ClearedHot

Gearpig, If you read my posts you will not find me slamming the airlines. I already posted that of course the airlines will purchase the cheaper product because they are in business to make a profit. I have flown on the Airbus with United and I think the other was Air Jamaica. Boeing can’t win the contracts because of the way Airbus and the French government sell aircraft to the airlines. Airbus receives huge subsidies from the EU (mainly France), so they can sell their aircraft at what would otherwise be a loss and rely on the government to provide the difference. There is no way Boeing can compete in this unfair market. It is an economic model that has been applied by other countries on everything from cotton to wine. It has also been ruled illegal by the world court. However, when it comes to great powers of the world, it is very rare to apply sanctions for fear of starting a greater trade war. Congress has been looking at legislation for the past two years that would apply a tariff, but the airline industry is in such dire straights post 911, it has been put on the back burner. They funny thing is Airbus has blatantly stated they want to put Boeing out of business, when that happens they are free to charge whatever they want. The whole situation reinforces the conclusion that I have come to over the past ten years in the USAF, France is an enemy of the United States. It is one thing to vote independently on UN mandates and resolutions. I understand the argument that they are a sovereign nation and want to exercise policies that are in their interest. It is another to sell munitions, weapons systems, technology, and information to countries that mean to do us harm. I am going to France for two weeks in may to walk the battlefields of Verdun, Calais, and Normandy. Every time I think of the American lives that were lost making sure the French didn’t speak German for the next 100 years, it makes me sick to think how they have repaid us. Sorry for the rant, but I have actually done a lot of research on this subject and I truly hope our government finally decides to do something. [ 12. October 2004, 21:36: Message edited by: Clearedhot ]

I had no idea the Cirrus SR was so popular. A great friend and UPT classmate was killed on a test flight five years ago. Glad to see it was for a worthy cause. I have also noticed the FAA has lightened up on allowing major sections of homebuilts to be assembled by third party companies (51% rule).

If you want to be insulted that is your issue not mine. I can throw the family tree around as well. My great-grandfather, Pilot #26 in the world, was a barnstormer and worked on the Spirit of St Louis and for Ryan Aircraft Corp. My Grandfather also a pilot, worked for Pitcairn Aircraft. My dad flew three tours in Vietnam in the F-4. All of that means diddly-squat to your argument. You might want to look up the word isolationist in the dictionary, let me help you, Isolationism = A national policy of abstaining from political or economic relations with other countries. I said we need to level the paying field based on subsidies the EU (Mainly France) pays to Airbus to make it fair for U.S. aircraft companies. I agree with preemption which is about as far from isolationism as you can get. As for the Airbus 380, great plane I am sure, but when I look at it I see the technology France has shared with our enemies. I see the Roland missiles and all sorts of other military technology they sold to Iraq, even after the UN resolution. I see my buds in the squadron who risked their lives fighting them during ONW, OSW, and OIF while you were laying in your room starring at pictures of the Airbus. I am not for isolationism. I respect a free market economy that is FAIR. However, this is not a zero-sum world, and if someone has to lose, I choose them.

RedDog, I would never question your decision to take care of your family first. I also understand the argument about cars and that is a topic no one wants to talk about, (Hell my wife is buying the new Acura next month). Take a longer view and you might find that if the trend continues your kids may not have jobs when they grow up. It is a free world and competition is one thing, but when we have to step up to bat with one hand tied behind our back, something has to change.

Flynhigh, Actually the job base has been reduced by nearly three quarters if you look at 1970’s-1980’s numbers (I know it is hard to pick a period given the economics of the Reagan build up). The main reason the merger was allowed to go through was it was doubtful either one would survive on it’s own so they tried to save what jobs they could. Look military aircraft production under the Clinton Administration, F-15E’s at a trickle rate, F-16’s at a moderate rate and the C-17 at full production rate. This is a huge decrease from past years (the peace dividend) that has translated into a very “old” average aircraft age for the U.S. military. The problem as has been pointed out many times by the regulators, is you are left with one major company to develop new military aircraft, which stifles R&D. In the end they choose the lesser of two evils. What is the answer? Subsidy for our aircraft makers? Tariffs on EU products? I don’t know, but in my opinion we need to stop playing nice with the French, who obviously are not our friends. Flynhigh, BTW, I respect your opinion as well.

Now who is being self righteous? Sorry that my choice of making the USAF a career offended you and you guard sensitivities. Heaven forbid we use a little patriotism.

Flying high, I don’t think you are a wise guy and that it a great point, but it actually proves my point. Ever wonder what happened to all of the other big aircraft designers? making aircraft is a brutal business and I don’t pretend to understand all of the economics that are involved, but a lot of good companies have gone under or consolidated because of the unfair competition from the EU. Bottom line, it reduces our industrial base here in the US, it exports jobs to Europe, and gives us fewer choices in the long run. I was not trying to start a flame war, so I should apologize if anyone feels offended. My frustration comes from looking at the big picture, and fighting the weapons systems that our "Friends" the French have sold to our adversaries.

I have no heartburn with anyone who wants to get out and fly for the airlines. In fact, three quarters of my UPT class got out when they had the chance five years ago, (although most of them have since been furloughed). However, the first posters in this thread have not even gone to UPT yet. They have ten years after UPT to dream about flying the Airbus and an airline career. In the meantime, there are hundreds of guys and girls that want to join because they want to fly for the USAF and their country. That was my point, “WE” are the US government and we can sit back and hope the someone does something or we can speak out. The average American person has no idea about the subsidies, they just want cheap airline tickets. The problem is without expensive subsides to Boeing or tariffs on Airbus products, we might see the next generation of American Air Force pilots flying the Rafael. Self righteous because I would like to preserve American industry? Simple solution then, ignore my posts.

