Radio

Well they certainly do joke about us at least - “The Marines’ sense of toughness permeates the Corps’ lore as well as its reality. “To recall an illustrative story, a soldier is trudging through the muck in the midst of a downpour with a 60-pound rucksack on his back. ‘This is tough,’ he thinks to himself. “Just ahead of him trudges an Army Ranger with an 80-pound pack on his back: ‘This is really tough,’ he thinks. “And ahead of him is a Marine with a 90-pound pack on. And he thinks to himself, ‘I love how tough this is!’ “Then, of course, 30,000 feet above them, an Air Force pilot flips aside his ponytail — I’m sorry, I don’t know how that got in there, they haven’t had ponytails in a year or two — and looks down at them through his cockpit as he flies over. ‘Boy,’ he radios his wingman, ‘It must be tough down there.’ ” - David Patraeus My point wasn’t that CAFTT has been the worst deployment ever, or that you can’t complain about it. My point was I wouldn’t want to be in a bar with a bunch of grunts and hear an AF guy say “I’ll go if they give me a car and an apartment.” Plus I think HueyPilot had it right when he said the Iraqis “really liked the idea of having iron on the ramp so they could shake their fist in the air and spew a lot of bravado and talk smack”. In the original article posted, you can see the Iraqis are hell bent on getting fighter jets from someone, even if it isn’t Vipers. I don’t think the IqAF leadership would be interested in basing them in the Kurdish part of their country, which might not even be part of Iraq if the locals get their way. They will want them closer to the old Mig guys in Baghdad, so they can get rides and brag more easily.

Is it just me or does this post speak to grunts complaining about how soft the Air Force is? I've seen where HeloDude and HueyPilot had to spend their CAFTT tours...shared rooms, shared cars or lots of walking in the heat/with gear, no access to alcohol, a trip to the nearest USAF base considered a treat and a riskier threat environment for their aircraft. I bet they both volunteered too.

Create numerous "Ancillary Training" requirements which take priority over all work and must be reaccomplished as often as possible

The guy you are quoting (“Living In MEM”), is out of date. I know Capt Petrizzo and by the time “Living In MEM” posted this statement, Petrizzo had finished CMR training and had flown without one-on-one supervision for months. There haven’t been any incidences of beta pilots having any rash of errors that wouldn’t be typical for guys right out of UPT or guys coming from a non-CAS background. I agree that pilots with fighter backgrounds bring a lot more to the RPA community than Betas or UPT grads. If every RPA driver was a former A-10 or F-16 guy, we would be providing clearly improved service to ground forces. On the other hand, how hard is it to precisely execute a HF shot on a hill? (The shot from the article Living in MEM references.) Or even taking out the machine gun nest with danger close? Both shots sounded simple for the Pred, almost regardless of the quality of the pilot. Betas have demonstrated to SEFEs they can do ISR, BSA, and CAS…almost 100% with a Q1 no downgrade or Q1 with Commendables on their checkrides. Coordinating a 10+ aircraft stack over a pitched battle is not something betas can do yet and is not the FTU grad standard. What does the Army prefer? 20 Orbits fully manned with fighter pilots or 50 Orbits manned by crews that can perform ISR, BSA and CAS? The answer was clear when they started training NCOs and arming their own RPAs. Have there been a lot of complaints within the Army about how their own RPAs suck compared to ours?

This quote has a lot of logical problems. First, two FTU classes have graduated that included beta / future 18X officers. Not classes that contained just beta guys. Beta guys won DG for both classes. So were instructors intentionally marking down the 11X officers in each class to produce a 18X DG? Were both classes the worst ever? Second, the vast majority of beta grads went through FTU without ever hooking a ride. But some hooked because they didnt meet the standards. If IPs were told to pass them no matter what, then why hook anyone? If all the betas were the worst ever, why didn't everyone hook multiple times? Third, the quote assumes a widespread agreement among IPs and a lack of ethics to "let" the betas perform better than 11Xs within each class. I can tell you from first hand experience that many of the IPs take the Pred mission incredibily seriously (especially CAS). FTU IPs grew up all in different airframes and many are civilians. It is hard to believe they would all go for a sudden and unprecedented drop in standards that produced the 17 worst Pred FTU grads in history.

18Xs and CSOs have a few more rides in FTU. Also, compared to all other RPA pilots, the 18Xs have extended Combat Mission Ready training in their operational squadrons. This is basically more actual combat missions with an experienced pilot sitting over their shoulder and giving them additional tasks during the ride (simulated Hellfire runs, mock 9 Lines, mock restricted airspace to deal with, etc.). This is like Rifleman's idea of extended FTU, only probably more useful because the stud has to maintain real world SA while performing the training tasks. It obviously doesn't bring the 18Xs' SA up to the same level as a second assignment single-seat guy, but it seems like a step in the right direction.

