BFM this

You asked so, yeah, you're out of line here. Comm officers don't do the same work (danger/personal risk//length/duration/intensity of training) but they also don't get flight pay or the bonus opportunities you have. Does current flight pay/bonus structure cover the value difference of the two jobs? No, I don't think so. But I also don't feel the need to undercut the value position of a career field that I think is dangerously undervalued in terms of emerging threat horizon either. Our position stands on its own merits. Sent from my iPhone using Baseops Network Forums

9mm: 115 FMJ for plinking 147 HST otherwise. I shoot a mag or two every few trips to the range just to keep the supply rotated and test functionality. Sent from my iPhone using Baseops Network Forums

I dunno, man. I got the joke. I thought it was balzy as hell, but I got the joke. Responses seem unintentionally SNAP-ish, compared to the clumsy attempt at humor. Maybe my brain just works that way. Sent from my iPhone using Baseops Network Forums

True, but if it had turned out to be a pure, no-exceptions 1500 hour rule, that would have been a clean kill. Ironically, 1500hours probably would have worked in the AF's favor. Pilot careers would have been: -OPS assignment with plenty of "broadening"...~600 hours -RPA/ALO/365/etc -Maybe, if you're lucky, another ops assignment...but probably not. If you're lucky, 1300 hours -back to a desk/dumpster Sent from my iPhone using Baseops Network Forums

Agree with all, except the matinee ticket is 750 hours, not 1500. Still a substantially different problem to solve than the previous standard (or lack thereof), but credit where credit is due: the ERAUs and UNDs successfully lobbied themselves out of the hangmans noose. Sent from my iPhone using Baseops Network Forums

It will be interesting to see what their proposed solution will be. They could set up a robust 141/142 training program, and that could qualify their graduate to get an R-ATP at 750 hours. Graduating as a Comm/CFI would happen at ~250 hours, without applying Ponzi economics, the CFI puppy mill itself could get that graduate another 200 hours. Still 300 hours that need to be bridged somehow before that graduate can produce revenue in the right seat of an RJ. Airline subsidy with a contract term? Sent from my iPhone using Baseops Network Forums

Tonnage Coming up with metrics is easy. Metrics that matter, when it matters is the hard part. Sent from my iPhone using Baseops Network Forums

Just to cage your sight picture: If all of this is true, and Congress were to humor Fingers' request and eliminate the ATP requirement for 121 ops (It's not a 1500hr req, btw, but an ATP req, which is what drives 1500hrs), and we go back to the good old days of 250hr wonders in the right seat of RJs. You wouldn't be directly competing against those 250-1000 hour pilots. Imagine the market as one of those beer cups at the ball park that fills from the bottom. Those 250 hour pilots would flood the market--from the bottom--and the top of the market at the majors with 2500-5000 hour RJ captains. Right now, the civilian flow is stifled by a historically high barrier to entry. The CFI route--historically the biggest civilian pipeline--is chilled by lower demand as prospective pilot wannabes are daunted by that barrier and the murkier path forward. Pipeline patrol, sky-diver-driver, and other commercial time builders all pay waaayyyyy worse than even the regionals, and don't have near the capacity that the once thriving CFI puppy-mills could boast. But again, take away the 121-ATP rule, and you aren't directly competing with those 250hr wonders; they are just buoying the boats of the graduating RJ captains, who would increase pressure on your demographic.

This has been a problem for a while; just getting around to squaking code-2. I am only able to open ~1/4 of posted links at most. They neither open in the app, or push over to another browser. So if I'm really curious about a link, the fix has been to open up BODN in Chrome. Any fix within the app for this? Sent from my iPhone using Baseops Network Forums

Who said that any of them were permanent members? Rove, Jarrett, Emanuel, Axelrod; none of them were statutory NSC members, yet they all participated in meetings and discussions as Bannon is now. Sent from my iPhone using Baseops Network Forums

You don't like Bannon. Got it. Neither do I for that matter, but this doesn't pass the sniff test, unless your indignation applies across previous administrations as well. Do I need to name names? I could go back to at least Reagan off the top of my cranium, but I'm sure the Google machine will help me find earlier examples. Copy: the WH has been running the first few weeks like a rally car race, with fender scuffs to prove it. The article that you provided was that at the end of the day they are adults and found their designated lanes. Like the author said at the end: a tie.

