Bagram DFAC sets the fail bar

[Guest]

Maybe he was a big fan of the J-10 thanks to this video...

Interesting how many things were accurately portrayed but probably missed by 99% of the people that will ever watch it.

[BFM this]

True, but the Hog was über-cool!

Agreed, but then the Kabuki-Phantom showed up, and that was just disturbing for some reason...

[pawnman]

I'm curious why the Chinese fighter was trying to refuel from the same tankers that were refueling all the US assets...

[OverTQ]

True, but the Hog was über-cool!

That is too funny. My vote if for the Hog too.

[Toro]

Toro; Thanks, that poster = Awesome. It went on my Face Book wall for all to see.

Now, can we PLEASE change the title of the thread to read "Bagram CHOW HALL sets the fail bar"? Every time I open Baseops.net, I do not expect to see anything even remotely politically correct. My level of disappointment can not be emphasized enough. Thanks.

When I think chow hall, I think food. When I think DFAC, I think shoes and douchebaggery. It seemed appropriate.

[discus]

When I think chow hall, I think food. When I think DFAC, I think shoes and douchebaggery. It seemed appropriate.

Point taken.

[Stitch]

It doesn't really bother me that folks don't know what a C-17 is.

You should be bothered, greatly. And by the way, don't be fu*ing retarded! We're not asking the shoes to give technical reports on aircraft capabilities; but son of a bitch! If you're in the FU*KING AIR FORCE you should be able to pick a C-17/F-15/KC-10 out of a goddamn police lineup. Or at least appear to have a clue when trying to impress Mary Jane Rottencrotch when escorting her around the base airshow. But then again, said shoe wouldn't go to the airshow for fear of some static display a maintainer/operator wooing her out of her panties. (Provided she was worth it.).

EDIT: "Fixed" cuss words, someday I'll get swear capes on this board.

Edited September 22, 2010 by Stitch

[schokie]

EDIT: "Fixed" cuss words, someday I'll get swear capes on this board.

This is something I have yet to determine. At want point are we allowed to swear? I feel like I'm stuck in Dante's version of Kindergarten.

[GovernmentMan]

If your job is to learn travel vouchers, you probably aren't going to know a lot about C-17s. A little more focus on systems in our training programs could go a long way.

I have to agree, and that kind of bullshit kills me. On the flipside, every C-17 pilot knows how to fill out a travel voucher. If the guy processing said voucher doesn't even know what a C-17 is, he can choke himself.

Edited September 23, 2010 by GovernmentMan

[discus]

I have to agree, and that kind of bullshit kills me. On the flipside, every C-17 pilot knows how to fill out a travel voucher. If the guy processing said voucher doesn't even know what a C-17 is, he can choke himself.

No, thanks to DTS, every C-17 pilot knows how to create his own orders, fly his/her mission, come home, fill out their travel voucher, upload their receipts, and wait 6-9 weeks to get the voucher paid by some nameless, faceless entity that may or may not exist somewhere in South Dakota, who has never even been downrange, or SEEN a C-17 in "Real life" before.

[Guest Hueypilot812]

It doesn't really bother me that folks don't know what a C-17 is.

It bothers me. I'm not asking people to be able to fill out an ops limit and boldface sheet for each major aircraft type, but hell, people should be able to say "that's a C-17, and it carries cargo worldwide....that's a C-130, and it does tactical airlift....that's an F-22, and it's an air superiority fighter", etc. As I said before, I'd give people a pass on the lesser-known types of aircraft out there. I wouldn't expect the average airman to see a U-28 pull up on the ramp and go "oh, that's an AFSOC U-28"...but the airplanes that are our bread and butter (ie, major airlift, tanker, fighter and bomber types), the average airman should at least have a clue what they are.

After all, over the years I've not only had to learn what things like PC-III, DCAPES, DTS, etc are, I've had to learn how to actually access such systems at one point or another for many of them.

