New study shows grim outlook for future of Air Force pilot shortage • Hacker News Board

Re: New study shows grim outlook for future of Air Force pilot shortage

#161

Post by averros » Thu, Apr 18, 2019, 1:45 AM UTC

umvi wrote: post #134

souprock wrote: post #127

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I believe the F-22 uses air that is oxygen-enriched by a mechanical device that does some sort of filtering/diffusion process. Picture this: It's time to go fly. The alarm is going off, and you need to get in your jet. Boogers are streaming down your face, and you are experiencing sneezing fits that have you bent over with your eyes closing and tearing up. You can put on a mask with nice clean air, but it'll take an…

Not all allergies are like that. I would wager the vast majority are pretty mild symptoms easily treatable with anti-histamines. I myself have allergies, but I never even notice because the air at work is filtered and I'm not outside long enough for symptoms to manifest as I travel to and from my car. Maybe the case could be made for fighter pilots (though I still think it's a non-issue for 99% of people with seasona…

Antihistamines make you sleepy. That's why they are usually on "do not fly if you're taking it" list, even for commercial and private pilots.

Re: New study shows grim outlook for future of Air Force pilot shortage

#162

Post by averros » Thu, Apr 18, 2019, 1:55 AM UTC

openasocket wrote: post #36

This is probably part of the reason why the USAF is leaning so hard towards unmanned systems in the future, because it opens up a lot of doors here. Drone pilots can be put pretty much anywhere in the world so they don't need to be forward-deployed, which will probably help attract people. The physical standards can be strongly relaxed, no need to worry about eyesight or their ability to handle 8Gs, which increases t…

Drones are susceptible to electronic counter-measures (ECM). As it stands now, Russia has a lead in this field. So, (presumably) has China which is busy buying Russian military hardware in addition to developing its own.

Drones are great for slaughtering camel herders armed with AK-47s and TOW missiles. They're not that great against a tech-parity adversary.

Re: New study shows grim outlook for future of Air Force pilot shortage

#163

Post by averros » Thu, Apr 18, 2019, 2:03 AM UTC

chrischattin wrote: post #98

kevinventullo wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As an American voter, I can assure you my choices have always been war or war.

Tulsi Gabbard.

Yes, she's the only human in the current posse presidential wannabe reptiloids. Too bad that her understanding of economics is lacking. (Rand Paul / Tulsi Gabbard (in whatever order) anti-war ticket would be great... not gonna happen).

Re: New study shows grim outlook for future of Air Force pilot shortage

#164

Post by BXLE_1-1-BitIs1 » Thu, Apr 18, 2019, 2:52 AM UTC

The AF needs to look at the software industry. Bring in hordes of newbies and keep the ones that don't kill themselves for 3-5 years, then repeat.

Re: New study shows grim outlook for future of Air Force pilot shortage

#165

Post by dingaling » Thu, Apr 18, 2019, 6:54 AM UTC

chrischattin wrote: post #40

jwally wrote: post #14

An Anecdotal "I quit" I read a couple of years ago about the (then impending) pilot shortage: https://www.jqpublicblog.com/punching-out-latest-dear-boss-l... Dear Boss, I’ve fucking had it. I’m finally giving up on my Air Force and I’m throwing in the towel. Flying fighter jets is no longer cool enough to outweigh the bullshit, and so I’ve broken the mach for the final time. You’re going to believe that I’m leaving b…

I'm a former Air Force pilot and was going to writeup a long post about my experience. But, this pretty much sums it up. I loved the people, and LOVED the flying. Some of the best times of my life. But, the organizational bloat, bureaucratic BS, and constant deployments just became too much. As you can imagine, it really wears on you to be gone 6 mo's every year risking your life for a counterproductive endless war t…

> it really wears on you to be gone 6 mo's every year risking your life for a counterproductive endless war

Did you not think about that before signing up? What, honestly, did you expect military life to be like?

The entire history of military organisations has been pushing the individuals at the sharp-edge to their limits and beyond in order to achieve the unachievable as directed by the politicians. And usually without anyone knowing about their sacrifice.

There is nothing unusual or inconsistent with the modern USAF. Back in the 1960s "SAC SUCKS" could be found scraped on the interiors of B-52s after 26-hour Chrome Dome missions.

Re: New study shows grim outlook for future of Air Force pilot shortage

#166

Post by chrisseaton » Thu, Apr 18, 2019, 7:44 AM UTC

true_religion wrote: post #160

chrisseaton wrote: post #156

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> force them to retrain into another career field. They give you a short list to choose from. Most of the jobs are special operations and aircrew. How can that possibly work? How can you force someone to retrain into special operations? How does anyone build the motivation and determination to pass the qualification courses for that when they don't even really want to be there? Why would special operations even want…

The big hurdle is volunteering to be in the military. Once you have though, you can’t quit whenever you want and can’t skip without serious punishments.

