brabus

That’s how the guard works - no promotion past O-5 until you’ve been selected for an O-6 job. It generally helps keep the wrong people from weaseling their way into a job simply because they “have to go somewhere for their O-6 job” like on AD.

Never have heard that, and I know a couple people with multi-millions who were/are in the mil with larger than average security clearances.

@Sim Unfortunately even if they win that lawsuit, assumption is it’s not finished before the 2 Dec deadline. Doesn’t seem like it will help anyone in the AF.

@MEMguy Great rundown. I had no desire to circumnavigate the world/fly nights most of the time, so that’s what led me to the pax side. However, seems that part of cargo does not have to be what you always do if so chosen. Too committed seniority-wise now, but wish I would have had this type of input when making decisions 4 years ago. Certainly good info for those still considering the direction they want to take.

Question for cargo guys (out of curiosity): all the cargo guys I know fly a circle around the world for ~14 days straight every month, so anecdotally it seems like that’s the “standard.” Clearly there are deviations from the standard, so curious what those are (besides reserves). Are there options to do a month that look a little more like pax (e.g. 3-4 day trip = transcon to a couple destinations and back home, or similar to one international destination, then back home)? If so, what kind of seniority and rate of occurrence is seen to make these happen?

A lot more to worry about than VBIED 172s…not saying it’s not a threat, but saying we’re fine with what we have to counter that threat. Discussing some new airplane to fly ACA is pissing into the wind.

I agree with 99% of this, but that MCO battlefield allusion is really a fairytale nowadays. I can’t think of one remotely likely situation where there’s the 1980s style tank v tank without an IADS that’ll decimate the A-10. The only likely scenarios it’s survivable/effective in nowadays are things like what we’ve been doing the last 20 years, which it has done amazingly at. But, those types of scenarios in lightly defended areas can be serviced by light attack. Same situation with the 15C…it’s rapidly only becoming useful/survivable for HLD or Korea (assuming China doesn’t get involved. Hence, they need to be replaced by more capable/survivable aircraft (and that aircraft may not look/“feel” like we traditionally have thought…if we do it right).

I think your high/med/lo is a good concept. Kill the A-10, move the “CAS culture” to specific F-16 squadrons, as well as A-29/AT-6 squadrons. The A-10 is awesome, but it’s not sound to continue it (or the 15C for that matter) more than a few more years, given the current and future threats in the world. Read the book Kill Chain - discusses how fucked our acquisitions process is and how our thought process is backwards from what it should be. One of the main premises is how we focus too much on platforms/making new versions of platforms instead of developing revolutionary new ideas and mindsets in how to face emerging problems. It’s very interesting.

@NegatorySo in spirit of attempting to have rational/unemotional conversation, here’s why I think much of this discussion is just stuck in a luftberry - we (and others on here) actually agree there are a lot of people in this country who should get the vaccine, and that by not getting it they are hurting others…filling up ICU beds, etc. There’s actually no argument there from me or a lot of other so-called-“anti-vaxxers”…what the discussion really should focus on so we’re not talking past each other is two-fold. The vaccination necessity for low risk people (<50, no underlying medical conditions, have natural immunity), especially with consideration to what the vaccine actually accomplished for that group, and the more difficult/subjective discussion of liberty, federal overreach, etc…where’s the line for “you do you.” When people just scream about “but muh ICU is full and it’s every unvax’d person’s fault!” or “the fuck I will get the jab…now back to my 15th slurpee and Big Mac for the week” there is no real conversation, because while there may shreds of truth/honest sentiment in statements, they are just pieces, not the entire picture, and it becomes a discussion based on omission of facts and not the whole enchilada.

It does matter. And another thing that matters to this specific article that was left out - staffing shortages. It’s not a literal bed/equipment shortage in many places, it’s a shortage of staffing. This has been a problem all over the country; so interesting that so many health workers have been laid off over the past year. Yet, such significant CFs as this are swept under the rug because the only thing being currently sold is the “pandemic of the unvaccinated,” which is complete bullshit. That is not to say there aren’t obese people with diabetes refusing to get the vaccine and ending up in the ICU (they should get the vaccine), but they are not the only people in the ICU. Remember that MA study the CDC conducted that I brought up where 75% of the ICU COVID patients were vaccinated…no you probably don’t remember, because you block absolutely everything out of your brain that doesn’t conform to your holier-than-thou opinion, even when it’s irrefutable data from credible sources.

So it begins, we’re down to only 99.99% of Austin not in the ICU for COVID (actual number, not hyperbole for effect). Not saying it doesn’t matter these people are in the ICU (who by national average, 95% have pre-existing conditions). But let’s paint the entire picture, not be like this author and just about everyone else in the media who paints whatever picture they want through omission of facts. Fear sells, “99.99% not in ICU” doesn’t.

