di1630

I prefer "sport bitcher". Whining is what a support weenie shoeclerk does when they can't beat the 1630 (that's 4:30 pm to you) traffic out the front gate.

Cool, it can land anywhere, as long as "anywhere" has a secial Lockheed designed and sold super-special-landing pad installed which requires delivery by a C-17 needing a runway. https://news.yahoo.com/stealth-jump-jet-t-094241674--politics.html

Reading stuff about RPAs/pilot shortage, made me recall an incident at my base about 10 yrs ago, that still infuriates me. A fighter pilot G-locs during a training sortie (at an operational sq). Wakes up just in time. The guy had a family, new kid etc. and had been struggling in the jet. Tells his leadership that he would like to volunteer to go fly RPA's when they were just starting up and needed people. Instead of letting a good motivated dude volunteer for RPA's, he got FEB'd, lost his wings, reflowed into an overcrowded shoe afsc and RIF'd a year later. Tough to feel bad for an organization that has manning woes after seeing shit like that.

If one gets non-continued but has taken a retention bonus up front, must that be repaid?

See PRF thread where it was argued that exec skills far outweigh pilot skills/leadership ability for getting ahead in the USAF.

The split track has also helped with attrition. Nobody likes to officially admit it but you can put people into a T-1 that would have not made it to solo in a -38. Possibly tweaking performance expectations, tracking into heavy/fighter earlier. There is no reason a guy on his way to AWACS needs tac form etc.

The high def full version is great. It is in the hands of the right people. Apparently after seeing the video, USAF leadership deemed it too "pro A-10" which could hurt divestment efforts and ordered it destroyed...only to release and promote the similar F-16 version. Nothing says "thanks" to a community for years of deployments than censoring a video that praises your work. Reason #69 I don't trust our political leadership and evidence they have zero F-ing clue on why they aren't trusted.

Correct, let me use some lessons learned from current esteemed military leadership, F-35 marketers and USAF PA to bolster my multi role A-10 argument. Just as the B-1 has become a premier CAS platform and the F-22 has excelled in combat over Syria, the A-10 has proved itself an incredible multi-role fighter in the A/A realm. After scoring more kills versus aerial tgts in the Gulf War than F-16's and with a current A/A kill record better than the F-22 and F-35 combined, the A-10 also has also never lost an aerial battle, unlike Mig-29s and other 4th gen fighters. In fact with up to four AIM-9 sidewinder missiles and more bullets than any other A/A fighter aircraft, the A-10 is exceptionally suited for the majority of current A/A missions. According to USAF statistics 90% of A/A alert missions have been launched versus Cessnas and helicopters, airframes the A-10 can more easily intercept given its slow speed, tight turning radius and long loiter time. The A-10 can do missions such as Noble Eagle cheaper and with less risk of fratricide than fighters such as the F-15C which shot down 2 friendly helicopters in the past, making it the most dangerous twin engine, two tail aircraft with PW-220 engines to friendly pilots in the history of mankind.

A-10's are being targeting as single role but thats a stretch. They are the experts in CSAR, FAC-A, CAS and those missions while all A/G, are far from a single role. You could make the same B-1 argument that it is much more single role. The chances of F-16's being used for A/A or even AI vs modern threats is so small that their primary job has become PGM CAS. I stand by my argument that you don't cut the jet tha is best at the mission you have been executing for the past 20 years for the cheapest price with no end to the ops in sight. And we shouldn;t cut any jets until we've trimmed the fat everywhere.

Just saw that he's gonna be charged with desertion via USA today

I understand the need to save money...but you don't do it by cutting one of the most used aircraft in the most used missions when the aircraft is hands down the best at what it does. A year ago our esteemed USAF leadership told us we'd be done with the low intensity conflicts in 6 mos. Now it appears we are nowhere near being done with them, but I'm supposed to believe The need for CAS in China 20 years from now is such a priority that we need to divest the A-10 now to meet that threat. And then leadership comes out on record with false stats and politics to support their argument.....f-ing looking like morons. How about we reign in the F-35 4bn over budget per year first. Then we phase out jets that the F-35 is designed to replace when it's ready. F-16, etc.

Holy Fvck ygbsm....the F-35 was over budget by $4B last year alone. The USAF is like an obese person who takes the pickles off a Big Mac because they are watching calories.

This whole argument in divesting the A-10 is beyond ridiculous. Either our top leaders are actually dumb and do not understand CAS, threats and the aircraft capabilities or they are compulsive liars. I'm really not sure but it's baffling. It's absolutely destroyed my faith in top leadership.

I've made up my mind after watching Welsh in front of Congress. He's kinda like Obama. Rode into power on a wave of hope/change, hasn't lived up to the hype. Great speaker to a seated audience (Although the one time I saw him in person he danced around a blunt question politician style), but I have just lost faith in the guy overall. As I have with many other generals as I've watched them lie, distort facts and play politics instead of lead which makes me wonder if they are incompetent or liars.....either way, not people I'd want in charge.

I had an accident which required a fusion of my vertebrae. I know this is FC2 waiverable but the waiver guide says its 6 mos DNIF. My docs say I should be healed in 2 months and good to go. Anyone know if there is a way to appeal to get the time reduced if all tests/x-rays come back normal?

