Hacker

The Enforcer was designed/overseen by the same guy who performed most of those 2-seat P-51 conversions back in the 60s. In fact, it was intended to be a 2-seat aircraft from the beginning (although the two prototypes weren't). The earlier "PE-2 Enforcer" aircraft that was built about 10 years prior to the PA-48s was a full dual control aircraft.

A different view of some tanker-on-tanker action.

Since I was traveling with a family, I just elected to use a pet shipping service. It cost about the same, and eliminated the hassle. Someone else picked them up at my house, put them on the airplane, picked them up on the other end...and eventually dropped them off at my new house on the other end. Again, cost more, but was oh-so worth it in diminished hassle.

Over on WANTSCheck.com, I have posted a PDF file with scans of 37-ish successful AF215s. http://www.wantscheck.com/LinkClick.aspx?fileticket=qqnvQCs7A48%3d&tabid=66&mid=623 Not sure if that link works properly, but it is on the page called "Getting a Pilot Slot from Active Duty", and is a link on the left side of the page. This is a link to the page: http://www.wantscheck.com/PilotSlotResources/ActiveDutyPilotSlot/tabid/66/Default.aspx Here are the details about the 215s that are in that PDF: One thing I will add to reinforce the point: stratification is the rage right now, and it is as close to being "required" as possible. Your raters on the 215 need to stratify you (preferably HIGH, of course!), so make sure they find a way to make that happen. Either strats among your fellow UPT applicants, or among other people in your career field, or your rank, whatever...gotta have it. That's what's going to make a difference between an average 215 and one that grabs the attention of the board. In addition, search this board for the posts Dupe and I made a year or two ago after our Commander participated in the active duty selection board. His observations were worth their weight in gold, IMHO. EDIT: Here's the link to that thread. http://www.flyingsquadron.com/forums/index.php?/topic/12904-active-duty-upt-board-selection-brief/

Anybody looked up Mr Ramos' office symbol on the Global? I'm betting there are people out there with less letters in their office symbols who'd be very interested about Mr Ramos' new "mission". Now, if you'll excuse me, I need to go get a clue as to what it takes to keep us whiny girls qualified to fly planes.

Steve, have you tried posting this over on AirWarriors? Much higher Pk of getting someone with Seahawk and Prowler experience over there.

They lost credibility at "DFAC".

What just happened? Is this still the boob avatar thread?

Get used to it. I was the first person ever to PCS to the CONUS from my overseas base, too.

Valid shot...hence my comment above about her potentially having a "good personality".

Vegas still just seems like someone with a good sense of humor. Uh oh...she might have a "good personality".

Some Flight Docs have the ability to sign off FAA medicals, and some don't. Ask yours beforehand if (s)he can, and they'll do the paperwork. If not, spend your $69 like the rest of the community and have some doc downtown sign you off.

I think it's pretty funny, actually. C'mon, we bitch and moan every day that shoes are a bunch of lifeless drones who have no grasp on the reality of our mission...and one comes along with what appears to be a pretty good sense of humor that pokes right at the whole "mission" argument, and we bag on (her? I'm assuming that's her gender based on your post, Hoss). Although I think CGOC is pretty retarded, I'll admit that before I was an aviator I went to numerous CGOC events. The "community service" events and such were usually followed up by a bunch of Lts trying to recapture their college days through several cases of beer. It was fun, I have to admit.

Well, there's only one way this thread can go: we need to post these avatars in the main body of the forum so they are preserved for posterity sake (and not lost when we change our avatars later). Mods: Edit the thread title and add "NSFW" please. I'll start...

The Goldsboro News-Argus had photos on their website the day the names were released.

It's really quite religious -- I mean, who could argue with this kind of proof that there is, in fact, a God and that he loves us?

Check back four posts before yours and see.

In honor of this thread, I have changed my avatar to something less offensive to the former Vietnamese who operated the Hanoi Hilton.

Not to worry. The SECDEF has assured us that the Reaper and Pred can handle it.

There are about 4 different designs in those "artist's conceptions". Sounds like a lot of hot air.

Thumbs down for use of the nomenclature "AK-47" when he meant something other than the fully automatic Kalashnikov. Probably WASR-10s or RPKs for the price he's talking about. Using the name "AK-47" does nothing but stir up fear in the namby-pambys who think that they're actually giving away NFA/Title II weapons. Note: Big up to him if he DID actually mean AK-47 -- if he wants to pay the price, pay the tax stamp and go through all the paperwork, then good on him and the people that buy cars from him.

http://www.newsargus.com/news/archives/2009/07/19/pilot_wso_identified/

This article today from the Goldsboro News-Argus prompted me to write them: http://www.newsargus.com/news/archives/2009/07/19/two_from_sjafb_killed_in_jet_crash/ My letter, in response to the bold section of the article above:

BAI and KI are not the same as SCAR. You're correct that SCAR was a follow-on to Killer Scout, but the focus of SCAR is to find things and identify targets for other people to kill after your bombs are gone -- there is a recce/ISR piece to SCAR that is not explicitly part of KI (or was not part of BAI).

In the early days of OIF, they used the term "Killbox Interdiction" (KI) to describe roughly the same mission as BAI. I haven't seen that term since then, but then again there hasn't been any teritory beyond the FSCL since then either.