When you did your research did you notice that the majority of the money Airbus made went back to Europe? Sure they created a few jobs here in the United States, they had to, they were catching so much flack, but the profit went straight to European coffers. The engineering jobs created in Kansas were offset by a loss of 10:1 in American Jobs. Highly skilled trade-craft jobs performed by the people who build aircraft are now all overseas in a Airbus factory. My mistake, I forgot about our good friends the Germans who supported us in the international community during the Iraq War. Actually the majority of the subsides are paid by the French government as they own the largest portion of Airbus. They have a stated purpose of putting American aircraft companies out of business. Maybe you think that is ok, but I don’t. I am merely pointing out he bigger picture. The French sell to our enemies. They want to destroy our aircraft building infrastructure. They want to see our position in the world minimized. A lot of thanks for making sure they didn’t grow up speaking german. I could careless if it is an awesome machine, ultimately it led to loss of jobs here in America and more money for a country that provided arms to kill American troops.

I have no intention of going to airlines, never did. 15 years and the USAF has treated me good, as well as educated me in the ways of the world. I find it refreshing that you can profess to want to be USAF pilot while pimping the Airbus and a airline career in the same breath. Just what I am looking for in my Air Force... [ 11. October 2004, 23:33: Message edited by: Clearedhot ]

By the way, if you did a little research you might find that Airbus is doing so well because it is heavily subsidized by the French government. The government pays the subsidy not as a simple gesture to keep Airbus competitive, instead they do it to purposely hurt American industry. Do a little research and you will be sickened by the efforts France is going to in their effort damage our country, economy, and military.

After being chased around the desert by the Roland, I completely disagree. I think the plane is almost as ugly as the people and their politics. After ten years of OSW and ONW, I support nothing the cheese eating surrender monkeys do or build. [ 11. October 2004, 21:47: Message edited by: Clearedhot ]

A320 made by a French led consortium. No Thanks You want to be in the Air Force, then fly a French made aircraft? You have a lot to learn about the world and just how far they are willing to put our companies out of business, let alone sell weapons systems to our enemies (like Iraq). Let me suggest you try send an application to this website instead of the USAF. https://www.defense.gouv.fr/air/ [ 11. October 2004, 21:33: Message edited by: Clearedhot ]

Both

There are also fighter tours with the Austrailians, Brits, Germans, USMC, US Navy (F-18 and F-14), and several other foriegn countries. A few years ago we had a Navy F-18 driver on exchange with the Weapons School flying in the Viper Division.

There are several slots for exchange tours each year. Numerous countries participate. Some require language school or a tested proficiency in that language. I had to do three years of language school for my exchange tour with the USMC.

20-30% of Mid-level officers (Majors), will go to Air Command and Staff College, AFIT, or a similar school form another service. The opportunity is increasing with slots to get masters degrees at major universities. I went to ACSC last year, then got picked up for another year of school at the USMC School of Advanced Warfighting, I will probalby go to the Air Staff for a two years, then back to fly.

Weapons School Instructors fly and instruct in their primary MDS only. While at Nellis you may will have chance to fly in the tub with the Vipers and Light Gray's, in the pit with the Mudhens, strap hang with the Buff's, or even an AC-130. A great chance to learn more about the other systems out there. When you graduate you payback is expected to be at the squadron level. After a tour as an instructor at the Weapons School, most guys will go to school (IDE) or off to a staff tour.

Straight through initial at Laughlin AFB rolled left to look down and watch my best friend taking the barrier at 150Kts with his left engine stuck in Mil: Just before impact he tightens every muscle in his body including his thumb and broadcasts on Guard “OHHH SHHHHHIIIITTTTT!”….a few more seconds of noise….F%#$, that SUCKED…click. Watched him un-ass the jet and was glad to buy him a few beers later that night at the club.

Mild, There is always a chance. There were a lot of guys going through a few years ago that were banked for three years early on. A big factor in determining who gets picked is the recommendations you take to the selection board. If it is something you are really interested in, sit down with your the DO and your squadron Weapons Officer and see if you guys can build a road map to get you there. As with everything in the USAF, there are waivers for everything. Good Luck.

Typically, graduates will go back to a squadron for at least a year. After that many will follow a normal progression up to wing level jobs. The flesh peddlers will normally nominate potential instructors to the school 2-3 years after graduation. Instructing at the Weapons School was second only to flying in combat. I worked harder and played harder that at any other point in my career.

Not all of the players at the Weapons School put iron on target, but all are a vital part of that effort. CCO has Weapons School courses for the several support frames like JSTARS and AWACS that are vital to the fight. The tanker and transport folks are not part of the USAF Weapons School. They left in 2002 after differences over control of syllabus. As a result, they have aseperate course that is managaed by AMC. Different patch, different course, same concept, produce the best instructors possible.

Actually the AFSOC AC-130, MH-53, and MC-130 courses, syllabus and instructors fall under the 57th Wing at Nellis. Collectively they are called the SOF division, and are offically known as the 14th Weapons Squadron, a tenant unit at Hurlburt. The KC-135 and C-17 courses, syllabus, and instrcutors are not a part of the USAF Weapons School. They belong to AMC and thier students interact with the USAF Weapons School WUGs only during CORE academics and the Mission Employment exercise at the end of the course.

https://www.columbus0510.com/ https://www.columbus0507.com/ https://www.geocities.com/halfmilefinal/ https://home.earthlink.net/%7Ekschlappi/kyle.htm https://www.geocities.com/pilotusairforce/brooks.html https://www.pilotcrossing.com/ https://www.geocities.com/lancer145/Homepage.html

Engineering degrees are highly desired but not required. Math or science degrees qualify you to apply.