HU&W

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zrmm16snPmg

Details I seriously doubt it. He was accused of something sensational. You don't recover from that.

Relief and evac are a challenge with only 7000' of asphalt and all support facilities destroyed, but looks like our C-130 brothers and sisters are getting it done in the PI. https://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/world/survivors-begin-exodus-from-tacloban/article15386202/ https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-24910209 https://www.sfgate.com/news/world/article/Tons-of-aid-in-Philippines-but-not-where-needed-4976149.php It feels like we faced similar challenges in Haiti.

Taken another way, it sounds like you're making an argument for the Super-T. Limited but viable A/A, great A/G (including armor), great ISR, good CAS, and can deal with every SA threat you mentioned earlier.

Shilla's for authentic Korean food. Railroad Thai for Thai food. Hamburger King for burgers. City Grill for seafood and steaks. El Rey for Mexican food.

We start by defining the question exactly the way you did here. Define requirements first and then let the engineers turn them into a product. Don't define the desired product by specific capabilities (stealth and VSTOL). From what I understand, we need emergent threat survivable OCA, DCA, EA, Strike and CAS that can be launched and recovered from a <900' mobile platform. I'm pretty sure we could get a balanced product that may not do them all perfectly, but would be suitable for the lower intensity requirements of a MAGTF. I'm beginning to seriously doubt that the albatross the F-35 has become will be the answer we're hoping for.

Good choice. A little bit of CLP/hoppes should work well. Pay attention to how things come apart so you can get them back together. I'm personally a fan of bore snakes. Again, run it by a gunsmith for a safety check before shooting it.

Planning to fire it or for decoration? If you're planning to use it, have inspected by a gunsmith first. They'll know what to look for. In terms of cleaning, you'll need to provide more details. Is it rusty? Dirty bore? Are you trying to do a restoration? Do you want to preserve patina for collector value?

Why did they design the T-6 with a propeller? To keep the instructors cool. I know this because every time I turned it off, they started sweating.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HT50W0kKDfs

You're right. He should have compared himself to a KC-10 pilot.

The Final Toast of the Doolittle Raiders will be today 9 Nov 2013 at 6pm eastern. It will be streamed live here.

Good post. The only way we're going to get the officer corps you describe is if Senior Officers start letting Junior Officers be officers. NCO's don't outrank Lt's, but down in the trenches it almost seems that way. Ever see a Capt get crushed my a MSgt? I have, and it wasn't over socks. Part of that is the Capt's fault, but most of the blame for this type of disintegration in the chain of command falls on the FGO's who value the opinions of their peer enlisted (those with similar time in service and shared experiences) over officers junior to them. Don't get me wrong, CGO's make lots of mistakes and need to be corrected, coached, and mentored by their superiors. CGO's also absolutely need the mentorship and help of SNCO's, but I fear we may have taken it to far. Our enforced erosion of the chain of command is even bleeding through to our Airmen, folks that have been in only a year or two. When I was an Airman, we lived in fear and almost awe of our Lt's and Capt. Today, not so much. Edited to add: I'm a huge fan of a simplified OPR that contains simply the list of go/no go standards like PT score, an honest summary narrative of a 360 feedback, a few bullet lines of accomplishments throughout the rating period, a commander's strat by peer group (___ of ___ in the _____ year group) , and a senior rater's strat by peer group. If that's similar to what you're implementing for GO's, I'd love to see that roll out to the entire officer corps.

Why waste the opportunity to get two guns. One deer gun and one elk/big game gun. Compromises usually don't pay off; you get something that can do everything, but no one thing well. Even better throw a new .22 practice rifle in the mix as a companion trainer.

The roving patrols were started to help combat boredom in the TSA job. Link

Here's the list for those who don't like to google. It probably warrants discussion since our branch tends to be influenced by the changes the other branches make.

