Hacker

Before you guys start going all "SNAPs invented Lieutenants not saluting each other", I'll pass along that my father, who was a USAF pilot during the Korean War, told me about the "Rank among Lieutenants..." bit when I was just a little kid. So, I guess you'll have to consider a Korean-era B-29 pilot a SNAP, because that "tradition" of Lts not saluting each other has apparently been around the USAF since about 1955.

The F-15E that I bought from squadrontoys a while ago totally sucks. I have an Asian Imports T-38 that I like significantly better.

Not much more to say, but "throw a nickel on the grass, save a fighter pilot's ass." THE quintessential USAF fighter pilot, as far as I'm concerned, and a great loss to the fighter community.

If this is the case, then you need to talk with them about more than just the ADSC...

People who mis-use apostrophes are equally as dangerous.

You're not the only one frustrated. All I can do is pay my AOPA membership and hope that all of the varied aviation lobbies squash the user fee idea as it is currently fielded. I feel the pain that airspace is slowly being constricted around GA, however so long as there are not user fees to go through controlled airspace, it's really not that big of a deal to use the US Airspace System.

I don't know where you got the idea that you were being demonized. I certainly don't think that. You were involved in something that was new to you, and were asking for opinions and information, which I think is highly commendable. I was trying to provide a perspective. You're damn right I've made mistakes and done dumb things in airplanes -- never claimed I have not. Forgotten where I came from? Certainly not. I am an active GA pilot (or I was, at least, before I PCSd to the UK recently) so I know that there are two sides to the story. I am actually irritated that there often is a military-vs-GA debate, because we're all pilots and we are all striving for essentially the same goal.

I never suggested any of those things. I was providing some perspective from someone who has also worked my way through college and paid for flying lessons and ratings AND uses MOAs for military training. No, you probably didn't sh*t away their whole day of training. When I flew T-38s, a GA aircraft flying through the MOA could cause a loss of about 30% of the day's training, which is significant.

Actually, it's probably quite the opposite. They probably did NOT see you coming, and had to turn their attention away from whatever work they were doing to avoid you. Yes, it's legal to fly through a hot MOA...it's just not smart. It's also pretty rude to the guys trying to conduct training (on the extremely limited flying hours they have) in that MOA. What about it rude to you, as someone who is just trying to exercise his priveleges as a GA pilot? Yup, it is a little rude. And it may cost you a little from your pocketbook to avoid the MOA.

Fuseplug, have you ever actually been in a military aircraft conducting training in a MOA? I was a GA pilot for many years before I started flying for the AF. I'm completely aware of what "right" a GA aircraft has to fly through an active MOA. I'd NEVER do it (an extra $50 in fuel? Gimme a f*cking break, waah, cry me a river) because I know how having an un-briefed aircraft in a MOA sh*ts on the training you can get. Wanna talk about a waste? When your jet burns $10K of fuel per hour and you can't use it to get any worthwhile training because some GA pilot doesn't want to take the long way around or under a MOA.

Trust me, Rainman, if they'd let us throw rockets on the two "unused" wing pylons on the F-15E (1 and 9 for the technically inclined), I'd be ALL for it.

With the F-15E's upcanted gun and the limited effective range of the 20mm, strafe is one of the riskier attacks that the airplane can do. It is exactly the opposite of the A-10, where it is the easiest weapon to use in any situation. It's not something that I would use in a threat environment just to MARK a target. To kill something...sure, gladly, any day. But, if I'm not sure where the target is before the pass, I'm sure as f*ck not going to stick my nose downhill and try and ID it through the pipper while I'm screaming at the dirt at 480 KCAS.

You actually completely missed the sarcasm of my post -- JTACs sometimes make some really retarded weaponeering requests. Marking the target with the gun is a really stupid idea (I know it's not a big deal in the Hog, but a strafe is a relatively high-performance maneuver for an F-15E) as is hitting a mover with a GPS-guided weapon.

Superb post, Rainman. I'm at Bagram right now sitting CAS Alert, and your words could not ring more true. Thanks...

Weaponeering doesn't really make a difference when the JTAC knows exactly what kind of weapon he wants and when he wants it. Like when he'd like me to "mark the target with 20mm" or hit a moving truck with a GBU-39.

As mentioned, the Hog puts on a pretty cool bat-turn and in a 9K setup with the A-10 defensive this ends up giving the appearance of a high-aspect merge! In the F-15E, the vertical was the best answer -- zoom up several thousand feet while the defender was "circling the Hogs" and point the nose down for slashing attacks. There was really no way to actually get to and maintain the control zone.

