Tonka

Anyone have experience with cell phone plan commitments? I have AT&T, and don't want to fork over more $ then I have to while I am gone for 6 months. However, my crazy wife feels like she would still like to use her phone (family plan)... Website says they will do it (call it a military suspend), but was curious if the juice has been worth the squeeze for folks. The 1 downside is that I would be eligible for a new phone when I return had I not suspended it... I doubt that is worth the extra $ each month, but maybe. I also plan on taking my phone with me to use the wifi for web and apps, any downside? Thanks!

Fair. But imagine your basic grunt, or his equivalent in the AF, none of his skills translate to the work force. When it is his time to get out (for whatever reason), he has nothing to compete with. Without going down the rabbit trail of the entitlements debate, I think their are quite a few members of the military that we "owe" an avenue to acquire those skillz, which was aided by TA.

I don't think anyone fully understands the long term effects of such a decision. Just because the government chooses to cut huge chunks without forethought, doesn't mean the service needs to too. We could of easily made smart cuts to TA, and saved pain to our Es and junior Os... Some people actually care about an education for non-square-filling purposes.

Damn... Here's to a few of my Heros.

I got a chubby just thinking about the possibility of that... A commander forced to look at the quality of his people and not be able to quantify his cattle based on an excel spreadsheet. What's next?Actual mentoring done in person, cats and dogs sleeping together, SOS becoming like an island on Survivor where only the strong survive...crazy talk.

True, but at least it will only count "once", instead of it contributing to both your Wg strat/DP as well as the board's scoring. A pipe dream, but I would rather see him direct CCs to rank/strat based on job performance alone and would mask AAD/PME completion from all CCs (and not the board)... Then let the board look at the "whole" person.

I think he was a C-17 Sqd/CC @ CHS. From his intro, he was probably 2 below to LTC. Yeah, I'm not a fan of falling on that big of a sword just to draw attention to something you believe in... Some folks do give too much credit to themselves and the impact their "bold" move will have (not that that was what Tony's intention was, and I doubt it was). In my experience, shouting from the trenches tends to fall on deaf ears until someone actually rises up who would rather wield their sword and be forced to go out swinging than hope that someone sees them walking for the exits. Might as well take a few swings with the sword and see what damage you can do for the folks climbing up behind you. I actually knew Tony in a former life, good dude... He'll do great things, but we sure could of used him fighting for us.

Formation in the Wx...

It wouldn't be radically different; it would be similar to a centralized command decentralized execution-esque model... who better to make decisions, but those leaders nearest their effects? Each state has a higher than average # of specific demographics, and could adjust policies accordingly to those local attributes. Additionally, if a representative of that state had to spend the states $, rather than put pork in federal bills so that a federal bill is passed AND they get federal $ to their state... you might just have a fewer bridges to nowhere. In some sense: if my local town was solely responsible for everything in that town: roads, welfare, unemployment, etc.(obviously a logical extreme example) you would probably find that towns/states would become much more incentivized to be efficient with that money (because it is THEIRS!) and therefore would find ways to incentivize (or better help) individuals to become less dependent (in fact I, as a voter of that region, would reward efficient politicians, not those that spent with abandon). You could then greatly reduce the federal involvement while letting them focus on broader items like defense, intelligence, and the like. Mother Teresa didn't just "cut a check" to solve the problems of the poor.

"Unfortunately, there is no 'room' on an OPR for me to rate subordinates on how well they are applying critical thought and their 'empowered' leadership traits... for that would require me to put some critical thought into the way I do OPRs. Since I cannot change the way the AF does OPRs, I will not change the way I do OPRs... therefore I will continue to use hoop-jumping as my primary justification for strating my subordinates and therefore their promotion. Even if I have the avenue to rate them, I have no way to justify the rating because I cannot empower them; they might fail and make me/us look bad. So I HAVE to micromanage so that I can continue to play the promotion game (so that when I am in charge I will change things)" -the sentiments of many an AF officer. aka: I can't change the way we do things, because I can't change the way we do things. If it (hoop-jumping=leadership) is systemic in America, based on his examples at other universities and businesses, it might just be a change that the entire populace is experiencing. Opinion article about the powerful people in the world becoming powerless: Link (was also in the early bird), with similar sentiments. Leaders today seem to be more prone to immediate scrutiny, second guessing, and punishment since the information age. Instant feedback and transparency of actions has thus led to more permission asking than decision making... I felt more empowered 12 years ago, before everyone worshipped email, then I do today. I distinctly remember 1 on 1 personal conversations with a Wg/CC back then, today I can't even email the OG/CC without asking mother-may-I. Democracy and transparency has brought about a good many things, but taken to the extreme: leadership by collective reasoning and consensus is leading to more leaders that are powerless to accomplish change... i.e. email=devil.

