Track Selects and Assignment Nights

[SurelySerious]

What is HAS?

High Angle Strafe, but really it's irrelevant.

 

My larger point is that what we should be expecting from fighter guys, bomber guys, UAV guys, and A-10 guys (apart from certain advanced skills/quals) is the same wrt Brief/Stack/Mark. ALSA Bulletin 2013-2 has a good article articulating this. https://www.dtic.mil/dtic/tr/fulltext/u2/a579983.pdf

 

If the AF isn't providing adequate training to provide the product at the end of MQT (and really, they're missing the mark in UAVs to an extent I'd argue in the name of faster production), that's a different issue.

[BashiChuni]

2 minutes ago, SurelySerious said:

High Angle Strafe, but really it's irrelevant.

 

My larger point is that what we should be expecting from fighter guys, bomber guys, UAV guys, and A-10 guys (apart from certain advanced skills/quals) is the same wrt Brief/Stack/Mark. ALSA Bulletin 2013-2 has a good article articulating this. https://www.dtic.mil/dtic/tr/fulltext/u2/a579983.pdf

 

If the AF isn't providing adequate training to provide the product at the end of MQT (and really, they're missing the mark in UAVs to an extent I'd argue in the name of faster production), that's a different issue.

in a perfect world sure that'd be nice. 

it's not attainable though. barbus made my point much more eloquently. and it's not one dude nor one data point. 

regardless it's a moot point cause it ain't gonna happen. 

[tac airlifter]

9 minutes ago, SurelySerious said:

High Angle Strafe, but really it's irrelevant.

Thanks; I've been out of the game for ~2 years so my tac acronym knowledge is weak.  

Apparently I can't maintain a dual qual in staff speak and tactical speak.  I feel like that is somehow relevant to this discussion....

 

[SurelySerious]

Thanks; I've been out of the game for ~2 years so my tac acronym knowledge is weak.  
Apparently I can't maintain a dual qual in staff speak and tactical speak.  I feel like that is somehow relevant to this discussion....
 

Understandable and applicable.

Any chance your staff office is the place to lodge the concern that continuing to decrease the general airmanship and tactical exposure/experience/training prior to getting to the ops unit is a failing path?

[Clark Griswold]

2 hours ago, brabus said:

While nice at first thought, dual qual is not as easy as some of you think..

Valid point(s) but I wonder if the problem is not the concept of dual qual but the current execution / concept of it.

We (the USAF) have always executed it as an afterthought or in response to a manning crisis / operational need instead of anticipating it or planning to make it part of our strategy to deliver a Core Function / Mission Set.

Flight deck commonality, synchronized and reciprocative training, tactics coordination, etc... these and other factors could be planned in advance to execute dual qual way better than the concept now of marriage to a faithful wife and having a girlfriend on the side... one is suspicious and the other only wants more, there has to be a better way of doing this.

[Duck]

Valid point(s) but I wonder if the problem is not the concept of dual qual but the current execution / concept of it.
We (the USAF) have always executed it as an afterthought or in response to a manning crisis / operational need instead of anticipating it or planning to make it part of our strategy to deliver a Core Function / Mission Set.
Flight deck commonality, synchronized and reciprocative training, tactics coordination, etc... these and other factors could be planned in advance to execute dual qual way better than the concept now of marriage to a faithful wife and having a girlfriend on the side... one is suspicious and the other only wants more, there has to be a better way of doing this.

I'm drunk and only understood every other word but I completely agree.


Sent from my iPhone using Baseops Network Forums

[Danger41]

This is interesting but to throw in an additional derail...the VAST majority of RPA ops now are not CAS. You may use the CAS 9-Lines and such, but it isn't actual CAS. I love the RPA community and have killed a lot of bad guys with them, but there's a big difference between true CAS and current ops.

[Duck]

This is interesting but to throw in an additional derail...the VAST majority of RPA ops now are not CAS. You may use the CAS 9-Lines and such, but it isn't actual CAS. I love the RPA community and have killed a lot of bad guys with them, but there's a big difference between true CAS and current ops.

