tk1313

First, I 100% agree with RTB: The training is going to require you to continually convince yourself that you want to be a USAF pilot. If you're already questioning your desire to fly, please do some serious soul searching and decide if this is really what you want to be. Did you already have a secret (clearance)? I don't know how much you want to disclose, but your civilian job security depends on who you work for. If it's the government, and you've worked for them past your "probationary period" (should be between 1-3 years), I don't think they can get rid of you. If it's a major government contractor like Boeing, Lockheed, etc.... I believe they are more inclined to keep you too. I'm an engineer as well, working for the federal government, and my bosses are 100% supportive of my decision to move to the tip of the spear. It's a lifelong goal, period. One of the guys that actually helped talk me into the Guard route is a former guard C-130 pilot. He had a civilian business job before going to UPT. Throughout his guard career, he said he had a couple of times where his bosses were upset due to the time he spent flying, so he got approval to do incentive rides for his boss(es)... Apparently, getting to watch a cubicle buddy fly military planes is pretty cool... So it calmed them down. How do you manage two jobs and a family? Just do it. Stay positive. Tons of people have done it before you, tons will do it afterwards. "If it was easy, everyone would do it." Again, refer to RTB's post. You need to be sure this is what you want. I have no doubt in my mind. Like I said, it's been a goal of mine for as long as I can remember. Hope any of this helped.

Does the package go to NGB before or after FC1?

A guy I know who got picked up very late last year to fly fighters for his reserve unit was describing the program to me. He basically said if you want to fly fighters it might not be the best route, but that out of the 2 or 3 guys he knows who have done it, each got picked up by a unit in their top 5 choices (non-fighters). I thought the unsponsored boards was a fairly new thing.

It seems like you want location over mission/airframe. If that's true, I think you should put maximum effort into visiting the guard units around your location. If you're not having any success and you're running out of time, apply for the unsponsored board, fly your a$$ off, and put units close to you at the top of your list. Hopefully someone who has gone the unsponsored route will chime in.

DID?

Tell us your other username.

Take a Q-tip and stick it in the cockpit louvers... Breathing that and only that the whole flight probably isn't the best thing for a pilot. Also, it could be pressure related, but it doesn't seem like that's the gripe from the pilots.

My guess is, since they aren't flying above 10k', the "modified mask" is either detaching the hose from the OBOGS on the underside of the panel and possibly attaching an air filter underneath the panel that filters cockpit air (which allows the hose to remain secured to the panel), or just letting the hose dangle freely in the cockpit. Yes, the cockpit is pressurized as VMFA187 said. The cabin pressurization schedule can be found by anyone curious enough if you know what the Navy/Marine version of the dash 1 is...

Read this, they even quote the instruction. Best advice was from Bayou_Eagle_Driver

I picked the circle that popped out of the screen. Why are they instructing you to pick the darker/lighter circle? Sent from my SM-G935V using Baseops Network Forums mobile app

same

Serious question(s): Bad Wx and down jets can decide mission/airframe for the next 10 years for an AD stud? Or would you guys have sent more to -38's if you felt maybe 3 or 4 guys were much stronger swimmers than the rest?

7 posts too late... Unless you're an insanely hot chick, you shouldn't be acting this crazy. Chill

Fvck it, I'll be the jackass... What was up their asses? Oh wait...

My answer is no longer valid, since a doctor has recommended to declare the event.

You didn't need to grab tweets from 4-5 years ago to tell me Trump needs to STFU on Twitter. Also, it's funny that you chose tweets from a time (late 2012) where Obama was chastising Romney for being suspicious of the Russians. Basically, two arrogant Presidents who haven't served a day in their lives are awful at foreign policy, and have since basically switched roles... No news here.

Yep. For maximum effect, press the mute button.

Here's how watching the "news" from our lovely mainstream sources like Fox and CNN goes for me: 1. Watch Fox because I'm on the right side of the political spectrum (in both senses of the word). 2. Get pissed off at how stupid Fox news is after roughly 10-15 minutes. 3. Switch to CNN so I can view the issues from the opposite side's perspective, which allows me to convince myself I'm a worldly thinker who approaches every issue from a neutral point of view. 4. Get pissed of at how stupid CNN is after roughly 5-10 minutes (I have a shorter fuse with CNN). 5. Angrily turn off the TV, curse politics, and decide to do something meaningful with my time (read: inebriation).

Valid point on politicians being sh!tbags. I also agree with the previous presidents' decisions to not entirely embrace the phrase "radical Islamic terrorism" to deter recruiting efforts... I get why Bush did it, I get why Obama did it. I'm not a politician so I have the luxury of calling it as I see it. And ISIS has completely twisted the Quran to fit their agenda. I don't have all the "behind the scenes" intelligence, so all I have to go on is that Obama himself said he wasn't worried about ISIS or Al Queda when he pretty much did nothing about the gas attacks in Syria. Basically, our main disagreement is that while you assert that you're willing to turn a blind eye to occasional ethics violations to keep Syria from becoming another middle eastern sh!thole, I believe the leaders of middle eastern countries don't have to resort to banned warfare tactics to keep their country under control. At that point, it becomes a question of "who are the real monsters here?" or "which monsters should we support?" Nobody needs chemical weapons to defeat ISIS.

