BFM this

Or it means that you weren't a non-vol. A little encouragement for more folks to "take the red pill".

10 years from now I imagine that this era will be referred to as BT2 (Bathtub 2).

Already hashed out. Ad nauseam. I don't have time to point you toward the discussion; look in the "Track Select/Assignment" thread circa 07-08 when UAV's started going to UPT grads. Though it was agreed that the concept was bullshit on a some levels, your argument boiled down to a "crybaby" approach to the problem. While added to the list of personnel-management shenanigans that I think are on the verge of biting the AF in the ass, it was well within the AF's rights to do so. And yes, those saddled with the assignment were duty-bound to execute. And by all reports, they have.

several great points made in the last couple of pages, though I think we're all just circling the Root Cause. Service? Yeah, Hacker, I'm leaning toward the EABOD crowd on that one; if you want to drive the "service" point home, give Randolph a call, I'm sure you'll have a RIP before you hang up the phone. Well, no, I don't really think that you should do that. Why not? Because right now no pilot in his right mind should volunteer for this black hole. That takes us a step closer to the point. I've spent the better part of the last three weeks getting at best 4-5 hours a night, waking up several times with one central thought every time: "I'm going to UAVs". That thought really sux. But wait, what sucks about it? The mission? Schedule? Stress? Learning/broadening/advancement opportunities? Nope, all of my friends who've been or are there have nothing but great things to say (caveat that they DO want back into a jet), and truth be told, this nerd is actually a bit motivated overall. Getting warmer. So why is every rated Officer that’s worth a shit avoiding this assignment like The Plague? I’ll throw a “service” spear—right at AF leadership. Their actions over the last 5 years have been self serving, myopic, and damaging to this mission. Self serving because their only concern has been to give their Masters short term solutions that were flagrantly flawed over the long term. TAMI-21? Permanent MWS assignment? Non-vol? No ALFA credit? Return to flying boards? YGBSM!!! Where does the buffoonery end? At this point, Leadership and AFPC have ZERO credibility with those in the field who are getting, in, or even considering this assignment. I personally think the RTFBs are a red herring at best, if not completely disingenuous. We’ll see. Here’s two steps toward fixing this problem and giving this a permanent place in our assignment system: 1: this field will be 100% manned. Already been stated by leadership. This IS an important mission: press. 2: this will be a CONTROLED ALFA tour. Exceptions will be voluntary. No compromise. It has to be no compromise, as a contract, made by AF leadership to those that they should want to fill these positions: the best and brightest rated officers. Not the unwilling, kicking and screaming crowd that they have DESIGNATED by design to fill this field right now. 3: You want volunteers? Guaranteed TX course follow on. Assignment of choice for a 1 year extension. Add up #1 and #2 and you have a real personnel problem reaching across the CAF. Not insurmountable though. The rest of the assignment system will be strained by manning and assignment length. The UAV community itself will suffer those same stresses; RTU will go into overdrive in the short term. At some point the 18X AFSC should dovetail to help even things out. The way we’re going right now is toward another bathtub. Oh yeah, there is absolutely no reason that this problem should have ever reached this point. Side note: IMO, 18x aside, this mission should NEVER be completely devoid of rated participation. Separate discussion. BL: Leadership is trying to sell this as a great experience, with great opportunities, while every real action and policy has treated this asset/mission like they don’t really believe in what they’re selling. Leadership doesn’t believe that a promising officer should even want this as a “broadening” tour. From what I’ve read and discussed with friends, this mission is a valuable broadening experience, on par with ALO or UPT/IFF, if not more so. Meanwhile the mission has suffered from the “min qualification O2-converter” mindset of current manning policy. Leadership is treating the “ALFA” poker chip as a personnel management tool, they’ve completely lost sight (or just don’t care) about their greater responsibility to shepherd the development of future officers (at least within this narrow scope). OPR signed, another assignment, another star, UAV manning: forgotten. Those in place right now (Leadership): put your $ where your mouth is.

