BQZip01

Damn, Wish I'd given odds on that bet. Perhaps SOMEONE would have bitten: https://www.military....C=airforce-a.nl

What a fabulous way to spend the evening...clearly morale isn't a top priority Therein lies the problem. He'd be a BETTER pilot if he didn't focus on pointless, useless degrees. What you are really saying is that a master's degree is the best discriminator and you don't give a slightest bit of a damn what type of degree it is or how it benefits the Air Force. All you care about is box checking. I think we all hear you loud and clear, "We don't care whether what you learn is actually useful, only that the drive to achieve is present. As a matter of fact it ranks behind doing your job." I will wager $223 right now to anyone who believes this pipe dream will finish anything but over budget and behind schedule. 2019 delivery rates simply won't happen I call bullshit. Our Air Force is being gutted by bean counters and shoe clerks. They are only worried about efficiency, but our shortfalls will be showcased in the next big war (I'm betting Iran, North Korea, Syria, or China (in that order), I call bullshit again. We are currently overmanned by 1400 officers. Cuts are going to continue to happen. I'll take a $23 bet on this one too. This is the same guy who told us that the nuclear enterprise was one of the top goals of the AF and that "every single one of you is absolutely essential to get the mission done and we can't do it without you." Then, when asked about the upcoming personnel cuts, said, "We are going to have to cut some of you..." The guy's word/integrity is completely worthless and his leadership and inspiration is virtually nonexistent, IMNSHO. So the burden for that all-important (yet worthless) discriminator is now going to be shouldered more by our officers. Nice. One more expense that we don't need for something that's largely worthless. /rant off

I'm "just" a dumb backseater, but why the hell does it matter which jet took on 14K of fuel and which one took on 22K in a formation? The unit (sts) will get charged either way. So just make a note that 36K was offloaded to STUKA69 flight and carry on. Reduce the paperwork required inflight and it'll make everyone happy. As for "well, what if lead doesn't show", well guess what boys and girls, that's what updates are for. There's little reason that our respective command posts couldn't relay the info via HF (most of the time those guys spend WAY too much time doing absolutely nothing; give 'em something to do on shift).

Just goes to prove that the mission is second, looking good on paper is job #1! The Air Force doesn't care complete shack

Bullshit. Don't pigeonhole yourself (sts?). You CAN do things to help. No, you can't make the specifics of the system go away, but you CAN improve the interaction. What if you simply gave a tail number from each location. That way the math turns out correct and the right people get billed. It already happens, just make it an option (that we already use) and the booms can spend more time hacking the mish and giving the LGPOS pilots their precious gas to burn holes in the sky for another 50 minutes [/dig at rainman]. I also wouldn't have a problem mandating tail numbers painted on the receptacles. In the case of the B-2, just bill Whiteman AFB since they ALL originate there...

Information Operations is (at least historically) part of the Comm AFSC. This includes both information within the AF and information to our allies/enemies. For this same reason, this is why every Exec billet at the Wg level and below is fragged for a 33S/17X specialty: the comm dudes actually have training in it. Yes, the training is largely bullshit, but it keeps those comm nazis "in the game" and overjustifies their manning levels. In any case, document management is also part of the career field, so I'm guessing that's where our friend is coming from (sts). That said, if you have the option of making this painless, or at least with less pain, please do so. Passing tail numbers that don't mean squat is ridiculous. If it has to do with what unit we're with or where our operations are out of, a 2-3 letter code would be sufficient and would make some things a HELL of a lot easier...better yet, let them know the code before we take off so we can actually preserve some sort of EMCON

Gonna be kind of interesting to use at night...

Oh, thank God. We've fixed our manning problems.

I think the problem people are seeing is person XYZ is in squadron 69 (not in my MAJCOM, AOR, or even the same hemisphere) does something that most people would kindly describe as "stooopid". The Chief of Staff finds out and issues an edict saying "You need to adhere to flight discipline" (right. we should also have integrity and not tell our people that "you are essential and we can't do the job without you"...and then RIF them...). Seriously?!? In my airframe we are quite exact and professional regarding the AOB limitations on our airframe. Why do I need to be reminded with a vague "nonleadership-through-writing" e-mail when it isn't our portion of the fleet that's having issues? We learned the lessons of Bud Holland and haven't had a need to look back. I'm sure >95% of the people here don't need a reminder to fly by the rules. It's sort of like checklist discipline: either you perform each step of the checklist or you don't, but just because Airman Snuffy in Baghdad makes a mistake on a checklist step, it doesn't mean those of us performing professionally need a reminder to do our jobs. It makes as much sense as a Gov't-wide e-mail from the President reminding us to follow the rules in our workplace because some bubba in the FBI accidentally shot himself while cleaning a firearm. It's overkill and it unnecessarily wastes time. Instead, they should focus on WHY it happened in the first place and determine if there is a personnel problem, a local problem, a theater problem, a majcom problem, or an AF-wide problem. I know it doesn't take long to read and sign off, but with tens of thousands of aviators grounded until they read and sign off this FCIF, how many man hours are wasted? Then let's throw into the mix that the reason that they did it in the first place is that they violated the rules set down by their commanders intentionally. What makes you think those that ignore the commanders are going to listen now?

What's the AFI on that situation out of curiosity?

Great advice...unless you don't have a HUD...

I'm on my way out of active duty...rest assured, I have no problem being slightly dickish to get my point across. Make sure you know the regulations that state that they must stand when a superior officer is addressing them.

It's all a matter of motivation. If someone is correcting another individual, but is doing so to make others' lives better or to prevent bigger problems (i.e. "Sir, your collar is flipped over. Let me fix it for you" or "Sir, your parachute straps are wrapped") that's one thing. It's when junior personnel are either disrespectful or are doing so just to exert power over others/superiors I would consider it conduct prejudicial to good order and discipline

Check PEX; I'm sure it's in there...

"BCS" has one too many letters...

I laughed

That isn't necessarily true oveseas. In some countries, you are responsible if you are the owner of the car (or in this case, the renter)

I was involved with an incident in Guam and the police took my ID. I told them that was against the law...I forgot that the exception applied to official government functions, so yeah, it is completely valid with gov't agencies, just not with private entities.

because the Air Force approved the design, ergo, the USAF is responsible

Minot does a runway run once or twice a year. 1.5 miles with a light Minot breeze (23 gusting to 69) at your back makes the test a bit easier.

Duh. I support people having the most ridiculous views as much as they want. To quote Dennis Miller "there are those who feel the need to enlist you in a cult whose core doctrine consists solely of their personal beliefs. Well, I subscribe to the theory of "The Cult of One." The cult of the individual. That way, if I "lemming off the cliff, I'm only following my own nose and not the ass of another lemming. That's what America's all about. A great nation that guarantees you the right to lead whatever sort of existence you want to lead, that guarantees me the right to ridicule it mercilessly."

probably was wearing the wrong color of socks/underwear too

And few of them have necessary arresting gear for fighters. They can fly off of smaller ships (i.e. amphibious assault ships) where F-22s can't. The Marine Corps also has a requirement to be a stand-alone force. That stand alone force needs air cover and, since the Marine Corps doesn't have a carrier to its name, this leaves helicopters (VTOL) and VSTOL jets like the Harrier as the only solution. Marine Corps Hornets are great (got to fly with some of 'em), but they need land bases that may not be accessible in certain tactical situations.

STOVL offers us a myriad of combat capabilities (starting with the lack of 7,000 ft runways in the 3rd world); I won't even mention the uses of helicopters. However, I agree that the Raptor isn't designed for CAS, but, in the long run, re-opening the F-22 assembly line would be a net win for the US DoD