Interestingly, it's not that simple in the AT-38. Being a good BFM'er in the Eagle does not translate directly to the T-38. Similar can be said for dropping bombs. I think that in general, all IPs were able to perform the IFF missions at an equal level regardless of what MWS they came from. The two exceptions were in some of the CT missions: A-10 guys had a little less proficency at ACM, and F-15C guys had a little less proficiency at CAS. As far as the standard multirole IFF missions....based on what I saw with IPs dropping "nerf bombs" at IFF, there were two factors that offset each other: - IPs that came from bomb-dropper MWSs had an immediate ability to "see the wire" and it was easier to make corrections to parameters. On the other hand, the habit patterns established in the individual MWSs did not necessarily translate directly to the AT-38C (especially with Hog guys but also to some extent with Strike Eagle guys). - IPs that came from Eagles had no pre-established habit patterns and had to learn how to do it from scratch. Once they learned, they had no pre-established habit patterns that detracted from the AT-38C TTPs.

I can't take credit for that one...it was the lead-off slide in a job briefing at SOS by a UPT classmate of mine, Putty Eaglin. Well stated, IMHO.

Yeah, it must be insanely difficult to pick up the JFIRE and flip a couple of pages from the "Call for Fire" page to the "JCAS 9-line" page. While I understand the point, CAS is CAS...regardless of how the talk-on progresses and whom it progresses to. Having a guy who all ready understands what .1% PI means is a benefit over someone who has never read the JPub.

Here are a few constant naming ceremony options: Vaginal Blood Fart (VBF) Sperm-Burping Gutter Wench (SBGW) Triple-Ripple Butt Plug Shaved Dog's Ass (SDA) ...and my favorite... Asshole + peg number (e.g. Asshole 25, Asshole 18, etc) I have tried to name a guy FCO, pronounced 'fucko', for dating Fat Chicks Only. Didn't make it past the hordes, though.

???? What on earth is the AF missing without the Spartan??

Well....not really. Has a lot more to do with avionics use while still being able to fly fast and turn tight. Has nothing to do with the lack of a 2-seat trainer. The fact of the matter is that T-38 based IFF just doesn't produce a product that the Raptor community can use. The skillset that the current IFF program produces -- e.g. a wingman -- is not what the Raptor needs. The biggest complaint was that the way the F-22 employs is not like how standard fighters operate, and that every pilot needed to have at LEAST 2-ship flight lead kinds of skills, and they'd prefer something on the order of Mission Commander skills. If you look at the requirements they had for who they were accepting from the CAF -- 2-ship FL min and current in a radar-equipped fighter -- that is some hint as to what they are looking for their basic qualifications. This is an issue that was being worked on the entire three years I was at IFF, and the last I heard was that there was going to be an interim solution prior to a major overhaul of the IFF program. The major overhaul would include replacing the T-38 with a different aircraft that has performance and avionics which can accomplish the required training. Looks like this is the interim solution.

You don't wear them if you're just wearing the blues shirt without the service dress jacket, but if you wear the jacket you wear your ribbons. As I said...I haven't worn my blues in about 5 years...and even then that was the first time I'd worn them since UPT graduation.

Looking for some experience from anyone who has ordered one of those custom ribbon sets for their blues from someplace like www.ultrathin.com or www.superthinribbons.com. I hate to say it, but I haven't "updated" my blues since I went to SOS about 5 years ago and I have to wear them for an event in about a month. So, I'm gonna go buy a set off the 'net. Any recommendations or reviews, aviation brothers?

I personally don't care if it's exclusively a pilot thing, or if it has anything to do with being Mission Qual'd, or with retention, or anything like that. If it were up to me, the uniform issue A-2 would be just like it was in the 40s, sans the leather name tag and MAJCOM patch. Oh, and we'd be able to paint nose art on the back. Of course, I'm all for painting nose art on the jets, too, but that's beside the point. I'm even for bringing back pinks 'n' greens, along with the tucked-in tie, hehheh. The current-issue A-2 is different than the A-2 of the 40s, and as far as I can tell the changes were made with the Avirex contract of the late 90s. The original Cooper A-2s that were issued in the late 80s and early 90s were true to the wartime A-2 pattern. The one I was issued in '00 has three notable modifications: the neck closure hook has been eliminated, extra material has been added to the under-arm area (a popular Pop's Leather mod!), and the pockets have been subtly modified to allow the side-entry. I think the story of how the A-2 came back is pretty interesting. It's almost as amazing as the success of ACC Heritage Flight (which I expeted to fizzle and die after the 50th Anniversary in '97). https://www.afa.org/magazine/1993/0993jacket.asp