brabus

9-5 only, no weekend and holidays. Shit, I've said too much.

Let me start by saying this, in no way is my statement saying we can do everyone's job or are a valid replacement for certain aircraft with a crew doing X, Y, and Z; hope it was not taken that way. I also have zero doubt you have not seen such a thing happen. But that reason is not for a lack of capability, but a byproduct of how COIN CAS is conducted currently. Other than the 4 radio part, what you describe is a relatively benign scenario for a single seat FAC(A). When we end up fighting MCO CAS in the future on Day 15 of the war, there won't be fighters at E10, "sensor warden" won't exist, and the show will be far more advanced, complicated and difficult than the current fight - single seat FAC(A)s will do just fine running that AO because that's what has already been happening since the 60s and what we still do today in training...without a dude in the back. Remember, not a pissing contest between different assets, just making a point that more people is not always required or desired.

Non-starter, what you mentioned is what single seat fighter pilots do every day (and more when we're not talking about low threat CAS, which apparently is the only mission that exists in the AF according to BOPS.net). Mistakes are made, but significantly less than successes. Strikes do it well too, they also fuck it away (just like single seat guys). The point is, at least in the fighter world, there is not a need for a second dude, with the exception of the Strike which was specifically designed for a WSO. We've been single seat weaseling since the 90s and FAC'ing single seat since Vietnam, extremely effectively as well. It's a non-issue in the fighter world - this is not chest beating, it's simply reality. To give the F-35 a 2nd seat would be a huge mistake, waste of money; essentially no gain for a whole shitload of pain.

Heard good things about them from several friends who have been there. If I end up doing the ATP, that's who I'll probably use.

I have the rest of this year left to get the practical done before my test expires, but the more I think about it, the more I have no desire to spend $1.5K+ on a rating I have absolutely zero desire to use (and is as useful as my TUI masters). Sure, there are some REMOTE possibilities that could drive me to airlines, but I think they're very unlikely. That said, with the amount of hiring going on and likely to continue over the next 5+ years, am I screwed without an ATP in the eyes of the airlines if on a very long shot I am forced to look for work there? I know the easy answer is just spend the money and do it, but I'd say there's about a 95% chance it'd be a complete waste of money and could be much better spent elsewhere. Is anyone getting hired with just an expired written or none at all?

"(Joint) Urgent Operational Need" - Unless you have that pinned next to a program/widget, there's no hope of even approaching "reasonable" when it comes to getting it, let alone getting it in a timely/decent cost context. Shack.

Yep, the "I want 100% everything" thought process crushes us in the long run. I'm with you, we need the 80% solution now and can add tech as it comes, but because of the aforementioned group of thinkers, we have a bloated and long-winded program.

We're fighting to get better EA, AESA and a lot of other shit on 4th gen fighters to increase effectiveness/survivability into the future; these are necessary things, but they aren't the ultimate solution by themselves is all I'm trying to say. There are good dudes well above me arguing for this stuff right now, and there is some light at the end of the tunnel, but unfortunately not near as much as you and I would like. We can thank the colossal fuck up the F-35 acquisition process has been for that one.

True, but it also is far less effective capability-wise than what we need. No matter what you do, you cannot make an F-16 into what is needed to cover the next 30-40 years, you can only make it better to a point, and that point misses the mark if it's to not be flown in conjunction with assets like the F-35.

The SCRA does not force companies to waive annual fees, just many do out of their own prerogative. The biggest thing it forces is low interest rates for those who incurred debt prior to entering military service.

I want to laugh at this analogy, but its too true in so many places.

Shack...seen that exact act 3 times now. Seems like very few good MX officers stay for the long term.

I'm shocked. Of all the monumental amount of MX terribleness I've seen in my career (and continue to see), 80% is the fault of shitty MX leadership, 10% is the fault of shitty mid-level leadership on the line (SSgt/TSgt level) and maybe only 10% I would even remotely consider putting on younger guys, but that's even a stretch. If the MX career field on AD could unfuck their terrible leadership, things would be much better. Every time I run into good MX leadership, they seem to be the exception, rather than the norm. It's sad.

I don't follow...

