Hacker

Sorry, gotta post this again:

You are my hero, Tracy. Flame on.

There is no national registry of DFC recipients, and the DFC society only lists people who have applied to be members of the organization and had their (or their relative's) award of the medal verified. Having worked with base historians before, it's not very likely that the Vance Historian is going to be able to provide you with much. If he went through training there, you might get his class number, might get a class photo, but that is about it. Certainly nothing on a medal he was awarded long after leaving Vance. The best way to really find out is to research through the US National Archives, where military personnel records are filed. The citation for the medals should be part of those personnel records. This is a fairly easy process, and I know several people who have done it and obtained some very great bits of history from the files. http://www.archives.gov/veterans/military-...ce-records.html

Well, yes and no. Yes, that's what I meant...that U-2s don't just drop on FAIPs as part of the normal process. But, there's more to it than that. My understanding from this particular dude, whom I worked with in the OSS at Moody, was that his flying SQ/CC did not support him seeking out a job in the U-2. There was something that had occurred which made the CC want to see this individual go to the 135. It was being in the OSS, with a CC that thought he did really great work (he did...) and supported his desire to get to the U-2, that allowed him to start working the interview process at Beale. Don't get me wrong...this guy is a very good dude, great pilot, great officer. He absolutely is an asset to the program, I'm sure. I think he got a *nearly* bad shake from a boss, though.

Realize that guy did not "get" U-2s...that assignment didn't just roll down the pipeline to him. His default assignment, had he not sought out the U-2, was going to be a KC-135. He actively went out after the assignment at Beale. He arranged on his own to go out for the interview, etc, and mostly because he was an attached OSS guy and the OSS/CC let him do it.

I owned a NaviHawk back in the day...I was attracted to it becaused it just "seemed" like a cool pilot watch. Unfortunately, it let me down in two ways; One, it hard broke -- the LCD screen went purple and black one day when I dropped it. It was significantly more fragile than my Omega or Breitling. Hell, it's more fragile than the SUPT-issue G-Shock. Two, I never, ever used any of those "cool features" that attracted me to it in the first place. Seriously. That little itty bitty E6B on the bezel? Worthless. 1500 different time zones? Who cares...I can reset the hour hand easier than I can hunt for what time zone Afghanistan is in. So, to me all the Citizen pilot watches are a lot of hype that don't really offer much to the pilot like you and I. Maybe joe private pilot in his C-172 might dig all those tiny dials and hash-marks and a kajillion different digital features....

I would like a photo of the flight attendant's boobs, while we're making requests.

CAP-10....don't waste your time with the Citizen.

No, not true. Remember, there are two different definitions of "pilot in command" time. - The FAA Part 61 definition says that when you are the "sole manipulator of the flight controls" in an aircraft for which you are rated, you can log PIC -- regardless of if you are with an instructor or not. - The "airline" definition says that you're the PIC only when you signed for the aircraft. So, JT was asking specifically about what the FAA considers, not what the airlines consider. By the FAA definition, once you pass your first checkride and can "area solo", that's when you are officially checked out in that aircraft (that's according to the Memphis FSDO back in 1999 when I asked them specifically about this situation). If you have a license for the same category/class of airplane (e.g. FAA ASEL), then you can log every minute that you are the sole manipulator of the controls as PIC. Here's a good article, but a little dated, that gives more information on how the military, the FAA, and the airlines differ in what they consider PIC time: http://www.jet-jobs.com/articles/loggingpic.html Also note that one of the mods has appended this article to a previous thread that has good discussion, too.

The real question is, WITHOUT your UPT time, how close are you to the 1500 hours? Second, did you have your FAA ticket before you started SUPT? There are plenty of ways to creatively log your USAF time depending on how close you are and how many total sorties you have. A F-16 bud of mine kept his own logbook in which he kept FAA times, logging "aircraft moves under its own power" and "primary manipulator of the controls" time -- the two areas where military time diverges from how civilians do it. This USAF time was something like 1200 hours, but by his FAA-style timekeeping he had nearly 1600. When I was in UPT, the Memphis FSDO told me that my T-37 time could be logged as PIC after the Midphase checkride, since that was the time that I became "qualified" in the airplane at the same level as my Private ticket.

