Pooter

Since I posted the link with zero context.. BLUF: the Tony Carr (formerly JQP) rips the B-1 AIB a new one. Specific issues he brings up: -Sq/cc’s being criticized for manning shortages entirely out of their control -strange contextual omissions throughout -potential conflict of interest with the board pres being in direct career competition with the people he’s investigating -does no root cause analysis on why aircrew CRM/GK/experience/skill level were low enough to result in a crash -OG/CC firing timing looks to be directly the result of AIB backlash and done reluctantly, Potentially indicating daylight between the SIB and AIB -alleges deep culture problems but bends over backwards not to implicate anyone above the squadron level

https://open.substack.com/pub/radarblog/p/bone-of-contention?utm_campaign=post&utm_medium=web

I don’t think you’re in any danger of eating crow. Name a time programmed UPT syllabus hours increased at any point in the last decade. I’ll wait. And if anyone thinks that’s gonna happen especially when we have a shiny new trainer that’s more expensive to operate, I would love to have some of the drugs you’re on. More likely is they’ll send heavies to a sim only track after the contractor IFT or whatever the hell it is, and the 38 track will have hours cut based on some stupid argument that the t-7 training is higher fidelity somehow.

I’m not trying to excuse the crew. There are numerous cut and dry things they fucked up. It’s important to take those, debrief, and get better. If one person in a squadron doesn’t know or understand the things this crew missed, that is a foul. But, for anyone who has read an AIB before you know that they often tell half truths with one eye on the facts and one eye on the eventual public release and how that will reflect on the brass.

I’ve got a question. How many night sorties do you have to get to complete the T-6/UPT syllabus these days?

100% And I think some of the highly experienced flyers in these forums should know better. Random question for the group: You’re king for a day and a crew in your command crashes a half-billion dollar plane. You need a scapegoat. Is it more politically convenient to: A) acknowledge HAF and MAJCOM-level institutional problems like chronic undermanning and low flight experience B) blame it on “culture problems” at the squadron level

All valid points. But doing those things are all codified community standards so I don’t really buy extrapolating one crew’s mistakes to culture problems of a whole squadron/base. There’s a lot of editorializing at the end of this report, a weird amount for an AIB actually. 6 pages of scorched earth opinion for what essentially boils down to a botched ILS and a broken weather sensor seems vindictive and targeting to me. Makes you wonder if there was bad blood/personality issues at play.

Conveniently not mentioned in the report is how Ellsworth’s ILS, TACAN, PAPIs, approach plates, displaced thresholds, and taxiways have all wildly fluctuated from operational, to 28 BW use only, to INOP, as the airfield gets turned upside down for B-21 construction in the months leading up to the mishap. But it’s probably a culture problem in the squadron that just successfully did three deployments, a red flag, and the longest combat b-1 sortie in history all in one year

-Be ready for every event you’re opted for -consider taking a year off extra risky hobbies, knew lots of wash backs that were due to injuries -if you’re married, stay that way. If you’re not married, stay that way -probably wait till you graduate to have a kid -don’t kill yourself trying to study way ahead. Near rocks -have a stash of completed, triple checked boldface’s and leave off the date. -if you put your time to good use during the work day, you should not need to study that much at home -attempt to keep a workout regimen -actually relax Friday night and Saturday. Sunday is for studying and getting life chores done

I think my main stance was pretty consistent throughout: mandates for civilians = bad mandates for military = shut up and color But for debrief purposes: Knowing what we know now about efficacy, should it have been mandated? No. Do I think it was a horrible reckless medical experimentation campaign that subjected service members to huge risk? Also no. Virtually everyone I know got the first two jabs, and I know zero vaccine injured people. Did I take any boosters? Also no. I caught covid within 9 months of my 2 shots, reference the efficacy point above. Last thing I’ll say is: a big frustration for me in this thread has been that you guys project every gripe you have with the government covid regime on a handful of us slightly dissenting voices, who actually agree with you on most of the big picture issues here. I also think the government seized on a crisis to try and take as much power as possible. I also think suppression of the lab leak was bullshit. I also think fauci has perjured himself numerous times and probably belongs in jail. I also think the lockdowns accomplished nothing and were a huge detriment to the economy and people’s mental health. I just think there’s an argument to be made for military mandates (in general), a lot of the objections were based on pretty weak BS, and the shot was never very risky. Still happy to debate those.

