Champ Kind

I got the RIP for the TDY en route before we knew that we were pregnant. A block on the assignment RIP did have a block for pregnancy. The TDY en route is immediately followed by the PCS. I am considering moving the entire thing to the right and trying to start in the next latest J-model class, but before I ask my CC, I was hoping to hear that there was a simpler way to remain in Little Rock a little while longer and not mess with the timeline, as RIPs have already been signed and orders are being created.

I cannot imagine that this situation is very unique, but I haven't been able to find any definitive answers. My wife and I are expecting our first child, but the expected due date falls right in between the scheduled completion of a TDY en route at Little Rock (C-130J initial qual - I'm currently an E/H guy) and our RNLTD to our next base (Dyess). My question: Is there any way to extend one's TDY en route without taking leave until after the due date? It would be good to have some continuity in our OB/GYN appointments and have the baby in Little Rock, then travel to Abilene, versus the other two options of: -Her leaving Little Rock in the third trimester and into our yet-to-be-purchased house (we will have closed on it by then), 8 hours away from me whenever the time comes to have the baby -Us having to travel from Little Rock to Abilene with her nearly full-term to have the baby in Abilene having never visited any of the practitioners in the area. Anyone swung something like this before? Thanks!

I did too. So that fact that I scored high on the DLAB means diddly-squat to my O-4 board?

Someone had to say it.

It's a shame the section won't at least include a line in there that contains your DLAB score, if you have one.

Isn't "pram" how you say "stroller" in the Queen's English?

Hey bad press is still press, right?

I saw nothing in that report saying that the age at which a military retiree could start collecting benefits would change. Excerpt from the report: "RECOMMENDATION 4.1: REVIEW AND REFORM FEDERAL WORKFORCE RETIREMENT PROGRAMS. Create a federal workforce entitlement task force to re-evaluate civil service and military health and retirement programs and recommend savings of $70 billion over ten years. Military and civilian pensions are both out of line with pension benefits available to the average worker in the private sector, and in some cases, out of line with each other across different categories of federal employment. The Commission recommends a federal workforce entitlement review to analyze civil service and military retirement programs in order to 1) Make program rules more consistent across similar programs, and 2) Bring both systems more in line with standard practices from the private sector. The review will have a ten-year savings target of $70 billion; recommendations of the task force would receive fast track consideration in Congress. Examples of program design reforms that the task force should consider include: Use the highest five years of earnings to calculate civil service pension benefits for new retirees (CSRS and FERS), rather than the highest three years prescribed under current law, to bring the benefit calculation in line with the private sector standard. (Saves $500 million in 2015, $5 billion through 2020) Defer Cost of Living Adjustment (COLA) for retirees in the current system until age 62, including for civilian and military retirees who retire well before a conventional retirement age. In place of annual increases, provide a one-time catch-up adjustment at age 62 to increase the benefit to the amount that would have been payable had full COLAs been in effect. (Saves $5 billion in 2015, $17 billion through 2020) Adjust the ratio of employer/employee contributions to federal employee pension plans to equalize contributions. (Saves $4 billion in 2015, $51 billion through 2020)"

So are the people in that squadron dual-qualed to operate both the Predator and the Reaper?

Sounds like the aftermath of drinking soju....

As someone that's going to leave his first assignment with an IP qual, Master's knocked out, and SOS in-res complete, I would absolutely sign a piece of paper saying I'd stay in for 20 years as long as I made O-5 and could fly/instruct the whole time. ...not sure about refusing the bonus, though. Maybe if they incorporated the above "deal" in with the bonus, it would be ever more appealing.

We can hardly ever get O-3/O-4s in group- or wing-level jobs to do that. Another reason why is so sad, but true.

These clowns remind of those kids you knew in middle/high school that got their lunch money stolen and stuffed into lockers. Please don't intermix these dweebs with the term "leadership." "Management", at BEST.

Sad.

Are all -Js going to AMC units (particularly KDYS) going to be stretches from here on out?

Saw it today.... Twice. Agreed.

Nice link, thanks.

How about getting "declared distances" ("Double/Trouble D", or whatever people are calling it) in the approach plates (a corner on the airfield diagram maybe?) or IFR supp instead of having to reference the FAA Airfield Directories, which we don't carry in our FLIP bags? Sure we have them in our flight planning areas/base ops, but that does no good on the road.

OK - I know someone in AFCENT is going to douche this up, but, this doesn't necessarily have to be a bad thing. Think about all of the people that are going to wind up taking > 2 PT tests a year because they deploy for 4 months twice a year, and you can't deploy if your PT test is going to go non-current, so you wind up taking at least 3. At least now you don't have to do that many. Plus, I don't know about you guys, but I'm definitely in better shape in the desert than at home. YMMV, but this doesn't have to be a bad thing. .....I know, I know. Someone will fuck it up and use this as an excuse to make it worse than it already is.

https://www.af.mil/news/story.asp?id=123219081 In other words: "The ABU is a piece of shit."

