SPAWNmaster

It's not about being tracked, it's about see and avoid which is the issue in GA. Agree combat aircraft in highly controlled operating areas don't really need it especially with TCAS (or similar) plus a ADSB-in puck make it a moot point.

Copy all, sounds quick. My service commitment situation is similar to what you had asked about further upstream in this thread. What ended up being the answer re UPT flying commitment release, ADSC etc?

I just started working the VLPAD process and looking for a little gouge to facilitate app routing, NGB side of things, etc. I'm a Guard dude with an assignment already lined up, and my local leadership is supportive (as is AFPC) so now just need to get paperwork rolling through the wickets. My questions are: 1) How long did it take for your TAG to endorse the recommendation MFR? 2) What is the right way to communicate the intent up to NGB so there are no surprise "no's" later on? Do I need my DOT or leadership to notify A1 to grease the wheel? 3) Any gotchas or things you would have wished you knew if you had to do it over again? I'm really impressed with the VLPAD team - they are responsive, supportive and have a clear process outlined. However, I also know enough about the Guard side of things to know that it may not be as straight forward of a process as advertised. I appreciate any additional information based on experience. Cheers

They are adding FLIR, hoist and 2 x M240's for one thing. I don't know what other sensors or defensive systems will be added on top but you can imagine the regular stock of sensors. Plus the wiring, the mounts, the ammo, etc. All this eats into useful load, but more importantly alters the CG. The fact the bid was accepted means obviously someone thought they will pull it off but we know how things worked out in 60 land with all the add-on afterthoughts and years of upgrades (wiring that gets added not replaced) so I thought it was worth mentioning.

Both SK and Sierra were pretty steeply undercut and SK already made a protest. I'm not convinced there will be another one. I do think the 139 is a great tool for the job and significant boost in capability over the N models. Dual FADECs, modern glass, systems integration (CDU/FMS/VXP/IVHMS type technology but newer). All 90's era production is an entirely new generation ahead of the 60 and at least two over the Huey. Also a good pedigree, over 1000 ships produced and Boeing+Philly supply chain. I think the automation will save lots of greenback on human factors and maintenance upkeep. My hangup is on the addition of the mission equipment. Just look at how much of a pig the 60 is loaded up and the fact we fly it 6,000lbs overgross into OBS. Can the 139 hold up and support the mission without all the ancillary issues related over time remains to be seen. Looks like a great deal for the AFGS community.

There's no shortcuts dude! Also, learning itself is not a stressful activity. If there is anything I have learned so far it is that your IPs will always rise to the challenge of inducing stress and push you to your edges. You are only raising the bar by trying to skip ahead. Getting your hands on gouge and pubs ahead of time (the 11-248 or whatever it is they use these days) is probably time well spent but nothing you can do in the civilian world flying wise will approximate the structure of a military training program. Maybe hire an instructor that likes to yell at students and tell him to beat you with a stick every time you are off parameters? That might get you pretty close.

Pointy noses are not in my wheel house so I have to ask - what is the intended service life hour limit for the T-38A's? I ask because in the H-60 world we are flying 12,000+ hour machines that were designed for 6,000 hours and are now showing structural cracks, etc. We also fly them 5,000+ lbs (30%) over the original max gross weight and max perform our E-M charts every day so it's a real wonder we aren't seeing worse issues IMHO.

I used to be a Naviator fan, but this is not even a question anymore. With every release FF is dominating the market on features (engine out glide rings, real time IFR clearance release and filing through the app, bull cuts, geo plates, AHRS backup etc. could go on all day). The real question is what size iPad which there are tons of recent threads from other pilots on reddit/r/flying discussing as much. Personally the 9.7" works best for me. I can wear it on my knee but it's also big enough to operate essentially as an MFD on a yoke mount or window mount. Mini is too small IMHO, while the Pros are overkill and too large.

You get that anyways now. Full rate meals and up to max locality for lodging. So what’s the benefit?

Anyone know what the actual benefit to a letter of non-A is now? Some finance dude tried to tell me it's only good to get off base during TDY but my sub-par JTR knowledge made me question that. Now I'm curious...

(Edit because it didn’t come off in flight) Apparently fell off a truck just outside ATL today:

I am not in a position to speculate about the fighter world, IFF or UPT syllabus changes. However I do want to share an anecdote about the technology. I went through Rucker having built a $2000 home VR set up in my office with a Huey model that performed surprisingly honest compared to the real thing. We had guys come through in the evenings sometimes to have a go and it seemed to help dudes out quite a bit for part-task training. In particular we had one stud in my class who just couldn't learn to hover for the life of him. He was getting extra rides, special emphasis from his dedicated IP (our IPs were all old savage vietnam legends), etc. The kid was getting real frustrated. Personally I think he probably just needed a change in instructional style but anyways, I had him come over for some stick time on my VR setup. In about two hours in my home office we fixed what ~10 hours in the actual helicopter wasn't getting him. We all flew our sorties the next morning and he never had a problem hovering from that point on. And by the way he is a solid 60 pilot now. Having seen a few things like this, I will say that I personally think VR is a game changer from an instructional technology standpoint. How it is implemented and what it can replace is beyond me but I would not be surprised if it's capable of substituting more than some would give it credit for. As far as 30 hour T6 pilots going to Vipers that's a realm of analysis that I can't get my head around. Will be interested to hear about the learnings from all of this...hopefully doesn't involve any fatalities.

