ClearedHot

"Two"

I truly wonder if the community will tear itself apart. I wonder what will happen when large numbers of dudes/dudettes get to the end of their commitment. For folks in the business; Are the claims of high job satisfaction true? What is the divorce rate? What is the DUI rate? What is the retention rate? I am a simple man and it would seem to me the answer is NOT to train more dudes...NOT to create UAV only pilots who lack SA. The answer has to be technology. We need to develop systems that allow one pilot to fly multiple systems and only intervene when completely necessary. We need to develop sensors that don't simply stare at one spot or are limited to a soda-straw view of the battlespace. When we can open our aperture and have one person controlling 4-8-12 RPAs with each RPA have a field of view and field of regard that covers many miles in a single look, then we will have arrived at something we can sustain. Oh...and I am completely in favor of putting GCS' in move favorable places like Fl, Co, Ca, and Hi.

Happy #70 Chuck...That's right, Chuck Norris is 70 freaking years old and could still kick your arse. Chuck Norris Turns 70 -- And He Could Still Break You

MXF next month...

Sure there is, it keeps the pilot safe when the airplane crashes.

You owe me...

"Two"

The "need" for 65 (and sure to increase), orbits will NOT go away. The RPA commitment is here to stay.

Well played sir! My most humble apologies!

M2 Curious what is was like when you carried that in the war?

Private Pyle, I'm gonna give you three seconds--excactly three fucking seconds--to wipe that stupid-looking grin off your face, or I will gouge out your eyeballs and skull-fuck you! One! Two! Three!

The USAF was directed to increase the number of orbits to 40 and will increase the number of orbits AGAIN to 65. Until they meet the need (and I don't think the beast will EVER be happy), there will be no discussion of follow ons.

Anyone know any good Russian beers? I am off to Belgium and Russia in the near future.

Answer here

Family friend is in an exclusive Navy club being one of a few pilots to eject out of a plane, then fly that same plane again a few years later. It's been a few years since he told the story but as I recall he was flying an RA5C Vigilante and was trying to trap on the boat in bad seas. Just before impact he realized the deck was coming up way to fast and that he would not be able to go around so he ejected. The jet crash landed on the boat and he was recovered from the water. They kept the plane in the hangar for the remainder of the cruise and he thought it would be sent to salvage. Two years later he was reporting to a new unit and when he went out to the line to fly a mission, he recognized his tail number for the day as the same one he had ejected out of. The RA5C Vigilante is one big bird by the way;

Some of the better CAS integration papers in recent years have been written by dudes that do CAS while flying left-hand turns. If we could ALL stop measuring dicks (STS), and start working on TTP's the entire community would be much better off.

I would post the link but all of the AFPC info is now .mil only. If you log on to the portal and go to officer promotions and search around a bit you can find statistics on each board for the past 10 years or so. They break down the board into numerous categories and you can see what the percentage is for each. As I recall you can see promo rates by AFSC, PME (broken into Res and Corr), DP or P, BAC+ or MS....etc. If you are coming up on a board PME is a deal-breaker. If you don't have the appropriate PME complete the selection rate is 0%, even with a DP (on some past boards there were exceptions for BPZ folks, but still rare).

Randy "Duke" Cunningham is a highly decorated volunteer who served, want to celebrate him? Mao Zedong served in his country and later killed millions, should we celebrate his service? Adolph Hitler was a highly decorate military veteran, should we celebrate him? While I certainly applaud the military service of John Murtha, it does not give him a pass. If you don't understand the animosity, perhaps you should do a little research; 1. He was an unindicted co-conspirator during ABSCAM, he should have gone to jail given the FBI video. 2. There were numerous ongoing investigations of his actions and close associates. 3. A watchdog group had him among the top 5 most corrupt politicians in DC Link 4. Murtha accused U.S. Marines of warcrimes based on an article in Time Magazine, when Time corrected the story he refused to apologize. You seem willing to celebrate everything but the facts.

Searched to the old thread about the crash, but got an error when I selected it, a result of the recent forum maintenance? Report: Ice buildup caused Heathrow crash landing LONDON – A British accident report has confirmed that a buildup of ice in the fuel lines of a Boeing 777 jet caused its crash landing at London's Heathrow Airport two years ago. U.S. and European regulators moved to impose modifications to the engines of some jets after the British Airways plane fell 330 meters (1,080 feet) short of the airport's runway on Jan. 17, 2008. More than a dozen people were injured. Investigators had suspected that water usually present in aircraft fuel froze up, choking off the engines. That was confirmed in Tuesday's report. British Airways Pilot Avoided Worse Heathrow Crash, Report Says British Airways Pilot Avoided Worse Heathrow Crash, Report Says February 09, 2010, 06:56 AM EST By Sabine Pirone Feb. 9 (Bloomberg) -- A British Airways Plc jet that crash- landed at London’s Heathrow airport with 152 people on board in 2008 avoided a more serious accident after the pilot executed a last-minute maneuver to clear antennas fringing the runway. BA Captain Peter Burkill altered the flap settings to reduce drag when the Boeing Co. 777 was only 240 feet above the ground, the U.K. Air Accidents Investigation Branch said in a report today. That delayed the impact for 50 meters (164 feet) and the plane came down on a grass apron with no fatalities. The Boeing cracked a wing and had its wheels ripped off in the crash on Jan. 17, 2008, after frozen fuel lines stopped its engines from providing sufficient thrust as it neared Heathrow. Had the pilot not adjusted the flaps the 777 would have plowed into a cluster of antennas that communicate with the instrument landing systems of aircraft before touchdown, the AAIB said. “The reduction in flap setting did allow the aircraft to clear the ILS aerial array,” the report said. “The effects of contact with the ILA antenna are unknown but such contact would probably have led to more substantial structural damage.” The 777-200ER plane crash-landed after flying from Beijing through temperatures of minus 73 degrees Celsius that thickened its fuel and reducing the flow, the AAIB concluded. Earlier reports from the investigator instructed 777 pilots to rev their engines before landing to clear any ice, while Boeing told crews to change altitude periodically when flying through very cold air. Rolls-Royce Group Plc, which made the engines, was compelled to redesign fuel-oil heat exchangers for Trent 800 engines in use on 777s worldwide. Unique Circumstances The AAIB said today that the aircraft was unique among 35,000 Rolls-powered flights in experiencing a combination of the lowest fuel flow during cruising and the highest fuel flow on approach for landing with kerosene still at low temperatures. Among new safety recommendations, the AAIB said that Boeing should apply the modified design of landing gear from its more recent 777-200LR model to future planes. The Chicago-based company should also revise the design of fluorescent ceiling lights on its 777s after tubes shattered on landing, the report said. The European Aviation Safety Agency and U.S. Federal Aviation Administration should test the safety of cabin fittings under stress, and the EASA should also mandate a revision to seat-back video screens after nine came loose.

