Welcome to Flightinfo.com

  • Register now and join the discussion
  • Friendliest aviation Ccmmunity on the web
  • Modern site for PC's, Phones, Tablets - no 3rd party apps required
  • Ask questions, help others, promote aviation
  • Share the passion for aviation
  • Invite everyone to Flightinfo.com and let's have fun

UAV's for UPT Grads

Welcome to Flightinfo.com

  • Register now and join the discussion
  • Modern secure site, no 3rd party apps required
  • Invite your friends
  • Share the passion of aviation
  • Friendliest aviation community on the web
That's because the fighter lifestyle is appealing to gays, so it is kind of like a social club where you can hang out with the boys and wear a scarf, and not be judged.

So thats why they like to play volleyball, then go take showers together....hmmmm
 
I visited 13 countries last year, flying a single seat fighter... so your point is, well, wrong.


I know airlift guys that have done that in a week or two. I have done 52 countries. Plus we need to define "visited". If it is nothing more than a fuel stop, then it does not count.

It is a simple fact that if really you want to see the world, a fighter is NOT the way to do it.

Having said that, flying a fighter would be cool for the first part of your career and then something bigger later on.
 
Recently someone I know was pulled from his fleet P-3 squadron early to go fly Global Hawk @ the AF RAG (or whatever u guys call it) and then to fly it for the Navy out of PAX for a while... On top of that, he got 3 weeks notice that he was going to be doing this for almost a year.
 
That's because the fighter lifestyle is appealing to gays, so it is kind of like a social club where you can hang out with the boys and wear a scarf, and not be judged.
I've never been assigned to "a fighter", but I know quite a few that have been: for all their quirks, I'd say most of them would laugh at anyone that made such a statement, knowing that said person had absolutely no clue as to what they get to do day-to-day.
 
I've never been assigned to "a fighter", but I know quite a few that have been: for all their quirks, I'd say most of them would laugh at anyone that made such a statement, knowing that said person had absolutely no clue as to what they get to do day-to-day.

I know quite a bit about what fighter guys do. I watched Top Gun and Iron Eagle at least 15 times.
 
My question: do we really think this will stick? I can see another rash of crashes and an overhaul of the proposed UAV track system to end up back as a vol/non-vol 3-4 year tour. Plus, I don’t foresee the dudes who finish last in their UPT class as the only ones who end up with UAVs. Granted, finishing last doesn't necessarily equate to sucking, but the brass will not want the perspective that only poor performers get UAV’s (like the observation about 6 years ago with FAIPs, AWACS, and RC’s). I’d be worried if I was a middle of the road UPT performer.
 
Wouldn't this be perfect duty for rated guys that have lost their medicals?
 
Wouldn't this be perfect duty for rated guys that have lost their medicals?

I was thinking that, guys that get passed over or are non-selects, etc.

The irony is that it's an incredible platform, and extremely capable with potential that we haven't even dreamed up... but no one wants it. They do more killin' from Creech than most units will ever do on deployment, and they get to go home everynight. However it's not flying, and thus sucks.
 
Like I said to start off this Thread....listen to the Chief Tuesday/Wednesday this week.
Well, it's seems it's only a temporary measure until they crank up a specific UAS track, but I'll admit that you're the first one to have gouge on an accurate announcement on this issue.
 

Latest posts

Latest resources

Back
Top