HeloDude

Wait…are you referring to the “mostly peaceful protests”?

Just curious if you think things are still going well?

What squadron?

This If they’re going to be “just as good” as FAIPs because they’re doing the exact same training, then why not make more FAIPs? Oh wait…they already did that a few years ago. And good luck training a civilian to the same standard as a FAIP when the civilian can only work 40 hours a week. Oh, and who is going to train these civilians?—it’s not like UPT has open seats not being filled and that PIT isn’t running 2+ months behind.

I wouldn’t call close formation and ET3 “fundamental flying skills”…and I’m pretty sure they don’t teach this in IFT. A civilian IP can definitely learn/be able to teach it, but it will take much more training since they’ve never seen it in UPT. Oh, and here’s a data point: Some T-1 trained FAIPs have gone through CRs at T-6 PIT (and some have even washed out) for lack of formation flying abilities due to the cuts in UPT. As far as being a military officer, UPT is centered around flight instruction based on the foundation of military bearing, integrity, etc. If this wasn’t necessary, then mil cap wouldn’t be a thing. It’s not to say that 23 year old civilian pilots can’t also have these qualities, but there’s no training program to weed those people out who aren’t a good fit. Just think about people you’ve met who said they’ve wanted to be a military pilot but just didn’t have the qualities we seek in a military officer…there’s a reason why we’re different. Also, unless they rewrite the rules, you can’t work a civilian more than 40 hours a week without permission, compensation, etc. This changes the ball game quite a bit. Rucker, Kirtland, and other programs have had civilian/contractor flight instructors, but I’m pretty sure the vast majority have been very experienced military pilots in the past, and their instruction has been more/less limited to contact/instrument flying…they leave the formation and other stuff to the mil IPs. That all being said, my biggest concern is with the comments on this page who think this will make a better IP than those graduating from PIT…and across the board, I just don’t see it. Do you agree with Jice that these young civilian CFIs with 50 hours of C172 IP time will be better than a UPT graduate going to PIT to be a FAIP?

So a 23 year old, 50 hour CFI, who has never gone through any military training (flight or otherwise) will be better than a 25 year old officer who has gone through a commissioning source, graduated UPT (they still wash people out btw), and has successfully gone through the current PIT syllabus (which also still washed people out)?

I might be misunderstanding you…but are you suggesting that this program will make instruction at UPT better by making white jets more selective for AD pilots due to sending less qualified low time CFI’s through some sort of PIT (I’d be willing to bet their syllabus will not be the same as it is right now)?

The ad says they’ll be teaching in all phases of T-6 training…

If you stay in long enough, you’ll see what happened years ago (then ended), come back again.

Well, the root cause for the Taliban falling and a “democratic” Afghanistan taking place was the US invasion and occupation, so it’s not that surprising…

Yeah, definitely allows us to spend money that has a “tremendously positive return on investment”… “U.S. Spent $384,000 to Study Peruvian Brothels” https://www.realclearpolicy.com/articles/2022/06/02/us_spent_384000_to_study_peruvian_brothels_834482.html?fbclid=IwAR04gSHh7uGawa-weNa4SfZs6T15OoVCYa1OT_3gndNje21WmBRiAD68Vx4

Never believe a progressive when they say “nobody wants to take your guns away”…because that’s exactly what they want to do.

Looks like Adam is working really hard to get that “token GOP” contributor job on MSNBC, CNN, etc. As he gets closer to that job, he starts changing his stance on “rights”. “Look, I have opposed a ban, you know, fairly recently. I think I’m open to a ban now. It’s going to depend on what it looks like because there’s a lot of nuances on what constitutes, you know, certain things,” Kinzinger told CNN’s Dana Bash on “State of the Union” when asked if he still opposed “a ban on the kind of assault weapons that were used in the shooting.” But he used to say… https://kinzinger.house.gov/issues/issue/?IssueID=126991 https://www.foxnews.com/media/second-amendment-red-flag-laws-mass-shootings

He’s in charge, for better or for worse. That being said, I’d be truly surprised if he/the Dems run him again in 2024…if he even makes it that far.

So I’m confused…Biden said we’ll use our military to defend Taiwan against China, but right after he made that statement, his staff was quick to make a a “clarification”? So which is it? Biden Says U.S. Will ‘Militarily Defend’ Taiwan against Chinese Invasion https://news.yahoo.com/biden-says-u-militarily-defend-141519941.html

What was your time between the original and the booster?

Beat me to it…except I was going to make the joke about the booster, and here it turns out to be an actual argument by the “health professionals”. Isn’t the small pox vaccine a one time dose for military members?

Wait…so you’re saying that Trump has formally announced that he’s running for President in 2024? Can you provide a source to share?

I’m not aware of him saying he’s running or not? Just like Hillary…

I think the same one that Trump is running for?

There’s a line…and Demonrat crossed it. His recent posts and subsequent replies have been deleted.

Yeah…the economy is doing great. I say we spend even more money.

“Whatever the number is”…that should tell you that it’s high. I’m much more concerned about our own economic problems threatening us than I am Russia or China. But again, if we’re in NATO, then why do we need a massive defense budget? And if we need a massive defense budget, then why do we need NATO when other counties (Iceland as the easy example) pays next to nothing for defense?

But they’re in NATO, are they not? I thought being in NATO is what protects these countries?

$30.5 TRILLION in debt…