No courses like those for special operations specifically let you voluntarily withdraw even for people already serving as they only want volunteers.

The military isn’t all sir-yes-sir as people think - if you don’t want to be there then they don’t want you to be there either.

Re: New study shows grim outlook for future of Air Force pilot shortage

#167

Post by dingaling » Thu, Apr 18, 2019, 9:48 AM UTC

BXLE_1-1-BitIs1 wrote: post #164

The AF needs to look at the software industry. Bring in hordes of newbies and keep the ones that don't kill themselves for 3-5 years, then repeat.

That was actually how air forces adapted to the jet era. Attrition was horrific, about 35% of USAF F-84s and F-86s being lost in crashes through the 1950s. Actual combat losses in Korea were insignificant compared to accidents.

The 1970s-designed F-16 has a loss rate of 3.4 per 100,000 flight hours. The two 1950s fighters were 52.6 and 44.2 respectively.

Re: New study shows grim outlook for future of Air Force pilot shortage

#168

Post by magduf » Thu, Apr 18, 2019, 2:33 PM UTC

a3n wrote: post #82

magduf wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There have always been 3rd-party choices on the ballot.

Which I always voted for, as a "none of the above" vote. (The above being the two main party candidates.) In 2016 I voted for HC (no love) as a vote against DT. Some things are more existential than others.

In 2016, I voted for Stein, because Hillary and her supporters (esp. all the really nasty, condescending supporters on Reddit) clearly told me they didn't want or need my vote (as a Bernie fan), and the media told me my state was absolutely certain to go to Hillary. Well, the media was right, but not as right as they thought, but Hillary did win my state by a reasonable margin.

Honestly, I can kinda understand why some people would be turned into Trump voters after seeing what kind of people Hillary fans are really like. They're truly horrible human beings. I even had the displeasure of having to sit through a nasty argument between a Trump fan and a Hillary fan while in a carpool last year, and it was pretty interesting how the Trump fan was the one who actually cared about rural voters, and the Hillary fan's attitude was seriously "let them die". It's no wonder things are falling apart in this country.

Re: New study shows grim outlook for future of Air Force pilot shortage

#169

Post by magduf » Thu, Apr 18, 2019, 2:35 PM UTC

asark wrote: post #107

reallydude wrote: post #80

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think it's ironic that your comment was downoted. The mentality of Americans is warped beyond repair. If you don't think you have a chance of winning, it's not "realistic" or what-have-you, until you get to the lottery... See the sister comment about voting for HC against DT because it's all or nothing.

It's a structural problem with how our elections work. No sense blaming individual voters for chosing "vote with the intent to maybe (but almost certainly not) affect the outcome" versus "definitely do not affect the outcome, but maybe (but almost certainly not) send a message".

It's ultimately the voters' fault. First-Past-the-Post (FPTP) voting systems do result in this, but still, it's the voter's responsibility to demand change from their leaders, and demand that they implement a better voting system. Have they done this? No. Everyone just assumes this is how it is and refuses to look at all the European countries that have had approval voting for ages, with much better outcomes.

Re: New study shows grim outlook for future of Air Force pilot shortage

#170

Post by magduf » Thu, Apr 18, 2019, 2:39 PM UTC

asark wrote: post #137

reallydude wrote: post #131

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> No sense blaming individual voters You're literally restating the tactic, as if that countermands the truth. There is no change unless the behavior changes, which is at the individual level. Why not dispense with the public altogether, if the individuals don't matter? Just leave it to the political parties?

> You're literally restating the tactic, as if that countermands the truth The truth is the current system stabilizes at two parties due to how the rules are written, and that most voters are de facto disenfranchised at the federal (and, largely, state as well) level for a bunch of reasons. Spending any time or energy getting worked up at someone (uselessly) voting one way to try to work within that system for change…

>Spending any time or energy getting worked up at someone (uselessly) voting one way... is counterproductive.

No, it's really not, because there is no alternative: the voters are the ones who have the ultimate power and responsibility here. This isn't China where the Party controls everything.

>An effective use of one's time is working at the party level (by which, yes, I mean the two that get elected, not the rest) to get better candidates on the ballot

People have been trying that for ages, and it doesn't work; the system itself is broken, and when they do get "better" candidates elected, those candidates don't actually make any big changes because they don't really want to.

>This includes working to change the way our elections work to break the two-party stability point

The only way to do this is to change the voting system altogether to one like those used in Europe. Working to get "better" candidates on the ballot isn't going to accomplish that. I've never seen any popular candidates talk about changing the voting systems.