. You tell the thanks for their service, they get on social media about why they were unjustly terminated, etc. Congress is going to listen if you let a former VP of Facebook go for a stupid reason. Otherwise it'll be the same thing as when those Generals were coming back as "leadership consultants" while allegedly hawking their contractor gig merchandise. How much money do those fuckers need.....

I've been thinking hard about this one. Every way I look at it, I don't see how having civilians cross in at the O6 or higher-level is going to translate to meaningful change for Cyber. I've got Cyber O6's that I know now agitating for meaningful changes: real mission assurance, real network advancements, etc. They can't get it done and they've been in the system the whole time! What's some civilian with no history, contacts and context going to bring? Dear Lord.. if he/she starts on staff without ever having supported an operational mission... the hate we get now will only be magnified because the leader only isn't in touch... they've NEVER been in touch. We aren't like civilian companies where we can dump one vendor for another. We're beholden to DISA for services. We're beholden to our MAJCOM/NAF for mission requirements. We're beholden to AFSPC/24AF for "cyber mission requirements." Finally we're beholden to the IMSC for... something. Couple the serious mission challenges to the promotion and "up-or-out" and you're going to demoralize the cyber force. We've already got enough problems with not having a career cyber person in cyber leadership. Now you're going to shift some of these few O6 slots to civilians coming in? How exactly am I supposed to believe there's any credibility at all with AF Cyber Leadership if this happens? It's already difficult enough as it is and I've been told very good things about the folks in charge. Finally I don't know many "cyber leadership" civilians who could do well on our PT systems. Hire civilians as non-line tech advisers, increase the industry internship opportunities, allow more sabbaticals, develop/promote Technical MS programs (AFIT doesn't count), provide mid-level (vs high-level) cyber leadership/operations training (less demanding CNODP/Cyber WIC) and get some damn career cyber leadership visible to the force. I will note none of these even start to address the problem with current GS-civilians who are retired O's and SNCO's who refuse to do anything meaningful to move Cyber into the current decade. For them the AF hasn't changed since the day it retired, and by God it'll be the same when they retire again in 10/20/30 years.

Yea, sorry, should have included it. https://www.moaa.org/Content/Take-Action/As-I-See-It/Why-Whack-Military-Housing-Allowances-.aspx?utm_source=Legis&utm_medium=email&utm_content=legis&utm_campaign=JuneAsISeeIt

It'll drive up costs on all rental properties, just like it does overseas. Again, it's going to screw the lowest ranking Airmen and dual-mil families the most. The MOAA article showing actual changes in compensation is the best write up of it I've seen.

This self inflicted timeline failure is amazing. Basically the AF is destroying itself to identify people earlier than any other service for GO positions years in advance, because otherwise they won't get to an important position 20 years from now? And.. that's on a timeline we set. As a service we're aware of it. I've spoken to a few Col's now who've stated it's a problem, as well as a retired 2-star. We're aware of what it's causing in the force, causing in leadership positions, causing in promotions... and we continue to do it. So.. we control the totality of the development timeline. We control the training, evaluations, assignment, education and even living locations and conditions of those who the Air Force has decided will one day assume responsibility for vast portions of the Air, Space and Cyber enterprise. But we just can't seem to get it done compared to the other services who identify their folks later in their careers?

my location was under 40%

I think BFM, for me at least, highlights the most important part of this whole discussion with this single point. There is no way the AF, as an organization, has ever rewarded or recognized someone immediately for a sacrifice or helping out. Not in a meaningful, life impacting way. Get a piece of paper or a RMO.. fantastic, but it doesn't make up for being gone from my family AGAIN. I say this as the deployer, and having my spouse deploy. I say this as a dude who's come to accept that I LOVE getting awards, and getting my Airmen awards. There's nothing I can point to for them to say "it was worth it" for a lot of the "requirements of service." Everything is delayed and nothing is guaranteed. You're not going to get that next promotion if you take this excrement-sandwich job. Busted your ass all year in some staff position working some legit-important mission stuff, then fail a PT test? Sorry, no decoration/gucci job/whatever for you since you've failed to "uphold standards." Even then, this regard the reward is delayed. Leadership can't even guarantee a strat for your OPR.

In my neck of the woods it's top 25%, which can be broken along many different lines (AFSC, position, level). Our current CC does not like strats among year-group, his rational is sound though I've heard good arguments to the contrary. This is the first year I've paid attention to "the game" and it's been very interesting to see the... discussion take place among people who though they were a shoe in for promotion, and didn't make it. Additionally, those that though they were BTZ.. but aren't. We've started sharing that "You Are Not BTZ" article about, and having frank discussions with our peers...since most of the O5's can't seem to be honest about it, or don't know how to. Seriously.. how hard is it to tell someone they're not in the top 25% and be honest about their future prospects?