Dupe

I definately agree that our future choices have to be different than our current ones... especially as America's demographics shift towards an aging population. At some point, there will be a higher risk premium on American debt. The thing is, that hasn't happened yet. Not even close. T-bill rates have been in a decline since 2007 (the chart in your link shows that). Now, rates are rock-bottom lows and have been flat since 2009. Even with the American credit downgrade...T-bill rates and hence the Fed Funds Rate didn't much move. Why? I think the answer is that investors believe we're still a low-risk investment. In fact, with the Euro crisis flamming and the low cost of the American dollar, I think the risk of investing in Amercian debt has actually decreased. T-bill returns have dropped accordingly. What I'm trying to argue is that ideas like the Bush-era tax cuts, medicare prescription drug benefits, TARP, the stimulus, funding two wars, and the automotive industry bail-outs all seem more reasonable if the debt you take on has a 0% real interest rate. I'll offer a heretical opinion: Right now, we're in a unique time. Inflation rates are at or above the interest rates on American debt. That means American debt has a zero to negative real interest rate. At the same time, the future road looks hard. America's population is aging and our infrastructure is crumbling. Global challengers (ok...really one challenger) to American military hegemony are growing. America's access to cheap energy sources is increasingly challenged. We should be using this opportunity to deficit spend while the real cost is essentially free to fund enabling projects/programs for the next few decades. When the real rate of our debt then starts to increase, we should shift to a more balanced fiscal policy. We're in agreement that change has to happen...we just don't agree when.

I think one of the reasons our debt is high is because debt remains a viable policy option. As long as the return on T-bills remains at or below the inflation rate, then the real interest on that debt is essentially nil.

You ready for this? You can use TA at an aeroclub to get a CFI as long as it's part of a bigger degree program. The thing is, no aeroclub is partnered with an institution to offer such a program. You can now use Post 9/11 GI Bill to fund aeroclub ratings above your PPL like you can with MGIB, but are you really going to burn months of eligibility on something that won't cost you more than $5k or so to knock out on your own?

This isn't about cost....it's about having an alternative fuel that's been tested in our assets and a more mature alternative fuels industry should the shit hit the fan.

Oh, I hear ya brother. I would definitely hire outside counsel for any legal proceedings that I hope I'm never involved it. For what it's worth, this guy was a prior civilian criminal defense attorney before entering the Army. The bulk of his work now is defending sexual assault cases and ground ROE violations. He said that he's seen outside counsel try to take a case to trial when a more than reasonable deal is on the table because the hired gun gets paid more if the case goes to trial. It's been so blatant that he's had to threaten notifying with ABA about such actions. This is all caveated with the fact that the guy's average client is an E-5 soldier. I'm sure most folks on this board are both mentally and financially able to research and retain effective counsel. Just know that some of your young troops may be hiring bus-stop advertising attorneys instead. Buyer beware...you get what you pay for. Bigger than that, I think we're really bad about mentoring guys to say "I would like an attorney present" when a commander or investigator starts reading them an Article 31 rights card. We're taught from a young age that if you mess-up, you fess-up and take your lumps. It's even a quality that we highly value as aviators in the debrief. Turns out, that may not be in your best interest in legal matters. If you have experience with or have seen the horrors of the military legal system, you owe it to your young folks to pass on lessons learned once cases are closed.

I was just BSing with an ADC lawyer last night, and he believed that hiring outside counsel was generally a waste of money. In his view, competent outside counsel is almost always prior JA corps attorneys thus just as good as the ADC counsel. Worse, folks hire counsel who may be unfamiliar with military justice and that ends up hurting their case. He also noted that the military seems to be willing to bring more cases to trial when the evidence simply isn't there, and the Air Force is leading that trend. If it were me, I would decidedly hire UCMJ-smart counsel. Fud, are you able to elaborate on your experience? Guys need to know how the justice system works / doesn't work in case they ever find themselves getting their rights read to them. We're good about LFE lessons learned and career info, but bad about passing down info on what to do when the boss reads you the card that starts with "You have the right to remain silent...."

Don't even bother with a TV...AFN is annoying and Sky just isn't that great. Use your TV with your DVD player and use Netflix if you must. Your local will have all the tely that you need (I.e...cricket, rugby, and the occasional nationally televised dart championship). I lived in Cambridge as a single guy....it was most awesome. Would you like to live in the few market towns close to the bases, or live in England's equivalent of Boston with non-stop train access to London?

I can't put my finger on it, but I feel like the Army has had a quiet revolution among its officers Maj and below in the last five years that simply hasn't happened in the Air Force. With the guidance from Gen Petreas to young leaders that "In the absence of orders, you should figure out what the orders should have been and execute that," folks like CPT Travis have come up with ideas like "How to win in Al Anbar." They've been able to innovate, test these ideas on the battlefield, and duplicate the good ones out to everyone in the AOR. The Air Force has been fighting various shades of the same fights since March 1991. As a result, we haven't had the absolute transformation that the Army has in terms of a young leader's ability to innovate. In my view, we've had continuous top-down evolution in the form of updated systems and equipment, but not nearly as much push upwards from our young folks. We've evolved into the ground combat support force that we are today. It will take a revolution to get us back to a force that can capture and maintain absolute air supremacy....I hope we have the environment that allows push-up rapid innovation before the time when it is needed.

Were these all unit-funded TDYs? If so, convince the boss to send you TDY to go pick up your POV with the argument that it uses less of his precious DBA than had you rented a car and flown to each place. If that doesn't work, at least ask for PTDY to pick up your car. If the car is a beater, maybe just giving a bro a power of attorney and having him sell it is a better use of your time. As Huggy said, don't be afraid to use what's authorized in the JFTR. In this case, a string of flights and rental cars would have been a wise move. Had your car broken on the road, it would have been on you to fix. If you didn't want to fly because of the ass-pain of checking 3 months worth of bags multiple times, a one way rental car would have been an option as well.