Bottom line: The USAF expects aircrew to broaden their skills outside the ops world in order to move up and have successful careers...we've got to learn about personnel, finance, contracting, logistics and a bunch of other disciplines. But airmen in those non-operational disciplines aren't expected to learn anything about the operational world. An officer who only knows airplanes will never go above the rank of Major. But you see lots of shoes that know nothing about the flying world that make O-6, and that's sad.

Edited September 23, 2010 by Hueypilot812

[pawnman]

It bothers me. I'm not asking people to be able to fill out an ops limit and boldface sheet for each major aircraft type, but hell, people should be able to say "that's a C-17, and it carries cargo worldwide....that's a C-130, and it does tactical airlift....that's an F-22, and it's an air superiority fighter", etc. As I said before, I'd give people a pass on the lesser-known types of aircraft out there. I wouldn't expect the average airman to see a U-28 pull up on the ramp and go "oh, that's an AFSOC U-28"...but the airplanes that are our bread and butter (ie, major airlift, tanker, fighter and bomber types), the average airman should at least have a clue what they are.

After all, over the years I've not only had to learn what things like PC-III, DCAPES, DTS, etc are, I've had to learn how to actually access such systems at one point or another for many of them.

Bottom line: The USAF expects aircrew to broaden their skills outside the ops world in order to move up and have successful careers...we've got to learn about personnel, finance, contracting, logistics and a bunch of other disciplines. But airmen in those non-operational disciplines aren't expected to learn anything about the operational world. An officer who only knows airplanes will never go above the rank of Major. But you see lots of shoes that know nothing about the flying world that make O-6, and that's sad.

It baffles me whenever I talk to some finance guy who's been here for 3 years and never seen a B-1. It's not like it's difficult to find someone to take you out to the line. Sadly, the number of folks who have never seen one up close will probably increase now that the gate next to the museum is closed for renovations.

[Stitch]

I wouldn't expect the average airman to see a U-28 pull up on the ramp and go "oh, that's an AFSOC U-28"...but the airplanes that are our bread and butter (ie, major airlift, tanker, fighter and bomber types), the average airman should at least have a clue what they are.

That was exactly my point. We're talking about what, TEN different airframes.

Fighter world: Hog, Viper & Eagle (both types)

Airlift: -130's, -17's & Fred

Tankerland: -10's and -135's

Helos: H-1 & Blackhawk

This is the bulk of the fleet. No need for the average shoe to get into details such as "that's an "R" model -135, you can tell because...."

But crap, just basic police line up identification would be nice.

[bfargin]

That was exactly my point. We're talking about what, TEN different airframes.

Fighter world: Hog, Viper & Eagle (both types)

Airlift: -130's, -17's & Fred

Tankerland: -10's and -135's

Helos: H-1 & Blackhawk

This is the bulk of the fleet. No need for the average shoe to get into details such as "that's an "R" model -135, you can tell because...."

But crap, just basic police line up identification would be nice.

Probably an oversight ... but I'd definitely include the bombers in your list ... B52, B1, and B2

[pawnman]

Probably an oversight ... but I'd definitely include the bombers in your list ... B52, B1, and B2

Beat me to it.

[afnav]

You should be bothered, greatly. And by the way, don't be fu*ing retarded! We're not asking the shoes to give technical reports on aircraft capabilities; but son of a bitch! If you're in the FU*KING AIR FORCE you should be able to pick a C-17/F-15/KC-10 out of a goddamn police lineup. Or at least appear to have a clue when trying to impress Mary Jane Rottencrotch when escorting her around the base airshow. But then again, said shoe wouldn't go to the airshow for fear of some static display a maintainer/operator wooing her out of her panties. (Provided she was worth it.).

EDIT: "Fixed" cuss words, someday I'll get swear capes on this board.

I don't know, but when I went to basic (Jesus - 23 years ago), the aqua-colored book they gave us to study had a crap-ton of airplane pictures in it. A fair number of us had no idea about what airplanes the Air Force had, but it may have been a different world then. They had a one-hour class on each of the major commands, which was the same length of time they covered on shaving waivers and STDs.