Maybe that's the case, but it's kind of irrelevant. U2s come from all walks and fly 38s. That's why there are dedicated IPs. But at the end of the day, you're probably right. Sent from my iPhone using Baseops Network Forums

Creech AFB: just...why? Sent from my iPhone using Baseops Network Forums

It's not about longer hauls. Pilot requirements would not change. It's about hauling cruise fuel off the rwy and up to altitude, not about range. Confusions aside, this idea is a flying car in every garage. Sent from my iPhone using Baseops Network Forums

Alice Springs > Creech Sent from my iPhone using Baseops Network Forums

[Waiting for the next Reading Rainbow to chime in with "but who wants to sit in a 777 for 21 hours!?!?!?"] Sent from my iPhone using Baseops Network Forums

Then less reviving old threads and more finishing up the 20 or so hours to get your PPL. Problem solved.

https://dailycaller.com/2017/01/13/goodbye-blame-bush-hello-blame-trump/ This one?

-$150 in Hampton Roads VA Grandfathering FTW Sent from my iPhone using Baseops Network Forums

Ten years ago, and these rules will sway back and forth with the winds at AETC bases, but... I did some light flying at the local glider club and FBO while at UPT. Just did the hazardous activities worksheet, got the counseling from my flight commander to not do anything stupid,...beyond that it wasn't treated any different than riding my motorcycle or boating with friends. ymmv

You are asking for pain. Unnecessary, over-scripted, high threat (dialed back in the past few years, but nonetheless) pain. Why? Why are you getting into flying? Ego? Family pressure? Is Fun anywhere in the calculus? My recommendation: don't sweat UPT. Attitude is everything in that program. Every SIE or 89 elimination that I remember came down to attitude. My own ups and downs came down to attitude. Want to knock some of your flying rust off as a form of anxiety therapy? Do some fun learning. Good ideas: -get a Glider add on -tail wheel endorsement -upset training/acro lessons -local checkout to take the girlfriend for a sunset flight You're going to spend the next several years getting nut punched and occasionally asking if this is still fun. You are literally asking to practice your anxiety. Don't: get an instrument ticket or commercial training (see above) Coming from the guy that had all his ratings going in, and thankfully missed the IFT paintrain. Sent from my iPhone using Baseops Network Forums

While making no excuses for the train wreck that was TAMI-21, those that were affected, in general, followed two paths: -Some recatted. While there are varying accounts about whether they were sold a bill of goods, most did so with clear vision, and are thriving; WIC, school, staff, etc. I've met one or two, that suffered buyers remorse, but it wasn't wholesale. -Non-recatters thrived in place, and got jets starting in late '12 early '13 timeframe. -Same story with the original UPT-D's; first of which are often WIC grads, arriving at staff/school (recats) while the rest are in manned a/c. BL: I'm not arguing against the shitshow that was TAMI and UPT-D--those initiatives poisoned the well for a generation to come.

I don't know. The first batch of UPT-dct-RPAs shook it off, and thrived both in the suck, and their follow-on's for the most part.

How, in today's information age, could this even be a question? Is your leadership's office located under a rock? On the moon? The fact that this kind of buffoonery still exists in broad daylight... Your leadership should be publicly identified and provided counseling behind the nearest woodshed. I'd love to know what base/wing, but that would unnecessarily highlight you. FFS...

AFI 16-1301 no longer has specific verbiage, which it did when I crossed this bridge... Sent from my iPhone using Baseops Network Forums