nsplayr

Caveat: I do not watch or particularly like CNN. Cable news as a whole is about 90% junk food television and 6-9% news. I also have have a specific dislike for Van Jones above and beyond CNN as a whole. That being said, this one is pretty easy to get a fuller picture on. Real Van Jones' response here: https://www.cnn.com/2017/06/29/opinions/much-ado-about-nothing-burger-van-jones/index.html His point is that nothing is gonna come of the Russia investigation this week and that Democrats need to let the relevant investigators do their jobs while staying focused on kitchen table issues that actually affect American families. I agree.

When I login to USAA and search for the word "limitless," it's there in the first return. It does say "online pilot, limited availability" so YMMV depending on what that means. I have the card already, so ops checks good in Tennessee.

It was my understanding from my handful of brainwashing sessions that we are currently flying, fighting and winning in air, space and cyberspace...

Here's a leaked photo from the deck of the H.W. Bush after the crews returned to the ship:

Yea, I'm good man, I play the credit card rewards game pretty hard: - Chase Sapphire Reserve for travel and restaurants, 3x chase ultimate rewards points - Chase Ink Plus for business expenses, 5x chase ultimate reward points on my cell phone and internet bills - Chase Freedom for spending on their rotating categories, 5x chase ultimate rewards points in those categories as applicable - Chase Marriott to help maintain platinum status, although I don't actually use the card even at a Marriott hotel since I value 3x chase UR points from the sapphire reserve higher than the 5x Marriott points I would get here - Chase Amazon card, 5% cash back for all Amazon purchases - Target red card, 5% off at target instantly - AMEX Blue Cash Preferred, 6% cash back at grocery stores up to $6K per year, 3% cash back on gas - USAA Limitless, 2.5% cash back on any spending not mentioned above All this (and the need to travel regularly for my civilian job) has earned me platinum status at Marriott and a Southwest companion pass 2 years running, probably 600K chase points over the last three years, and a few hundred thousand Southwest and Marriott points on top of the top-tier status. Never paid 1 cent in interest. For those willing to play the game there are ample rewards to be had, my point was that for those not so inclined, USAA Limitless at 2.5% on everything with no upper limit is a pretty good way to roll. Looks like you had some fun in Europe with your chase points so well played yourself!

So you want to explore a blazing hot shit hole in a blimp rather than go somewhere where you can actually walk around and maybe bring a rock or something home as a souvenir?? Sounds fun...

Captain Goldfein's > 6 year ACIP tier paid $650 per month in 1990 while he was flying Vipers at Shaw. That's exactly the same as it pays for Captain Bagadonuts today in 2017. Until now-General Goldfein can secure an ACIP of at least $1,216 for that same tier today, the Air Force and Congress are kidding themselves when they say they're trying hard to retain mission-critical aviators. Welcome to America, dollars are a sign of what we value, and we're valued a lot less as an aviator than our predecessors were in 1990. 27 years of purchasing power lost due to inflation is a real bitch when you actually stop and think about it. Increasing the bonus $10K per year? ACIP staying the same unless I missed the memo on that one? Good luck with that gentlemen.

Amen. USAA Limitless is my go-to card for anything not in a high bonus category for some other card. 3 months in and everything has been smooth...can't beat the 2.5% cash back for all purchases.

??? ^ this Now that we're all dumber by beating around this bush with PilotGuy, everyone just go out and read Emet's post on aviationbull for reference and make a smart decision for yourself and your family based on actually running the numbers and figuring out what you value in terms of your career and your life. As I've said before, I'm not a pilot and have no dog in this fight, so I honestly don't care either way.

My point is that it's not all that helpful to speak in broad terms, fight against strawmen (millions and millions!), and to guestimate things that are in fact quantifiable. Folks have shown numbers that directly contradict what you're trying to say (sic "there's not that big a difference in lifetime pay between airlines and retiring from AD") and I guess I'd encourage you to make a stronger, fact-based argument for what you believe in if you think that you're right and others are wrong. Dudes have done a lot of good bar napkin math to show numbers elsewhere (and at times here too), it would be great to see that level of detail in the airline-centric conversations had around BO.net as a standard.

