Jump to content

Cannon AFB

Guest mil1

By Guest mil1
in General Discussion

 Share

Recommended Posts

Disco_Nav963 Flight Lead

Disco_Nav963

Posted
Posted

https://www.offutt.af...io.asp?id=16882

Some people just don't put it on their bio at all. (One year between usafa graduation and starting...ABM training). I especially appreciate the "aircraft flown" section here.

/thread derail

Cannon sucks

Former AWACker thread derail... That's two wing kings in a row that Tinker has sent on to bigger and better things at Offutt. I feel used. (Kind of like how we get B-2 guys in senior leadership in BUFF units to season them before they go back to the 509th.)

  • Replies 210
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Popular Posts

AnimalMother
AnimalMother

Liquid, fair enough, Ill concede some of the points as you apparently have more intimate knowledge of the discrepancies than I do. I, for one, didn't mind Cannon a whole lot, but I was gone most of t

ViperStud
ViperStud

Get over yourself dude. The reality is that most (not all) students in the T-38 still want pointy-nosed jets. The last two drops at my base had 6/8 and 6/7 fighters respectively and guess what? The

matmacwc
matmacwc

You might actually point blame at the politicians at the Cannon and Holloman quagmire.

brabus Gray Beard

brabus

Posted
Posted

How do you log time in a KC-10 or U2 as a weapons guy? I get that he got a ride but....

Flew with an IP, so he could technically log it as dual time; like you do when getting your civ license with a CFI. Maybe, just a total guess. Either way, someone putting what amounts to a FAM ride on their bio is retarded.

ThreeHoler Gray Beard

ThreeHoler

Posted
Posted

Probably logged as "OO" on the 781. Any KC-10 IP that would let that guy get in the seat is a jackass.

All kinds of O-6 and above put every last airplane they've logged time in on their bio. Standard.

nsplayr Gray Beard

nsplayr

Posted
Posted
Nsplayr

With the U-28s going to Cannon. Is Active Duty taking over maintenance from Sierra Nevada like at Duke with the C-145?

Nope, not yet at least.

Techsan Gray Beard

Techsan

Posted
Posted

All kinds of O-6 and above put every last airplane they've logged time in on their bio. Standard.

The good ones don't.

Karl Hungus Gray Beard

Karl Hungus

Posted
Posted

Probably logged as "OO" on the 781. Any KC-10 IP that would let that guy get in the seat is a jackass.

All kinds of O-6 and above put every last airplane they've logged time in on their bio. Standard.

He should change "aircraft flown" to "aircraft flown on". Sleeping in the back in between making the crew their chicken nuggets and fetching them rip-its doesn't count as aircraft flown.

Snooter Flight Lead

Snooter

Posted
Posted

Dang, so using this logic, I've flown 737, 757, 767, J-3, C152, C172, T-6, T-1, C-17, A330. SUCCESS! I'm totally putting this on my resume when I get riffed and the hiring boom starts...

bbj77 SNAP

bbj77

Posted
Posted

I'm curious though, do you guys simply not know what awaits you years down the line when you pick these sorts of assignments out of UPT/UNT? From the guys I know, they kinda understood the implication that AFSOC meant you were there (and deploying constantly) til death or separation do you part.

To be fair, not everyone there wanted to be there. Not every UPT student performs well enough to "pick" their assignment. It changes every UPT class but I've seen it happen over the last year or two where some planes (U28,PC12, Dornier, Skytruck) go to the top students or equally as frequently to the 1-3 kids in the bottom of the class as their last choice. Some kids are gung-ho and want the crazy AFSOC mission, do well and get their top choice. But others in the class suck all through UPT, have false visions of the C-17 or KC-10 up through drop night, and are surprised/blindsided when a U-28 pops up on the screen. I have felt a little bad sending kids to that mission who didn't want it, but in a way they earned it.

tac airlifter Gray Beard

tac airlifter

Posted
Posted

I have felt a little bad sending kids to that mission who didn't want it, but in a way they earned it.

Could you clarify this statement? Because it sounds like you're a UPT IP who thinks the bottom students "earned" a U28..... And if that's the case you have no idea what U28s do and you're an idiot who has hurt the war effort.

  • Upvote 1
KState_Poke22 Flight Lead

KState_Poke22

Posted
Posted

Could you clarify this statement? Because it sounds like you're a UPT IP who thinks the bottom students "earned" a U28..... And if that's the case you have no idea what U28s do and you're an idiot who has hurt the war effort.