Because, no one comes close: oh and we land on bridges, yo...

Because you don't have to re-invent the wheel.. the path is easy:

Some flying communities are closer than others... 2 become 1, we become I. Or it was a survey for pirates, not pilots.

I'll have to side with FG on this, the regs are broad enough in some cases to allow rationale thought for flexibility...but the more they are abused the more likely the flexibility will be taken away. Yes it is a small amount, but it is a cultural, mental shift that is important... https://www.businessinsider.com/ashton-carter-sequestration-defense-pentagon-cuts-employee-2013-2 You can't talk about who needs to make cuts without finding ways for yourself to make cuts.

Sounds like the development of the Whiskey... Dare I ask, might this dramatic reduction bring hope to keeping the C27J around. It's crazy, but it is probably ~80% the same as the 130J (avionics/engines wise) and has a few tricks up its sleeve.

OBIGGS provides NEA for the Ullage... (reduces the % of O2 in fuel tank vapor space). Theory: no O2, no boom. Debatable if the risk outweighs the cost/weight of protection on any/all aircraft (especially if you think the risk is only from lightning). There were a couple of aircraft (commercial) accidents in the last few decades that were a result of mostly empty fuel tanks (i.e. lots of vapor) near a heating/spark source in the aircraft, and on a warm day (oversimplified report). While there is a potential for lightning to cause the spark/heat in the fuel vapor, IMO it isn't a high probability... i.e. we don't often hear of airplanes getting hit by lightning and instantly exploding, at least not enough to warrant everyone w/o such a system to stay away from lightning potential areas. The fuel venting system must be so limited in its ability to reduce the fuel vapor ignition-potential in the tank(s) that it is working in a manner opposite of a normal OBIGGS, and increasing the potential for a "boom".... So, it's not what they are doing with the aircraft, it is what the aircraft is not able to do: control fuel-vapor ignition-risk.

Admittedly, I have been CONUS-only for about 5 years... so I imagine a few things have changed out there. I went to ask for ABUs, they said it was illegal to issue me those so they gave 2 sets of multicams instead.

So, say some one is going for 6 months-ish to be a worthless well-thought-out addition at OTBH (in a non-flying, power-pointing/emailing gig)... reporting instructions (Apr 2011) only talk about "staff" positions wearing ABUs. Can I assume that if I am not an exec, commander or something close that I am not "staff" and therefor I can go in desert flight suits, rather than ponying up $400 for ABUs? I also have 2 sets of multi-cams, would I be out of place wearing those instead of buying ABUs?

I'm guessing if we (USAF, Congress, America) had the ability to prepare for such a dramatic change in the way we operate, we probably wouldn't of ever arrived here. In my first decade of service, I used to hear statements like this (not dissing you, because I have made them too) and honestly believed them because they came from some very reliable sources of knowledge (we will never, we could never, they will never do, etc...). However, I have learned in my second decade that when those statements are being made (routinely and/or with absolute conviction)... watch out... "Yeah, we're going to need you to come in on Saturday and Sunday... and plan on full days"

The French got one too, surprisingly similar... and that's a big white flag to carry. https://www.gizmag.com/neuron-ucav-demonstrator-maiden-flight/25268/

https://www.udacity.com

If cool-heads are leading both sides (within Syria), maybe. But I sense a lack of military discipline is on the horizon, if you are going down and all hope is lost who knows what a few errant shots could do for you. You can only poke a cheetah so many times, regardless of how many times you say 'sorry'. Israel isn't stupid, but if you start causing serious damage the gloves might come off.

Warning shots fired by Israel... https://www.jpost.com....aspx?id=291326 This kind of reminds me of the shower room scene in "The Rock", it could escalate quickly.

Is this all still about the same? Heading out in a few months for my mid-career, re-blueing, punishment tour... I seriously hope my job isn't power point and emails.