@LumberjackLet me clarify, I have a higher risk of an adverse reaction from the vaccine than the gain in protection I receive from the vaccine. I was not comparing fatality rate. Though in either case, we’re splitting hairs. So how important is something that you’re arguing takes you from 99.9% to 99.99% survival, but comes with an unknown price tag (long term affects)? Point is, very reasonable to not get it, or get it, depends on the person and their situation. The only insane thing is not accepting that both answers can be right, and it’s a personal choice in which is right for an individual.

@frogI wouldn’t be so quick to condemn torqued’s words as hyperbole that lacks historical context. For times sake, just referencing you’re first point of hitler…Germany, 1933 up to invasion of Poland: - Hitler takes control, Nazi party consolidates power by taking multiple measures to snuff out other political parties, merges powers to be as centralized as possible. For example, the Reichstag Fire Decree, curtailed freedom of expression, with police empowered to search out and arrest those that were deemed a “threat” to the state. US example: Inaug day and “EVERYONE was an insurrectionist,” but massive BLM/antifa riots were “mostly peaceful.” See next point… - Cinema and mass rallies organized and aimed at changing public opinion to be in favor of the Nazi party - Education became focused around race (e.g. race is the most important factor that drives XYZ)…weird, where have I seen this today? There’s more. So I’m not saying we’re exactly like Germany during the rise of the Nazi party, but one’s eyes are firmly glued shut if they don’t see some very concerning parallels. Don’t repeat history’s mistakes; if you think we’re not or it “can’t happen here,” you (the royal you) are incredibly wrong.

I already did that, with the data that’s available (my risk from COVID vs. VAERS). It’s about equal risk, slightly favoring not taking the vaccine, for the < 50 age group with no underlying med conditions. The bigger elephant in the room is what are the potential long term adverse reactions? Nobody knows, and that’s the biggest factor for many. No one can make any statistically significant argument that immediate adverse reactions equal the driving decision to not get the vaccine, but why get a vaccine that does so little for you (again, the healthy/young crowd specifically) in trade for an unknown longterm risk (could be very low, but could be bad). Also, if you’ve had COVID, you are significantly better protected than if you just had the vaccine, so no scientific reason to get the vaccine if you’ve managed to already have COVID. None of this is a “no brainer;” it’s dependent on many variables that differ from person to person. To say COVID vaccination is a blanket “obvious,” “no brainer,” etc. decision one way or the other for everyone out there is ignorant, selfish, or both.

Cool, you latched onto the .53x increase, while not addressing: - the massive amounts higher probability of being reinfected with COVID/being symptomatic if you’re vaccinated vs. natural immunity - Vaccination status has little effect on viral loads And since you breezed my post in about 30” based on your reply time, you left out an important chunk of the study conclusion, which to highlight is ”natural immunity confers longer lasting and stronger protection against infection, symptomatic disease and hospitalization for the Delta variant of Coronavirus compared to Pfizer vaccine,” as well as failed to address how the vaccinated were the bigger problem in MA than the unvaccinated. This is not a pandemic of the unvaccinated (blanket statement) as the media is cramming down your throat, but you can argue those at high risk who aren’t vaccinated are causing issues. So, it’s a “pandemic of those people,” not one of low-risk, unvaccinated people. And if you already had COVID, you’re better off by a large margin than those who have been vaccinated and have not had COVID yet.

1. CDC study on MA 3-17 Jul: - 74% of cases occurred in fully vaccinated persons - Among this group, 5 people were hospitalized. 4 were vaccinated, aged 20-70, and 2 of those had underlying med conditions. 1 was unvaccinated, age 50-59, and had multiple med conditions - CDC: “Delta infection resulted in similarly high SARS-CoV-2 viral loads in vaccinated and unvaccinated people.” 2. Israeli study around the same time: - Overview: study found natural immunity confers longer lasting and stronger protection against infection, symptomatic disease and hospitalization for the Delta variant of Coronavirus compared to Pfizer vaccine - Model 1: risk of break through infection was 13.06 times higher among vaccinated patients (vs. reinfection of those with natural immunity) and they were 27 times more likely to be symptomatic than unvaccinated people who'd had COVID previously - Model 2: risk of break through infection was 5.96 times higher among vaccinated patients (vs. reinfection of those with natural immunity) and they were 7.13 times more likely to be symptomatic than unvaccinated people who'd had COVID previously (Model 1 was between people with same time of first event, and Model 2 was without syncing) - Israeli Health Ministry (IHM): “With a total of 835,792 Israelis known to have recovered from the virus, the 72 instances of reinfection amount to 0.0086% of people who were already [naturally] infected with COVID. By contrast, Israelis who were vaccinated were 6.72 times more likely to get infected after the shot than after natural infection” - IHM: “effectiveness of the Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine has fallen to 40%” No spears, just data that many have not likely seen. The Israeli study did find a .53 times increase in protection if you had natural immunity + 1x shot. So, it’s not an anti-vax study, but does demonstrate the effectiveness of the vaccine and the expected results post-vaccine compared to natural immunity is substantially different than what the media, big pharm, and everyone who’s bought off on what they’re selling, is arguing.