That program was in decline long before now. I'm sure many of the saltier staff know more of the history, but some of the milemarkers on its way downhill: -end of the Staff Air Transport Service (hastened along by Flightstar and for a while, two carriers into Willard) -getting rid of the Helos, and while I was there, the Stearman -end of the Mx program -inability of the current program to sell itself to the mainstream academic programs on campus (can't count how many HF experiments I was required to participate in over 4yrs) UofI is white-trash Ivy League (like to think they're IL, but obviously not). It's tough to hang out with that crowd when you have that 'vocational education' eyesore on campus.

Agreed, but then the Kabuki-Phantom showed up, and that was just disturbing for some reason...

Mentoring.

Caveman, If you don't mind, this seemed like a discussion relevant to this thread, and might draw other viewpoints, so I brought it here. One additional thought that I'd had was that the bulk of the USMC pilot pool (to support FAC, AirOff, and staff billets) wasn't from jets, but from RW. So as the numbers shrink from a lot of CH-46's to a lesser number of MV-22's, I imagine a manning problem for tradtional MEU and other functions tradtionaly supported by x-number of pilots from the fleet.

30" google search. The only pointy-nosed 4thMAW (USMCR) squadron left. As of 7 years ago, when I left USMCR, the only way into the pilots seat was through AD.

Great info, thanks. I put the question to the registrar's office directly. They replied along the lines of: "No, Silly, you can't get TWO master's. DUH!" The reply I sent back went something along the lines of: -I'm trying to game the system, not get two master's. -I know I'm not the first to come up with this idea, and I'll bet you're wise to it. -Will I be allowed to game the system? It's guys like me who probably got you that Leadership Concentration course right off the bat. YW.

This seemed like the most appropriate thread to revive for this question: I'd like to start work toward ACSC Online Master's (the goal being to do the PME/Master's in one vul). Unfortunately, I'm not eligible. Air University is offering an OLMP in a Leadership Concentration for which I am eligible. That course has the same Core Courses as the Joint Warfare Concentration (ACSC). So my question is: Can I start work in the one Concentration, then transfer to the other once eligible? The variable would be in what order the courses are completed and if I have any control over that. IE, if I can start with the Core Courses only, most of that work will be done when I'm eligible to do the Concentration Courses (ACSC vice Leadership). If they are "striped", then I'm doing a bunch of course work (Leadership Concentration) that doesn't gain ground toward the goal (I'll just get my Masters elsewhere and do ACSC when that time comes). Just tryin to get ahead of the game a little. Sidebar: anyone completed either OLMP? Feedback/review?

Since somone mentioned Rosie Roads: NAS Bermuda! Or, in keeping with this thread's track: Kindley AFB.

Maybe those layers of insulation that he had while on AD are gone. 12 pages of this thread; does anyone think that any substantial fraction of the info here made it to his ears while he had stars on his shoulder? My bet is that he prob still doesn't accept his image yet, but the gears might be turning. Or like Hacker pointed out, he prob hired someone who is whispering: "Dude, tone it the fuck down already!" in his ear.

What year chickenhawk? I lost an engine in a 68 model, on a moonless night, S&L 7500'. Had some time, tried a throttle burst, which seemed to get a bit of a response, then I tried the primer, which gave me 2-3 second bursts of power; enough to get me up over a final glide to the nearest field. The motor suddenly woke back up as I was rolling out on final, but by that time I was as good as checked into the nearest motel... Mechanic said it was likely vapor lock (which made little to no sense).

Need to start a new thread, stickied, of "Classic First Posts".

Yes, but true to AF tradition, the t-clones have a cast of thousands lugging how many barney's worth of stuff while the blues have *A* herk...

I've taken the time to paraphrase this sentiment on every post deployment "Are You Going to Off Yourself? Survey" that I get sent. I know that it isn't going to go anywhere, but like a near-beer, I can pretend for a moment. Edit: spell check is your friend.

anyone notice in that slideshow that they intend to start stamping out new CH-53's? Interesting...

