Radio

I submitted an IG complaint against AFPC last year. Don't expect much. First I spoke with my base IG and he thought there were clearly problems with the way AFPC was manipulating my records. He had to refer my complaint to AFPC's IG. I was in his office when called his counterpart at AFPC's IG and told her how important it was for them to discuss the case with me after they received my complaint form. My local IG assured me AFPC's IG would call me within 48 hours. A week passed without them calling me. I called them and they said they would be in touch. Three weeks passed without them calling me, and I called them again. They said they were done investigating my case and had found my complaint had no merit. I could have referred the complaint to HHQ but instead I applied for voluntary separation the first chance I got.

Are you seriously defending this statement? "often times they also shoot without clearance through the middle of an air stack while failing to place their crosshairs on the correct target." I haven't said anything about RPAs being superior to manned aircraft or vice versa. Obviously they are not in most regards. I'm just saying that statement is pure BS. If it happens then it certainly doesn't happen often. You and viperdriver69 can rail all you want against RPAs and it doesn't bother me at all. This is just an unbelievable catch 22. RPA crews are so regularly negligent that they put all the fighters and other manned assets in danger or catching a hellfire. Lets all be mad about that but also assume it wouldn't be a big deal to the RPA crew and senior leaders wouldn't take it seriously. If it happened in my squadron I can guarantee you the crew would be Q3d, an SII would be written the next day and additional training or checklist items would be added for everyone else. It wouldn't be the type of "aw shucks, well thats RPA business" attitude you two seem to suggest. You're mixing apples and oranges. The original point was that RPAs often shoot through stacks without warning lower level manned assets. I can't speak on if they had clearance or not. I guess the people who made that point would have you assume the worst.

Thanks for clarifying it wasn't in a conventional CAS scenario, as the original posts would have implied. It wouldn't surprise me if someone called in without clearance because I've heard of this happening 4+ years ago and the JTAC immediately cleared them hot after they announced rifle. Its a cautionary tale taught in the school house. I would also expect "don't shoot through a stack without clearance" to also be cautioned against with SIIs and added checklist items from the OG. Your original points included - "See how many of these three letter agency UAV's can't even talk to ATC because the radios suck balls. Finally, ask around and see if anyone else has experienced the random "hellfire going off through the stack" bullshit." You mixed in a weakness inherent to the airframe with the actions of a few crews with unknown alibis. Then someone else piled on with "Often times they work great for single specific missions, but often times they also shoot without clearance through the middle of an air stack while failing to place their crosshairs on the correct target." If this really happens "often" then my POV is even more relevant and I definitely have to call BS. Now it seems all along you were talking about non CAS, non text book events with generals playing back seat JTAC.

Speaking generally about what some people have heard, then my point still stands. I've never heard of this happening and if it did, I would first ask the JTAC or air warden when and how they lost SA on their stack during a kinetic strike. If the RPA didn't have clearance or GFC's intent in a CAS environment, it would probably be a commonly talked about story in the community and I would expect it to have gone to a court martial or at least losing wings.

So one JTAC didn't inform his immediate buddies that he was going kinetic. Yes I am aware of mirc 9 lines, the point still being the RPA had clearance and was being told by a ground force commander to shoot then and there.

Please explain. Pred Reaper gets a 9 Line and clearance. Shot goes through the stack and all other players are unaware or not properly deconflicted. Its not the JTAC's fault and this becomes a story about how RPAs frequently shoot through stacks. If the RPA is just shooting in a tic without clearance or SA on the stack, then I would hope there would be court martials. If this is as common of an occurance as these posters make it appear, then I would have heard about it. If most fighter pilots have a story about a mystery hellfire dropping through an unprepared stack, then there would be a lot of comm about this.

I've never heard of an RPA firing without at least 9 line passed. It wouldn't surprise me if someone just forgot to call in for final clearance, but I've never heard of a confirmed event of this. Wouldn't a hellfire through a stack be on the JTAC? There is one known unintentional hellfire release without a splash and it let to big ripples throughout the community. It wasn't during a tic or in a stack.

Is it me, or do these kids look like they are distressed?

