Napoleon_Tanerite

Because to a fighter pilot the line between gay and not is a VERY gray one.

Uh, do the numbers 3, 7 and 9 mean anything to you?

facepalm.gif I volunteer with CAP and more often than not I wear my bag when I'm there. I do have a set of CAP uniforms that I wore when I worked their encampment last summer, but I rarely wear any CAP uniform other than their polo shirt. The same thing applies in 2011 as applied in 2006 when this thread was new. CAP is a solid program with a lot to offer young people. I was a CAP cadet back in high school, and I got a lot out of it, and I think it directly contributed to where I am today. That's why I am back with the program now-- to offer the same opportunity to today's cadets. The problem comes when people (especially senior members) take it too seriously and convince themselves that CAP is anything more than a volunteer service organization that has received the blessing of the AF to wear the AF uniform and associate themselves with the AF image. Aside from a few adopted practices and customs, CAP is nothing like the military, and should never be confused for it. I've "counseled" several cadets and SMs regarding that subject. I disagree with people who generalize CAP as being nothing but a bunch of ate up toolbags playing military. Yes there is that element, and poor leadership allows for it; however, at it's foundation (and when properly executed) the CAP cadet program is one of the best leadership and character development program available to teenagers. If you think CAP is that jacked up and producing shit-tier cadets-- VOLUNTEER and offer your expertise. I've actually learned a LOT about leadership by working with CAP, so there are benefits there for adult members as well.

There are two sides to this, and it comes down to there being two different worlds within the AF. There is the flying world and the non-flying world. I've always been taught "when in doubt, salute" and in my opinion, this is the safest COA. You may come off looking like a tool, but you will be in the right. Flyers are all bros. If you're not a bro in your squadron, you should probably be wondering why. This leads to the "there's no rank among LTs/CGOs/Bro" thing. Whether it's right or not, it is what it is, and it's a tradition. I remember being a 2Lt with wings at laughlin and being saluted by other 2Lts without wings. 99% chance it's because it was a poor VID, but in the grand scheme of things it is what it is. We as flyers tend to respect those with experience more than those with rank. The flying AF is a weird dynamic unique to the entire military. The AF is the ONLY place where a Capt (AC) will have absolute legal authority over an O4+. That's another place where the bro system will come into play. A bro AC will ALWAYS win over a "i'm the AC deal with it" AC because he fosters the environment of mutual responsibility and respect. That's something the "rest" of the military will never understand. The AF's "position trumps rank" perspective is what leads to our existing mutualism system. This provides unique leadership challenges for the Jr. AC, but at the same time allows for a much more inclusive dynamic if things are done properly.

This link should cover it pretty well. Are you a FL resident or just passing through on work/vacation? That should play a major factor in your course of action. If you're not local it will probably cost you more to fight it than just pay the fine and call it good, since any court action will have to be accomplished in the county of citation.

Military bearing and customs and courtesies are not shoe-exclusive (shoesclusive?) things. The same with proper uniform wear, adherence to regulations and things like that. The problem comes when emphasis on those things takes away from emphasis on the mission and leads to mis-placed priorities. Unfortunately in our anti-shoe backlash we tend to immediately write off ANYONE who mentions uniform wear or C&C as a shoe. This is not the case. A shoe is someone who equates uniform wear to aircraft operations, and genuinely believes that one effects the other (aside from my 12 hour flight making my flight suit look a bit sweat stained and worn looking). These are the kind of people who will say stupidity like "If you can't be trusted to tuck your shirt in, how can you be trusted to fly a plane" and makes a scene over it. Is the guy with the un-tucked shirt wrong? Yes. Is it important and something to lose sleep over? No. The same holds true for saluting. The author of the article has a valid point. Most people salute like shit. The example he gave of a senior leader rendering shitty salutes at an ALS graduation is unfortunately a common occurrence, and especially bad in that example because it's a senior leader setting an example for new NCOs. Even guys who prioritize "important" and "unimportant" salutes can probably agree that being on stage at an ALS graduation is a time to look sharp and professional. Now in Centcom there should be more liberal use of "hat optional/no-salute" zones, especially in the residential areas of those bases. Gotta love walking the gauntlet that is the sidewalk from the CC to the BPC at the Deid. Places like that should probably be no-salute zones due to their residential nature and high traffic volume. I do find it ironic that we bitch about a lack of tradition and military professionalism while lampooning a guy for publicly complaining (and I believe rightfully so) about people and their shitty looking salutes. Do it right, we're not the Civil Air Patrol.

I always tell mission crew guys they can bitch about one of two (but never both) things, either A) transition, or B) shitty landings. This has so far proven ineffective. WRT the story, I'm still trying to figure out what an "aborted landing" is. You're not landing until the wheels are on the ground and the speed brakes are out (or whatever the point of commitment is in other TOs). Up to that point you are CONTINUING THE APPROACH or executing the missed approach.

