Hacker

Warning: Sarcasm detector inop.

I got a good laugh once when I saw a U-28 guy billing his community as "the Tier 1 of the Air Force". Yeah, keep tellin' yourself that.

Not insulting your intelligence or showing my masterful command of the obvious. Just making sure other folks knew that, unlike your statement, it is not just "MFWIC". Very likely the reason that in some communities MFWIC is the chosen term.

As they said in the SAC days, there is no horse too dead to beat.

Are you saying that someone/some organization was tasked to do this, and they refused? And that Hauben's squadron/airframe/crew/whatnot heard this, and decided they'd go do it?

HMFIC means Head Mother Fucker In Charge. I heard that before I heard of "mif-wick". Both valid in my opinion.

Still a relatively new trend. I'd never heard of it (outside of Korea) before 2004.

I think its right down the Street from Typo University International, known by their initials, TUI.

The actual part of this post that begs for comment is the blue-kool-aid stain at the very end:

The article is actually summarizing a report written by the Standford and NYU law schools.

Words mean stuff.

How do we not have (more?) Generals like this in the USAF?

I believe what he's getting at is that it's G-induced Loss Of Consciousness -- GLOC. Not "G-lock". Video does pretty clearly show the maneuver and that there wasn't any contact. Doesn't necessarily mean it was GLOC though. There's another airshow crash within the last year or two that the root cause is believe to have been control interference via something in the rear cockpit (ergo, RCP seatbelts not buckled and tightened, etc). Lots of possibilities.

Where does it say this in the email?

What was his name?

Any online links of the entire 60 Minutes interview? All I could find last evening were the "Overtime" extras that CBS put online, and a repeat of an interview they did with "Demo Dick" back in 1992.

Halfway through it, and is better than I thought it was going to be. Surprised at some of the content, though. The interesting part is in the foreward, where "Owen" speaks of only writing about people, events, and organizations that are previously discussed in open sources. Just a reminder to all of us: having something discussed in open sources never relieves us of our own NDAs.

Yes, exactly. I've never seen any tower like that, and as I looked at the photo and considered being out there where it's blacker-than-a-bag-of-assholes, fatigued at the end of a LFE sortie, and I saw that...that might very well tumble my internal gyros. If "day man" thinks that's weak, well good for him.

The 14.7" barrels are constructed at that length specifically so an A2 flash hider would take the length to 16".

Man, that Y-shaped tower might be enough to cause me to lose SA....

Translation: I want to fly for SWA, but don't want to pay for the type.

Fox, fox! Oh, not that kind of drone?

Of course it depends. Hell, I've been that guy. That being said, even high-time crusty experts who have been away from flying for even a little bit lose their proficiency quickly, and that was my point.

No -- that is not one of the SUPT options.

This is the second half of the equation -- proficiency. We all know that flying is a perishable skill, and the more high performance the task, the easier it is to lose proficiency in executing that task. I mentioned that many of these guys are not "professional pilots" for a reason: they have day jobs, and usually high-powered and high-pressure day jobs. They don't think about and execute flying day in and day out like a professional pilot does. There's a reason the USAF has RAP and "beans" and all the other required continuation training events during the course of the year, and proficiency is the answer (weather RAP is an effective means of doing that is another discussion all together...I mean, do you really want the old attached dude who is alternating between CMR and non-CMR every month on your wing on night 1 of the war?). Civilian guys don't have RAP, nor any other mandatory program to keep them sharp on the non-FAA required items. It is entirely up to their own conscience how much they dedicate to staying sharp, and there are certainly a lot of pilots who don't recognize how much and how quickly they can lose proficiency. Again, not a spear at non-military dudes -- I know plenty of civilian guys who are great sticks and make sure they spend the time and money required to remain proficient. But, unfortunately, there are also many who do not.