Tracy - Please, please, tell us more. That is quite possibly the best post I've read in the last 5 years on Baseops.

http://www.airforcetimes.com/news/2008/07/...afghan_072808w/

I've flown with it for going on nine years...beat the living crap out of it for a couple years flying defensive BFM in the T-38 twice a day...and it is still as sweet as the day I got it. VERY durable. Early X-33s that were sold to military guys suffered some problems and they got a bit of a bad name. Omega redesigned many of the components in that "Generation 1" watch, and the ones you order today are the "Generation 2" follow on, so they should have none of the issues (mostly pushers popping out). My watch had none of the reported mechanical problems and is still going strong. Toro's edited pic:

The forums at www.lowfly.net also have tons of pics from Cad Pass and Bwlch.

That's the kind of sh*t that NEEDS to be said -- in public -- by a SQ/CC or above.

Needed to be quoted for posterity. Great, great f*cking post.

I just heard that friday patches were banned by a new Wing CC at Spangdahlem, too. My jaw was on the floor when I read the C-17 post, but to hear that a fighter wing banned friday patches...well, that just knocked my what-the-f*ck-o-meter right off the charts. Was there an AWC class in the last year or two who all decided that they were going to single handedly destroy the last little bastions of morale the flying community had once they took over power?

So, every Fighter Wing in the AF is busting this reg every Friday?

I seem to remember circa '98/99 some of the students had a friday patch that had "Columbus Blasé" on it. Speaking of dumb slogans, anybody know how Moody/479 FTW got the slogan "America's Flying Training Wing"?

There have been numerous criticisms of both the book and the series. The main claim is that Evan significantly sensationlized the events, especially the ones he did not witness but wrote as if he did.

The more important question is, are you having a problem with it now? If you're not having a problem with it in IFF, the techniques provided during your qual spin at Holloman should be more than adequate to keep you awake in the Viper. As was said earlier, if you are "USAF standard" physically fit -- if you can pass the PT test -- you should generally be just fine to handle G once you use the techniques taught by the physiology people without some "program" to get you ready for it. If you ARE having a problem dealing with G in the T-38, even after going to the 'fuge (or if you've failed the 'fuge and have to go back to pass in order to go to FTU) then talk to the physiologists and they can design a specific workout routine to work with your body type.

Probably a disgruntled TAMI-21'd fighter guy trying to take out the PC-12 fleet one at a time. As the man says, "that's one less spot for me."

I agree that, if you're into Tupperware, that's a sweet pistol. Anyone have a Kahr PM-9? I've been interested in one of those for several years as a carry pistol. I have had the opportunity to shoot a P-9 once, and it was very awkward for me since I am used to the single-action trigger of the 1911. I think if I practice with it, though, I can get used to the DAO trigger pull.

On the other hand, I would think the more important question to contemplate is why anyone would want/need anything other than a 1911. WWJMBD? Remember, a 1911 is a type of pistol, so price and quality vary widely between manufacturer and model. If you are looking for an entry level 1911 with a basic GI configuration, I recommend the Rock Island Armory fullsize and the Springfield GI (both around $400-$500, and about $100 cheaper used). Many people find the GI sights too small to use, so the next step up is the Springfield Mil-Spec, for about $650. Once you get North of those base models, then the field is wide open. A lot of people like Kimber, but IMHO they are more show than go. The original Series 1 Kimbers are actually very high quality pistols if you can find them on the used market. What they are selling new today isn't even close to being worth the price they are charging. My personal preference if you wanted something higher quality than the Springfield (or wanted to Buy American) is to get a Colt.

MILF! MILF! MILF!