Moody just implemented a all-vest all-the-time policy a short time ago. To a lot of safety conscious riders here, this new policy sets the rider/safety/command relationship back a solid decade. I've got a 10# custom armor leather jacket with far more reflective material built in than any vest on the market (cause I had it custom made). Acording to the new policy, I can leave that hanging in my closet b/c it's not a vest. The Icon Mil-Spec backpack is ok, as long as (I'm not making this shit up) it has it's own vest wrapped around it. Reflective belt around a backpack is a no-go. BL is that DOD sets the baseline, and from there ymmv based on how much your local command hates motorcycles (cause most do). \\rant off\\

The 38 is a lot of things, slow not being one of them. For pattern and transition work, no prob. Ain't nothin chasin that girl once she was off the leash, though.

You've got a sick mind.

Not really a true revival. I think this was a derailment snipped from the "Track Select/Assignment" thread a few days ago, and pasted, more appropriately, here. The mods really need some sort of chat window to keep the SA flowin.

Gringo, First off, my vote on your original question is "FVCK YEAH!". You've already explored most of the why's and how-to's so I won't belabour the issue, but I'll add something to consider. It's been a while since GA in this country (or anywhere for that matter) has had an experience base in conventional gear primary flight trainig. The school that you are looking at may have some CFI's that are experienced TW instructors, but they may have never taken a stud from 0-PPL in TW. I had a student walk through the door when I was teaching at an FBO that wanted to do the same as you. Luckily (since I was the only TW-CFI there) I got the job. But he and I fought an uphill battle with issues that the typical trike pilot doesn't have to deal with on the way to a checkride. Checkride day: It was the chief pilot from the university I'd been attending that came over to give the ride. After he opens the guy's logbook, he paused, and raised an eyebrow in my direction... Needless to say, we went well over the 40 hour goal (and well over the 55 hour average) to PPL. Worth it? In hindsight, I'm not so sure. To him, well, he could afford it (he was retired) and it's what he wanted to do. He's gone on to his retirement dream job flight instructing at Ohio State. fwiw

Jarheadboom: 96-0202. And I wasn't even there... CrewReport: two posts earlier, based on discussion in this thread, the number is playing Waldo in the picture you provided as well. C'mon, you can do it... For those that have been trumpeting on the 18yo just out of training = IB FAIL. But if you're satisfied with that... For those that ask why this is important to us, 2 reasons: 1) most of my trips to the boom were just a welcome change of scenery during my last depolyment. A chance to stow the pod and fill a piddle pack. Ocaisionally though, I didn't have you up hot mic b/c I was working three radios and plugging grids while you were looking for the next cloud. Ever wondered why you heard my voice talking to Wizard while plugged? 2) you've got your 18yo baby boom, I've got my just out of MQT wm. I'm trying to hammer radio discipline into him while you want to fill out a travel voucher over the radio. This is an important skill that may save someone's life someday (read turning a TIC into a controlled bad-guy killing environment post above). Before the flames, I'd like to recognize the crews that get it: To the pilot who unexpectedly rolled out one afternoon while I was on the boom. "Understand you wanted to turn back uptrack?" "Yeah, but the sun is in another 20 degrees, so we're rolling out till you're complete" I nearly cried. To the pilot who figured out how to do a 200fpm tobbagin when that's all that I needed and 300fpm would've put us in the clouds. To those who insist I disco before you'll start a tb: To all those who give TCAS SA based on bearing instead of "I show you at my 10 o'clock" And my all time favorite: thank you to the booms who refrain from starting a metronome with the boom just after I start forward to contact. WTF is that, anyway? You understand I'm flying vis-refs, right?

Top-3 in the fighter world is the term for squadron supervision during flying ops. The OG puts a SOF in the tower, the FS/CC puts typically a Flt/CC or ADO at the desk (referred to as Top-3). Job comes with expectation to get verbally crushed every few tours.