About the whole fixed wing thing and the Army.
The Army does, in fact, operate several types of fixed wing aircraft, including the C-12, C-20, C-23, C-35, C-37 and RC-12N (elint).
There is talk of the Army buying a new intra-theater airlifter, like the C-130. In addition, when there was all that hullabaloo about the USAF retiring the A-10s, the Army started putting some suggestions into Congress that maybe they should get the A-10s as they are retired from the USAF.
Those of us in the AF of course hope that never happens - it is already hard enough working with USN/USMC combat aircraft in joint environments. And at least they are at least decently educated. Wait until some neanderthal WO1 in an Army A-10 destroys a whole column of Marines on accident during the next war.;-)
Note: Sarcasm used heavily in above statement.
I give a Power Point briefing at least once a month, sometimes more often.
Sometimes I think the Air Force wouldn't exist without Power Point. It is the de-facto standard for all Air Force briefings, and is actually part of the officer training curriculum at ROTC.
I believe the original poster's complaints annoyed me a little as well.
Complaining about the AF and its fiscal policies will do him no good. The Air Force doesn't choose how much an officer or enlisted member is paid, the Department of Defense does! Any one even remotely connected with the military should have at least a passing knowledge of this. In order to divert more money to R&D, the Air Force will release people, as wages are perfectly inelastic.
This is all despite the fact that an E-1 in the Air Force is treated completely different than an E-1 in any other service.
As an E-1 in the Air Force, you will generally have your own room and share a bathroom with one other enlisted fellow. Compare this to the Army and Marines, where there is a good chance you will be stuck in an open bay with 100 other folks. And you can be sure there will probably be at least one officer sleeping near-by.
If the original poster did not like the military and wanted to get out, he should have said so.
But to complain that the "Air Force spends more on R&D at the expense of its people," I question greatly whether he even paid a little bit of attention to his pay when he was in the Air Force.
Kind of beats that 'corpse' plant, doesn't it? It is nice to see our school in the news for something other than bad smelling flowers.
I *used* to be in the Computer Engineering program. Seeing as I never wanted to use my degree, I changed into Letters & Sciences. Now I graduate a year earlier, and can spend my time sleeping and drinking instead of going to class. And still receive a higher GPA than you engineering dummies! =)
The Germans had many revolutionary aircraft, but you have attributed at least three wrongly.
'ME-262 Komet - a rocket powered blended wing fighter-intercepter'
The Me 262 "Schwalbe" was a duel-jet engined fighter-bomber.
The Me 163 "Komet" was a (somewhat) blended-wing rocket interceptor.
The "true" blended-wing aircraft used by the Germans were built by the Horten and Gotha companies. One of which, the Go 229, was actually test flown before surrender to the allies.
A large number of aircraft designs from many German firms in development at the end of the war showed a fascination with the blended-wing design. Even Messerschmitt, who continued building Bf (later Me) 109s right up until the end, was working on aircraft such as the Me 329, a 'zerstoerer' (heavy fighter) of blended-wing-body design.
In fact, we should all be crediting the brothers Reimar and Walter Horten, who began experimenting with flying-wing gliders in 1931. It was their Ho IX which was put into small-scale production as the Go 229.
Slashdot Mirror
About the whole fixed wing thing and the Army. The Army does, in fact, operate several types of fixed wing aircraft, including the C-12, C-20, C-23, C-35, C-37 and RC-12N (elint). There is talk of the Army buying a new intra-theater airlifter, like the C-130. In addition, when there was all that hullabaloo about the USAF retiring the A-10s, the Army started putting some suggestions into Congress that maybe they should get the A-10s as they are retired from the USAF. Those of us in the AF of course hope that never happens - it is already hard enough working with USN/USMC combat aircraft in joint environments. And at least they are at least decently educated. Wait until some neanderthal WO1 in an Army A-10 destroys a whole column of Marines on accident during the next war. ;-)
Note: Sarcasm used heavily in above statement.
Actually, the USAF and USN will use them as well.
MV-22 is slated for Marine usage, the CV-22 is for the USAF, and the USN is looking at an HV-22 variant for Combat Search and Rescue (CSAR).
The USAF version, the CV-22, will be operated by the USAF under US Special Operations Command.
This is in no way true.
I give a Power Point briefing at least once a month, sometimes more often.
Sometimes I think the Air Force wouldn't exist without Power Point. It is the de-facto standard for all Air Force briefings, and is actually part of the officer training curriculum at ROTC.
I believe the original poster's complaints annoyed me a little as well.
Complaining about the AF and its fiscal policies will do him no good. The Air Force doesn't choose how much an officer or enlisted member is paid, the Department of Defense does! Any one even remotely connected with the military should have at least a passing knowledge of this. In order to divert more money to R&D, the Air Force will release people, as wages are perfectly inelastic.
This is all despite the fact that an E-1 in the Air Force is treated completely different than an E-1 in any other service.
As an E-1 in the Air Force, you will generally have your own room and share a bathroom with one other enlisted fellow. Compare this to the Army and Marines, where there is a good chance you will be stuck in an open bay with 100 other folks. And you can be sure there will probably be at least one officer sleeping near-by.
If the original poster did not like the military and wanted to get out, he should have said so.
But to complain that the "Air Force spends more on R&D at the expense of its people," I question greatly whether he even paid a little bit of attention to his pay when he was in the Air Force.
Kind of beats that 'corpse' plant, doesn't it? It is nice to see our school in the news for something other than bad smelling flowers.
I *used* to be in the Computer Engineering program. Seeing as I never wanted to use my degree, I changed into Letters & Sciences. Now I graduate a year earlier, and can spend my time sleeping and drinking instead of going to class. And still receive a higher GPA than you engineering dummies! =)
The Germans had many revolutionary aircraft, but you have attributed at least three wrongly.
The Me 262 "Schwalbe" was a duel-jet engined fighter-bomber.
The Me 163 "Komet" was a (somewhat) blended-wing rocket interceptor.
The "true" blended-wing aircraft used by the Germans were built by the Horten and Gotha companies. One of which, the Go 229, was actually test flown before surrender to the allies.
A large number of aircraft designs from many German firms in development at the end of the war showed a fascination with the blended-wing design. Even Messerschmitt, who continued building Bf (later Me) 109s right up until the end, was working on aircraft such as the Me 329, a 'zerstoerer' (heavy fighter) of blended-wing-body design.
In fact, we should all be crediting the brothers Reimar and Walter Horten, who began experimenting with flying-wing gliders in 1931. It was their Ho IX which was put into small-scale production as the Go 229.