FourFans

Any society that would give up a little liberty to gain a little security will deserve neither and lose both. (paraphrasing Benjamin Franklin) Unfortunately, modern America has a very short memory. Historically, when suppressions of vices and liberties are emplaced in the name of social responsibility, dictators rise to take the reigns of the socialist movement, and tragedy ensues. On the flip side, you never hear about these mass attacks occurring in places like Switzerland, where virtually the whole population is part of the militia and owns an automatic rifle. American society doesn't need more fences to keep the wolves away, it needs more people with a sheepdog mentality, along with the abolishment of entitlement, such as "it's the federal government's responsibility to protect me from everything".

Revival. I'm a bit surprised I haven't seen more discussion here about the mounting Russian threat. https://www.wsj.com/articles/russia-targets-soldier-smartphones-western-officials-say-1507109402 I'm not shocked that the average American doesn't care, it's all too far away and the media isn't selling it. I can attest that Eastern Europe and the Baltics are justly concerned however. If Russia advances, NATO won't even be a speed bump. US, UK, and German airpower will be the only immediate response that's even remotely effective. These guys are evolving modern combat employment faster than anyone on the planet.

Concur. Sounds a lot like a Stoner or an M-60. Either way, a lot of firepower for someone to sneak into a hotel room, especially someone not known as a gun guy. Appears to be a lone wolf gone crazy, but it doesn't smell right. Prayers and condolences to the victims and their families.

and a good ride for anyone who only wants female offspring

Not if you ask 603rd or the CAOC's AMD judging by the number of times I heard: "We've got the waiver already approved for you..." when I never asked for it. I can see both sides of this argument, but I don't understand why they picked this particular target right now. Like putting a JDAM on the outhouse of a SAM site. Maybe it's been on the chopping block for a while, but as a priority seems right up there with rolling up sleeves.

Have you seen ops in Africa? What you're referring to is how we used to roll...specifically in A-stan and in hi-vis theaters. That's not how we roll in conflicts that the US media doesn't see or care about. If it makes it to CNN, there will be an F-16, F-22, or F-35 (heaven help us) dropping ordinance. Iraq, Syria, and A-stan are catalysts, not the intended theaters. At least that's how I hope the LAAR concept is being developed. Ok...so it's all REALLY a program to get rid of the A-10, but hopefully there is also a sincere purpose and mission for the airframe we're pursuing. ...or perhaps I'm just an idealist who refuses to quit...

Yeah, it's in the retire-and-go-fly-for-the-airlines memo right under to the it's-unwise-to-stay-in-AD-past-20 paragraph. The USAF doesn't care about O-5's as pilots. If they did, they'd care about getting pilots to make O-5. There is non-committed/previously expired bonus eligible text in the PSDM. But if a qualified pilot is past 20 and has no ADSC, I would seriously question their sanity for taking a bonus and staying instead of getting out.

There is nothing good about an FEB. I've been party to a couple. There has to be a whole lot of documentation, wrecked career(s), maybe a wrecked airplane, and a lot of painful waiting (months, if not years) while squadron mates stew in speculation and sideline quarterbacking. While FEBs do expose a lot of ground truth, they also open the door for a lot of opinion, personal and professional bias, hearsay, and straight up misinformation to enter in to the "judgment" process. Often the FEB is the second or third major investigative event in a string that can politely be described as 'forcible body cavity examinations' for the crew member(s) involved. One of the FEBs I saw was completely overturned by the convening official because the panel's judgments missed the mark so badly. Just another perspective. FF

Any words on the cost of the 3.5 motors plus install? It could majorly improve capability across the force if it's cost effective. Those performance numbers sound similar to the J. I'd be curious to see the TOLD numbers. Using line crews as test pilots. I cringed at that. Especially after the recent Marine KC-130 crash. Fly safe fellas. FF

U-28 guys get kinda touchy about their weight.

I wonder how deep Big Blue is going to bury the data about the number of pilots turning down continuation. That'd be a great slide for the AMC/A1 road show.

Just saw that too. Looks like a significant step in the right direction.

I'm beginning to believe there's some ground truth in that statement. Big MAF has been non-promoting and downplaying the C-130 community for a decade now, and it's showing. I personally think this is an outflow of some sincere C-130 hate that developed in SWA. I wish this was hearsay, but got to see it first hand more than once: senior C-17 guys who fostered a deep and seething hatred at the idea that a C-130 might perform better at something than a C-17 (specifically airdrop and LZ efficiency in those conversations). I love the C-17, and I think we need more of them, but C-130's are better at tacair because that's what they were built for. Big Blue doesn't agree with that idea. I didn't believe that sibling rivalry could actually impact this high in the scheme of maneuver, but I'm beginning to think otherwise. Sorry to hear that the C-130 community is in such a state that dudes are not wanting to promote to O-4. That says a lot. Duck, good luck and I'm glad to hear you were able to get what you wanted. 16 months and counting... FF

