Inertia17

Getting FAIP'd in general apparently closes a few doors (Weapons School for example, or at least makes it more difficult), but it seems most of the T-6 FAIP's who flew T-38s in UPT are heading to fighters now. As for T-38 vs T-6 FAIP, as with anything it is a bit of luck and timing as well. There could be a dude who would be a great FAIP, but there isn't a slot for T-38 PIT available to the Sq at the time, so they end up in the T-6 instead.

XL 17-13 T-38 T-38 ADAIR 2 x F-16 B-1 T-6 FAIP T-1 2 x C-17 (Hickham/Charleston) AC-130W MC-130 T-1 FAIP T-6 FAIP C-130J Yokota HC-130 RC-135 I might have missed a few, but that it most of the AD drop.

The three SUPT bases all drop on the same day for a given class to my knowledge. DLF does have a drop tonight.

You seem to be neglecting the mentions of Heroism and Valor. Heroism: great bravery. Bravery: courageous behavior or character. Courage: the ability to do something that frightens one. Valor: great courage in the face of danger, especially in battle. If you are frightened, or believe you are in danger in your air conditioned GCS at 1G and 0 kts...well that just screams bravery.

U, Spooky. Corrected list.

XL 17-11 T-38: F-22 3 x F-16 F-15E T-38 FAIP T-1: AC-130U 5 x C-17 2 x KC-135 E-3 T-6 FAIP T-1 FAIP U-28

Ah right, I thought the CPI adjustment matched the increases we get yearly, my mistake. And completely spaced on the high-3 calc.

I am pretty sure they just calculate it from the present year (when you are receiving said payments) pay charts based on time in service and rank, then adjust based on your retirement percentage. But I could be wrong.

Pretty sure those are the first two items on a dollar ride in the T-38.

Oh I can definitely see that, I just can't miss an opportunity to quote the Simpsons. It is definitely concerning to hear all the stories of various screw jobs and to see how things are playing out as a young Lt right now. When a good portion of the IPs are planning to bail as soon as the ADSC is up, it doesn't exactly encourage you to press for 20. Particularly when being constantly reminded about the BRS.

There's no justice like angry mob justice...

I never saw him wear that down here, almost guaranteed PA coaxing. Good dude.

Unnecessary Deployments Perhaps they are paying some attention. Who knows if anything will actually come of it though.

XL 17-10 T-38 F-22 2 x F-16 F-15C F-15E T-6 FAIP T-1 C-17 x 2 C-21 T-6 FAIP KC-135 x 2 KC-10 HC-130J Bunch of Guard KC-135s and a C-130 to round it out from memory.

The F-35 wasn't made for the merge anyway...apparently it is a thing of the past, would never happen. Or at least that's how they want to justify it's awesome maneuverability...

Yes. If they keep the market share, which they would likely need to reduce ticket prices to do with less/no crew. It is not as simple as throwing that on top of their profit margin.

Assuming you get the passengers willing to go without that extra crew member/no crew for that $15-20 saving, instead of flying with a fully crewed airline. That original ballpark was said in response to gaining market share by offering tickets at 25-50% less than current rate (suggested by Guardian), which would not be possible with such a small saving.

That is what I was saying earlier, most you would save is $15-20 per ticket. Just not worth the effort at this stage. Once again, too general by me. Referring to airline operations, not taking 6-9 people on a charter flight.

My statement was overly general, I should have been more specific. And while human error is the leading cause of accidents, aviation will continue to be about redundancy for risk mitigation. The time where they entrust an aircraft to remote piloting, or even single pilot is likely still many years off. The FAA would never allow something with a single point of failure. Single pilot, with a remote capability, with multiple redundancies, would be the minimum they would consider initially. In my opinion at least.

I definitely agree. It wouldn't be for a very long time, even for single pilot ops. But that would be the first place they would likely consider RPA/single pilot.

There is no way they would be able to offer flights for half the price just by removing a pilot. Call it a couple hundred dollars and hour per crew and then divide it across each passenger, you won't save any more than $20 per ticket (conservative napkin math, 150pax $500 an hour for 2 crew, 4 hour flight...$13.33 saving per seat). Then you have incidents like QF72 (QF72). Where the autopilot is out to lunch and tries to fight the pilot. How do you think that would have gone down with no crew on board, and the pilot monitoring was in the middle of an approach on one of his 3-4 other aircraft? RPA or single pilot ops are a fair way off, not because of technology necessarily, but the risk mitigation that has to take place to even consider it. Cargo would likely be first, and even that would be a battle with the FAA I'm guessing.

Now that is an assignment you wouldn't have trouble filling.

And if we needed any more evidence to know Chang is a troll, there it is.

DLF 17-08 T-38 3 x F-16 (1 guard) 1 x T-6 FAIP T-1 CV-22 3 x U-28 2 x EC-130 KC-135 (guard) 4 x C-17 (2 x reserve) T-1 FAIP C-130 (guard) Might have been a couple I missed. But that is the majority of it.

I'm guessing you *non gender specific individuals* get a propaganda class on those training days every second Wednesday? EDIT: Can't say 'guys' any more...oops.