Holy shit. Are "what if's" open?

Wasted effort on the trick-fucking; all they have to do is keep chugging along like they are and the bullshit will continue to naturally weed out selects from going to IDE in the form of two big middle fingers combined with a guard/reserve/airline job.

So in dumb pilot speak, is this to say at least 5th gen should prioritize more weight of training effort to the "virtual" side in order to take advantage of full system capes? I'm well aware of all the "we can't go full up" limfacs, but no sim will ever replace the training available in live fly, even if there's some "trick fucking the system" that has to be done. Sims are great training tools, but they belong in the 10-20% max category when it comes to training allocation.

I think you win for the most fucked up personnel story I've ever heard. A1/AFPC are just unbelievably retarded.

to your uncle; it's awesome that even in his 70s/80s he would walk to the VA to support others. The world needs more men like your uncle.

YGBSM! Guess I shouldn't be surprised - what a bunch of dickbags.

Valid - the C model fleet has been cut a ton in the last 5 years, but I'm not sure why it's not getting the "full axe" like the A-10. Maybe it's because "they" view us as having more jets that can "replace" the A-10 compared to those who can "replace" the F-15C. Who knows, pure conjecture and not saying I have any reasons to support such a thought. I know, not saying A-10s are one mission. Where "they" draw the line is it it can't do A/A and AO/AI is pretty much not going to happen (take too long to get to a target and egress / not survivable in such scenario). It's ignorant to say CSAR, FACing and being a CAS fighter are the same thing, but from a large, institutional viewpoint when it comes to this topic, it's not completely out of this world that the three are combined into "single role." I hate all this as much as the next guy, and hell no we shouldn't be crippling combat capability like this. But, there's a lot of assholes who don't give a shit about such things and just want to keep their power, money, etc. They have put us in this "save X amount now!" and regardless of how insane and ridiculous it is, the CSAF has to make a very difficult decision that unfortunately can't be solved by TVs, furniture and TIB. The real solution to this problem is get the damn funding we need and allow BRAC. Or save us a shit ton of money by not spending it elsewhere in the world, who are ungrateful dipshits anyways.

I'm completely with you. But again, the latter statement especially lies heavily on Congress. My entire point is the CSAF is having shit forced down his neck and because of how our system works, there's nothing he can do about it except do the best he can with the shit he's been given. Congress is unwilling to reign in the F-35 (jobs and money for all my friends!), so they scream bloody murder for X savings "some other way," which has forced the AF into a very terrible situation. It's bullshit we're forced to do it, but since we are here, from a purely objective standpoint, you can't really argue (un-emotionally) against single-role being targeted over multi-role. The CSAF shouldn't be in this position, but he is, and I think given the stark reality of having to choose between piss and shit, he's not doing bad. Again, all of this to say I put 95% of the blame on Congress and our civilian leadership for these problems and bullshit situations, not the man at top in uniform.

So what does he push to divest that offers the same amount of savings as the A-10/KC-10? I'm not a fan of either going away, but if we have to divest something, what else? And yeah, I know there's bullshit waste like Tops in Blue and new flat screens - but unfortunately none of those will create the same savings. It has to be something "big"...I don't know the answer, and because of that I'm not going to throw spears at the guy. I will however throw burning spears towards Congress - this is their giant shit pie and now they're making him clean it up.

Completely disregard drops on this forum and anything people say, including UPT instructors or a random fighter pilot you know...completely serious. You are so far from track select, let alone getting a post-UPT assignment, there's no telling what will happen. If you go AD, you could be in a class where everyone gets a Viper on assignment night (apparently just happened), or you could get to track select and there's one T-38 and you're not the guy. Point is, NOBODY has an clue what it'll be like for you in 1.5-2 years. Every class is different, assignments go in waves, etc. If you go Guard there's a lot of great things, but you can pretty much count on never flying a fighter - if you're OK with that then take the guard job and never look back. If you'll always be wondering, "what if?" then in my opinion it's worth taking the chance, and even if in the end you don't end up in a fighter, there's still a lot great flying to be had in something else, doing great missions, and hell, you could still end up flying Hercs anyways and get a job at your hometown unit in 8-10 years.