I'm neither (10 minutes of searching would have helped you there...), but please allow me to clarify: I mean millennial in only the most derogatory, degrading, and hurtful possible sense. Much as I would use the term "gay" while having absolutely no reference to sexual orientation or lifestyle. Here I mean "millennial" to reference the 5-year-old minded 28-year-old who points out injustices that are, in fact, wholly just, but that leave said millennial getting an outcome they don't like. The "millennial" response being to whine and complain instead of seeking a rational, effective, and practical solution. These "millennials" want the world perfectly presented on a silver platter, in a safe space free of insult or discomfort, at a time that perfectly suits their whimsically felt 'need' at that specific moment. To be honest, I know a lot of people that fall in that associated generation who are in no way shape or form "millennial." I've worked 6 month deployments with them. I've flow combat missions with them. They are what I profess to be: professionals focused on the employment of combat airpower. Look at any generation and you will find that the true military professionals have a hard time wholly identifying themselves with the Gen-Xers, millennials, hippies, grudge rockers, oregon trailers (my year group), or whatever other subculture/sociological term might be blanket applied to that year group. That's because we have a culture rooted in who we presently are, not an identity externally stamped by sociological academia. You sound like a whiny child instead of an airpower professional. Improve yourself. Find and present a plausible solution through reasoned and constructed argument so we can discuss it instead of just bitching how some non-specific people group wronged the world and it hurts.

Your millennial is showing. Next you'll be aiming us at a civilian organization to help us become a better employer of today's youth. Warfighting is a profession unlike any other, hence civilian organizations look and are led differently. Leaders who can't lead individuals in combat, shouldn't lead the military organizationally. Of course there are always exceptions, and you appear to be building your case entirely based on those exceptions. Edit: Ok. Having found some more time for a reply, you need to re-visit your TL, DR post. Not a single one of those arguments points to pilots being the problem. In my tenure in the air force, I have seen lots of queep get put into place, almost every bit of which was started by a "support requirement" and not from a pilot leader. You want to know what's wrong with the Air Force? Look at the MXG and MSG. In my time, they went from being pilot led to being support Colonel led, ever since we've taken a massive slide since then. Not placing cause, simply noticing outcome. There is no such thing as a single root cause to a morale collapse. The heart of your complaint is not pilots but mission focus. I would argue that is an outcome of having LESS operators (pilots or not) in charge. The worst command decisions I've witnessed came from MXG and MSG...but those were individual, and I forgot you're not concerned with them. Carry on in your ignorant bliss and enjoy your right to whine.

Service bias bleeding through during Cotton's second career. Non-flying army officers in general do not like USAF pilots. Too much hair product perhaps...or perhaps it has to do with life outlook and freedom. Pilots have the airlines to look forward to (I cringe at typing that...I will deeply miss tactical flying), while ground dwelling Army officers get to look forward to being a civilian in the Army staff they just left. Working with the Army has taught me that they embrace the service first mentality at an epic level. Asking for more money would be hypocrisy to them. Sent from my iPad using Baseops Network Forums

Go read the books "Boyd" and "Flying Through Midnight." Kick butt at UPT and go do things you never could anywhere else. The greatest regrets are the lions we didn't chase and the mountains we didn't climb. Ignore those who want to be someone, and go do something big. When you're in the jet, being a USAF pilot is the most challenging and rewarding job on the planet.

I really hope that the leadership knows this won't work. I am watching entire year groups punch out . At one base, in one squadron alone, I've heard that 9 of 12 bonus eligibles are separating after their 10 year ADSC...all instructors if the rumor mill is accurate.

FIFY

Fire for effect and don't quit. Good luck man.

Bugger, cock, bollucks, bellend, plonker NATO network ops check good.

Someone make Ram a General. He's ready.

Documentary Google for the win. The Boeing Bird of Prey was a black project aircraft, intended to demonstrate stealth technology. It was developed by McDonnell Douglas and Boeing in the 1990s. The company provided $67 million of funding for the project; it was a low-cost program compared to many other programs of similar scale. It developed technology and materials which would later be used on Boeing's X-45 unmanned combat air vehicle. As an internal project, this aircraft was not given an X-plane designation. There are no public plans to make this a production aircraft. It is characterized as a technology demonstrator. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boeing_Bird_of_Prey

Open source speculations are always fun. https://www.combataircraft.net/2017/06/23/how-did-a-30-year-old-su-22-defeat-a-modern-aim-9x/ Also a neat quick read about the red eagles from an embedded link on that page (where did Steve Davies go?): https://aviationweek.com/blog/we-didn-t-know-what-90-percent-switches-did

Clearly you meant flight engineer.