Yeah...Robin Olds grew an out of regs stache because he was really pissed at those facial hair rules during Vietnam. Or did I read the 1. Bullet punctuated wrong?

Butters, are those Fbos mil friendly? Anyone do an ATP thru them?

An old A-10 pilot once told me that in a real war, he'd jettison his bombs and other only use 30mm and Mavericks. The L model is terrific, as is the K for optical shots. Oh wait, this is the F-35 thread....last time I was at the -35 factory I was told no rockets or AGM capes....is this still true?

The F-35 was conceived damn near 20 yrs ago, and a big problem is that the world/military needs and technology changes...a lot when it takes that long to become operational. And for the price, it's not King Kong of anything, in fact less capable in some areas. Air Interdiction - hindsight would have been a strike version of F-22s. That said, would you rather send a 4-ship of LO F-35's vs a preplanned tgt...or a truly stealth tail-less RPA (x-47b type) jet to do the same preplanned job? CAS- anyone who knows CAS knows the F-35 can do some types of CAS with PGMs but cannot really do others (effective strafe/AGM-65) but it wasn't designed for CAS so I don't hold its future drawbacks against it. Proponents may argue you could load up external hard points but c'mon...at that point, why not just have a cheaper legacy jet doing the job. And don't give me contested airspace bullshit...the radar threat is not the main one in f on f CAS A/A...again, should have bought more F-22's. Hope LO pays off but EA is a b-tch and the F-35 was not designed for a visual fight. Technology....sweet, it's got an awesome touchscreen with 2005 era display technology but can't even put down an IR mark at night. Plus, a lot of the gee whiz, cool but not really necessary stuff doesn't work too well (yet) anyhow. I'd like someone to tell me what I'm missing.

Can you elaborate for those of us without the #'s?

Ha, Chang, you have no clue. You think from my posts I'm bitter? I'm just pointing out some well known problems that leaders like yourself are either too stupid or out of touch to acknowledge. I'm truly trying to help the AF that I love. "Hide" my brand of leadership? Hell no, someone has to stand up to the madness. One of the reasons I have been highly successful with both officer and enlisted subordinates is I don't "hide" things...I don't play AF games, people see that and LOVE it. I see a stupid rule...I try to change it. I see a worthless ppt presentation....I cut it. I see a jackass fast burner being a jerk to subordinates, I call him out. I've proudly not played the game, and it's cost me a few career points but the satisfaction I get from having a steady stream of officers, civilians and enlisted tell me the USAF needs more people like me....it keeps me going. You think guys like me are causing bitter attitudes?? Get real. The guys causing the problems are the guys like you, who can't understand the core basic issues with things like morale, micromanagement, wasted time/resources, lack of mission focus, etc. Your welcome Chang...I'm constantly working to fix f-ups caused by people like you. No sweat. I'll keep doing it. You just stay oblivious.

Chang, if you are indeed USAF leadership (which by your comments, all indications are yes you are indeed), you prove just about everything I've said about the way we choose leaders in the USAF as correct....we promote (not always but too often) out of touch, careerist square fillers who can't identify with the other 69% who actually keep this bureaucratic inefficient mess of a system up and running. I'll take my 3,000 hrs of flying, numerous deployments, a real world job working in NATO and filling A LTC billet as a Capt at the wing to your exec learning how to create an outlook calendar and maxwell school taught how would Clausewitz fight ISIS lessons learned ppt bullsh!t anyday.

Wow....Chill out, take a midol there Nancy. I'm not bashing ALL the dudes who take the exec>school>staff>whatever the f-else route. Some of them are my good buddies. A lot are complete f-ing d-bags. What I will bash is the system that seems to think someone who is an exec, goes to school for a year etc. is the best person to lead. The best leaders I know didn't need that crap to lead. And finally, you think I need to go to school or be an exec to have any SA about it? Bulllllllsh!t! I have plenty of experience at all levels, I've seen the game, I know how it works and what it takes to "usually" get ahead in the USAF.

No, married to one so I've seen the work, but being a glorified secretary was never my goal when joining the AF. I've attended a few worthless USAF schools but not ACSC in res as I presume you are inferring. All my knowledge of the happenings are from friends and colleagues who have. I'm not sure why my attitude seems the exception but I could think of nothing worse than spending a year of my life at Maxwell. The only good thing I've heard is its a year long vacation from the CAF and it's easy. But I don't hate the CAF so I'm fine sticking around. I fly my lines, do my work and go home to my kids while the careerists slug it out with extra work and politics for the same paycheck. While they take on an extra meaningless project to impress the boss, I have a jack and coke in the bar. Someday their hard work might pay off with a sweet Pentagon staff tour or being a generals aide. Good for them if that's what they want. Climbing the big blue ladder by being an exec and doing school was never a dream of mine. Getting paid to fly jets and have a family was. And I'm succeeding. Cheers

Back to Gen Welsh. I had very high hopes. He seems like he'd make a great politician or Lockheed spokesperson as his speeches are great...but I was hoping to see something more. I know his job is tough and he's done a few things to reform, but overall, not real impressed. I'd rather see a 4-star utter unpopular truths than play politics. This is sad because I imagine he was one of the best prospects. Other views?