I know it is fun to point out when non-flying communities do this sort of thing. But I have also seen it the other way around, where a pilot gets a non-flying command and wants to "Operationalize" all the non-rated jobs. Checklist and checkride everything because that was his comfort zone. The finance and contracting dudes shrug and go along with it. A few years later that commander leaves and the next guy is probably thinking "who the hell do these guys think they are?!" Who knows how many of these SOS and Space/Missile stories came about because a rated CC influenced it.

I heard 7/10 promoted in another RPA Sq, one non-select was just the Wing Flt/CC of the year. I don't know of anybody from RPAs who was a school select, even the Exec types and the Wing CGO of the year types. It appears having RPA on your PRF meant overall lower score.

I could understand an A-10 showing some prescence for the guys on the ground...who might have been working with you/putting their lives in your hands all day without ever actually seeing you but trusting you had their backs. But this Apache seems to have crashed on an established HLZ, for guys who probably regularly see all varieties of helos.

When I was an 2LT, I volunteered for 1 CGOC related function. It was the summer time Ops AF...show the Cadets around your base gig. The CGOC President made a big show of advertising the job and I guess several people volunteered. After a few days he sends out an email saying "After careful consideration the Wing CC picked me to do it!" Me being himself, the CGOC President. He kept trying to get me to take on truly useless projects like working on a CGOC conference, but I never agreed If you saw him at the O Club, he would talk a lot about how he really wanted to be a 1 Star. But I heard he got out as a 1Lt.

I know the guy in this picture. He was a really good LPA member but I highly doubt he is CGOC. Guess they just wanted a random flight suit picture?

At least those 11xrs have a nice ACP cushion to help them make up their minds. As previously discussed, there was a quasi "beta test" before this current version (a few years ago). A guy made it all the way through FTU and was about to start CMR before he was shipped off to Space/Missiles. He was eventually accepted to the 18X pipeline and is now a fully qual'd MQ-1B pilot. But taken all together, UAS beta tests have a 50% success rate. Either way, it being a "no fail" endeavor was never explained to the betas testers themselves. They still had to step off a ledge with their old AFSCs, just 1-2 years before their Majors boards. Forcing those 15 guys to double their signed ADSC contract won't really help hundreds of 11Xs. But the career field they helped create is already helping.

Awesome story. What ever happened to that terrorist in the UK that lit himself on fire?

The first 2 "UAS Beta Test" classes entered training with the express knowledge that the test could be deemed a failure any second, and they would be made to report back to their original AFSCs. They took a huge risk to their careers and it paid off for the AF and the RPA community. It doesn't seem fair to me to hope they get sea lawyered out of the contract they were made to sign. Also who knows if some AFPC guy decided to make it a 3 year committment, knowing there was a good chance the test wouldn't work out. After Beta 1 and 2 succeeded, the new beta wings were created and the 18X AFSC was formally created. Perhaps only after that point, other AFPC guys said, "well thank goodness that worked out, lets try to keep them for 6 years now."

So the first 2 or 3 beta classes were made to sign a 3 year contract. Now a few hundred 18As are in the pipeline because of them. The future manning problem is solved because these guys and gals burnt bridges with established AFSCs knowing there was no promise of even the beta test concluding. And people are worried about morale if they get out at their 10 year point? Maybe more of the betas would stay if they weren't about to become the only qualified RPA pilots (including Navs) not getting continuity pay to get over the 10 year hump. But now we should hope the AF pulls a fast one on them?

This is well said. I wouldn't be scared to say something, but you do need say it tactfully and you need to give Preds 100% while you're there. Really though, my point was more that filling MQ-9 transition classes has been a major heartache in my Sq. Forcing the Commander to constantly be polling the masses and leaning on flight leadership to drum up volunteers over the last 6 months. This was obviously a bigger problem when the class dates were short notice. In general I would say the 15th and 18th are rare in that they are feeder squadrons with extremely high levels of turnover and progression. We have loaner pilots/sensors who already know they have a new assignment looming and are just there for seasoning. We get people pulled for short notice PCAs on a regular basis. It is a rare case where tactfully declaring your future plans may immediately solve your Flt/CC's and Sq/CCs problem. I've even seen a guy tell the Sq/CC during his initial sit-down that he really wanted to PCS...to a location the CC coincidentally needed to send people to. He wasn't treated any differently in the Sq and soon got his wish granted. If you get assigned initially to any other squadron, then my advice probably won't work for you.