Fvck yeah!


Sent from my iPhone using Baseops Network Forums

[Disco_Nav963]

1 hour ago, Danger41 said:

This is interesting but to throw in an additional derail...the VAST majority of RPA ops now are not CAS. You may use the CAS 9-Lines and such, but it isn't actual CAS. I love the RPA community and have killed a lot of bad guys with them, but there's a big difference between true CAS and current ops.

Not trying to take this off on a whole other tangent, but anyone else feel like this bureaucratic construct we're operating (in both OIR and OFS, albeit under a much tighter leash in OFS) under was a giant counterdoctrinal mindfuck by the land component to take over not only CAS, but interdiction as well?

e.g. Back when I was a hardened nuclear warrior who only did "CAS" in imaginationland, I'd hear stuff like "They have CAS on a tight leash out there because can't have CIVCAS and 'no one target will win this war' and dangers of relying on indigenous forces for targeting" etc. And then I get out here and what I see is: (1) deliberate targets developed well outside the 72 hour ATO cycle tasked by the land component via 9-Line as "CAS" with little/no visibility by the CAOC, (2) clearly offensive targets (i.e. interdiction masquerading as CAS) assigned under defensive ROE in order to circumvent CAF TTPs for avoiding CIVCAS, (3) JTACs who want me to ignore what my sensor is telling me and be a BOC machine because some Army 1-star standing over their shoulder staring at an FMV feed (pushed by a contractor whose idea of a far scan is to go WFOV) must have more SA than I do, and (4) occasionally actual CAS. Oh yeah, (5) Laser JDAMs and SDBs for terrain denial.

Watching what the Army mentality has done to both our strikers and ISR makes me both more convinced than ever about the foundational need for airpower to be controlled by airmen... and also more SMH than ever at our so-called leaders that over a decade later still haven't learned how to say "No" to terrible ideas from the land component.

[SurelySerious]

Not trying to take this off on a whole other tangent, but anyone else feel like this bureaucratic construct we're operating (in both OIR and OFS, albeit under a much tighter leash in OFS) under was a giant counterdoctrinal mind by the land component to take over not only CAS, but interdiction as well?

e.g. Back when I was a hardened nuclear warrior who only did "CAS" in imaginationland, I'd hear stuff like "They have CAS on a tight leash out there because can't have CIVCAS and 'no one target will win this war' and dangers of relying on indigenous forces for targeting" etc. And then I get out here and what I see is: (1) deliberate targets developed well outside the 72 hour ATO cycle tasked by the land component via 9-Line as "CAS" with little/no visibility by the CAOC, (2) clearly offensive targets (i.e. interdiction masquerading as CAS) assigned under defensive ROE in order to circumvent CAF TTPs for avoiding CIVCAS, (3) JTACs who want me to ignore what my sensor is telling me and be a BOC machine because some Army 1-star standing over their shoulder staring at an FMV feed (pushed by a contractor whose idea of a far scan is to go WFOV) must have more SA than I do, and (4) occasionally actual CAS. Oh yeah, (5) Laser JDAMs and SDBs for terrain denial.

Watching what the Army mentality has done to both our strikers and ISR makes me both more convinced than ever about the foundational need for airpower to be controlled by airmen... and also more SMH than ever at our so-called leaders that over a decade later still haven't learned how to say "No" to terrible ideas from the land component.

Pretty much. Now they sign off on a metric shit ton of interdiction/dynamic targeting using the facade of CAS procedures. And the rest of the DT has gone back to largely centralized control/centralized execution. Progress.

