ClearedHot

1st and foremost, everyone gets the math wrong. The 10 year commitment starts AFTER you complete UPT, so in reality it is a 11 year commitment. Today, most pilot will continue flying at the 11 year point, some will go to school and staff jobs, but the priority is to fill cockpits and the needs of the warfighter. Your question lacks some logic..."is it bad to get out?"..."commissioned officers are never really out?" #1. the grading of good or bad when getting out at 11 years something you have to decide. Financial matters and career opportunity are the driving factors, not what someone else thinks. #2. When you get out you are technically in the inactive reserve, but it has been a LONG time since anyone was called back from that status. Realistically, at 11 years you will be a pinned on major making good money and at the height of your aeronautical skills. Uncle Sam is not dumb, they know getting you to this point increases the odds you will stay out of a feeling of security if nothing else. In the end, it is a personal choice you should make with your family.

Well played.

Similar issue as I am out of the normal channels. If anyone has a link or other method please PM and I will provide a .mil address.

I sent Esnacko a note last night and they replied that they do not do visor covers.

Nonsensical drivel from a lying FUCK. The Marines are crying as loud as the Air Force when comes to aging fighters. Their F-18's are the oldest jets out there and they are falling apart. As a result of the age of their jets they have waged a war in the Pentagon and on the Hill to keep their version of the F-35 alive when it should have been cancelled several years ago.