Ironic they got a new OG who is an 18A about "a year ago." "Nearly equal terms" So you admit there is still a barrier. I don't see 18As being treated differently during CMR or during regular MCE ops. Obviously not all 18As are alike and some come loaded with operational experience. But honestly pretty much every problem CMR student I've seen at Creech has been UPT-D, retired return to active duty, or former MWS pilots. I would say that the first generation of 18As (Beta classes 1 and 2) got treated a bit differently, but nothing heinous really. Also, recent 18As are being handed positions of responsibility faster than a year ago. But still, there are heavier hours requirements for 18As to be considered "experienced" which is what I was mostly referring to with my "nearly equal terms" comment. A year ago, the OG was pretty adament about 18As not going to MQ-9s or deploying until they had heavy time on station. Remember the complex hours criteria he tried to roll out? This many hours/months to deploy or make IP... That has been trashed and the OG's tune seems to be far less restrictive...more so "why haven't these things happened more often for 18As yet?" Maybe it has something to do with the first UPT-Ds starting to get follow on jets.

Lately, I haven't seen any barriers to 18As going to Reapers. A year ago it was undiscovered country. But the first few have transitioned, these days 18As and 11Us are being evaluated on nearly equal terms for MQ-9 tx in my sq. Really the calls for MQ-9 vols have been pretty desperate for the last 5-6 months. It has been a matter of picking non-vols or prodding people to go, more than holding back a bunch of eager UPT-Ds or 18As. I even wouldn't worry about making your intentions known as soon as you get to a MQ-1 sq (although that is typically great advice). I have seen guys get to Creech, make it known early they want to go to Whiteman or MQ-9s or wherever, work with leadership to get more seat time to build hours faster, and be on their way in just a few months.

I doubt you're going to get out of IFS. PPL doesn't mean much to them. Good luck.

Excerpt from my newspaper today. This guy Frelinghuysen sounds like a DB. Article by Steve Tetreault. McCollum also argued for cuts in funding for military bands. She proposed to reduce spending from $324.8 million to $200 million for what she counted as 154 performing bands and more than 5,000 full-time musicians. "We all enjoy listening to military bands and cherish the traditions of military music," McCollum said. "But at a time of fiscal crisis, $200 million must be enough for ceremonial music, concerts, choir performance, and country music jam sessions." Rep Rodney Frelinghuysen, R-NJ, defended the spending, saying musicians are trained as security guards as their "go to war mission." "The Department of Defense strongly believes that military bands are vital to recruiting, retaining, and community relations, and that they provide patriotic, inspirational music to instill in soldiers, sailors and airmen the will to fight and win, and foster the support of our citizens and promote national interests," Frelinghuysen said. The House agreed to the McCollum amendment, 226-201.

CNN has nearly the same report now...one crew member still in country. Per the report, wish they would have kept quiet on this until all personnel fully recovered.

Good eyes! I noticed the beret and name tag and strangely long ribbon rack for a SSgt. But that upside down badge is the best.

More experience is great and future 18Xs will probably come to the fight better prepared to learn the RPA business, compared to how prepared the original beta classes were 2 years ago. But as long as the URT pipeline delivers level headed dudes who can multitask and learn, then the 18X / allow UPT grads to return to cockpits plan will continue. However, the early beta testers might be ruining the argument for more real flying during URT. You now have 30 dudes/dudettes that are becoming Ops Sups, IPs, Flight CCs, etc, proving the job can be done with hard work, 30 days at IFS, a few months of sim time and academics, and buckling down at IQT. Not sure how future 18Xs could show up and operate cirlces around the people who train and supervise them, or what that would prove. The real test will be once 18Xs are deemed experienced enough to try LRE. But according to the new rules, that won't be until they are fully RPA qual'd for 18 months. So 26-30 months after IFS, will an extra 2-3 weeks at IFS help an 18X L/R an RPA?