tac airlifter

We are the ones choosing to use 138$ mil jet to do what simpler & cheaper platforms can do. And we're hitting them in small numbers because we chose not to strike when they were in massive convoys in open territory. So I copy that frustration, but that isn't an "unwinnable war," that is us making stupid decisions about how to wage war. I don't disagree, but it's presumptuous to assume the policy end is unattainable before we even give it our best shot. And giving it our best shot means, partly, keeping our best talent in the fight. Do you think that experienced school grad will influence national security strategy from a position on a staff? We're already sending credible guys to staff but our approach to VEOs hasn't been changing. I get where each of you are coming from, but we're all products of our experiences to some extent. And my experience is constantly working for commanders downrange who are unwilling to change their approach but repeatedly disappointed in the outcomes. This isn't an "I'm right & you're wrong" discussion and I appreciate your views. Big picture all I'm saying is: after 14 years of failing to produce desired results from combat, and doing so with the most educated force in history, we might entertain the potential that something about our officer production formula is wrong since we seem to be producing people who do the same things. And those things aren't working. And if those things can't work.... Why aren't we producing people who have the balls to say that at expense to their career? Also I don't want to go to staff!

What do you mean by "unwinnable?" and we certainly aren't doing our best. How could you even say that? Are we hitting every target we could? Are we streamlining the laborious target approval process? Are we capitalizing on every TST? Regardless of the viability of our strategic objectives, we simply aren't doing our best to accomplish them. If we were doing our best we wouldn't be forcing experienced line operators into school and staff while leaving the units executing missions short handed.

So far, no one at ACSC can explain to me exactly what I'm supposed to get out of it beyond a general sense that eduction helps build problem solvers. We have the most educated force in history and we're losing wars, so I'm not sure education = problem solving. I won't thread derail anymore than simply saying that ACSC is not worth a year of my time off the line while ops units are short on experienced pilots and the nation is losing wars.

Russia is NOT a de facto supporter of IS. This situation is more complicated than a binary paradigm can explain. I think this was a foolish move by Turkey. Just because you have the right doesn't mean you necessarily should. Besides we knowingly violate airspace too, if this is the new standard we'll eventually be on the receiving end.

We're all different with different motivations. I'd absolutely rather be an RPA guy doing something relevant to the war than any number of flying assignments which aren't helping the fight.

When will all this equality result in the same PFT standards?

that's a significant observation. We think somehow our modern era has intellectually matured beyond mankinds gory history. Not so, and our naïveté cannot be fixed unless first acknowledged.

maybe valid, I'm uncertain; we've yet to see our cyber dudes flex their might like the world saw the USAAF flex (CBO, nukes, etc.). Cyber & space guys keep telling me they have amazing capes justifying an independant service if only I were read in. Maybe. I've just had my fill of overt posturing while hiding failures behind layers of over classification; that's an old trick. An entirely separate issue is the practicality of attempting to create a new service from something not specific to military services. Meaning: if cyber/space branches off should they morph into a 5th service or new 3 letter agency? i don't know what structure would fit best, but it might not be military. Regardless, they'll be unable to integrate fully or be taken seriously while simultaneously insisting on total information control. Other tribes have secret capabilities too, but through years of combat discovered we'd be more effective with smartly placed fully read in liaisons sprinkled throughout the interagency. The JIATF construct has flaws but most times gets the right people cleared to know the right things. Cyber/space seems totally unable to overcome their classification barriers.

Add this to the list of rules I'll never read or follow.

Anybody own a scorpion EVO? Prices are reasonable & it looks like a fun range/ HD gun.

Anyone at ACSC now?

Stranahans Diamond Peak. Worth 65$, go buy it! Also I've officially found the best IPA around- Ballast Point grapefruit sculpin. You're welcome!

Just got the M6IC. I like the IC lower.