I used to have it when I was on Android probably 3 or 4 years ago at this point. At the time I remember it being VERY impressive compared to the other options (and frankly it was pretty much the only thing you could get on android at the time) plus I was happy flying GA with it. That said, the current state of foreflight is extremely feature-packed and pretty much the defacto standard throughout aviation. If Naviator works for you, I don't see anything wrong with it.

FTFY

YMMV. They wouldn't give me a ticket for Jolly 51 since I "wasn't on the list". I'm a member of the unit. We then worked it up to a manager and they finally tried to get me on and of course all their seats were taken. Ended up paying $1200 out of pocket for a one day funeral trip (wouldn't have missed it for the world to say bye to my brothers). I just bring this up because I feel like these airlines do this for marketing or to say they are somehow charitable but haven't met anyone who has actually successfully done it.

Thanks. We legitimately want to use it as a primary residence just are tied up on orders for longer than the 2 months. Any agents or lenders you recommend who can help us in New York State?

Marty - in your experience would I have luck getting an unusual circumstance extension by saying my wife will move in at the conclusion of my current TDY (say within 6-9mo of closing)? Thanks

That’s kind of what the wife and I were thinking. Biggest threat may be economic downturn or bad timing on rates etc. Thanks all for sounding board!

Does anyone know if VA loan requires you to live in the house immediately upon purchase? Anticipating being away from the area on orders for another year or so but wanting to jump on our “dream home” now.

We are familiar with the area and have lived there before. Originally we said we’d come back when we retire but why wait? Finding out life is short with all these friends of mine going in so may just end up pulling the trigger if we can make it work. Question now is if VA loan permits us to be away or if we have to move in immediately.

Financially yes. It wouldn't be a burden but obviously we won't be saving as much as we would (however we are saving mainly for this purpose anyways)

Traditional guard guy currently on full-time orders. Expect to be away from home of record for another 1.5yrs. We do not currently own property and have have been thinking about buying a house very seriously over the past two ish years. We've spent this time researching what we want and we already have lived in the area we are looking (we know we like it there). Come to find our dreamhome listed a few days ago, seems to be the right place for our kids, the price is right and all the features we wanted. We don't want to lose our chance at getting this place especially since we haven't seen anything of note pop up in-market as we have looked the past few years. Is it crazy to buy a home knowing we wouldn't be living in it for at least another year (if not longer)?

Completely anecdotal but worth mentioning: In my Fort Rucker class we had a guy we'll call Ryan. The kid just could not hover. Maybe his instructor wasn't the right match, couldn't make the right connections for him, whatever. Or maybe the syllabus didn't afford Ryan the time and free space to focus on his weak area when we had a full list of other contact maneuvers to work on. Trying to be a bro, I invited Ryan over to put on my HTC Vive and I spun up the most accurate flight model for a Huey I could find (DCS Huey for the record). We spent a good hour drilling the required control inputs and hand-eye exercises demonstrating the various aerodynamic phenomena involved in hovering (and make no mistake for those who haven't flown a helicopter, hovering is all experimentation and feel till you get it.) No shit, within that hour something finally clicked and Ryan was getting it. The next day we saw that kid hover the way he was meant to in the helicopter and it wasn't a problem from then on. I bring up this story because I can see how as a function of part-task training, you could easily accelerate learning for very specific skill sets in undergraduate training using technology. To the extent that these accelerative events would add up to producing an extra pilot (or however many extra pilots) without sacrificing quality is obviously the big question. I'm just saying that I can see how there is value in holding the experiment.

Any guard/reserve DOT guys here notice the NGB A3 timeline to full up is now showing about 5.5 years from start? I think it was closer to 3 years total when I was hired over two years ago. If I had to guess why so long I'd venture that significant b-course delays are the issue. Curious what the timeline is for the active duty component. Now back to your regular programming...

If one believes per the article that a) there has just been poor communication about this aspect of the test and b) that they legitimately want data points on learning modes (and not trying to actually build an enlisted -> pilot program) then this is just a big flag that they are investing heavily in Instructional Design to optimize pilot production. In any case I think everyone is pretty clear that big AF has given up on the retention piece and is now in panic mode to make enough pilots fast enough to get us through what will be a very painful ripping of the bandaid as experiences guys continue to pull chocks. No matter how you slice it it's not a good signal.