Majestik Møøse

Why's that? I've lived in NorCal for 5 years now; I think it's pretty awesome.

The OODA Slow Roll.

...I think we should start talking about this.

Kick ass dude. I take it all back!

Well, super helpful comm guys like you are still the minority. The ones I'm working with are "default-no". To the point where I was told to call A6 and report back. And the Surface is still a POS. Bottom line: What my Sq is looking for from Comm is the approval to use iPads as e-readers. AFNET access is not required, and actually it would be preferred to not have it. We'd rather plug into a stand alone or use wifi to sync pubs. Nobody wants to pay for and update Good For Enterprise, either.

They got Surfaces because they asked the CS. The CS assumes by default that you want access to Sharepoint and Outlook and the Surface works like a laptop without a keyboard. Of course, nobody actually wants the Surface because they're shit.

Has anybody in ACC successfully bought iPads as pubs readers? They're the last of the cavemen and seem to think that every "OS" has to be AFNET enabled using GFE. And this is coming from A6.

If someone doesn't already know they want to drive the Nurburgring, it may be inadvisable to send them there!

I remember the old guys telling me that the desert rotations would never stop after OEF-A. They were right; it's been going on for literally 25 years.

Utterly invalid point that assumes aircraft development is linear. These planes have been around for a long time for good reason. Operationally, the KC-46 will be more or less identical to the KC-135. It will carry marginally more gas, burn a bit less, and be able to get a little closer to a threat. All for the low price of $250m each. The KC-135 has been around so long because it works fine. A tanker doesn't need to be cosmic. The U-2 argument is shit because they were redesigned and built new in the 80s. The S-model today has a F-118, the cockpit is all glass, and the sensors are the illest shit around. The "newer" HAISR platform that the USAF spent the taxpayer's hard-earned money on is inferior in nearly every measurable category. The Buff can still end the world at a moment's notice better than it ever could, so there's never been much incentive to get new ones. Even after we buy $60B worth of LRS-Bs, we're still keeping the Buffs anyway. Did the chief mention that part? Edit: TLDR: The B-17 was inferior within 10 years of its first flight. The 3 aircraft above are still relevant and their replacements will either be similar in capes, a newer version of the same design, or not even required.

As a flyer, I would prefer that ABU wearers had patches so I could tell where they worked. About the only enlisted badges I recognize are MX and ATC.

Huh. That trick actually works? I always figured the ABU wearers found it condescending, like when presidential candidates roll up their sleeves while visiting factories.

Force dudes to go fly preds and no one wants to go. But offer a $200k/yr contract job and people will volunteer in droves. It's all about choice; no one wants to feel trapped.

Yep. He lost me at "Claim 1". Not sure how how he couldn't have heard of the oil boom up there, so he's either poorly informed or hiding facts to make his argument better.

"It doesnt carry any short-range, dogfighting missiles like the Raytheon AIM-9X Sidewinder when its in a stealthy configuration." Wait, what?

I was under the impression that the 3d system is used because it's cheaper.

Back to shiny aluminum jets, then! Or a million little DLP mirrors to redirect the energy right back to its source.

Considering this combination of wing, fuselage, and avionics has never been airborne before, I'd say there's enough reason to warrant a measured approach to flying it.

Or why don't we just keep flying hawgs.

Rolling over like that is totally not cool.

Fuckin A, Mr. Rogers.

Dude are you having a stroke?

Written by the same guy who advised the use of the term "PMV-4" instead of "car". We're really swimming in "technical correctness" and hyper-inclusiveness these days.

I think there is a problem, in some corners of the Air Force, that everyone has become so busy supporting the bureaucracy that the proper time can't be given to brainstorming sessions and idea development. Guys are treading water in the office while min-running mission knowledge. The only active idea soliciting going on is the "anybody got anything for me" part of the weekly CC call. Guys may have good ideas or bad ones, but they'll never be asked in the first place. Fixing tactical problems is priority #22 in a lot of places. Leading an open, honest, and non-retributional "bitches/gripes/complaints" session once every couple of weeks might help open things up a bit.

Billy Mitchell was court martialed for criticizing superiors.