Lawman

Well for 1, you can't just keep flying the current fleet forever. That's the thing that boggles the mind when I hear people say "let's just build more _____s" Silent Eagles are up over the hundred mil mark at last check. The A-10 tooling is gone, along with rooms full of file cabinets to actually make the tooling and the engineers are retired by now. Yes we could buy Blk 60 Vipers or even say F it and go to a land version of the next gen Super Hornet Boeing is pimping if one wanted to. Here's the big problem though, the money on F-35 is already spent. Any "cost savings" at this point will be massively cut into by all the country partners in the program wanting their money back. So we will spend near the same money and now not have a 5th gen jet fleet.

How long has Raptor been IOC? Still doesn't have JHMCS despite it being our premiere air dominance platform. My point is this needling and sharpshooting of any detail in the program viewed as a "serious flaw" is either ignorant of the rest of the aircraft in the inventories problem or just dredging up crap to dredge up crap. It's like screaming "new F-35 can't fly inverted" because they were still on the ground taxi phase of testing. It's not true but it makes a good headline. Now if there was something like Guns removed and plugged due to catastrophic failures in testing... Or the redesign hat was needed on the tail hook of the C model after landing tests that would be a worthy article. But that's the problem, so many people and sources are jumping on anything they think they can spin as negatives of the program that any real big deal issues get lost in the noise. I fly the E model Apache... It's currently 5 years behind the D model as far as software and avionics but nobody is screaming it's an inferior platform. Because that gets fixed in late 16 with lot 4. Till then we wait.

The more and more these articles get posted all over facebook the more I'm reminded of the early 2000s stupidity with the Tomcat retirement. Admirals writing op eds, people calling out the Hornet for not being able to carry the Pheonix when the last few years it was in service neither could the Tomcat... Just nonsense. It's the aviation equivalent of "the sky is falling!"

Well our administration just called it an "act of vandalism".... Pretty sure this qualifies as an act of war by most standards.

You should talk to the Laser expert over at MSIC. She paints a very grim picture at just how far the Chinese have progressed in directed energy. Shooting down like Star Wars, no nowhere close to that yet, but they are further along than we are to look at the number of systems and complexity they have spent money on. Essentially that and cyber/sat/GPS Attack are part of the big deny access plan to take away or at least severely effect our major advantages.

Hey Sig Saur's answer to all am I questions is "fuck off and learn to shoot right handed." I'd settle on most guns for a safety and mag release.

Good luck and congrats. Now, don't F it up for the next guy. God knows there are a whole bunch of 58 guys still wanting to fly somewhere for somebody where they get to keep wearing a flag on the uniform.

Meanwhile, 140 Joes crammed in the back of a C-17 for 11 hours while wearing body armor because SgtMaj said so have zero fucks to give. Tops in Blue, living out all the High School drama club/band stereotypes well into adulthood.

Resiliency training is a crock. It can be summed up with "always look on the bright side of life." Or, for people that eat meat, "quit your crying and stop being such a pussy."

The police/USAF M15 (.38) and police/FBI M19 (.357) have a little bit of nostalgia value, but the sheer number of them produced means short of being a mint gun that value addition is in the tens of dollars. About the only ones that seem to com,and any money for that era are the shortie detective/chief model .38s and .357s. I've got my dads old M19 which both him and his father carried at one point or another as a deputy. It's become a family heirloom but it's still a shooter. They are very fine guns though they lack some of the more modern ergonomics of a true shooter pistol. Grips are of more of the old style peacemaker shape that seemed to carry through on revolvers so they make good slow fire target guns but won't give you some of the rapid fire control of a more modern gun but that's pretty much true of any mid 50s-80s revolver. If you can pick one up and you've been looking to add a .38 to your collection you could do far worse. Me I'm partial to the heft on the M19 over the M15.

The F.....? This reads like a storyline out of the more recent walking dead episodes. https://www.breitbart.com/Big-Peace/2014/10/31/Congo-crowd-kills-man--eats-him-after-militant-massacres--witnesses

Well I found out from a guy that used to be on it, that the Air Force sponsors a skateboarding team. Maybe this is like that........a complete waste of money.

Bought an M&P shield to replace my P7 as a semi auto carry gun. I don't think I could find a mo'betta option of small & light while staying rugged, and in a caliber I already owned in bulk. The thing is tiny, and I can hide it in just about any type of outfit or weather I would want to carry. Also came with two different mag options so if I really need to make it small in shorts and a tshirt I can for the option of 7 instead of 8 in the mag. Still one more than my S&W .38 and same profile but skinnier. Shoots pretty well, though not spectacular like the P7 but at nearly 1/2 the weight and the fact it's a close quarters option only really that doesn't bother me.