[MooseAg03]

alright ill be the asshole...i don't think dual qual RPA/light attack makes sense
GENERALLY (key word GENERALLY) the pilots sent from UPT direct-> RPA are not your top sticks...i'll just leave it at that
throwing that dude into a dual qual to fly light attack would be asking for trouble when he's splitting his time on a robot.
light attack ain't flying from point A to point B...CAS deserves specialists not generalists and not guys fcking off half the time just so they can "fly in a cockpit"
the guys i've encountered in their post-RPA duties are 70-30 not sharp/low aviation SA-descent stick good SA. that's just my experience. the talent isn't there for dual qual. hurt feelings RPA guys flame away!
and +1 for moving RPA bases to cool locations...too bad congress will get in the way.

I definitely wasn't bottom of my class and didn't suck in the MAF either. Just got pulled into the giant manpower sinkhole that was RPAs in 2012 with terrible timing. If we had bought and fielded a light attack aircraft years ago, I'd stick around to fly that. Now I'll be long gone before that ever happens.

Sorry for the epic thread derail.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Duck]

I definitely wasn't bottom of my class and didn't suck in the MAF either. Just got pulled into the giant manpower sinkhole that was RPAs in 2012 with terrible timing. If we had bought and fielded a light attack aircraft years ago, I'd stick around to fly that. Now I'll be long gone before that ever happens.

Sorry for the epic thread derail.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I 100% feel you brother. If it wasn't for an awesome Commander? I would have been in the cubicle beside you. I saw first hand how fvcked up the AF filling of the RPAs were. Let me know if I can help.


Sent from my iPhone using Baseops Network Forums

[3PAARO]

2 hours ago, Disco_Nav963 said:

Not trying to take this off on a whole other tangent, but anyone else feel like this bureaucratic construct we're operating (in both OIR and OFS, albeit under a much tighter leash in OFS) under was a giant counterdoctrinal mind by the land component to take over not only CAS, but interdiction as well?

e.g. Back when I was a hardened nuclear warrior who only did "CAS" in imaginationland, I'd hear stuff like "They have CAS on a tight leash out there because can't have CIVCAS and 'no one target will win this war' and dangers of relying on indigenous forces for targeting" etc. And then I get out here and what I see is: (1) deliberate targets developed well outside the 72 hour ATO cycle tasked by the land component via 9-Line as "CAS" with little/no visibility by the CAOC, (2) clearly offensive targets (i.e. interdiction masquerading as CAS) assigned under defensive ROE in order to circumvent CAF TTPs for avoiding CIVCAS, (3) JTACs who want me to ignore what my sensor is telling me and be a BOC machine because some Army 1-star standing over their shoulder staring at an FMV feed (pushed by a contractor whose idea of a far scan is to go WFOV) must have more SA than I do, and (4) occasionally actual CAS. Oh yeah, (5) Laser JDAMs and SDBs for terrain denial.

Watching what the Army mentality has done to both our strikers and ISR makes me both more convinced than ever about the foundational need for airpower to be controlled by airmen... and also more SMH than ever at our so-called leaders that over a decade later still haven't learned how to say "No" to terrible ideas from the land component.

The other factor in targeting cycle in OFS/ORS is that targeting goes through the Afghan ministry of defense. Imagine how efficient that organization is. As far as whether Army is trying to take over interdiction...there really isn't classical interdiction out here. Where is the FSCL?

Edited July 24, 2017 by 3PAARO
more thinkin'

[brabus]

2 hours ago, 3PAARO said:

The other factor in targeting cycle in OFS/ORS is that targeting goes through the Afghan ministry of defense. Imagine how efficient that organization is. As far as whether Army is trying to take over interdiction...there really isn't classical interdiction out here. Where is the FSCL?

The Army is using 3-09.3 procedures to conduct "interdiction-like", offensive targeting WELL clear of friendlies. Despite the lack of a true FSCL, this is an abortion of doctrinal application and devoid of tactical common sense. Disco is right on, the Army's stupidity is a massive supporting case for why the AF is its own service, but unfortunately we allow them to have ultimate control. Why the army is the supported command in OIR defies logic, it's a fucking nearly 100% air war from the US perspective. The AFshould at min have the reins in OIR, OFS is different. 

