stract

as an attached flyer, I make sure that I make myself available to fly, and I'm proactive about letting scheduling know this. I see other attached folks who just kind of disappear, don't pop into the SQ occasionally to remind folks they're still around, and they're the ones who fly once a quarter and then feel bitter about it. If you don't make yourself available and bug scheduling on occasion to get on a line, it's your own fault.

Please no! Even though we've been passed around since our inception, a move to AMC would be HORRIBLE! I was in Pakistan when we found out we were moving from AFSOC back to ACC. Literally changed patches overnight. Even in AFSOC we were treated as the red-headed step children. At Balad we lived and worked in the JSOAC, but we had to stay in our little corner the entire time ("well, you're not really SOF, so we're not actually going to give you any details for the missions you're supporting daily, or allow you to talk to anyone, or eat at DFAC 5, or have access to X pot of $$, or really support you as a command"). We've been treated better in ACC. I'd only want to go back to AFSOC if it's done right this time. edit: multiquote fix

glad that eject button worked.

we had ours today.

wait, so the FY12 ACP only applied for those whose commitment was up in FY12? So since my Pilot Training ADSC is Nov 13, I won't be eligible for the FY13 ACP (or whatever it's going to be called)? Well, that makes choices interesting...

wow.

It's also interesting to note the decline in experience in communities...retention dropped 30% in CSAR from the previous FY, and TARS dropped 2.5 years worth of experience. Someone should correlate that to mishap rates and see if anything significant shows up.

according to 11-301, there's a document called Allowance Standard 016 which covers this. My google-foo is not working to find this AS, though links to plenty of other regs which mention it. edit: AFI 65-601v1 says: "Refer to Allowance Standard (AS) 016 available through the the Air force Equipment Management System (AFEMS)." edit 2, further reading in 65-601 (note that TA 016 became AS 016, but they missed updating this reference): "10.55.7. Uniform Clothing Issued as Individual Equipment. Installations will use their organiza- tional O&M-type funds to obtain required special uniforms (e.g., desert BDUs, flight suits, and other TA 016 uniforms which are not included as regularly issued uniforms which are paid by individuals from clothing allowance), as directed by their commanders or other competent authority. These uniforms and the matching stripes and accouterments are “optional items directed wear.” The cost of any associated rank insignia, name tapes, and accouterments, as well as sewing on of these items on these uniforms, as required, may also be provided from organizational O&M-type funds at the discretion of the commander. This is applicable to officers and enlisted."

2

CSAF slides in front of me...mishap rates FY13 to date: 12/1.15, FY12 same date: 15/1.22. so FY13 is actually doing better than FY 12, though it's higher than the 10-yr average (22.9/1.11). If you look soley at fatalities, though, FY13 9/0.86 vs FY12 5/0.41, the rate is twice as high. 10 yr fatalities avg is 8.2/0.40.

the next time I get the weekly CSAF slides I'll see what it says for the mishap rate to date.

1st Heli in the news... https://www.cnn.com/2013/05/27/us/reagn-airport-close-call/index.html?hpt=hp_t3 not being TCAS equiped, a question for the masses: if both aircraft had each other in sight and were maintaining visual separation, why did the crew respond to the TCAS RA?

But do you get to keep the $$ you were already paid via ACP if Big Blue decides to cut you loose, or do they add insult to injury and expect to recoup that too?

and also the Pilot/Controller Glossary. when ATC calls out traffic to you, and you see the traffic, the proper response is "Traffic in sight". The word "Visual" does not appear in the PCG.

EMCON 1 sucks balls. There is nothing I hate more than having to deal with a tanker wanting to do EMCON 1 (usually said tankers are USMC).

flying around at 20' AGL would be absolutely stupid, even as slow as we go...

No, I'm implying that leadership knows better than to speculate on these things, so 5 min or less discussion at the staff mtg seems good to me, if they'd spent an hr talking about the mishap and 5 minutes about mustaches, then I'd take issue with that. I hope the discussion was about how the crew is doing, the status of the ISB, etc.

5 minute discussion is good. Let the SIB do their job.

can I have a Bell Model 47 instead?

not in the directory.

we don't have SOFs, we have ODOs. And when MX tries to give me a bird with the pilot's floor mike switch stuck in hot mike (writeup from the day go which they neglected to fix), and expect me to go fly doors off and conduct .50 cal weapons employment, I say "Great!" I'll buy that MX late T/O while you fix the fucking floor mike switch. But seriously, in our community, ops could really give a shit who takes a dev at the end of the day. So this is a bit comical to read...

true. Many is the key word (we still don't have them).

are we just making up acronyms now?

already discussed yesterday

Who is Welch? A grape juice maker? It's probably important to know the CSAF's name, and Welch ain't it.