Saw it. Holy hell that was awesome. They took the mantra "Death Before Dismount" and really ran with it. A lot darker and more serious than I was expecting too.

Well it's obviously a workable model for employment. Haven't you had to deal with the lazy good for nothing accountable to nobody fungus people who occupy (I don't want to say work) in the finance offices at every military post. Government job creation in action ladies an gentlemen.

Fixed it for you.

The beatings will continue until morale improves.... https://m.gazette.com/toxic-fort-carson-battalion-commander-returns-to-job-despite-recommendation-of-firing/article/1539975 Further proof the system is truly broken and nobody seems to care.

Corrected for offset

The combination of that article title and your avatar is spectacularly appropriate.

Well the thread title was only a year off. Good hunting.

And 1 pissed off Major making Popcorn? Jesus.... There are 7 maybe 8 LtCols in an Aviation Brigade in the Army.

My old Battalion is gonna be there till March by most estimates.... a CAB is already slated to come in and replace them. What advisory role does an Apache have?... Bueller?

Its kind of amazing how much different we are between services. In Army aviation, Command that everyone views as the best time in your life is a Line Troop/Company as a Senior Capt. Everything after that is just a long down hill slide. Even the guys that make Battalion and Brigade level commands will flat say the most they enjoyed as far as a Command was the Line Company spot they held when they were a 6 year time in service O-3. Then again the 2 Air Force LtCols I work with right now are amazed at how much differently they are treated when they interact with Conventional Army guys. A LtCol in the Army is a big damn deal where it seems like you cant swing a dead cat without hitting one at an AF Base.

Update to the original point of this thread: Scot's Vote No on referendum. By 400K more people (about a 10% split). I dont think the independence voices will go silent on this, I just wonder if they will channel more energy into the idea of an amiacable solution to the issues they have grievances with rather than go for the big gun of Independence.

Good point. And Article 4 of the Constitution provides for that process though like creating an amendment or ratifying a state it is incredibly difficult. That is probably the reason it hasnt happened since 1863 and only happend three times before that. Overtorque, I used Texas as an example because everybody who has ever met "that Texan" can recall some level of conversation about "We can leave, they taught me that in Texas History." Honestly as vocal as Texans are though after dealing with Native Hawaiian on how they view their states ownership you guys have a long way to go to hit that level. Helodude, here is an excerpt from the opinion of Texas v White (apology for the Bolding, I copy pasted it) The Union of the States never was a purely artificial and [74 U.S. 700, 725] arbitrary relation. It began among the Colonies, and grew out of common origin, mutual sympathies, kindred principles, similar interests, and geographical relations. It was confirmed and strengthened by the necessities of war, and received definite form, and character, and sanction from the Articles of Confederation. By these the Union was solemnly declared to ‘be perpetual.‘ And when these Articles were found to be inadequate to the exigencies of the country, the Constitution was ordained ‘to form a more perfect Union.’ It is difficult to convey the idea of indissoluble unity more clearly than by these words. What can be indissoluble if a perpetual Union, made more perfect, is not? While Madison and Jefferson did in fact say those things they were also under the initial formation of a country that had never existed in such a likeness before. It was also under the Articles of Confederation and the idea that Slavery was not in contention for the right of all men to be equal, so yes things change. Also Jefferson finishes that quote with "I would rather the States should withdraw, which are for unlimited commerce and war, and confederate with those alone which are for peace and agriculture." Meaning its not a statement as to the legality of secession its a statement of him not believing in taking up arms to preserve the greater Union. Also its important to note the language used in the creation of states from Ohio afterward. These were the first states to literally be carved out of Territory by their enabling acts passed by the US Congress. That act was the Federal governments endorsement for the State to form a constitution and State legislature allowing adoption of them into the Union and their allegeince to the US Constitution granting them the same rights as previously formed states. Enabled... as in the Power to become a state is a grant by the Federal Government. Hawaii and Texas were slightly different the same way 14-16 were because they had some form of existing government at the time of their admittance but if you read the enabling acts passed for those states, it comes the same way the power to become a state was granted by the Federal Government. Its really simple from the point of view of allegiance. The State, through its formation and ratification as one was adopted in its whole to elevate the greater whole of the United States. No different than a City or County deciding to leave one state for another is illegal (we fought a war for Toledo in Ohio and I dont know why seeing it now) it is an unacceptable loss to the whole and damaging to the citizens of the US for a state to leave without a demonstrated failure by those members to equally support that State under the requirements of the Constitution (hence my military example a post back). They are free states on the grounds that the powers not expressly given to the Federal Government are maintained by the states. They are not Free states in the idea they can come and go as they please without the grant of the Federal Government.