HeloDude

You're buying into their nonsense and not seeing it for what it is. It has to do with vilifying a certain culture (ie males, specifically white males), the stereotypes associated with it (ie a big truck), etc. I know plenty of guys whose wives are the ones blowing through money on silliness causing financial problems...yet that was not included as an example. Since when is making poor financial decisions a 'male problem'? Anytime you see anything with 'male privilege' or 'white privilege' just know that there's a progressive ideology being pushed.

Yep--standard ops. Progressive politicians will tell you how important our public schools are, how we can make them great, how they just need more money, blah blah blah...but the vast majority will never send their children to these schools. Another issue is 'climate change'...it's so dangerous and so horrible, yet progressive politicians and elites will have huge (and often multiple) houses using far much more energy than a typical American. They also travel more, are more likely to take private jets, etc...yet it is my fault for driving a 4 cylinder car to work. Judge people on their own actions and you'll usually learn their true intentions.

Don't let it happen again. But in all seriousness, don't live in a state or city ran by progressives.

You sound surprised...this isn't a secret: https://youtube.com/watch?v=9_5KQC7k8Lc

Wait...are you suggesting that the information/examples provided are legit?

For all you guys who own trucks, according to the U.S. military, you are using your male privelege to promote violence in your family and have an abusive relationship. https://www.med.navy.mil/sites/nmcp/Patients/SocialWork/Documents/Domestic Violence and Sexual Assault/PowerAndControlWheel.pdf

I definitely agree it's all about the money and power (the vast majority of politics is), but I disagree that anything with regards to this issue will change with the next administration. The country is not the same as it was 15 years ago, much less what it was 35 years ago. Also, the Middle East is losing its place when it comes to importance in the world...so not not only has our country changed, but the world, the world economy, etc has changed.

Funny--all (yes all) of my helo buddies who have separated or retired have found civilian flying jobs who wanted one. There's more than just the airlines/cargo carriers.

I hear ya man...

This is just a little bit bigger than the silly bands...the band is only one symptom. Do a little more research and you'll see what I'm talking about.

Just more proof that military promotions are becoming more about your genitals and the color of your skin and less about your merit... https://ca.news.yahoo.com/pentagon-promotes-lean-groups-boost-women-leadership-122906058.html

It just goes to show how much more of the Air Force has become a joke over the years. The Marines are the only ones trying to hold onto their true self, and they'll eventually succumb to the PC/'everybody gets a trophy' BS eventually.

From the article... Given the climate of things, my bet is it will be one of these two.

Of course, but it's their slot (and I'm pretty sure their money), so they can send whoever they want.

The only reason the AF started making their rotor wing pilots in the early 90's go through fixed wing phase 2 was to get higher numbers going through Tweets, to make the case for more T-6's. I think Hacker or someone discussed this years ago. It's actually silly to make rotor wing pilots spend the first 5-6 months in T-6's, to then learn a completely different kind of flying for the remaining phase 3.

Try 3/4 of the mass murders in the last 30+ years, the murders obtained their firearms legally. This is according to Mother Jones, which is about as progressive as you can get. https://www.motherjones.com/politics/2012/07/mass-shootings-map If someone breaks into my house and grabs a gun I left on the counter and shoots someone, that is not my responsibility...just as if someone broke into my house and stole my car, and killed someone drunk driving. This is also why bars aren't legally responsible for someone drinking in their bars and then going out and murdering someone via drunk driving. Now I'm a big believer of securing your firearms (especially among children, and we already have laws against negligence when it comes to children), but criminals should be at fault when they steal a firearm, not the owner.

This is one of the first examples that popped up with a quick google search...there are many more like it. I'm sorry it does not support your lame progressive ideology. https://www.foxnews.com/us/2015/07/27/cincinnati-man-shoots-at-1-year-old-boy-is-shot-by-man-with-concealed-carry/ Progrssives hate to admit that armed citizens can actually protect themselves against dangerous criminals. This is about control, nothing else, as progressives would rather us be weak and unarmed then possibly challenge their ideology.