Of course it's on the amn/nco page within minutes. I hope they find and absolutely crucify the source. Gawking at aircraft mishaps and posting pics for clout should be an immediate discharge

it's so interesting to watch these arguments morph -Jon Stewart sold a house once -it's not fraud it's a zoning thing -ok maybe it's fraud but everyone does it -ok maybe this is fraud is pretty big, but no one complained at the time -ok the AG doesn't need to show standing to prosecute, but it's wrong because it's politically motivated and now the latest one: -it's not going to move the needle politically so why even hold people accountable to the law This is the kind of blind party loyalty over any level of principle that has gotten us to the point where we have the two oldest, shittiest presidential candidates in history, and where whichever side loses is all but guaranteed to go on an unhinged riot spree. I don't think it's too much or too late to ask for accountability across the board.

'Everyone is doing it' 'its politically motivated' 'they didn't show standing' 'They didn't prosecute xyz person for the same thing' All true. Unfortunately for you guys (and trump), these gripes don't hold an ounce of legal weight in the jurisdiction in question. Regardless of the motivation of the AG I'm happy to see trump held accountable for something, for basically the first time ever, after a lifetime of pulling shit like this. And if it opens a pandoras box where the right prosecutes Dems for crimes, that sounds f-ing amazing to me! Selective prosecution is absolutely a problem, but you don't solve it by not prosecuting anyone for anything, because 'it'll be bad for the country.' Whats bad for the country is the system we currently have where the political elite are effectively immune from legal consequences. There is literally nothing I want to see more in politics than more prosecutions taking down as many of these assholes as possible (on all sides)

New York has a specific statute 63/12 which grants the AG broad power to go after fraud without having to show standing. The judges have knocked the 'no standing' argument down multiple times because it's completely erroneous. It's been used before and the statute has been on the books since the 1950's when it was originally created by a Republican.

And for the sake of fairness I think anyone who does this appraisal chicanery should be prosecuted. The 'everyone does it' argument is weak sauce and has nothing to do with what the laws on the books are. The fact that I have to worry about a few hundred in dividends on my HYSA during tax season but Trump gets to do this shit and Nancy pelosis husband gets to make millions off nvidia stock makes my blood boil.

I think you're misunderstanding the scope of the fraud. https://ag.ny.gov/sites/default/files/tto_release_properties_addendum_-_final.pdf Here's a great 8 page list of fraudulent activity across a wide range of properties including everything from commercial, residential penthouses, estates, and rent controlled apartments. This is not some zoning snafu on a single commercial development project. In a few instances he had properties professionally appraised, then lied about the appraisal value, but still cited the appraiser. In other instances trump org lied about the value of future development projects fully knowing that environmental and zoning regulations would prevent them from completing anything close to full development. This would be like me saying my house is worth 10 million because I'm going to 'develop' an amusement park on my property.. oh wait I live in a residential neighborhood and absolutely cannot do that. This litany of overvaluations fed into the acquisition of favorable loans by drastically inflating the reported 'net worth' of the trump org. While simultaneously, they used lower appraisal figures internally that they knew to be more accurate for tax and insurance purposes. It's fraud. On a massive, hilarious scale. Try doing even 1/10th of 1% of what the trump org did and you'd be absolutely f**ked by auditors.

The creditors were absolutely defrauded. They issued lower interest rate/higher principle loans based on fraudulent collateral asset claims. Just because the government figured it out before the creditors doesn't mean a crime didn't take place. And if you truly think this is some horrible selective prosecution that spells the end of the republic, I have an experiment for you. Next time you apply for a mortgage try grossly inflating your assets and see how far you get with that. And when you get investigated for fraud, try pitching the victimless crime narrative. But you would never try that because you know exactly what would happen. So only one question remains: why do you think trump should get away with something you never could?