I think he means more along the lines of they didn't earn their right to choose their airframe because they weren't high enough in the class...or maybe not, I only play an intelligent person on TV

bbj77 SNAP

bbj77

Posted
Posted (edited)

Could you clarify this statement? Because it sounds like you're a UPT IP who thinks the bottom students "earned" a U28..... And if that's the case you have no idea what U28s do and you're an idiot who has hurt the war effort.

If you are last in your UPT class, do you deserve the plane that 5 or 6 of the students ranked above you want ? Is that fair to students who worked hard, passed check rides, didn't go to any 89s, etc ?

Edited by bbj77
ViperStud Gray Beard

ViperStud

Posted
Posted

Could you clarify this statement? Because it sounds like you're a UPT IP who thinks the bottom students "earned" a U28..... And if that's the case you have no idea what U28s do and you're an idiot who has hurt the war effort.

Get over yourself dude. The reality is that most (not all) students in the T-38 still want pointy-nosed jets. The last two drops at my base had 6/8 and 6/7 fighters respectively and guess what? The bottom studs in each class got the non-fighters.

No one is dogging the U-28. I know just some of what it does and the mission is awesome. The fact remains though, the overwhelming majority of students still rank their assignments like this: fighters first, FAIP second, mix of bombers/AFSOC third. I talk to them all the time about their dream sheets, and they do mention Clovistan and deployment rates as a factor, especially if they are married.

I know two AFSOC guys very well and they both have their "how I ended up not getting a fighter" stories. Yes, they both love what they do. In time, egos heal and true pilots bloom where they are planted, so everyone ends up convinced that THEIR airframe is the best in the AF. That being said, everyone "earns" their assignments. UPT is the most non-bullshit, non-political, non-PME/AAD environment we have left. It's simple order of merit, and if you finish on the bottom you will probably get what's left over

  • Upvote 6
Danger41 Gray Beard

Danger41

Posted
Posted

ViperStud is spot on.

I wish that AFSOC did a better job of selling itself to students at UPT. When I went through EN, there was zero AFSOC representation and studs were dropping U-28's and NSAv like it was going out of style. I know more people would have been interested in the mission if there was some exposure to wtf they would actually be doing.

guineapigfury Gray Beard

guineapigfury

Posted
Posted

ViperStud is spot on.

I wish that AFSOC did a better job of selling itself to students at UPT. When I went through EN, there was zero AFSOC representation and studs were dropping U-28's and NSAv like it was going out of style. I know more people would have been interested in the mission if there was some exposure to wtf they would actually be doing.

I went through UPT at Vance in 07-08, and we did have some AFSOC guy come give us a brief about U-28s. One time thing as far as I know, but an effort was made. However, word quickly filtered back that the mission was significantly less awesome than briefed. I don't know if that was true or not, but RUMINT and stories from their IPs is all most UPT students have prior to assignment night. There were no U-28 pilots among the IPs so RUMINT was all we had.

theat6bisasham Crew Dawg

theat6bisasham

Posted
Posted

I went through UPT at Vance in 07-08, and we did have some AFSOC guy come give us a brief about U-28s. One time thing as far as I know, but an effort was made. However, word quickly filtered back that the mission was significantly less awesome than briefed. I don't know if that was true or not, but RUMINT and stories from their IPs is all most UPT students have prior to assignment night. There were no U-28 pilots among the IPs so RUMINT was all we had.

Bingo

scudrunner12 Crew Dawg

scudrunner12

Posted
Posted

Bingo

False. I hate to further contribute to the thread derail about Cannon, but anyone who perceives the U-28 mission as 'significantly less awesome than briefed' is the same type of person that would whine in any community. I had zero information on the U-28 before getting assigned there and it VASTLY surpassed my expectations. Having returned to AETC has only solidified how good I had it in that mission. It pains me the hear 'war stories' from most MWS guys... I can understand the U-28 mission isn't for everyone, but saying it isn't awesome is blatantly false. I want to put that out there for any of the young bubbas that are considering U-28s, do it.

  • Upvote 1
FlyinGrunt Flight Lead

FlyinGrunt

Posted
Posted

Yeah, I fly gunships, but I still think the U-28 mission is cool. I second scudrunner's opinion: don't listen to the haters. I will say that the opstempo is kinda hardcore, just like most of AFSOC . . . you will get plenty of experience, that's for sure.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share
Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...