Jump to content

SurelySerious

Supreme User
  • Posts

    2,634
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    44

Everything posted by SurelySerious

  1. Russia "slams" U.S. over human rights... Act surprised, deny, deny, deny, counter accuse.
  2. If only there were a place with every AFI in electronic format.
  3. For OOD: This guy.
  4. No, back to the vault; always something to learn.
  5. You have two arguments going back on your politics, capabilities post: 1) We could have done Libya with only the F-22, and 2) Replace TLAMs with F-22 to enhance SA. Regarding: 1) After about the first week, once the big ticket items were gone, most of the "actions to protect civilians from attack or the threat of attack" targeting was done with ISR (or NTISR) looking at an area and figuring out which people were shooting at civilians, then taking them out. 90% of the targets NATO hit were tanks, artillery, and small AAA. I don't understand how the F-22 could have done that on its own. I think that part lends itself to having a TGP, or getting a target from someone who does. 2) I can see the benefit in that, but the cost of moving them out there and flying them might still be more than lobbing in some TLAMs. Maybe not.
  6. But it still requires someone outside, probably with a targeting pod, who isn't stealth and who can carry more bombs while costing less to fly to give him updated coords to drop on. If they had the SAR, they can operate on their own more effectively and it makes more sense.
  7. True, they weren't in place. Another downside would be if they hadn't gotten their SAR software upgrade (which I don't think they had at the time), then they could only drop JDAMs on preplanned coordinates with no way to verify the target hadn't moved. Not having dynamic targeting capability would have been a huge con in the decision process for sending them to Libya.
  8. Nellis AFB Releases Final EA for Indian Springs Land Acquisition Resort property? They must have studied the wrong Indian Springs. At least the land area is right on.
  9. C models have less loiter than vipers, typhoons, tornados, and mirages?
  10. There have been plenty of ideas, and you've dismissed all of them.
  11. Don't take pictures/video. In addition to the FCIF we had a visit from the AFCENT commander, so it's not just leadership by email.
  12. True, I don't think it's possible to be more disgruntled than some of the TAMI dudes.
  13. For those of you keeping score at home, that's 34-1201 section 8.2.
  14. What does it say?
  15. Close. RC-135s EWO >> RPA Operator.
  16. Shouldn't; Duty AFSC is purely related to your current assignment, which they want to change everyone to the same so that they don't need to send paperwork to the ACC commander everytime a pilot goes to a different sqaudron and takes the billet of an RPA operator. I'd be more worried that they mix it up and change your Primary.
  17. Yep, real pilots. Mine hasn't changed yet, but he said the turnover is in the works.
  18. I agree it's pretty weak.
  19. Anyone checked their duty AFSC lately? Apparently it is changing to 18X; you will supposedly keep your permanent Primary AFSC, though. This is supposed to make manpower moves between squadrons easier, according to the ops group commander. I'd keep an eye on it though; AFPC is bound to mess up someone's records.
  20. They weren't for this drop, but there has not been a definite answer for the future drops. Edit: Had a chance to talk to the ops group commander the other day. His opinion on the matter is that 99% of the UPT-D guys from -38s wouldn't have gotten a fighter out of UPT even in the absence of UAVs, and he doesn't think it would be fair for us to get a second chance. I would draw a parallel to FAIPs who take another assignment in lieu of what is currently available hoping to get something better later as a counter argument. That's his (non-pilot) opinion, though; we'll see what AFPC hands down in the future.
  21. CCAF for Officers.
  22. NATO will be waiting to use your unique capabilities.
  23. In Libya, the regime was using mostly tanks, artillery, and rockets with very limited air assets to attack the civilians. Then we made a no-fly zone in which NATO dropped 69,000 air-ground munitions and launched roughly 0 air-air weapons. That's how it's similar to what you stated.
  24. So it'll be exactly like Libya.
×
×
  • Create New...