Search results

There isn't any great mystery in the 47 vs 60 debate. 47's cost more both in the short term ($$/airframe with or without development costs factored in) and the long term (O and M). When you factor in the Air Force's recent track record in competitive procurements it is pretty easy to see why...

Honestly, I expect even the ones that know the truth probably don't care - they just don't feel responsible for the actions of their (great) grandparents (not to mention whether or not they even think that Japan was in the wrong to treat China/Korea/etc that way).

Please tell me they wash them first....

I'm betting you are right on both counts. Interesting to hear your observations from the young Japanese. Keeping in mind that not only were they not around for WWII, but neither were their parents, I expect this generation does not feel any culpability for that war and doesn't see a need to...

Interesting if money were no object, but too expensive to even be considered. At this point, it would be a total re-design (like the 53K) in a shape of a phrog, with all the associated developmental costs.

No moving map on the R or S (minus the kneeboard POS). There are a couple routes forward, and money has been talked about, but nothing on contract.

I have to admit I don't understand the point of this past the obvious PR reasons, but it certainly shows the Air Force is buying in more and more heavily. Anybody know the currently "correct" nomenclature or why "remotely piloted aircraft" are a separate subset of UAS's? Is it a distinction...

Because she is a Captain. "Different spanks for different ranks" has been demonstrated over and over again. She will be allowed to quietly retire at some point.

And the associated caution is fair game for a checkride as well, of course.

What he said - don't pass up the chance.

Absolutely true, and personally I think it is a better option, but I'm not sure that is the direction they are going to go. I've had the chance to learn a fair amount about the 60 effort and the Brit's 101 effort, and I just don't think that the benefits will be there unless they go ahead with...

Most obvious example: going out to X nm in front of the boat with your sensors on and link that data back to your ship/the group.

As an added bonus, read here (warning, there is some math...) for an interesting paper that relates, and here (especially page 4) for a discussion of the JMSDF -60's SLAS.

I wouldn't be so quick to dismiss it. JMSDF already has their ship-landing assist systemon their -60's, the K-max UAS has made quite a bit of progress (though concentrating on overland at the moment), and you have to think that the push towards fly-by-wire by the Army for the 60 is geared more...

The plebe is fine, and his younger brother is fine. As for his kid - 20 years ago we were just about to fall off the cliff from the Reagan build up, and 20 years before that we were in Vietnam. My point being the Navy can and will undergo amazing change in the space of 20 years, so why even...

Do you think the Navy could get away with it politically? It seems to me they would just crush the cost/airframe and it would be hard to imagine the program surviving the after-effects. Not that I thought of it at the time, but I still wonder if one of the goals of the program was "too big to...

On the downside, I was too lazy to find the "ö" myself. On the upside, I now know where to copy/paste it from next time I have the urge to go obscure. I agree contracting may not be quantum mechanics, but I don't think "rocket surgery" would be too far off the mark.

Trust me, I'm with you on why it went down that way. Unfortunately, we have put ourselves in the situation where we (the gov't) have essentially giving industry enormous financial incentives to make proposals with these amazingly optimistic schedules and insane amounts of technical risk. To be...

I agree we may not have known, in a Schroedinger's Cat sort of way, but I'm pretty sure most of us guessed correctly.

As a side note to this thread, a lot of people seem to be confusing AMDO's with LDO's in aviation maintenance-related designators. An Aviation Maintenance Duty Officer (AMDO) is a Restricted Line officer with a 1520 designator (or a 1500 if a CAPT for 2+ years which is when the designator...

Nope. Read the regs and you will find that the punishment a CO can give is dependent upon the CO's rank, and it is pretty easy to argue that reduction in rank is the severest punishment.

There are a few - I only recently learned that you can be a DCO into AEDO as a SELRES. But if you do then you won't have wings.

You are an asshole: AEDO's did go to flight school - I'm on my third logbook and will be able to stay in the cockpit through 20. When you get to half my flight time total let me know. Until then, why not let me keep my wings?:D

For JO Navy types, here is about 95%+ of what you need to know about awards for career purposes. A below-normal or missing end of tour award will raise questions and be looked upon poorly. Nobody cares about participation-type air medals, but individual action (i.e. has a "V") will be remarked...

I've seen the AMDO pqs - they aren't just giving it away (certainly compared to the aviation supply device, for instance). I'd rather see good maintenance officers get those wings than have "HAC, but..."s keep theirs.

Did you/are you going to finish first in your winging class?

Landing back-asswards - stern to bow. No big deal but rarely that much help.

They don't - you have to use the general envelope which is generally restrictive enough not to help. The Belleau Wood/Essex used to screw this up every Cobra Gold by anchoring in a current that left them with quartering tail winds.

Nothing really surprising in it, but this article discusses more schedule issues with testing.

There are no LDO AEDO's. (Though there are LDO's in acquisition billets).

Fixed.

Here is a link to the approved 1510 community brief. I didn't think we ever took new ensigns - even in the reserves - but I could be wrong. Not all jobs are in cube farms, but the ones that aren't tend to be flying jobs.

Click me.

Little harsh, don't you think? You make your career choices, let other people make their own.

The pay is "enough" by definition since guys continue to take it. As long as people accept fry-jockey wages to chase the carrot of eventual promotion to being a Captain at a major, the regionals will keep putting the stick in the same place...

And what if those "simple" principles are contradictory? (Take "warrantless wiretapping", for an easy one: privacy is good, terrorism is bad, two principles as simple as you could hope for...). Believe it or not we are not just making fun of your belief in Ron Paul (though we could). Brett...

It is interesting that sometimes people's most high-minded sentiments turn into the most meaningless sentences. Or amusing. Maybe both.

As a side note, that can apply to any maneuver where the pilot can choose how fast to enter and how long to carry that speed. We've all seen people exceed their abilities on normal approaches, let alone more complex maneuvers.* *Having said that, the only rational response to the question...

It isn't sideflares, it is the loading/unloading cycle of the VERTREP itself (or any repetitive loading/unloading) especially as the load or gross weight grows. Straight in vs. sideflare really doesn't make it much better. Get a copy of the brief I mentioned and look at the finite element...

I can appreciate why you don't want to hear it, but outsourcing can save a ton of money. VERTREP is the main cause of fatigue in Sierra airframes, so any VERTREP they don't do means more flying down the road (see the Airframe Fatigue Enhancement Update from SAC/299 if you have access). More...

The physical airframe was never tested for VERTREP loads as the HC world normally performed them (yes, A's/L's etc have an extensive sling-load history with the Army, but that is a very different evolution). I have waded a lot deeper into the engineering waters of this issue and the short...

If there could have been any doubt that the writers didn't know anything about Naval Aviation, the fact that they thought that job would be a bad thing would clear it up.

From my point of view (2 year dis-associated, 3 other cruises + work-ups) there has been a concerted effort on the part of senior SWO leadership to improve the treatment/training of JO's. I think some progress has been made already and if they stick with it they will continue to see improvement...

Fixed.

A technical Masters will help your package.

Is there some follow on capability included in that $22M/kit number? I have to say that doesn't seem like a bargain.

It is also great for teaching annual CRM refreshers.

FDNF had limits based on the NK tether, so there may be a Fleet instruction that applies.

The F-22 is not being "cut". The contracted-for number of aircraft are being bought. Not continuing production of the F-22 saves no money because we never obligated any funds past the current number. There is no connection between the F-22 and JSF programs except in political rhetoric...

Which is why we need a large, top-line cut to force the issue.