ClearedHot

Maybe they were verboten in some obscure reg kept in a deep dark recess of USAF/HQ...and completely ignored by everyone including the CSAF. Now the Shoes have won another battle in the endless war of queep, soon, they will conquer us and all that is good. A Lt Col Afraid of a CMSgt...UFB!

Because things don't always work out like you think they will...kind of like when they designed the F-4 and did not put a gun on it because all future airwars were going to be BVR faceshots (sts).

I am a FGO...I don't have a braided belt, I wear blue jeans not dockers, and I never tuck in my polo shirt. Even if I did all of the above, nothing says heinous like a SNCO with his hair parted down the middle.

Fail... First rule of debrief, admit mistakes and learn from them. Quibbling or making excuses equals pay double.

No idea what this sentence means...also, no idea why you posted a picture of the A29 Super Tucano in a thread about the AT-6? Super-T AT-6

Nothing says fun like slinging 105MM hate at some soon to be red mist zombies. New mark is 1125. Going to be hard to beat that with the Civs running into the fray.

PCAS reaches first design review ...The programme will use an unmanned A-10 Thunderbolt II or ‘Warthog’ for the demonstration in 2015... ...It is understood that DARPA is considering four munitions including the JDAM, Laser Maverick, 2.75-in rocket and gun...

If the LGPOS could haul more than two bombs to the fight you might do better.

1016

Just ask your mom to show you her drivers license...son.

Completely true, it says NO POINTS on the ticket...ergo, no insurance premium increase. This is simply a battle against the man who is trying to collect revenue.

Agreed, but from what I hear, the court is not very tolerant of long-winded speeches about "confronting my accuser", "paying with pictures of money", or other "speed cameras are unconstitutional" declarations. The guy that recently won his case did so with math and was able to generate reasonable doubt. I really want help with the math and the formula...clearly the reflected signal would be large enough to encompass the other vehicle as close as it is. I just want to prove that.

No...local law and printed on the ticket, you are required to provide that information in the form of a notarized affidavit on the back of the ticket if you want to claim you were not driving.

You are required to provide the name, current address, and driver's license number of the person that was driving.

Normally I would agree but there is a big story on the local news about a local man who used data to prove the speed cameras just across the river are not working properly. In short, the cameras in Maryland take two pictures, he was able to overlay the pictures and show the speed calibration was incorrect. He already won three cases and has another 40 tickets he is contesting. I checked and the DC cameras record two pictures, but one is just a close up of the license plate and cannot be used as an overlay as outlined above. I appreciate the "check the certification" suggestions, but I would rather beat them with facts and math. I just have yet to find the formula to prove what I think is true. One thing at a time.

Great idea, but no beer for you...

The link works for me, goes directly to the PDF and downloads a 24 slide presentation.

Beers to those who help me defeat the man! (Disclaimer, you must come to DC to collect, I will also pay up if I find myself TDY to your location) Below is a picture of my lovely bride captured by a DC Speed camera...in a freaking Work Zone (with no workers), so she got a $125.00 ticket. She swears she was not speeding and that she knows exactly where this camera is so she is always careful in that area. She is not a known lead foot and I tend to believe her as I was directly behind her in the same lane, (we were on the way to the beach for a week), and I did not get a ticket. I was going to just pay the freaking ticket when I noticed the other car in the picture. Picture two has the depiction and verbiage from the back of the ticket and describes the beam width as 5 degrees, offset 20 degrees from the road. They claim the camera will not take a picture with another car in the beam. After looking at it I am a bit skeptical. I spent a little time on Google but have not yet found a suitable beam spread calculator for K band radar, I did however find some charts for a 10 degree beam and was able to interpolate down to a five degree beam which would make the beam width 10.2' @ 120 from the radar. Picture three shows my wife's car which is 72.2" wide with the 10.2' overlay. While the other may or may not be in the beam outbound, the beam width on reflection is at least 20.4' and the other car is certainly in the beam at that point. Anyone else have any ideas...

Our end strength won't drop like the other services (USA and USMC). While we are marginally over end strength, we are not looking for a mass exodus. The Air Force to a greater extent than the other services relies on highly trained people to man many key career fields, that training takes time to develop, and we are not looking to thin the heard by massive numbers. I look for the Marines to drop from 202,000 to below 176,000,....just a guess The USA will see an even larger drop. In the end if USAF does reduce it will be in much smaller numbers and if too many people try to leave I think it will take .69 seconds for them to drop Stop-Loss on critical career fields...i.e. Fighter Pilots. If these changes take place...I would strongly encourage my son NOT to join the military. If the new system becomes retro-active, I would also likely retire at the first opportunity.

Try 20....

Sorry Bra, not everyone can be a gunship pilot.

I guess I spend more time at work than you do...and I certainly won't open that thread in the office.

U.S. Air Forces Central Command Band goes viral https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eBaskRZDbNA

Man Allegedly Urinates on 11-Year-Old Girl During Flight to New York