This whole threat may be out of date. In late Feb, there was an announcement that RPA crews would receive an "Incentive Pay" that is very similar to "Flight Pay" but appears to be technically something else. This seems to have been a compromise so that manned aircraft could retain the sole right to earn "Flight Pay." My friends and I talked about this and we were not sure what it meant. Will 11X officers flying RPAs stop drawing "Flight Pay" and begin earning the new "RPA Incentive Pay?" Or maybe we are just reading this article wrong and the Incentive Pay is actually the exact same old Flight Pay. Air Force officials approve incentive pay for officer, enlisted RPA aircrews Posted 2/24/2010 Updated 2/24/2010 by Staff Sgt. J.G. Buzanowski Secretary of the Air Force Public Affairs 2/24/2010 - WASHINGTON (AFNS) -- Air Force officials here have approved an incentive pay for officer and enlisted Airmen who commit themselves to flying or operating sensors on remotely piloted aircraft. The incentive pay is equivalent to the current aviation incentive pay programs and is available to Airmen in the officer 18X RPA pilot or the new enlisted 1UOX1 RPA sensor operator career fields. The incentives scale with an Airman's time within the career fields. "Air Force leaders want the RPA career fields to operate the way other aviation career fields do," said Lt. Col. David DuHadway, the rated force policy chief at the Pentagon. "As a service, we recognize the need for people with these skill sets, and this represents a significant step forward in building a career field of RPA professionals." There are slightly more than 400 Airmen currently in the RPA career fields. Air Force leaders expect that number to rise to more than 1,000 as the need for more combat air patrols increases in the U.S. Air Forces Central area of responsibility over the next few years. "The pay is an incentive to attract and retain Airmen who dedicate themselves to operating RPAs," Colonel DuHadway said. Until recently, RPAs were the only airframes where an enlisted member of the crew wasn't receiving an incentive pay specifically paid for their aviation duties. Although the pilots receive specialized flight training, the sensor operators perform duties similar to those of other career enlisted aviators. "We're paying them for their expertise," explained Chief Master Sgt. Victor Allen, the career field manager for all career enlisted aviators. "The sensor operator position was often an additional duty for imagery analysis Airmen. But commanders want people who are devoted to staying in the career field. "Offering the incentive pay will help us build the force we need to meet the demands of the mission," Chief Allen added. For more information about joining the RPA career fields, contact CEA.Recruiting@Pentagon.af.mil.

Beta 2 is close to graduating initial qual training. Beta 3 is finishing a beefed up version of Initial Flight Screening at Colorado. Betas 4 and 5 have been selected and are starting within the next 3 months. I am not sure when the new classes are going to lose the "Beta" title and just be 18X formal training, but I have heard plans are for a new class to start the pipeline each month by the end of 2010. Not sure how future classes will be selected. Preface - I am a beta guy, so my POV is obviously jaded. I like the idea of GCSs around the world and I agree that the answer isn't dudes without SA. However, are the guys dropping RPAs from UPT middle of their class? Unless we want to go back to TAMIing dudes half way through their first fighter assignment, isn't it an improvement to have eager volunteers coming into the community at 10% of the cost and bringing skills equivalent to "middle of the road guys out of pilot training"?

OK, well Cleared Hot and I answered the original question already, but to elaborate: the current demand for RPAs is officially considered insatiable. Even if we had every orbit they wanted in OIF/OEF, there would still be COCOMs clammering for more RPAs in other theaters that previously haven't gotten them. If all OIF/OEF orbits suddenly went away, they would probably just limit the in flow of new RPA pilots, allow more to leave at the end of their natural tours, stop the "return to active duty" contracts, send more officers in the community to school and staff jobs. How many traditional airframes you could point to and say "if OIF/OEF suddenly stopped today, 3 others AOs would cheer because now its their turn to finally get X/Y/Z aircraft"? I can think of 1 or 2 aircraft that would probably fit in the same description, but I think most others would just go back to training and filling a spot in a war plan. Hence, I don't think there will be an issue with RPA pilots struggling to find meaningful jobs.

The party line answer is that there is a huge demand for UAS in Korea, Africa, South America, etc. The demand isn't supposed to decrease for a long time. I know UAS are the new thing, but couldn't you ask the same question of some traditional airframes that have been heavily tasked in OIF/OEF?