Yes

You've thrown out some fast and loose math here, but is that really your response per se to Emet's expansive post that was linked earlier in the forum? I know him personally and can vouch for his credibility. His numbers are all explicitly laid out in that post and others on his site along with the assumptions that go into them. If you want to disagree with his numbers, great, but you have to show your work in full if you want dudes to believe you. And I'm not a pilot, so I have zero skin in this particular airline vs AD game. To me, the only valid argument against a mil pilot bailing for the majors at the soonest opportunity is that the perceived value of the 20-year AD retirement check and Tricare for life is higher than the actual demonstrable monetary value of those benefits. That and/or just a good ole' fashion patriotic desire to serve (especially to command Groups and Wings) that perhaps can't be met in the ARC.

You mean like the Officer Affiliation Bonus? I took one @ $20K for a 3-year ADSC in the ARC as a 12S AFSC. Icing on the cake honestly, I was getting off AD and Palace Fronting to the Guard regardless and had no idea there was even a bonus to be had. Better to be lucky than good sometimes!

I love it. It would make deployments much more lucrative too, I'd have had months of > $2,500 ACIP under your system. Downside would be that tracking month-to-month would be a nightmare. A possible solution would be an annual ACIP check coinciding with your birthday-timed review of your annual flight records. Verify your hours/sorties, collect your large check, head to Vegas for a birthday weekend of hookers and blow, what could go wrong?

Amen. The +6 year ACIP was raised from $400 to $650 in 1990, and remained static since then. $650 in 1990 dollars would be $1,216 in today's dollars. Congress, through inaction, has cut the purchasing power of that incentive pay by almost half since General Goldfein was the Captain Goldfein they spoke about during the hearing. If they offered a technical track that enabled more flying and less BS that topped out at non-command O5, who would not take that? Unless such a system was terminal O4, maybe O5 for very shiny tactical pennies, I don't know many dudes who would choose the leadership track just for the shot to command squadrons at the same rank as their technical-track brethren.

You would think if the crisis was so urgent they would open bonus eligibility to uncommitted free-agents, e.g. pilots who passed on the bonus previously or CSOs not previously eligible. I know plenty of those folks, pilots in particular, who are only remaining in the AF until their good deal location/job/etc. stops or they run out a specific non-UFT ADSC, at which time they are overwhelmingly likely to punch unless they luck into or work a good follow-on.

Great exchange, thanks for posting. Side note: as much as I vehemently disagree with Sen. Cotton on a variety of issues, it's really good to see veterans like him in Congress. They tend to retain more of the"making shit happen" attitude that's common in parts of the military and demonstrate a higher level of reasonableness than many of the more traditional politicians. We desperately need more veterans of all political persuasions in the halls of Congress.

From that "article,": "Disclosure: the F-35 is produced by Lockheed Martin, which contributes to my think tank and is a consulting client." Pretty straight-forward hit job masquerading as journalism from LM, nice try fellas. Don't worry guys, with the money saved by passing on a light attack aircraft we can by 1/3 of another F-35! The author is not a qualified, rational decision maker who need to be convinced, he is an industry partisan that seems to lack any relevant experience and who needs to be ignored.

If y'all think that putting a former SECAF on your board hurts your chances when trying to sell an aircraft to the USAF, I'm not so sure you understand how this game is played. Regardless of that former official's reputation one way or other amongst the proletariat...

Just to correct the record here, there is one unit in the Air Force currently flying the MC-12 (185th SOS, Oklahoma Air National Guard), and they were not a former A-10 unit.

I'm sure Texas does have a good amount of Morales there.