A little fact checking goes a LONG way... March 10, 1956, Over the Mediterranean Sea A B-47 bomber carrying two nuclear weapon cores in their carrying cases disappeared over the Mediterranean Sea. The aircraft, on a nonstop flight from MacDill Air Force Base in Tampa, Florida, to an undisclosed overseas airbase, was lost with its crew. After takeoff the B-47 was scheduled for two in-flight-refuelings before reaching its final destination. The first refueling was successfully completed, but the aircraft never made contact with the second refueling tanker over the Mediterranean Sea. Despite an extensive search, no trace of the aircraft, the nuclear weapon cores, or crew, were ever found. July 28, 1957, Over the Atlantic Ocean A C-124 transport aircraft that was having mechanical problems jettisoned two nuclear weapons without their fissile cores off the east coast of the United States. The C-124 was en route from Dover Air Force Base in Delaware when it lost power to its number one and two engines. The crew determined that level flight could not be maintained with the weight of the weapons onboard and decided to jettison the cargo. Although neither weapon detonated, both are presumed to have been damaged from impact with the ocean surface and to have sunk almost instantly. Neither the weapons nor debris were ever found. The C-124 safely landed at an airfield near Atlantic City, New Jersey, with the remaining weapon and nuclear warhead aboard. February 5, 1958, Savannah River, Georgia A nuclear weapon without a fissile core was lost following a mid-air collision. A B-47 bomber carrying a nuclear weapon without its fissile core collided with a F-86 aircraft near Savannah, Georgia. Following three unsuccessful attempts to land the plane at Hunter Air Force Base in Georgia, the weapon was jettisoned to avoid the risk of a high explosive detonation at the base. The weapon was jettisoned into the water several miles from the mouth of Savannah River in Wassaw Sound off Tybee Beach, but the precise point of impact is unknown. The weapon's high explosives did not detonate on impact. A subsequent search covering three square miles used divers and sonar devices, but failed to find the weapon. The search was ended on April 16, 1958, and the weapon was considered to be irretrievably lost. Some accounts of nuclear weapon accidents list a February 12, 1958, accident involving a B-47 near Savannah, Georgia. "The best estimate" of the weapon's location, an earlier DoD narrative noted, "was determined to be 31 degrees 54' 15" North, 80 degrees 54' 45" West." The B-47 was on a simulated combat mission from Florida's Homestead Air Force Base. September 25, 1959, Off Whidbey Island, Washington A U.S. Navy P-5M aircraft carrying an unarmed nuclear depth charge without its fissile core crashed into Puget Sound near Whidbey Island, Washington. The weapon was never recovered. January 24, 1961, Goldsboro, North Carolina In what nearly became a nuclear catastrophe, a B-52 bomber on airborne alert carrying two nuclear weapons broke apart in midair. The B-52 experienced structural failure in its right wing and the aircraft's resulting breakup released the two weapons from a height of 2,000-10,000 feet. One of the bomb's parachutes deployed properly and that weapon's damage was minimal. However, the second bomb's parachute malfunctioned and the weapon broke apart upon impact, scattering its components over a wide area. According to Daniel Ellsberg, the weapon could have accidentally fired because "five of the six safety devices had failed." Nuclear physicist Ralph E. Lapp supported this assertion, saying that "only a single switch" had "prevented the bomb from detonating and spreading fire and destruction over a wide area." Despite an extensive search of the waterlogged farmland where the weapon was believed to have landed, the bomb's highly enriched uranium core was never recovered. In order to prevent any discovery of the lost portion of the weapon, the Air Force purchased an easement which required that permission be obtained before any construction or digging could begin in the area. Three crew members were killed in the crash. The accident was apparently so serious that it was reported to newly-elected President John F. Kennedy. According to Newsweek, President Kennedy was informed after the accident that "there had been more than 60 accidents involving nuclear weapons" since World War II, "including two cases in which nuclear-tipped anti-aircraft missiles were actually launched by inadvertence." As a result of the Goldsboro accident, the U.S. placed many new safety devices on its nuclear arsenal and the Soviet Union was encouraged to do the same. December 5, 1965, Aboard the USS Ticonderoga (CVA-14) in the Pacific Ocean An A-4E Skyhawk strike aircraft carrying a nuclear weapon rolled off an elevator on the U.S. aircraft carrier Ticonderoga and fell into the sea. Because the bomb was lost at a depth of approximately 16,000 feet, Pentagon officials feared that intense water pressure could have caused the B-43 hydrogen bomb to explode. It is still unknown whether an explosion did occur. The pilot, aircraft, and weapon were lost. The Pentagon claimed that the bomb was lost "500 miles away from land." However, it was later revealed that the aircraft and nuclear weapon sank only miles from the Japanese island chain of Ryukyu. Several factors contributed to the Pentagon's secretiveness. The USS Ticonderoga was returning from a mission off North Vietnam; confirming that the carrier had nuclear weapons aboard would document their introduction into the Vietnam War. Furthermore, Japan's anti-nuclear law prohibited the introduction of atomic weapons into its territory, and U.S. military bases in Japan are not exempt from this law. Thus, confirming that the USS Ticonderoga carried nuclear weapons would signify U.S. violation of its military agreements with Japan. The carrier was headed to Yokosuka, Japan, and disclosure of the accident in the mid-1980s caused a strain in U.S.-Japanese relations.

Is anyone else still encountering forum errors? Within the past hour I've seen three errors related to disk allocation...something about line "360". I ask because I notice the same errors early each morning around 0530. I usually get up to work out and check the forum with a cup of coffee. For the last few weeks the forum fails to load about 50% of the time. It usually resolves by 0600. Perhaps they are doing a back up?

Who is JSOC?

Homestead AFB B-58's Fridays at the O'club Lingerie shows at the O'Club Everyone going through UPT flies the T-38 Roosevelt Rhodes NAS Patches on ABUs Humor

Translation to herbivore brevity terminology; No Slugs = Howdy

Given the current environment several folks will want to "talk to you", but I don't think they will ground you like they did in years past. As a select you've made the top 25% cut and people have likely been looking out for you. Once you decline, expect the support to evaporate. The danger as I do the rough math from the situation you described, they may PCS you to a crap job to finish your time. Obviously you will be on the list in to PCS in the fall of 2011, but you will have to decline in the spring, leaving you with almost two years of ADSC. How is your relationship with your CC?

I truly miss those days… just killing the bad guys. Can we go back?