I agree with BQZip. According to the regs, if someone earns an MSM under wartime conditions, they get the BSM without V. Its not a slam against those that earn the V or Air Medals/Silver Stars/DFCs. AOs still award the MSM or the DMSM (joint version), but they technically shouldn't be doing that if the person earned the MSM and was anywhere near the war. People in Al Udied or Kuwait and getting BSMs is another story, but lets not go there for now. Back to the original poster, LRS types actually do regularly earn the BSM w/V. The ones I know did convoys all over Iraq for 6+ months and one took out a suicide bombers from close range. Because of Vehicle Ops/Convoy Ops, LRS probably has the highest chance of earning the BSM w/V of any non-rated AFSC except CE/EOD and SFS. I know several LRS guys that were awarded Purple hearts and not from random mortar shots onto the FOB. That said, it always sounds odd to see a guy get the BSM without V, but its just the rules. Its actually more of an abomination for someone to get an MSM for doing anything in theater. As a exec, BQZip could probably tell you there are plenty of times certain ranks earn medals regardless of time in theater or duties performed....medals that lesser ranks have to spend a year working for and still probably won't get. Then you have the cross-service comparisons where a soldier spends 14 months walking downtown Baghdad and gets an achievement medal. Regardless, the AF has gotten pretty damn tight about all those kinds of medals so chances are anyone who gets a BSM of any variety probably earned it.

More info on the lack of Tops in Blue performers this year. About 50% of those that applied made it. I think I had a statistcally harder time making the roster on my 5th grade basketball team. Tops in Blue picks 31 airmen, needs more Staff report Posted : Wednesday Mar 3, 2010 17:32:27 EST Air Force Service Agency officials have picked 31 airmen to join the elite musical team Tops in Blue for 2010, but they’re still in need of talented airmen who can play the guitar, alto saxophone and trumpet. Seventy-four Air Force singers, dancers and musicians competed for Tops in Blue spots over nine days in January at Lackland Air Force Base, Texas. The 31 selected will spend 2 ½ months training at Lackland, then hit the road in May for a 10-month tour that includes more than 120 shows in more than 20 countries. For tour schedules, details on how to join Tops in Blue and other information, contact Air Force Entertainment at 210-652-6566 or visit www.topsinblue.com.

https://www.youtube.c...h?v=fM34rIOb9_g There was a good comment on the TIB you tube link a few days ago: RainierWolfcastle2 (5 days ago) This is a personification of everything that is wrong with the Air Force. If you want to entertain troops downrange, send USO tour with a real band (one that civilians pay to see) and a bunch of cheerleaders. TIB makes me embarrassed to wear my uniform. "You won't survive TIB" Really? Tryouts are so tough that you will DIE? Get a life.

Looks like there is a fight brewing at the you tube comment area for the tops in blue vid. eckhardtc (16 hours ago) TIB is why the USO Tours exist. To bring quality entertainment to the troops after being subjected to such douchebagginess. All those pictures of the fans smiling and laughing? Yeah, they're laughing at you and all your "faggotry". Nice one MrSensor! MrSENSOR2 (1 day ago) All you TIB people should be ashamed of yourselves. This is a worthless organization. The statements on this video like: "this will be the hardest work you ever do in your life" are so sad and prove that none of you know what real work is. We're fighting a war and you're prancing around the world wasting money and resources on embarassing the USAF with your faggotry. Choke yourselves, you disgust me.

The situation has been fixed... The comments on You Tube are now much more appropriate. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=99SlWQiwxho&feature=response_watch Link to "video response to untitled TIB documentary." WTF is this guy doing? Is he trying to apply to TIB or show off to them or something?

I like all the enthusiastic "go TIB Year XX!!" comments under that you tube vid. I'm surprised none of us have posted there. I wonder how much the AF paid for that documentary.

Do the S&M guys ever wear desert flight suits? I remember seeing a lot of them in ABUs/DCUs in the box, but I don't ever remember seeing one in a tan flight suit.

So he intentially started this new thread to try to piss off Toro? Why else would he haved started a new account with "Toroisgay@yahoo.com," then posted something three times and the PM to Toro and everything?

I haven't followed all the posts here extremely closely, but how did this turn into a debate about how Christianity is just as violent as Islam? This isn't just limited to our our website here. It seems like after each terrorist attack, the media and our leaders all try to blame "guns" or "PTSD" or "Conservatism" or "violence in society" or "pressure" or blame our own foreign policies. I know it is a pretty complicated topic, but at the end of the day, its as if I walked up to you and punched you in your face. Then you felt compelled to talk about what you had done to deserve the attack, all the pressure I had been under, how most people like me are very peaceful, and how we just have to chalk it up as an "unimaginable mystery."

There is a workaround but I don't remember it. A guy from the company that makes TIMs showed it to me once. It is an option near the menus when you back up a grade book. I can call the guy and ask if some one else can't fill in the missing piece here.