Couple of thoughts on the above: 1. The "minor league" mentality should never get off the ground. Associating "big league" with big threat and "minor league" to permissive is not helpful or correct IMHO. Any platform closely integrating with ground forces and dropping weapons is, to me, big league by definition. Not sure why in the author's construct a new OA-X pilot would be mission qual'd and killing bad guys downrange after 12 months when T-1 track pilots for non-lethal platforms and FAIPs would continue to take longer to produce. Perhaps the author envisions greatly shortening UPT/IQT/MQT for all non-4th gen/5th gen fighter platforms? 2. The author mentions, of a potential OA-X platform, that, "...its small size and off the shelf procurement could leave little room in the airframe to add new capability without removing existing pieces." I will say that for one competitor in particular this couldn't be further from the truth. By design it is modular and has a TON of room for growt in both the airframes capacity to carry new toys as well as the overall mission systems architecture. This is at least somewhat true for all four of the competitors, to an extent that I'm not sure the author correctly acknowledges. 3. Directly chopping an OA-X squadron to an ASOS isn't a great concept IMHO, even as a guy who greatly appreciates the value of building personal relationships with the ground teams you are supporting. The army uses and abuses the air that it "owns," and I still believe the USAF is independent for a reason, even for a ground attack platform. 4. I always lol at the concept that the AF considers something a "niche" capability if it is permissive-only, and the author seems to agree. What % of all combat has been done in a high- or even medium- threat environment since Vietnam? Even there you had plenty of permissive-only-type platforms doing great work. Not that it'll never happen again, but after 30+ years of fighting this way I'd call the need to provide air-to-ground kinetic effects in a permissive environment enough of a trend that we can allow communities and platforms to specialize in that with no shame or "minor league" mentality. Overall good conversations to be had, thanks for sharing Clark. FWIW the upcoming competition is now branded as LAE, light attack experiment.

The appropriate law enforcement authorities are not tired of this investigation. In fact the Deputy AG, appointed by President Trump, undertook this new phase of the investigation because he judged it to be serious enough to warrant new action. Mueller likely took the job because he judged the situation to be serious enough that the job was worth taking and staking his stellar reputation on. There is no more "calling for" a special prosecutor/investigator/counsel, one has been appointed. Yes the terms are technically different in subtle ways, but the same role Director Mueller will fill has been called by all three titles in past investigations. Appointing a special counsel is not making a judgement of guilt, innocence, criminality or anything else, it's a step toward starting a more independent investigation outside the normal chain of command of the DOJ. Congress will also still continue their own investigations unless something changes there. Look, benefit of the doubt here, if there really is nothing and the President and his campaign associates are innocent of all crimes and wrongdoing, then you have nothing to be worried about. Maybe money and time is wasted, but at this point that's pennies on the dollar to restore the American people's faith and trust in our institutions of government. The President has been pretty emphatic in his denials of wrongdoing and maybe he's right, we're all going to find out if that's the case. I'm not a fan of over-politicizing investigations, even ones with clear links to electoral politics. Let's let things run their course, with no interference by the White House or congressional GOP and no pre-judgement by the congressional Democrats, and let the chips fall where they may. Can you really disagree with that?

Regardless of your opinion on any potential wrongdoing, calling this a "nothingburger" degrades the meaning of that term. The Deputy AG, who is the Acting AG in this case, and who was apppinted by President Trump, has decided this investigation is serious enough to warrant a special counsel. And he named a highly respected former director of the FBI to do it. This is not nothing. This is something. If Mueller and the Senate Intel committee's investigations come back with nothing serious, I can't speak for others but I'm prepared to accept that outcome.

Justice Department names former FBI Director Robert Mueller as a special counsel to lead the investigation into possible ties between Trump campaign associates and Russia. https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/deputy-attorney-general-appoints-special-counsel-to-oversee-probe-of-russian-interference-in-election/2017/05/17/302c1774-3b49-11e7-8854-21f359183e8c_story.html