pawnman

I'm good with telling them the mission comes first, and uniform standards in a deployed location a far distant second. That's as opposed to actively impeding the mission to enforce some nitnoid regulation. When the support services start showing the same dedication to their jobs that I give to mine, maybe I'll start paying attention to what they have to say about my uniform. I'd also say that there's a wide gulf between "Get those sunglasses off your head now!" and "Sir, the reg says you can't have your sunglasses on your head". Both say the same thing, but which shows the customs and courtesies that tie back to the standards you are so excited to defend? And which do you suppose is used more often in the deployed arena?

Here's the difference in attitude. If CP were screwing over my squadron like this and preventing us from doing our job, we'd find a way to do the job without CP. Like a scanner with someone dedicated to sit at the desk (or, as I said previously, we no longer have transpo take crews to the jet, we get a young LT from the squadron to do it). There are plenty of things we do in the squadron that are hypothetically someone else's job. I appreciate the frustration that comes from someone not doing their job, especially as a UDM who does 90% of the LRS squadron's job for them. But the key difference here is, that while it's frustrating, you are pointing the finger and saying "It's not my fault", while most flying squadrons would say "Alright, XXX shop is screwing us, how can we do this job without XXX shop?"

Or use some end of year money to buy a scanner and listen for aircraft calling SOF. Then you can guess you're probably going to need a bus in the very near future. Or you can even take a little initiative and call SOF after that radio call and see if they will need transpo. Or maybe get a copy of the flight schedule from the squadron.

Here's my favorite transpo story: In the B-1, if the taxi light is on during ground ops it means the radar is on and radiating. The taxi light is a signal to everyone else on the ramp to steer clear of the nose by at least 150' (give or take). We're sitting in the jet, running the radar through the preflight checks, and one of the pilots yells "Holy shit, that guy just drove right by us!" Seems young transpo dude did not remember his flightline driving training and managed to get himself and another B-1 crew radiated. The crew in the van with him asked "Hey, you know what it means when the taxi light is on, right?" His response? "Yeah, but I couldn't remember how far away I had to be". So instead of asking, or at least erring on the side of caution and going to the other side of the ramp, he decided that 10' was probably far enough. Oh well, it's probably better if he doesn't breed anyway. This is why at RCA we have an FNG to ferry crews out to the jet. We've long since given up on the transpo squadron to do anything useful. I could replace you with FedEx and a rotating MX dude. And then I might actually get the parts I need in a timely fashion. And probably for less money.

From one generation to another...unless we change it three times a generation.

Shoe is a mindset, not an AFSC. Plenty of shoes are wearing wings...look at the 'Deid thread if you have any doubt about that. It may be the double-d's enforcing the rules, but it's the flyers in charge that make those rules in the first place.

Time to scrape together $3000. https://www.martin-baker.co.uk/Sub-Navigation/Merchandise/Bremont-Watch.aspx

Including the poor Marine who didn't even OWN a reflective belt, because try as they might, the shoes can't make a local policy that overrides the uniform guidance for a sister branch of the military.

Beat me to it.

It baffles me whenever I talk to some finance guy who's been here for 3 years and never seen a B-1. It's not like it's difficult to find someone to take you out to the line. Sadly, the number of folks who have never seen one up close will probably increase now that the gate next to the museum is closed for renovations.

I'm curious why the Chinese fighter was trying to refuel from the same tankers that were refueling all the US assets...

You mean that often quoted "360 degrees of reflectivity" they use to make us put an additional belt on our backpacks doesn't actually say "reflectivity"?

Obviously the services guy who made this flyer hasn't had to brief any generals lately...Maybe BQZip can give him some pointers

Beavercreek is a nice area. Fairborn has some nice areas (like Rona Hills), but there are also a few trailer parks around. Getting further from the base, Centerville is fairly upscale. I couldn't comment on the number of junior officers in any of those areas...I grew up there as an Air Force brat. Dad retired from there, so that's where we stayed. I personally lived in Fairborn, right outside the main gate near the commisary. Hope that helps.

I think it was intentional. The shoes no longer cover their loathing of the operators with a thin veil of "We're on the same team". They are actively cheering for the other side.

Except that those guys were arrested and there wasn't enough evidence to deny bail. As opposed to "We raided the office and found some suspicious stuff, but we decided to let them go".

I'm curious...if you're able to test while deployed, is the 42-day waiting period after a re-deployment going to go away? If guys are able to take the test while deployed, shouldn't you be able to take the test on your first day back?

Then you have to hope finance will actually take it back. Our intel officer tried for three months to pay it back and finance insisted everything was fine. Eventually finance figured out she owed the money...for which she wrote a check. Then they kept trying to collect, because "she couldn't prove she'd paid the debt". The cancelled check was not proof enough. This one was resolved when she got her boss at the time (3-star) involved.

Is it a Yemeni custom to tape cellphones and boxknives together? Perhaps a traditional souvenir for the kids? I'm perfectly willing to admit that on this pass, they did not have the materials necessary to blow up a plane. But it looks damned suspicious, and it would not surprise me if one of these guys is found responsible for a future attack.

No, we still have PTLs and a UPFM. They just no longer administer the tests. Hell, I might opt to do mine in the desert with the squadron PTL, then if you score 90+, you don't have to retest for another year...right around deployment time anyway. Hmmm...

True. Like I said:

Bingo. Go in, fake some interviews, then come back with "Akbar hangs out in this cave and around this wadi most days". Then again, for all I know we are doing that.

I've always been curious...if these DB journalists can get in good with the Taliban, why can't the CIA or similar agency send someone disguised as a journalist to locate leadership types?

I honestly think I'm going to try and get my PFT done during the deployment. We've got a few PTLs around the squadron, and I was definitely in better shape after six months in the desert than I am now that I have American restaurants and fast food available and a desire to see my wife and kid for more than an hour a day. I know, I know...excuses excuses. But in the desert, I was running on a daily basis. I often find it hard to make time for that at home station with all the other queepy shit going on at work and maintaining some kind of family life.

I get it. It would be nice, when you present Finance with all the evidence that they have screwed up your pay, if they would take some kind of responsibility for it. A simple "You're right, sir, that is a mistake. Sorry about that" would go a long way. Instead, they always feel the need to argue with you about any problem you might have. It's amazing the level of evidence they need from you to fix a problem, compared with the level of evidence they need to take money away from you. I don't know if I've told the story before, but there is a guy in our community who experienced this first hand. As many flyers do, he was dumping 100% of his flight pay into TSP. Guy has a motorcycle accident and blacks out. Of course, this means he's long-term DNIF, without flight pay. When he finally gets medically cleared, he shows up for requal. As he's in-processing, some enterprising young Finance troop says to himself "Hey, this guys a flyer but he hasn't gotten flight pay in five years...I'll fix that right now". In one paycheck, something like $50,000 gets dumped into TSP. And then Finance realizes their mistake and essentially stops paying him altogether to recoup the $50,000. Keep in mind, at no time did they ask him if he should be receiving flight pay, nor did he tell them he should be getting the back pay. And now because TSP is a separate system, they have no way to get the money out of TSP, so they simply stop paying the guy until the debt is cleared. His first inkling is the $0 paycheck. I'm not sure what the resolution was.