Kicking the ball into her face was my favorite part. I am in a class at Randolph and everyone has been talking about this girl.

CNN Misquotes Ft. Hood Private to Cast Doubt on Cries of 'Allahu Akbar' By Lachlan Markay November 10, 2009 - 17:20 ET CNN misquoted a soldier at Fort Hood who was wounded in last week's shooting to suggest that the soldier's recollection that Major Hasan shouted "Allahu Akbar" before firing was in doubt. Many in the media have been doing their best to downplay evidence suggesting Hasan was acting in accordance with radical Muslim beliefs. "I was sitting in about the second row back when the assailant stood up and yelled 'Allahu Akbar' in Arabic and he opened fire," Pvt. Joseph Foster recalled yesterday on CNN's "American Morning" (Video below the fold - h/t Jim Hoft at Gateway Pundit). Anchor John Roberts commended Foster on his quick reaction to the situation. So you were acting like a soldier. You were acting heroically. We should point out that you're with the 20th Engineer Battalion and despite your best efforts and I guess the efforts of your comrades, as well, four members of the battalion were killed, 10 others were injured. And you were shot in the hip and you didn't realize it at the time? To which Foster replied with all of the modesty one might expect from a 21-year-old Army private: "I had realized it at first, but with that much adrenaline, you tend to forget things." It should go without saying that Foster was noting that with his adrenaline pumping, he did not immediately realize that he had been shot. But CNN, in its written report on the interview, quoted him completely out of context in an effort to dismiss his claim that Hasan shouted "Allahu Akbar". "Foster, 21, said he wasn't clear about whether the gunman said those exact words, noting that 'with that much adrenaline, you tend to forget things,' " CNN reported. Some might claim that if Foster's adrenaline rush could cause him to forget he had been shot, surely he could have heard Hasan wrong. But Foster heard the cry before he was wounded. It could not have been distorted by the adrenaline that follows a gunshot wound, as no shots had been fired when Hasan screamed the call to jihad. CNN's blatant distortion of Foster's account seems to be an attempt to downplay any evidence that Hasan was acting out of a radical Islamist hatred of the United States military. The cable news network is terrified of the "backlash" that could ensue against Muslims in the military (even though it hasn't), but doesn't seem to have much concern for the facts surrounding the deaths of 13 of our men and women in uniform. https://newsbusters.org/blogs/lachlan-markay/2009/11/10/cnn-misquotes-ft-hood-private-cast-doubt-cries-allahu-akbar

I wonder if there will be DoD-wide measures about threatening statements and anti-war sentiments. It has been reported that the shooter raised all sorts of red flags in past months. Not sure how accurate some of these claims are: like "he equated a soldier jumping on a grenade to save his buddies to a suicide bomber." His chain of command are all probably in for it if they really ignored signs like this.

IMO, ROTC DG would be nearly worthless at a Majors board or higher. Your very first opportunity for stratification (My #1/X 2Lts...) will be more important than that. DG ROTC would be worth something applying to special programs or the AD rated board. That is because for those types of programs, showing potential to succeed in a learning environment would be important. But think about it, how could that possibly be taken seriously for field grade promotion? Like others said, if you had some series of DGs to write about (UPT DG, ASBC DG, SOS DG, AFIT DG), it could make ONE bullet on a PRF. If you had less than 2 DGs it would make a pretty weak bullet and no matter what, the ROTC DG would have the least impact. Of course, one full line taken up by just "ROTC DG" would be laughable and honestly would hurt your chances of making Major...because whoeever read it would say, "WTF, this is all he/she had? Downgrade!" If a lot of wing commanders have ROTC DG on their records, it is simply because they continued to perform at a high level. But you're going to have to work your ass off throughout your career, consistently outperform your peers at each level just to be a flying Sq/CC. Then you have to get your school and staff assignments, deploy a few times, and still get lucky to make O-6 or Wing/CC. Its great you all started off well at ROTC. Yes, you should correct your records if they don't say DG ROTC (and "/F/A/G/", whats that about?). But only let it boost your confidence and don't at all rest on your laurels. I don't think anything shows up for Academy grads on their records except their line number for O-4 or O-5. Should Academy grads be putting on their PRF that they were a Cadet Squadron Commander for a 120 person squadron bigger than most ROTC dets? More than 2 years later, they would be insane to mention it as some sort of credential that shows potential for leadership. Edited to show "/F/A/G/" instead of "XXXX"

They must pass a modified Class III. There is something called AFI48-123_AFGM1, entitled, "Medical Standards for Unmanned Aircraft Systems (UAS) Pilot Duties," from Oct 08. It is very detailed and technical. I have a copy if anyone wants it.