I'll start.


I wore the same pair of underwear for the whole week.

I think I gave you an O'Ride Tuesday. If not, that fella followed your lead. LOL

I'll start.


I wore the same pair of underwear for the whole week.

As new senior former c/Lt Col I'm fortunate enough to automatically have tech in cp but I do with that the specialty tracks would be for atleast the knowledge part be done on line it's just demonstrating you know what going on because to find a senior who can give you the time needed to complete that knowledge portion is super hard and it's a  large part of PD

Yeah.  The plane's had 125 hours this FY; I think it's reasonably utilized.

125 hours seems pretty low.  How many pilots are available to fly the aircraft?

https://foxtrotalpha.jalopnik.com/how-a-rogue-drone-in-the-1950s-caused-a-fiasco-that-end-1786633506  and  http://articles.latimes.com/2005/sep/11/local/me-then11

The USAF and USN may have learned a few lessons back when... However, it doesn't appear that  anyone remembers them 51 years later.    :O  From time to time  I've seen more recent reports that TSA and other major drone users (like the USAF, USN, USArmy) have lost control of the modern versions of this Hellcat.

That old cautionary saying, "those of us who forget the past are doomed to repeat it" seems to apply.  And a post modern corollary:  "A GREAT preflight is always far better than just a 'good' one".

Someone should've noticed there were no gun sights on the pursuit aircraft, nor were the on board aiming equipment functional.  Or that the Hellcat control systems were functional.  Yeah, "woulda, coulda, shoulda" struck yet again.

The AEPSM is a very nice indoctrination to AE history including CAP's part of it.

For years it has been done as an open-book test in groups.  It has value. You should take it, and set
the example not be the example (of a blow-hard pilot). If you "already know it" then it will not be
a challenge, and you can help others.

And as someone who generally advocates for getting rid of grade in CAP, saying CAP has it because people
"like bling" grossly mischaracterizes the situation and the evolution of it, and sounds incredibly condescending
coming from someone who hasn't been in CAP that along and admits to being clueless regarding
significant and important areas of the organization.

......  I have yet to understand why we have grade as it is not really linked to anything.

'Cause some folks are really into all the bling on their blues. Each to his own.

At our last meeting someone told me I should take the Yeager test. I asked why, and he said I get a nice certificate I could frame. I just smiled and nodded.  I have the book, and enjoyed reading it, but will most likely never bother taking the online test. Some folks need and enjoy those things. To each his own. Its all good.

Quote from: Eclipse on Yesterday at 09:55:15 AM

Quote from: N6RVT on Yesterday at 09:42:57 AM

Field Grades in CAP actually mean something now.

Such as?

C'mon, for years CAP has been giving grades like it was candy. I, for one, am glad they're making it harder to get promoted. That said, I do think the current system still needs improvement, but this was a move in the right direction.

Promotions should be tied not just to PD and performance, but to responsibilities and expectations. Members should be promoted because they're ready to assume greater responsibilities with the organization.

Unfortunately, that's not always the case. We just need to look around to see many field grade officers who not only can't wear the uniform correctly, but can't even command, direct, or manage anything. Yet, they're Lt Cols and Majs. I think the intent with these and other changes was to minimize this issue.

We still give out grade like candy.  I have yet to understand why we have grade as it is not really linked to anything.  I am doing nothing now as a Major that I couldn't have done as a Lieutenant.  The only reason I say Lieutenant is because I'm a squadron CC and that carries a promotion to 1 LT.  From the ES side I could be a SMWOG and it wouldn't change what I am doing

A fair point, but hopefully the Wing DO isn't tracking airframe utilization on CAPTalk.  If it's under utilized yet still assigned there,
there's generally a good reason, which a lot of times is political.

With the above said, JFK, just because >you< don't see it used, doesn't mean it's used.  Unless you're out there chalking the
tire like a meter maid, it's very likley most of the flight hours are happening during times when you're not around.

A lot of people would be pretty shocked to know just how much flying happens week mid-week during business hours.

Yeah.  The plane's had 125 hours this FY; I think it's reasonably utilized.

OK, this is productive.

In the last week we've identified >two< things to never, ever do.

Ever.

I guess I've missed it. What are the two things?