As one would expect from breitbart, this article is missing literally any level of detail or context which would shed light on how Stewart and Trump's situations are completely, entirely different. It's just lazy trump defense hackery without any facts to back it up. For those still unclear on the difference: Jon Stewart's property was assessed by state tax authorities to be worth a certain amount. He then sold it for a different amount. This is how the difference between assessed value and market value works.. which fluctuates constantly and can be very different depending on market conditions. Discrepancies between assessed value and market value have nothing to do with someone committing fraud. Trump tripled the reported square footage of properties specifically to inflate his net worth in order to get loans, and then reported the actual smaller square footage on tax documents. Square footage is an empirical measurement and you can't just lie about the size of your property when it's convenient for you. That's called fraud. If any of us sold our houses right now, we'd likely list it far above its tax assessed value. That doesn't make any of us fraudsters. But you would be a fraudster if you had a 3000 sq/ft house and then went to a bank and got a loan predicated on reporting a 9000 sq/ft as collateral.

Lol maybe that's the problem, the army dudes I've talked to seem entirely unaware of how they fit into a pacific peer conflict.. if they've even spent time thinking about it at all.

Love listening to the service that would play quite literally no role in a China/Taiwan conflict calling the Air Force irrelevant. Army is welcome back at the big boy table the any time they figure out how to field a weapon with a range relevant to anything happening in the pacific. As for the drone issue, the army could quit bitching and just buy a few thousand off-the-shelf RF jammers to embed with their troops. But sadly, countering literal RC toys whose RF frequencies are a quick google search away seems to be too complicated for them.

Yes she died differently. The broader point here is the gradual process of radicalization and addiction feeding she allowed to happen. You don't end up in the position of getting shot while trying to bust through a barricaded door in the capitol by accident. Go look her social media history up, she was posting about pizzagate and qanon publicly years prior to January 6th. Both of these people were in intellectual echo chambers consuming garbage for years prior to the violent climax.

I think of wokeness (or really any form of extremism) more like an addictive drug or junk food, rather than a virus. Calling it a virus implies it can infect any unsuspecting person with almost no individual agency involved. I think addiction is more appropriate because you have to actively feed these ideologies in order for them to take over your life. You don't just wake up one day having caught a bug that makes you burn yourself to death. This dude was living his day to day life in the darkest corners of the anarchist internet for a very long time before he decided to do this. And it's not just limited to the woke side of the aisle. I'm sure Ashli Babbitt spent a considerable amount of time feeding her own addiction in the wacky hyper conservative trump corners of the internet too. The solution, just like with drugs and junk food, is discipline. Hold yourself to a higher informational standard, and make sure your intake is balanced. Affirming what you already think is like eating McDonald's. Do it every day for a few years and you'll probably end up dead. Reading a well-reasoned opinion you don't agree with is the intellectual equivalent of eating your vegetables.

It was the fabric softener and repeated washes that got him

If we can send CAF dudes to AIS for two weeks of academics on RNP stuff their jets can't even fly, no one should bat an eye over a 3 day course on useful foreflight features. The Air Force as a whole criminally under-utilizes foreflight. Send it.

FWIW the interview was weak shit. Exactly the kind of thing Russian state media would sign on to. 95% of it was Putin giving his version of approximately the last 1,000 years of human history interspersed with tucker's strange faces and poor attempts at indoor voice volume control. 4% was talking about the jailed reporter, which essentially boiled down to: Putin "well we think he was a spy, so we'll let the appropriate agencies handle it" and 1% was the only actual good question of the night from Tucker: "how do you plan to "de-nazify" a country if you can't even take it over?" credit where credit is due for a decent burn on that one. My biggest takeaway from the interview was that Putin tells an extremely dishonest yet convincing version of history that I'm not surprised most Russian buy into. He's an extremely shrewd politician who only divulges exactly what he intends to and talked circles around tucker all night. He's a bad actor.. but not a madman, and I sure wish we had someone as competent as him working for our side.