Ah the short-sightedness of state school grads. Feel free to correct me on what you perceive to be proper grammar, when in fact you overlook the bigger picture that trumps proper grammar everytime, the STS factor. If I were to adopt your "fail" guidance I would be forced to make statements such as the following; 1. Crap, I left my CAC in my computer at work. 2. Can I see your CAC? 3. Have you seen my CAC? 4. My Freaking CAC does not work. 5. I ended up with your CAC by mistake. As you are a Semenole I am sure you are quite happy using all of the above examples, but I will stick to CAC Card.

This forum will soon require a CAC card to post.

I went with the Airwolf as well, best watch I've ever had.

Bra, Reading your posts two things are very apparent; 1. You get excited very easily and the emotion translates to your posts. 2. You suck at typing. Where am I going... a bit of advice and this is not meant to kick you in the junk, simply a vector to keep your backside out of future trouble. Emotion can be good, but it should almost always be internal when it comes to the USAF. Showing your are dedicated usually comes from deeds, not words or "good intent". I suck at typing as well and I force myself to follow a few simple rules; 1. Wait 24 hours before sending a reply to something that made you mad. Sleeping on an issue can allow you to collect your thoughts and remove the emotion from an argument. I've seen a large number of folks mort themselves with an off-the-cuff reply full of anger. 2. When you type something important, walk away for a few minutes then come back and re-read it before you hit send. You will catch many of the common errors like "asked for a yes or now answer". I know you are just typing on the internet, but I am guessing that same habit translates to your other communication. You just had a lucky break...make the most of it! Stop making the excuse that your GPA would be higher without AFROTC...just fix it. If you are struggling to pass a 200 level Aerospank class, then you are going to have serious issues at UPT. This sounds like a wake-up call and I hope you do something about it. What is it you really want in life? You have two years of college left and if you are trying to go to UPT, the next year is probably the most important. Focus on your "learning" for a bit and see what happens. Don't Fuck it up!

When President Obama releases his budget on Monday, there may be a big hole where funding for NASA's Constellation program used to be. When President Obama releases his budget on Monday, there may be a big hole where funding for NASA's Constellation program used to be. Constellation is the umbrella program that includes the Ares rocket -- the replacement for the aging space shuttles. According to a report in the Orlando Sentinel, the forthcoming budget -- which the president will announce in detail during Wednesday night's State of the Union address -- will include no funding for lunar landers, no moon bases, and no Constellation program at all. Instead, NASA will outsource space flight to other governments (such as the Russians) and private companies. NASA's Constellation program aims to create a new generation of spacecraft for human spaceflight, consisting primarily of the Ares I and Ares V launch vehicles, the Orion crew capsule and the Altair Lunar Lander. These spacecraft will be capable of performing a variety of missions, from International Space Station resupply to lunar landings. SLIDESHOW: The Ares Rocket But according to the Sentinel, White House insiders and agency officials say NASA will eventually look at developing a new "heavy-lift" rocket that one day will take humans and robots to explore beyond low Earth orbit years in the future -- and possibly even decades or more. In the meantime, the White House will direct NASA to concentrate on Earth-science projects -- principally, researching and monitoring climate change -- and on a new technology research and development program that will one day make human exploration of asteroids and the solar system possible. There will also be funding for private companies to develop capsules and rockets that can be used as space taxis, reports the Sentinel. These companies may take astronauts on fixed-price contracts to and from the International Space Station -- a major change in the way the agency has done business for the past 50 years. NASA's budget, just over $18.7 billion this year, is still expected to rise again in 2011, reports Space.com, though by much less than the $1 billion increase NASA and its contractors have been privately anticipating since mid-December. A White House-appointed panel, led by former Lockheed Martin chief Norm Augustine, urged these changes on the administration in December. The panel also said a worthwhile manned space exploration program would require Obama to budget about $55 billion for human spaceflight over the next five years, some $11 billion more than he included in the 2011-2015 forecast he sent Congress last spring. A senior administration official told Fox News that rather than space programs, the president plans to use the address to renew his focus on jobs, calling for swift action on lagging bills providing tax cuts for job creation, new equipment purchases and the elimination of capital gains for small businesses.

Ohio Man Arrested on Charges of Urinating on $600-Worth of Steaks