Granted this is a 100% pedestrian perspective on this, but I wouldn't bank on "calling AFPC's bluf". VSP and RIF are two different animals, and while someone may not have been eligible to VOLUNTEER to leave (you know, the V in VSP) that doesn't mean that someone from a given non VSP eligible group isn't eligible to be included in a RIF. Telling them to pound sand when a RIF order comes down probably won't be too effective at retaining guys that should be retained.

I wouldn't be surprised if the plan WAS vetted through leadership before the left; however, I'd be willing to bet "well boss, I intend to shine my ass in front of tens of thousands of people and millions more on youtube, costing myself everything I've worked 20 years for" came up in the briefing.

Ya, the article definitely piles on the bullshit, but assuming the statements that were supposedly direct quotes from Kopacek were accurate, that're pretty shitty. What sounds worse "I wanted to give a good show and intentionally busted my altitude, resulting in overflying the scoreboard at 58'" or "I became task saturated at low altitude and luckily still had 58' under me when I passed over the scoreboard"? I understand the AF times is engaging in some serious yellow journalism here; however, this really seems like a clean kill with some unnecessary amplifying dog pile. Dude intentionally busts several altitude/airspeed restrictions, dude gets busted, dude gets schwacked. Takeaway on this is two fold: 1. Don't do dumb shit 2. Especially don't do dumb shit when there's a reasonable expectation that there will be 6900 cell phone videos of it on youtube before you even shut down engines.

ok, not mine but found these on youtube.... chick is smoking hot tons more on there too

Dangerous business gentlemen.

I'm so glad they were able to finally come up with an electronic equivalent of "Closed for Training". Someone, somewhere, must have had the MPF confused for an organization with a mission focus.

They would need proper leadership though

I wouldn't call 8 years of wheel spinning (not to mention billions of dollars, and hundreds of lives) as some symptom of our quest for instant gratification. The difference between Iraq and Afghanistan is that Iraq has a solid past and a good prospect for the future, and all it took was the intestinal fortitude to make it happen- which we did, by and large. Afghanistan has NEVER been a whole nation, they've NEVER been stable, and they don't have the resources or national identity to cause the different factions to come together to form a nation.

Seriously, there's no fixing Afghanistan. Over the centuries it's been the country where superpowers go to play war until they get bored, and then quit. Nobody wins or loses (though the Soviets had a good go at losing), they just get bored (or broke) and quit. I'm afraid we will eventually do the same. We've been there for almost ten years, with very little tangible gains over the past eight, and no meaningful gains on the horizon either.

Saw Hall Pass a few days ago. Save your money. I was expecting something along the lines of Old School meets The Hangover but doesn't come close to either in terms of comedy or plot. It's got a couple good lines, but not worth the cost of admission.

wtf? I'm watching it live and they haven't announced it yet

It's the same kind of argument that some people make about how they think ABMs don't "deserve" flight pay. Asinine arguments made by people with an acute inability to mind their own damn business.

I tell the same thing to guys who refuse to wear their leather jackets because ABMs have them. Some dudes get overly protective of "their" traditions and get butthurt and want to take their bat and go home whenever someone "undeserving" decides they want to play.

The thing is rotccadet is a confirmed troll, the jury is still out on Alarm Red. If AR isn't actually TRYING to troll, his -135 rating (as of 0315z on 23 Feb) is even more impressive... I mean, I'm an offensive ass, so a tip of the hat to you good sir!

imitation and flattery, YMMV

I fly the E-8 and actually really like it. It was far from my first choice at UPT, but knowing what i know now it would be close to if not AT the top. PM me uf you want more info, but you'll find most dudes really do like their jet, and there are no bad assignments...well, except preds.

It's really a chicken/egg type argument, but the root problem remains the same-- we as a service simply can not stand to document someone being a shitbag. At the same time we've downplayed true measures of quality such as flying hours, deployed time, etc. We've created an environment where a guy can be an unreliable, incompetent dirtbag who ducks every deployment or bad deal gig, yet still gets promoted. To make things worse, it's very likely that a shitbag can get promoted over a more deserving person, simply because that shitbag caught the one good deal opportunity and rode that to his success, while the passed over line swine was deployed and missed out on the "opportunity to excel" by virtue of doing his REAL job hacking the mission. ETA: And the it's a combination of nobody wanting to be that guy who takes the first step and gives an honest eval, in combination with honest evals that are actively shot down from the leadership level as "not taking care of your people"

I challenge you to find ANY OPR (or equivalent document) that calls a spade a spade, and could be used as anything resembling a credible evaluation of someone's character, or indicate possible problems with the individual. I've never seen someone called a shitbag on an OPR unless it as a no kidding referral, and even then it's a "he sucks, but..." kind of thing. I'll agree that there is a major problem with PC in the military, but the lack of any reference to Hasan's problems in his OPRs isn't just a symptom of the PC military, it's a symptom of our very broke performance evaluation system.