@BrightNeptune I hear you, just saying you could go get an antibody test, and if that pops positive, now you have another avenue to pursue against a mandatory vaccine, from a regulation/legal perspective. @Scooter14 Keep seeing these infographics, but an incredibly important point they conveniently leave out is how many of the unvaccinated with COVID in the hospitals have 1+ underlying medical condition (regardless of age)? Answer: the national average is 95% (CDC). If someone has an underlying condition, they should probably get the vaccine, as the combo risk of COVID and med condition may be higher than the unknown longterm effects of the vaccine. These infographics are misleading because they imply all unvaccinated people are part of this hospitalization problem, when in fact the healthy/low-risk people are statistically NOT involved.

https://deadairsilencers.com/products/primal/ A .46 cal suppressor, supports 45-70 up to .338 Lapua energies, and full auto rated. Somebody on here needs this immediately!

So what is so dangerous about landing at an airfield with 2x runways, 10/13k long vs. a single runway that’s 8.6k…the latter is better because some guy in the tower says “cleared to land?” Not trying to imply 8.6 is too short, but what the hell is the big deal with not having a civilian tell me I’m cleared to land (who collectively across my career have multiple times give me clearance to land which would have resulted in a mishap had I not caught the problem and reacted accordingly). Sure, talk to the guy and tell him the preference is LAW/another towered airport in the event of a land as soon as practical EP, but anything beyond that is egregious BS/CYA. Edit: Last week sent a 4 ship into a NTA with multiple GA in the pattern…turns out pilots can pilot and everything was fine. That OG would probably have a heart attack hearing this.

@BrightNeptune Another option, if you have COVID antibodies from a previous infection, is request a vaccine exemption IAW AFI 48-110 (look at section 2.6). There’s also a current lawsuit against DOD for mandating vaccines for people with natural immunity. No idea if either of those will be successful, but it’s another avenue to at least try…if you’ve been previously infected.

Cool, they should also charge an extra $200 for anyone with a BMI > 25, to keep it equitable. And if they were truly genuine, they should probably charge $400 for BMI > 30, which probably accounts for 50% of their workforce

Nice appeal to emotion, extremes, etc. To play the opposite side of your coin, is death no longer an acceptable part of life’s journey? Is an 87 yr old dying unacceptable now? How about the guy who’s made a million and one poor life decisions and dies at 40 with diabetes, hypertension and a half-ass functioning liver...sad that someone’s son, dad, etc. died, but you cannot logically disregard the root cause of his death was poor decisions he had control over.

5-10 years, based on the historical timeline for vaccine discovery/testing/authorization. I’m down for cutting red tape (of which we know there’s a lot of), so that’s taken into account for the lower end of the range. Now, if we come across a virus that has a 69% death rate, then you bet your ass it’s worth the risk to EUA something as fast as possible. But that’s not what COVID is, despite so many people acting like it is.

Not saying the short term data is worse for the vaccine, nor do the above numbers break down vaccine status (there are vaccinated people amongst that data). But when you look at the data above, the vaccine becomes statistically unnecessary for a large portion of the population. Additionally, studies show natural immunity is far more effective than the vaccine (e.g. keep your natural immune system strong vs. interfering with synthetic drugs). Those, combined with no long term data on the vaccine (the currently unmeasured, potential danger of the vaccine), is what makes it a rational decision for many to pause on the vaccine…for now anyways.

Related to the discussion (source: CDC) Current hospitalization rate: 0-4: 0.0018% 5-17: 0.0011% 18-49: 0.0062% Of those hospitalized, 91.8% of adults, and 53.5% of children, have at least one underlying medical condition. Of those hospitalized, here’s how many die: 0-4: 0.8% 5-17: 0.6% 18-49: 2.5% So to wrap it up by the data, if I get COVID, I have a 98.994% of not needing to be hospitalized. If I am unlucky enough to be that bad off, I then have a 97.5% of being discharged from the hospital alive. My children are even better off statistically. No anecdotal stories here, just what the data shows. So again, totally support everyone to make their own decision based on their situation, but those of you with this self-perception of intellectual and moral superiority simply are ignoring the data when you attack another person’s rational decision to not get the vaccine. This is in no way defending those who are foregoing the vaccine even when very unhealthy, old, etc. or because they believe in microchips or whatever else conspiracy theorist are selling. And it also in no way minimizes the reality that their are healthy/young people who get very sick or die, but unemotionally, the data shows they are still outliers.