Hacker

That's exactly the problem -- it is this kind of "begging the question", a statement that is made as fact when it has never been substantiated as being true. Immutable characteristics don't define anything about an individual's character, intelligence, skill, attitudes, etc. The layer after layer of self-selection that is required in order to find one's self in a UPT class virtually guarantees that there is a huge commonality of humanity, motivation, character, attitudes, etc., between classmates.

Uh...I don't even know how to respond to such a logic-free hypothesis. Maybe next they can check to see if different t-shirt colors lead to higher graduation rates.

Only one of the three that I know of. The Personal Endorsement continues to be important, but the same things that have always made a strong application apparently continue to be too.

What is amazing is that, in an Air Force that is massively overly concerned with "how things look", on this one they're mostly concerned with trying desperately to gaslight the people who have identified that there is a problem into thinking that *they* are the problem. The AF can't even get their own dysfunctional leadership processes and priorities executed well.

Had three friends get FedEx interview invitations this week, and one get a job offer at UPS. The dudes who got Purple invites: - One current active duty pointy-nose TPS grad O-4 with a separation date on file this fall. - One former pointy-nose driver, now reserve SUPT IP O-3. - One former AD/reserve MC-12 and C-17 O-4, now a couple years into a Legacy (and vulnerable to being furloughed) who didn't previously have a FX app in. The UPS guy is a former pointy-nose DO who is freshly-separated.

My view in the rearview mirror says that it really took a no-shit turn for the worse right around 9/11.

No, it was a generic "you", not *you* specifically. Really I meant "The AF". This has been the organizational emblem of USAF Mortuary Affairs Operations since 2014. Is 6 years not long enough for the AF to un-fornicate a logo? Is it incompetence or apathy? Or worse? Literally a symbol of "what's wrong with the Air Force."

But it *is* a specific aircraft silhouette -- a Flanker -- and even if it weren't the front-line fighter of our peer-state enemies, it would be in violation of the "rule" in that it *does* depict a specific airframe. It should have never made it past the initial design review for that to begin with. Of course it wasn't intentional, but the fact that the mistake made it through multiple levels of review is what is disturbing. Even worse, the apathy shown toward fixing the error (and, bizarrely, the doubling down on the mistake and digging in of heels to *not* fix it) is a *real* cultural problem, yes. In a culture that is steeped in symbolism -- as in, nearly everything the military does has symbolic meaning -- having an organizational emblem with Flankers overflying the graves of dead American soldiers and a folded American flag is a Russian or Chinese propaganda victory if there ever was one. We should *all* find that disturbing and offensive and massively disrespectful to those who've given the ultimate sacrifice, the very people that organization purports to treat with dignity, honor, and respect. Would you be okay if, say, the "mistake" was putting a folded Chinese flag on there instead of an American flag? Or if a casket came back with a Liberian flag over it by accident? Ludicrous. I guess "excellence in all we do" is just as empty a saying as "Dignity, Honor, Respect".

Plus, there's this great vis-recce powerpoint making the rounds. pa_vis_recce-2.pptx

Here's an email that was previously sent back in January to a number of different recipients, both at Dover, the AF Historian and heraldry folks, as well as CSAF. Apparently none of those folks are concerned about the symbolism of Flankers flying over our military dead and our folded flag enough to fix it.

Had several squadronmates in fighter squadrons who were Mormons. Non-drinkers, non-smokers, non-cursers. They killed commies just as well as the rest of us heathens, and were almost always just as fun bros as anyone else. And, as Evil mentions, they are usually happy to be DDs.

Huggy's orange flight suit is f*cking boss.

As Ernie Gann wrote back in the 60s: “All airline pilots are subject to the high cock-o-lorum of seniority, whether they like it or not. The system was established to banish favoritism and to provide some basis for assignment of bases, routes, flights, and pay. Its great fault, as in any seniority system, is the absolutely necessary premise that all men are equal in ability. The dullard and the genius must both live with the ostrich philosophy that one man can fly as skillfully as another. No one, of course, maintains this to be a truth. But the seniority system must ever persist if only because it is a protection of the weak, who are everywhere in the greatest number.”

How can it be that nobody's yet posted the clip of Baseops' @Steve Davies vs @HuggyU2 battling for ultimate domination of YouTube? https://youtu.be/ZgR3wzOioks

What's sad is that UPT used to be a filter in and of itself. It was a mistake to push that responsibility off on IFF so that UPT Wing Commanders could get themselves promoted based on their percentage of successful student graduation. Thus IFF became both a choke point and a single point of failure...and it sounds like IFF has succumbed to a similar cancer as UPT. Someone has to hold the line at some point. If they don't, then we're going to have smoking holes and flag-draped caskets. Oh, surprise, surprise.

Most pointy-nosed guys I take out for an hour in this thing find it one of the most humbling (and most fun!) stick-and-rudder experiences of their flying career.

Just think of all the fellas you and I fly with who have *never* been upside-down in an aircraft. When I fly with someone who is in that category, I usually encourage them to go buy an hour or two of aerobatic instruction for their own airmanship development. I have been surprised to hear many folks respond with either, "...if I needed to know that, the company would train me to do it." or "...being upside-down in a Pitts doesn't teach me anything about what to do if it happens in a 767." So, literally, these individuals are not concerned about their first time being inverted in an airplane being in a transport-category aircraft and it occurring at an unplanned/unexpected time. SMH.

Yeah, you have proved my point precisely. You said, " you can't say fire in a crowded movie theater," and that quote clearly shows that you can. In order for it to not be protected speech, 1) It has to be "false" 2) It has to cause a panic 3) It has to cause a clear and present danger. So, can I "say fire in a crowded movie theater" if it is actually on fire? Yep. Can I "say fire in a crowded movie theater" if it neither creates a panic, or creates a clear and present danger? Yep. You may call it semantics, but if you're going to make an argument like that, being specific matters.

Actually you *can* do that. Saying the word is not illegal or prohibited.

Unfortunately that's fleet dependent. I've been actively fishing for AVA, Volunteer, Draft, vacation buyback, etc, for the last 3 months on the A300 and haven't gotten a single credit hour of 1.5 pay.

Don't forget, Hitler also breathed air, drank water, and even slept at night.

I just broke out a pair of new-old-stock Addisons that I've been hoarding for like 15 years so I can get out of the "warbird-pilot-athletic-shoes-and-flight-suit" club.

Got it, I didn't get the full picture of what you were saying with respect to the retired dudes being management pilots at the airlines.

For what reason? Maybe I had a different experience, but since retiring my attitude is: What's there to hate on bros about? Hell, I don't even really hate on Navy pilots anymore either, despite their known shortcomings as both men and aviators.

Card counting is quite a skill. Is that supposed to be a strike against him?