W

e (the USAF) have always executed it as an afterthought or in response to a manning crisis / operational need instead of anticipating it or planning to make it part of our strategy to deliver a Core Function / Mission Set.

I understand your point, but regardless of reasons for its creation or its execution manner, I still think if dual ops came to RPA/Light attack, you would be very underwhelmed by the average performance level of dudes in either MWS. Everyone is not as good as you think and I feel very confident in saying only your above average pilots would fair OK. Essentially take a dudes performance level (SL abv avg, avg, etc) and subtract two. That's what you'll get in each MWS. 

Quote

 

Quote

 

Edited July 24, 2017 by brabus

[ShavedDogsAss]

Tami 21 guys who didn't re cat who got re flowed to holloman because the didn't re-cat didn't.


Sent from my iPhone using Baseops Network Forums

"Sorry man, I know you're on an ALFA, but since we released all the TAMI guys, we can't send you back as well. They met the Re-Cat board, so the Air Force has made them a promise. I know you're still 11F, but since you didn't meet the board, you don't have that promise.

Here's another RPA gig for you.

Oh, and don't worry about the re-cat'd guys we are sending to jets for 'career broadening'. "

-OG/CC

[Guardian]

Should change that signature line to Gen Goldfien and add the quote, "I don't get it guys, you volunteered to serve."


Sent from my iPhone using Baseops Network Forums

[YoungnDumb]

14 hours ago, RTB said:

I'm sure that story won't follow him EVERYWHERE he goes.

 

She. And ya, their has been some chatter to the bros out there.

Edited July 24, 2017 by YoungnDumb

[di1630]

She. And ya, their has been some chatter to the bros out there.

What was "she" expecting?


Sent from my iPhone using Baseops Network Forums

[Clark Griswold]

 

Possible but I would at least like the AF to try - an experimental group with a cross section of subjects based on previous flying experience, qualifications, recs, etc... to see if it is viable, how to balance that with real world responsibilities to the customer I don't know

 

Another idea for this (dual qualify) would be do both crew positions in the manned platform require dual quals status? Could you just require the CSO or Pilot to maintain dual qualification not both?

 

Would that be beneficial to the mission, needs of the AF, etc while responsibly managing risk?

 

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[brickhistory]

2 hours ago, di1630 said:

What was "she" expecting?


Sent from my iPhone using Baseops Network Forums

My nomination for "STS of the Year Award" on so many levels...

[matmacwc]

On 7/16/2017 at 9:17 AM, Sprkt69 said:

True. And there is 0% income tax (TX) versus 8.82% (NY). Plus the difference in how much house you get for the money makes it a big difference in TX over NY

I'd rather pay state income tax versus what TX has going on with property taxes.  I was paying $600 a month for a $200K house in TX.

[matmacwc]

11 minutes ago, brickhistory said:

My nomination for "STS of the Year Award" on so many levels...

There's probably a man in the mix, a current FAIP or something along those lines for this kind of reaction.

[Stitch]

19 hours ago, brabus said:

While nice at first thought, dual qual is not as easy as some of you think.

Serious question from the "teach me" point-of-view, not being a smart ass.  What about guys/gals who are guard/reserve and fly for the airlines weekdays and drive Mother Blue's hardware in their off time?  Couldn't that be considered "dual qual'd; airliner/something else?  Also dual-qual'd pilots like the guys at Beal flying the Duce and the -38 seem to do OK.  (yes, I understand the Beal crowd is really the cream-of-the-crop type of community) 

Again, asked from a "teach me" point-of-view not being a dick.

 

 

[Boomer6]

3 hours ago, di1630 said:

What was "she" expecting?


Sent from my iPhone using Baseops Network Forums

I'm guessing vipers..

[Sprkt69]

1 hour ago, matmacwc said:

I'd rather pay state income tax versus what TX has going on with property taxes.  I was paying $600 a month for a $200K house in TX.

Then you aren't making enough income. My bro-in-law pays $24k/yr In property taxes for 1500sq/ft and a 1 car garage in upstate NY. Not to mention income taxes