Making clear the opportunity costs of 20+ years of small war support is a valid shot.

Here's a few reasons to not have a fly-off: -It takes time, and you want to acquire this thing faster -it costs you double the development money to fund two (or more) contractors to produce developmental articles -You think the acquisition is technically simple enough to not be needed -You risk a contractor going out of business during the evaluation (which will certainly change the proposal from the other competitor) -You think a fly-off puts one contractor at a significant advantage (this is really why Taco wants a fly-off...Emb/SNC has a much more developed product. He's expecting that to shine through a fly-off. I think the increased development costs for H-B will be evident in their proposal) Do we really need a fly-off for something as simple as a fixed wing aircraft with a sensor ball and a few hard points? No. If we're not trying to get contractors to figure out different technology paths for something revolutionary (like..say a Joint Strike Fighter, Advanced Tactical Fighter, or Net Enabled Weapon), then no need to pay double or more for development costs while the clock continues to run. All I think the AF needs on this one is a firm fixed price contract with severe penalties for schedule delays. From there, let the proposal submissions decide. We didn't ask for a KC-X fly-off. No need to here either.

I regularly fly the second and third jets (E2 and E3) for flight test work (E1 is on permanent loan to Boeing for their development work). They're now at about 4k hours each, which is half of what most of the CAF fleet has. Without having the depot's data in front of me, I'd say the majority of the Strike's age issues now are avionics and subsystem issues (as Cap-10 said). Thankfully, I haven't seen or heard of any fatigue issues that would cause us to trash an airplane. We escaped the longeron fatigue issues that plagued the light greys several years ago. With money invested in the right systems, I think the aircraft will be capable until 2035.

Here's the reality check: there's no acquisition money to buy COTS anything. There is sustainment money to upgrade existing platforms (which may in the end be more expensive...but it's not a "new program"). Pretty much every Air Force MDS but the JSF is trying to figure out how to bend better capabilities out sustainment money in the name of improved maintenance

I find this far more disturbing. I can understand the macabre pics of someone actively trying to kill you in a war zone. It obviously doesn't help the cause...but I understand. I don't understand the equivalent of the WG/CC's wife going batshit crazy while the unit is away.

Squadron O&M budgets sometimes can be rIndiculously tight. Getting the burden of buying 2x $350 combat-proven pant-suits per person per year off the books for a space ops squadron might be a great deal for them. If that savings gets a pack of the smart space operators to what ever the space equivalent of WEPTAC is, then this whole thing is well worth it. Or it could just turn into more flat screen TVs at the end of the year. Edit: spelling

I'm pretty sure the guys turning the keys on the most powerful arm of the nuclear triad should have a constant evaluation process. Just what would you call such an event?

True...but somebody must do the narrating.

If we think that the RPA operator pipeline is good enough, then what's the quality issue with lower-tier UPT grads? Afterall, the bottom 2 guys made it through. You're making the "more than the minimum pieces of flair" argument. All the UPT grads are quality pilots. They're certainly more qualified than the RJ drivers who take me to and from Atlanta.

Well...we had some sort of doctrine that stated that European colonies are no longer allowed in the western hemisphere. Since 1823 even. We got them back, though....we invaded their little protectorate Grenada and saved our med school students (without really informing Buckingham prior to our invasion) a few years later. Seems that Regan-Thatcher relations weren't always as great as currently believed.

You should just email a CAF squadron directly. Ask Toro about the correct format for your letter.

I'm tired of the dumb copies of the Dear Boss Letter. The original was a masterpiece. Like the movies, all the sequels have been successively worse. The dude's complaints are legit..I'm just instantly turned off now when I see the Dear Boss format. If I feel that way... how those older, more wise, or better looking feel?

I think BQ's right on this one. When you look at Disco's numbers, the B-1B will get a mere $16M in FY13. $16M is life-support for a major MDS like the Bone. If it stays that way for a few years, the B-1 will quickly be irrelevant in anything other than a benign environment. The writing is on the wall. Edit: I used the adjective "mere" in back to back sentences. Bad form.

I'm confident we'll get the right bomber for the 2030+ environment. I'm also confident it will be well over cost and will start to be operational well beyond any current promises. We'll get it right...eventually.

I'll beat the near-dying horse here. Definately put your previous-life acquisition experience in your statement. The statement is the one place to put anything that's not in your official records. The board will have your OPRs, FEF, transcripts, and SURF. They have no data on anything you have done previous to Mother Blue. Having acquisitions experience sets you apart from other applicants...clearly state what you did and what DAU certifications you reached. The board isn't some giant random monstrosity like a promotion board. Its 5-6 guys from around DT who gather in San Antonio to drink beer and decide the near to medium term makeup of DT. There will be a herbivore guy there to clearly state the merits of the heavy dudes. I'm constantly shocked in my flight test job at how the flying is often not that complicated. I spend a majority of my energy fighting with idiots at the SPOs and passing lessons/ideas to my OT bros. There's no one technical area of the TPS curriculum I use all the time. Some of that stuff I haven't seen since I graduated. The aquisitions part, however, I use all the time.

When I was there, quite a few of the single dudes just lived on base and commuted via mountain bike. Tehachapi is nice if you want to escape all that is Antelope Valley. A few guys lived in Santa Clarita or further to be close to the LA scene. A few guys went in to rent McMansions in Palmdale that would otherwise be foreclosed on. Virtually no single guy I knew lived in Rosamond.