BQZip01

I wonder what you are supposed to do if you need a shave. I mean, you have to be in PT gear to go to the caddies to shave, but you can't be seen outside in PT gear if you aren't clean shaven...

1. Awesome! Stick it to the shoes and wear a "flashy" belt. "Sir, you can't wear that." "Why?" "It's unprofessional" "Show me the ****in' reg which states the requirements of a reflective belt and then we'll chat. Until then STFU." 2. I took this to mean they are checking to make sure people are properly shaven while wearing the PT uniform? If so, heaven forbid you get off a 20+ hour flight, go to sleep, and then can't get to the Cadillac to shave before "noticable growth" occurs. If not, you are saying that you MUST BE IN PT GEAR to shave? That's even more asinine. I have a cordless, so why would I not shave in other uniforms? There's no reg against that. Why can't you shave in the bathroom wearing a towel? It's significantly better for your skin to shave while taking a shower rather than before or after...ugh Too many shoeclerks with too much free time on their hands

2 EE is right. Let's keep things in perspective here. Remember it's that small 99% minority that give the rest of the Eagle drivers a bad name...

The comparison doesn't seem to fit, IMHO. The C-17 was designed for low-level flight and wasn't caught in wake turbulence of a heavy. I fail to see the similarities other than they are both cargo airframes.

Damn classy Farva I'll be drinking a beer tonight to those guys. Anyone have a callsign?

Honestly, from that description, it does not sound good at all. The fact that no information has been mentioned about the crewmembers leads me to believe the worst...I hope that I am 100% wrong. (BTW: I think any comparison to CZAR 52 is WAY premature.) EDIT: Removed speculation

You may want to look into the active duty board restrictions. If memory serves me, you must be no older than 30 and no more than 5 years of active duty. There is an additional 1-year waiver that can be granted by your Wing/CC or equivalent if there are extenuating circumstances leading to you no being able to apply in previous years (I know PLENTY of guys in AFSOC that got this waiver because they were deployed during the last boards and didn't have a chance to apply; others were not yet eligible due to TOS requirements). You should also consider applying at your 1 yr TOS as the class you are picked up for may be AFTER that 2 year mark. Anyone who knows the regs better than me, feel free to correct me if I'm in error.

I was only addressing the immediate situation, not the metaproblem

What schokie said is spot on.

This whole situation is bullshit. I've told full bird Colonels that their collar was flipped up or that a patch was messed up, but I did it quietly (sts) and without fanfare. I'm not looking for credit. I'm not looking to call him out. I'm just helping out a "bro" so he looks like he should in uniform. I did so respectfully. THIS kind of stuff NEEDS to be addressed at an officer level IMMEDIATELY when something like this happens. Don't let an NCO shoeclerk be disrespectful. I realize you were in PT gear, but a simple, "Staff Sergeant, making uniform corrections is certainly within your purview as you've likely been directed to pull this duty, but so is common decency and respect for your fellow airman. 'Hey!' is not appropriate, especially when you have no CLUE what rank of person you are addressing. 'Excuse me' would be FAR more apropos and a 'please' thrown in would certainly help matters. Instead of calling people out publicly on simple nitnoid stuff, perhaps you can be polite and criticize in private?" That said, at the end of a 16+ hour day (without Dex), I'm not sure I wouldn't have muttered something and went along my merry way. [/Monday morning quarterbacking]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VU-hJ9r7fGg&feature=player_embedded IMHO, looks like he lost control in slow flight (whether mechanical or pilot error), rolled right, and couldn't recover. Punching out was a good call. Hope you get better soon buddy!

I'll take that kind of improvement. Any chance Hooters could sponsor another upgrade to the Deid?

2 If you are interested in folks with mustaches, this really isn't the place...

The C-47 is still in production too. And while I'm not sure that production has been continuous, the USAF still flies it...

Looks like she has her bra on backwards...

The BUFF is from the same era & company and the YB-52 first flew 15 April 1952 (58+ years ago... :-P) They sure don't make 'em like the used to...

Until two aircraft file with the same flight name/number in the system at the same time. Many units use a <callsign> <day of week><sortie of the day> system such as CHILL 51 (the first aircraft sortie on Friday). If someone else uses the same callsign, this could cause problems with ATC and if you take one that is already being used properly, expect the wing king to hear about it.

Wish I could be there. I'm suffering through another B-52 hardship deployment to a tropical island...

Fill it out anyway. This is one of those rare instances where too much information on a government form is a good thing. Show you have nothing to hide=smoother process.

I failed by the slimmest margin on my 1st attempt (no real foul), so don't just use the gouge alone. The first test is easy enough to walk in and take it on the first day. The second test is not. BTW, I retook it and passed in the mid-80s. Read the gouge first and then browse through all the materials for the key points, it'll make 'em stick and you can filter out the useless stuff.

He works in the A&M administration. He isn't an Aggie and never has been (never will be either...)

https://www.theeagle.com/brazospolitics/Kemos-resigns-amid-scandal Got himself a $300,000 job over this? Throw the book at him!

I'lltellyouwhatIwantwhatIreallyreallywant... Drinking 17 of ANYTHING is likely to have some blowback

Can I assume B-52s are an option? If so, our deployment rates are currently about 4-6 months every other year...to GUAM! Sure beats landing in the kitty litter. PM me if you want more details.