Agree to disagree. I'm not OK with gas being used to keep your citizens in check. I also don't think it's a choice between "Either Assad uses chemical weapons on his people or ISIS/Al Qaeda comes in and rules his people"... Come on, you don't believe that do you? Not even Obama believed that at the time... Nov. 1, 2012: Obama touts killing Osama as one of his great accomplishments, and mentions that Al Qaeda has been 'decimated'. Dec. 3, 2012: In a speech at National Defense University, the president again warns Assad over chemical weapons. "If you make the tragic mistake of using these weapons, there where be consequences, and you will be held accountable," Obama says. April 25, 2013: In a letter to Congress, the White House says that the intelligence community assesses “with varying degrees of confidence that the Syrian regime has used chemical weapons on a small scale in Syria, specifically the chemical agent sarin.” Jan. 27, 2014: “The analogy we use around here sometimes, and I think is accurate, is if a J.V. team puts on Lakers uniforms, that doesn’t make them Kobe Bryant,” Mr. Obama told David Remnick of The New Yorker. So basically, 2013 is the year that we were more afraid of Al Qaeda and ISIS than a dictator using chemical weapons on his own people, but at the same time it was the year after Obama said Al Qaeda had been decimated and the year before Obama called ISIS the JV team? Yeah... my bullsh!t meter is going crazy Nov. 4, 2012: “You know I say what I mean and I mean what I say,” Obama said in Hollywood, Florida on Nov. 4, 2012. “I said I'd end the war in Iraq. I ended it.” So... Obama used his big Harvard Law brains everybody keeps talking about to pretty much go around the checks and balances when he felt it was necessary, but somehow big bad George 'Dubya' made it impossible for him to NOT withdraw from Iraq... Oh but I'm sure the credit was all Dubya's if the withdrawal was a huge success instead of causing ISIS to rise up like it had. Once again, I call bullsh!t. TL;DR: No, I don't think using gas is an appropriate measure to make sure the country doesn't fall into the wrong hands. No, I don't think Obama made a good choice in a bad situation. I'm OK with you believing that of course (it's what makes this country the best), but my opinion is that Obama is a cocky a$$hole who's idea of foreign policy is basically to blame Bush or deny that it happened if his plan doesn't work, or take credit and write some cool line about how awesome he is so that the media crams the story down our throats for weeks. I'll take a puppet Trump with Mattis pulling the strings over Obama's "foreign policy" (if that's even what you can call it) any day.

Why didn't he assess the situation and "eat his pride" prior to establishing the red line is my only point. And my first post should've said "Mad Dawg" instead of Trump because I have every reason to believe Trump pretty much asked Mattis what his response should be (as he should). But sorry, no... Obama doesn't get any partial credit from me for "taking a step back" from the situation after a foreign government gasses its own citizens. And if we're talking about the rise of ISIS being a major reason why Obama couldn't be stronger in his stance, I'm just going to blame him for that one as well because he went against our military leaders' advice and pulled out of Iraq for the sake of his 'legacy' (fvcking tired of hearing about his legacy as well). Saddam was an evil piece of sh!t who tortured his dissidents into submission. If you're fine with accepting the necessary evil of dictators being in charge and violating human rights for the sake of "peace in the Middle East" that's your opinion. We're by far the greatest nation on Earth, so personally I think we can do better than that. Edit to Add: The reason I'm so forcefully behind the missile attack and somewhat giving credit to Trump is because I believe Trump has enough sense to rely on Mattis's good judgment. A vast majority of our previous presidents (Republican and Democrat) have ridden on the backs of military leadership for so long that they thought themselves capable of assessing military situations on their own, contrary to military opinion... And it pretty much destroyed a lot of good hard military work and progress. Examples: Obama in Iraq/Syria and George H.W. with not ending Saddam's bullsh!t when he had the chance.

Looks like Trump's red line is a bit more stationary than Obama's (see below for the Obama policy).

Histotoxic hypoxia on the ground?! Send some engineers to the absolute worst jet (immediate symptoms after breathing) for a couple weeks... Tell them to take samples of the air being produced on the ground, then tell them to R&R everything from the concentrator forward all the way to the regulator and mask... Take a sample after the new components have been installed. If everything is good, send it flying with a senior pilot... If the problem persists, time to look for contamination in the ducting upstream of the concentrator. If the pilots are more willing to breathe cockpit air than mask air, you've got a major issue.

DCANG has a board coming up soon... That will make for a good story. Most importantly though, very glad he's OK. An eye witness sitting on his porch said the jet was on fire in the air, and it was "the biggest fire ball he's ever seen in his life." https://www.foxnews.com/us/2017/04/05/military-jet-crashes-after-taking-off-from-joint-base-andrews-report.html

My condolences. Leaking stuff after a breakup is a b!tch move, though. Just nail all of her hot friends like a normal person.