Not a reply specifically addressed to you..... But this cultural paradigm shift at AUAB needs to be documented in AF history. For years our Air Force was infected with the wrong idea that overlooking a rule, no matter how small, meant you would also overlook bigger rules and could therefore not be trusted to execute the mission. Simultaneously, leaders assessed (based on feedback from senior Es correcting these infractions) they were cursed with an especially undisciplined group and consequently needed to create more and more complex rules to exert more and more control; these combined factors created the bizarre situation which originally birthed this thread. People joining now can't even believe the level of stupid that existed in 2006, when guys flying combat missions to exhaustion would run off the plane with 10 minutes on an ERO and be told they were too sweaty to be allowed in the shitter, or they weren't allowed in the DFAC to get a bottle of cold water because they forgot their ID in Balad, or you'd walk 2 miles to chow only to be turned around because you forgot your disco belt. In the daytime. And now those extremes have burned themselves out at almost all locations; but it's important to kill the original philosophy which led to AUABs insanity by highlighting that without those rules and psycho enforcement WE ARE JUST AS EFFECTIVE AT THE MISSION. We shouldn't forget how wrong the whole system was about one of the most important aspects of leading people: understanding their nature and how to manage them. Also important to note how long it took the system to start fixing itself from even the most egregious and obvious foolishness. Those of us who experienced that time should take a moment to put a nail in the coffin of wrong philosophy every chance we get.

I can't speak to UPT, but for cross flow within AFSOC to RPAs half the guys we send must consistently strat in the top 20% at a minimum.

I just bought a LWRC IC PSD, the lower is engraved "pistol" so my FFL seems to think that will preclude me from converting it to an SBR. I'm new to the NFA game and just want to make sure I do it correctly. Any ideas?

Anyone have a pistol AR?

I'll rephrase: if the dude wants to fly low levels, he can do it in a training environment. If he wants to shoot terrorists, that's only happening deployed. So decide what you want and choose accordingly was my advice. You disagree with that logic?

Oops, my fat fingers and tiny iPhone accidentally down voted your post.

Caveat- I don't fly gunships. But the last 7 years in AFSOC has taught me that, assuming your luck and timing aren't terrible, switching between all platforms is possible. I've seen at least one of every type come through our SQ and our guys going every direction. My personal opinion if you're choosing between AC & MC would be take the gunship. You can fly a low level anytime, but the fight is raging and ACs are bringing the hurt to our enemies. There will always be fun flying, but if you have any desire to actually fight you'll regret not scratching the itch. Good luck.

I disagree, I think Budda's idea is excellent. There are more people on the fence about the decision to stay or leave AD than you might think, and ideas like this buy down the amount of obvious bullshit and increase chances of keeping talent around. Everything in life is a cost/benefit analysis of some kind- but we each make that calculation differently.

Great point. So often AF discusses capabilities void of the circumstances they're used in. Combat isn't a sterile academic environment.

you think manned ISR POL takes a lot of hardware/manpower over a 20 hour pred mission? Also, that 20 hour mission spends how long in transit? Compared to manned assets transiting 20 minutes? and you think logistics are lighter for RPA? There is 1 place in the world right now where unmanned is covering down and manned isn't. There are multiple places where the reverse is true. This isnt a pissing contest, I appreciate the significant benefits unmanned brings to the fight. But you're saying these things about target access and logistic limitations for manned ISR which you assume would apply to light attack; but it just isn't the case. Manned ISR is flexible and able to forward stage at austere locations- light attack would be the same; they could sit on the ground with a SAT radio and launch when the time is right. This is already happening. It sounds like you are projecting your experience in AFG across other fights and it doesn't fit.

All good man, admittedly I only know my niche and am wholly ignorant of the CAF outside where our lanes touch. Not sure we're thinking of the same thing though; there's more happening in the joint world than COIN CAS or LTA strikes; and those other missions would be straight up impossible with single seat. We'll leave it alone; suffice to say I concur that more isn't better WRT crew but I think you're glossing over complexities.

Managing 4+ radios, monitoring ITC, vectoring GFC, tasking multiple sensors and de conflicting multiple stacked aircraft in the ROZ is what single seat fighters do every day? I don't ask that sacarstically, I'm honestly curious. Because when I work with fighters they are holding CAS high at E10 until needed, then they come inbound hooked to a SPI or LST. Maybe they're on SAT, but mostly one LOS along with interplane. Again, I'm not throwing spears; I work in a very specific niche and there's lots we don't ever see. So if you guys have been "extremely effectively" acting as TAC-A, FAC-A, sensor warden, etc. I just haven't seen it. Except a handful of times with an A10.... No other fighter.