A lot of them figured out there were things in that 'official' book that were a lot more interesting than the other things 'the man' left in the day room. I still have mine, and it would be interesting to compare it to the current version.

[zrooster99]

Probably an oversight ... but I'd definitely include the bombers in your list ... B52, B1, and B2

This brings up a good point. There are people all over the world that know fuck all about aircraft but even they can recognize a BUFF when they see one. There is no excuse for someone who actually serves in the force that operates them to not know what they are. I remember in processing my last base. When I picked up my gear at supply (in my flight suite), the SrA asked me if I was a pilot. When I responded in the affirmative, he asked me what kind of airplane I fly. C-17s were the only type of aircraft on the base, and they're kind of hard to miss. I would say at a minimum, folks should know what's at the base on which they work.

Edit: To add, at least he bothered to ask and I made sure and answered his question.

Edited September 24, 2010 by zrooster99

[schokie]

Did he ask you what a C-17 looked like when you told him that's what you flew?

[Guest Rubber_Side_Down]

I think that--to the untrained eye--most aircraft look the same. All big aircraft look the same to non-ops folks (i.e. tankers, cargo, and probably even a B-52.) All fighters look the same--small, grey, cool-looking. Most people are able to instantly recognize the B-2, but hardly any of them know it's name. ("Oh, that's one them stealth things! It looks so weird flying around.")

Doesn't make it right. I'm just saying.

Oh, and the guy that said we operators are forced to learn all of those stupid computer programs and systems makes a good point.

[AlphaMikeFoxtrot]

Sad story: A nurse in my SOS flight thought we still flew the P-51. She also had no idea what an F-22 was.

Happy story: My wife (who could honestly give 2 shits about aircraft) saw a large T-tail aircraft on final here at CHS and new instantly it was in fact not a C-17 but a C-5. I was proud.

[Guest Hueypilot812]

My ex-wife could tell all the basic major types of aircraft apart...both when I was in the Army and in the Air Force. Sad that a woman who's not in the military can tell the difference between a CH-47 and a UH-60, as well as a C-17 and a C-130...but the NCOs and non-aircrew officers on base couldn't.

For those saying that to the average person, all aircraft look the same...an "average person" isn't also wearing a USAF uniform. Again, I could care less if Joe Civilian across the street didn't know what a C-130 looked like, but dammit, if you're wearing a USAF uniform you should have a basic idea. Again, it's sad that my non-military neighbors know more about the C-130s here at LRAFB than many of the NCOs and junior enlisted (and a sizable chunk of the non-rated officers too).

[discus]

To all the Enlisted and Prior Enlisted on this board who remember having a big, blue book in Basic Training where you had to identify all the major aircraft in the USAF inventory... You are correct, we did have that, as a matter of fact, I can prob scan a copy in from 1995. I do not, however, remember having anything like this in OTS. We did have some of the A/C in our "Talon", but were never quizzed on them like we were in basic.

[Prosuper]

Had a knucklehead working with me at Transient Alert who couldn't tell the differance between a T-6 and A-6, he lasted about a week. He spent all his time in the tool crib before he came to us. I always get a kick when shoes think 135's and 707's are the same.

[LJDRVR]

Man, I went through BMTS in 86' and don't remember a bluebook at all. Of course I could have taught a class on aircraft recognition. I was...OK, am a total airplane nerd. All these years later I still get fired up about just about all of them.

[afnav]

Man, I went through BMTS in 86' and don't remember a bluebook at all. Of course I could have taught a class on aircraft recognition. I was...OK, am a total airplane nerd. All these years later I still get fired up about just about all of them.

I just found mine in the basement, dated 28 October 1986, titled "Pathway to Professionalism". It has two pages devoted to aircraft and missiles with no pictures, but it does have sexy diagrams on how to style your hair, apply makeup, put in an IUD and do a breast exam.