You make a pretty good argument and I agree with most of what you said. But this? This doesn't make sense to me. The sq/cc selected the picture because she wanted it to be offensive. The whole purpose was to be offensive and see if anyone would speak up. She willfully placed material that she personally felt was sexually offensive in the workplace. You can't have it both ways. Unlike the person who doesn't know they've crossed somebody's line and makes a correction when informed of an accidental indiscretion, she knowingly subjected her subordinates to things she felt were sexually offensive enough that they should have been reported. I'm honestly a little surprised that she's being lauded for her actions instead of being investigated for sexual harassment herself.

During the great purge, many senior leaders worked to destroy anything that could possibly be construed as offensive, regardless of heritage. Museums were picked over. Walls were cleared of squadron history. Historic noseart was painted over. It felt like one more attempt to rewrite our past to make it more acceptable to the most sensitive elements of the present. There was one wing commander who was actually willing to stand up for Air Force heritage and defended artifacts in the AF Museum, accepting the risk to her command during this fervor. Here are her comments: “I think the tradition and history at the Air Force museum is just that,” Col. Cassie Barlow, commander of the 88th Air Base Wing, said Friday. “That’s our history. We’re not going to go back and change those things because that’s part of our history and that’s an important part of our organization. I think the museum will keep the displays that they have just as they are.”1 Emphasis added. I don't know her, nor have I ever worked for her, but I have great respect for her decision.

Wasn't this the same organization that was in the news about three months ago for teaching that the Founding Fathers were extremists?

That's the thing about "zero tolerance" policies. They are so often interpreted as zero judgement policies. Most situations involve various shades of grey, but a zero tolerance policy makes situations black and white, go or no go. These policies, although they sound good on paper, create the infamous line of offense nobody wants to cross. If you do cross someone's line, wherever they personally have it drawn, your commander must take action. It's in his policy. Although "zero tolerance" is a great soundbyte, in practice it is the surrender of a commander's judgement to the person taking offense. The worst part is that the offendee's judgement is a moving target. At least a commander with "zero tolerance" for PT failures is surrendering his/her judgement to a fixed and definable metric, but sexual harassment? So, what is sexual harassment? You mentioned that the picture of the bikini woman isn't sexual harassment, but is sexually offensive. You also mentioned that it was OK for the commander to plant sexually offensive material in the workplace as a training tool, but it is not OK for a normal person to have a similar picture of his vacation in the work environment. Here's some historic irony: my family recently went through a box of a deceased relative's military records from the 60's and 70's. In it, we found SOS courseware from around 1970. One of books had a drawing of a naked woman in the center of the page and words all around it and instructions that said "Read this quickly and don't look at the naked lady." It was a timed exercise for reading comprehension to show how easy it is to be distracted by your environment. Would something like this be in the same vein as the previously mentioned squadron commander's "test?" Or should this commander be prosecuted, under a zero tolerance policy, for willfully harassing her workforce by placing content that she had personally deemed sexually offensive in full view of her employees? That's where the argument breaks down. Although possession of an item that has been deemed offensive may not be harassment, once that item's been deemed offensive, the way it is used could be defined as harassment under US Law.

I saw the same thing happen once with a Sq/CC who purposefully wore an "out of regs" tie tack with his blues one day. He spent the first half of the day taking down the names of everyone he met who didn't call him out on his tie tack (nobody did). He then held an impromptu commander's call where he called those individuals out for failing to uphold standards.

1. Always keep the armrest down. 2. I hate when "spillover" passengers sit next to you in coach and you have their fat forcing itself into your seat the whole flight. 3. Delta Connection is the worst of all regional airlines.

Thanks for bringing back the up/down voting buttons on posts. I was getting sick of "liking" stuff.

Hero.

A correction issued by a subordinate is a recommendation/reminder, not an order. Also, subordinates do not interpret the subjective parts of AFIs to their superiors, especially when it comes to ancillary regulations. An example of this is an Airman who turns away a Major from his PT test because the Airman feels the Major's shoes are a little too bright or "loud". I have no problem with them acting as the SME in something they've been trained to do, such as actually administering the PT test, but turning someone away because their own interpretation of a reg that isn't core to their duty is out of bounds. This logic extends to all other areas too. At the end of the day, if I outrank you, I expect appropriate treatment, even if you're the SME. The same goes for people that outrank me when I'm the SME and I don't have a problem with that.