Yep--this murderer passed a background check. So the solution according to progressives: Pass background checks. https://abcnews.go.com/Entertainment/wireStory/latest-video-shows-shooting-tv-station-employees-33328710

Reports (link below) are that he has killed himself. The progressives are already on sites like Huff Post saying it's because we don't have enough gun control laws...even though I'll put money on him having bought the gun legally and passed a NICS background check. https://www.cnn.com/2015/08/26/us/virginia-shooting-wdbj/index.html

Too bad...the criminals there are most definitely carrying weopans.

Valid point. My original point was more of a general one with regards to mishaps: Severe maintenance problems usually concerns me more than pilot/aircrew error. Buddy Spike: Sorry to hear that. Prayers going his/her way and to their families.

Agree about the suck part and am definitely they're both safe. But why do you hope it wasn't pilot error vs a maintenance problem (for example)? Don't get me wrong, the witch hunt that can occur after a mishap can be hell for the aircrew, especially if it was pilot/aircrew error. But humans are very fallible, unfortunately, and I'd feel better knowing that a couple of well trained pilots possibly made a mistake, etc vs having severe maintenance problems with our aircraft, which would lead to the question of are there more problems with our other aircraft? Are they safe to operate? Sometimes us aircrew guys lose sight of the bigger picture when mishaps occur, which makes sense because it's easy for us envision it happening to us. I guess I'd be more concerned if we had problems with our aircraft vs accepting the fact that as humans, who perform a very challenging job in a very dynamic environment, we can make mistakes/have momentary lapses in judgement. Fortunately we'll have the SIB to tell us what happened and what we can do prevent similar future mishaps. Beers to to the life support/mx folks who made sure their seats/life support equipment were good to go.

Check this out... https://www.aviano.af.mil/news/story.asp?id=123455479 Working hard doesn't always get noticed...but breastfeeding for six months does! Winning!

You just proved my point by saying the word 'feel'. This is all emotional. The RPA world is here to stay and it's growing...it's becoming more of of a priority than some other MWS's as RPA's are fulfilling an extremely important mission. If guys are fearful that they'll get an RPA out of UPT and think it's to big of a risk to not get a manned airframe and spend ten years flying RPA's then they shouldn't go to UPT...someone else will be glad to take their slot. As for the guys dropping them right now, sorry, the needs of the Air Force will always come before your personal desires--they signed a 10 year commitment to go to UPT and the AF fulfilled their end of the deal, and now the pilot must fulfill theirs. At the present time, they can always quit before graduation. I'm not saying that getting an RPA out of UPT wouldn't suck (since 99.9% of guys go to UPT for a manned aircraft) and wouldn't 'feel' the best...I empathize with them. But I've been 'promised' something by the AF several times to only have it not be fulfilled several times over the long years. What it has taught me is that the AF doesn't truly care about what I want, and the needs of the AF (whether I disagree or agree if the need is legitimate) will always come before my desire or 'feelings'. You young guys need to learn this sooner rather than later. Of course, it's always better to be lucky than good. ...and of course UH-1's are better than RPA's!! Rucker is the best track you can get!

So the AF should cross-flow all their pilots who want a new airframe for fear of them separating? If a slick 130 guy wants to go AC's or MC's but will seperate if he can't, then the AF should give him what he wants to stay? Don't get me wrong, if it makes fiscal/mission sense to do it, then fine, but why should a cross-flow from RPAs to manned aircraft be treated any differently than other cross-flows? If anything, it's worse for the reasons that have already been stated. Cross-flows are expensive, and put an experienced pilot into an aircraft where they're now going to be less experienced than their peers. A bunch of sharp Huey pilots back in the day wanted to cross-flow to MH-53's but only so many got the opportunity...just the way it was. This issue has become much more emotional (to include for the AF leadership) than logical.