From the man; 1. Cut services and support contractors by 10% a year, for the next three years. 2. Freeze on size of OSD/COCOM staffs for the next three years. 3. Freeze number of General Officers and Senior Executives at FY10 levels. Tasked DOD to provide plan by 1 November to eliminate 50 General Officer positions and 150 Senior Executive positions. 4. Consolidate all DOD IT services. 5. Freeze the number of DOD studies at FY10 level and develop plan to cut number of studies by 25%. 6. Review of all outside boards and commissions, as well as cut their budget by 25%. 7. Cut DOD intel functions by 10%. 8. a. NII and J-6 go away, functions transferred to AT&L. b. Cut Business Transformation Agency. c. Close JFCOM, JT Staff to assume duties.

Gates to kill JFCOM

Wow...just wow.

Asymmetric thrust is a bitch.

Absolutely NOT true. The number of General Officers (and all officers), is prescribed by 10 U.S.C. § 525. that being said, Secretary Gates in a speech last month called for a reduction in the number of senior officers. It is convenient to make broad generalizations, but yours is void of fact.

Whatever Cliff Clavin. I could really care less what you buy... I never said gunships flew TF...I said you don't need a radar to fly TF.

DOD Identifies Air Force Casualties The Department of Defense announced today the deaths of four airmen who were supporting Operation Enduring Freedom. They died June 9, near Forward Operating Base Jackson, Afghanistan, in a helicopter crash. Killed were: Staff Sgt. Michael P. Flores, 31, of San Antonio, Texas, assigned to the 48th Rescue Squadron, Davis-Monthan Air Force Base, Ariz. 1st Lt. Joel C. Gentz, 25, of Grass Lake, Mich., assigned to the 58th Rescue Squadron, Nellis Air Force Base, Nev. Staff Sgt. David C. Smith, 26, of Eight Mile, Ala., assigned to the 66th Rescue Squadron, Nellis Air Force Base. Senior Airman Benjamin D. White, 24, of Erwin, Tenn., assigned to the 48th Rescue Squadron, Davis-Monthan Air Force Base. Him...Him

Exactly...there are still a few great ones out there.

TERPROM

You do NOT need a radar...

ARGH...... Best gunship ever is NOT a C-130. Unsure why folks want to see an evolution in capability like you will with a C-130J, rather than a revolution like you would with say a AC-757. Why do we insist on a platform that keeps us squarely in the heart of most threat envelopes? With all the 757/767 airframes parked in boneyards around the world, why not put the sensors and weapons on a platform that can overfly a vast majority of current lower threats, cruise to the target are at high subsonic speeds, and has the unrefueled range to fly across the ponds. For the record, the C-130 platform WILL handle the GAU-8 vibration...as will a 757 with a beefed up floor. Christ, sometimes it is like pushing a noodle trying to get people to think 20-30 year sin the future. Trust me. with 3,000+ hours in the gunpig, I LOVE the 130 platform, but it is NOT the best solution for the future.

My guess, a force management issue for two reasons; 1. The RPV/U-28/RC-12 programs have consumed most of the extra fight pilots and an ever growing portion of UPT graduates. 2. There is most certainly a force reduction on the horizon, as the wars draw-down in the next few years and the budget crisis grows, there will be enormous pressure to reduce the size of the force and it will be difficult (but not impossible), to field this in large numbers, especially if the intent was to establish an IW wing (like I am in favor of). The disconnect that I see is the cost savings. SECDEF is putting a lot of pressure on the system to limit costs. CNXing the F-22 and other big systems, coming out (STS), in the press this week calling for a smaller pay raise for the military, and over the weekend more questions about the size of the military's TACAIR programs/fleet. Also, Light-attack fits what QDR and a lot of the thought coming out of think tanks, we will likely fight small wars for the next 10 years, light-attack makes sense financially, tactically, and strategically. CSAF said our traditional platforms will continue to provide the capability which will cost a LOT more, in some cases 10X the cost of light-attack. This story is FAR from over and I suspect there is a LOT more going on behind the scenes.