Missed those days by a long shot, but I'd knock out a fix-to-fix or two and hand-chum a chart every semi-annual period to see those days come back.

Waiting for someone to create the FB group....

Perhaps the "100 missions" need to be adjusted for inflation?

I did a PACAF exercise at Hickam a few months ago and I was amazed at the inefficiency of having AOCs subordinate to a NAF that seems like it only exists just to house the AOC. Especially when the MAJCOM commander was at all of the meetings, along with the NAF and AOC commander, anyway.

THREAD REVIVAL: Looks like these pieces of shit got a nod from a federal court to keep it up. Good on Missouri for trying. Link Washington (CNN) -- Missouri's tight restrictions on protests and picketing outside military funerals were tossed out by a federal judge Monday, over free speech concerns. A small Kansas church had brought suit over its claimed right to loudly march outside the burials and memorial services of those killed in overseas conflicts. The state legislature had passed a law to keep members of the Topeka-based Westboro Baptist Church from demonstrating within 300 feet of such private services. Church members, led by pastor Fred Phelps, believe God is punishing the United States for "the sin of homosexuality" through events including soldiers' deaths. Members have traveled the country, shouting at grieving family members at funerals and displaying such signs as "Thank God for Dead Soldiers," "God Blew Up the Troops" and "AIDS Cures Fags." The Supreme Court last year had granted a temporary injunction blocking enforcement of the law until it could be challenged. The justices will hear a similar challenge this fall involving the same church. Judge Fernando Gaitan in a 19-page order, dismissed the state legislation. The laws, said the Kansas City-based judge, "could have the effect of criminalizing speech the mourners want to hear, including speech from counter-protesters to plaintiffs' [the Westboro Church's] message. As the law burdens substantially more speech than is necessary to further the government's interest, [the law] violates the free speech clause of the First Amendment." Phelps, his daughter, Shirley Phelps-Roper, and other church members had protested near the August 2005 funeral of Army Spc. Edward Lee Myers in St. Joseph, Missouri. The married Army Airborne Ranger died while on patrol in Samarra, Iraq, when an improvised explosive device detonated near his Humvee military vehicle. He was 21, and in addition to his wife, he left behind a daughter. He was later buried at Leavenworth National Cemetery in Kansas. In response to that protest, Missouri lawmakers passed the "Spc. Edward Lee Myers Law," criminalizing picketing "in front or about" a funeral location or procession. Phelps-Roper then went to federal court to ask for a preliminary injunction to block enforcement of the statute until its constitutionality could be reviewed. A federal appeals court eventually agreed. That court did not address the broader First Amendment claims, but noted the law was overly intrusive, since it "restricts expressive activity not just within or on the premises of a cemetery of a church, but also on traditional public fora such as the adjacent public streets and sidewalks." The Supreme Court has never addressed the specific issues of laws designed to protect the "sanctity and dignity of memorial and funeral services," as well as the privacy of family and friends of the deceased. But the justices in October will hear an appeal from the father of a U.S. solider killed in Iraq, after members of the Westboro Church conducted an angry demonstration at his son's burial service in Maryland. The family of the Marine had won a $5 million judgment from the protesters, which was overturned by lower federal courts. At issue is a balancing test between the privacy rights of grieving families and the free-speech rights of demonstrators, however disturbing and provocative their message. Several other states besides Missouri have attempted to impose specific limits on when and where the church members can protest. The justices are being asked to address how far states can go to justify picket-free zones and the use of "floating buffers" to silence or restrict the speech or movements of demonstrators exercising their constitutional rights in a funeral setting. Various jurisdictions across the nation have responded to the protests with varying levels of control over the church protesters. According to a legal brief it filed with the Supreme Court, church members believe it is their duty to protest and picket at certain events, including funerals, to promote their religious message: "That God's promise of love and heaven for those who obey him in this life is counterbalanced by God's wrath and hell for those who do not obey him." The congregation is made up mostly of Phelps and his family. The pastor has 13 children, and at least 54 grandchildren and seven great-grandchildren. He described himself as an "old-time" gospel preacher in a CNN interview in 2006, saying, "You can't preach the Bible without preaching the hatred of God." The church has also protested at least since 1993 at funerals of gay persons, those who died from AIDS, and others whose lifestyles are deemed sinful but were touted as heroic upon their death. Missouri officials said the appeals court improperly balanced the free speech rights of both sides in favor of the church. "Mourners cannot avoid a message that targets funerals without forgoing their right to partake in funeral or burial services, so are appropriately viewed as a captive audience" that is simply unable to shut out the offensive message, said state attorneys. The case is Phelps-Roper v. Koster (06-4156-cv).