Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted
It's literally in the first sentence of the article. 


Jesus I totally missed that and saw the 15 year supervised release part. What an idiot.
  • Like 2
Posted
19 hours ago, ImNotARobot said:

Wonder if it was uncovered in relation to his 89th Air Wing post. In his roll at that base I'm sure he'd have to recieve some fairly invasive background investigations given that he could have close proximity to POTUS. 

Posted
7 hours ago, FLEA said:

Wonder if it was uncovered in relation to his 89th Air Wing post. In his roll at that base I'm sure he'd have to recieve some fairly invasive background investigations given that he could have close proximity to POTUS. 

He was going to command 11 Wg. The 89th is a tenant wing at ADW.....11 Wg owns the base but has no opcon over the 89th and don’t have the same clearances AFAIK
 

 

Posted
8 hours ago, Homestar said:

He was going to command 11 Wg. The 89th is a tenant wing at ADW.....11 Wg owns the base but has no opcon over the 89th and don’t have the same clearances AFAIK
 

 

Makes sense.

Posted
Quote

"The former commanding officer of the USS Montpelier pleaded guilty in December to charges stemming from an inappropriate relationship with the spouse of an enlisted subordinate, according to the Navy's report of trial results."



Talk about shitting in your own nest!

 

  • Upvote 1
Posted
On 2/2/2020 at 1:35 PM, BashiChuni said:

"Not only was the flyover too low, Featherstone said, but in avoiding the landing traffic, the pilot also flew too close and too fast to where onlookers were watching."

seems cut and dry to me. low SA to do something different from the brief when you know lots of eyeballs will be on you. and sandwiched between landing traffic? GMAFB.

if i was the general i'd take that entire low flyby as a huge middle finger

Speaking of low flyovers, eyeballs, and middle fingers.

LOL.

  • Haha 1
Posted
1 hour ago, torqued said:

Speaking of low flyovers, eyeballs, and middle fingers.

LOL.

It's all about having the right waiver authority.

  • Like 5
Posted
1 hour ago, ThreeHoler said:

800 feet over the runway is now a waiver?


Sent from my iPhone using Baseops Network mobile app

Someone figure out who the authority is so I can request it next time I’m doing a low approach. I’ll just hold while that gets staffed. 

Posted
On 2/1/2020 at 7:18 AM, NEflyer said:

It's much easier to shift blame to the men for recent aviation fatalities and call them "cowboys" rather than acknowledge the massive organization faults, lack of resources, and corrupt leadership truly causing these accidents. 

For those who haven't read it yet, this should offer some context:

https://www.propublica.org/article/marines-hornet-squadron-242-crash-pacific-resilard

I flew with the Bats at a couple exercises during that time. Nothing in that article was particularly surprising.

The sad thing is that the USAF isn't far behind. I experienced the same shift-swap shenanigans at PACAF (mostly Korea-centric) exercises. One led to the scariest landing I've done  (at 5 am/night/IMC/trail ILS) and the other we called KIO at step. I have yet to receive any backlash for KIOing a sortie on the ground, but I know way too many young guys that don't think they have the right to call it.

For any of the younger guys listening, you can call KIO. I've done it 3-4 times in my career and have only received "thank-you," "good call," or a non-chalant "ok, cool." 

  • Like 1
  • Upvote 3
  • 3 weeks later...

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
×
×
  • Create New...