F-16.net

Elite Joined: Apr 08, 2004 Posts: 733 Status: Offline

Scorpion1alpha wrote:

Best of luck as you stand up and lead the 90th FS at Elmo with the F-22. I've no doubt PACAF has chosen the right person to lead in this assignment.

I second that. Just mentioning Dozer's name with the Raptor support crew up at Oceana a few weeks ago brought quite a response, both of the crew chiefs said that they had updated their 'dream sheet's' just on the chance of ending up in his squadron in 'The Great White North', and the pilots I spoke with agreed. It says a lot of anyone who inspires that kind of 'follow him anywhere' loyalty amongst his troops.

Hope to see you back down in the 'Lower 48' in the future!
Good Luck,
Mike Kopack

F-16.net Sponsor

This message from our sponsor will disappear if you log on as a member.

Veteran Joined: Mar 12, 2005 Posts: 384 Status: Offline

THANK YOU DOZER! That post cleared up a BUNCH of stuff. Thank you also to the person that pointed him in the direction of posting on here to clarify the situation created by this thread. Applause

It's getting a little warm in here.

I think it should be possible to reach common ground. Important capabilities of the Raptor should be kept secret as long as they have surprise/shock potential for the enemy. But the Raptor is, like ALL military systems, procured by funding for programs, and that funding is in the hands of congressmen who in many cases have never served. But they ARE the ones holding the purse strings, and the most important thing that is necessary in order to get that funding is to convince those congressmen that they are getting our money's worth. And it is equally important to note that these congressmen are going to be listening to what their constituents have to say about it, as well. If enough voters say "We're not getting our money's worth out of that dog and if you don't kill the program,
we'll kill your career at the ballot box!" then your program is in DEEP trouble.

I think it's inportant that if the Raptor is shown at an airshow, it should demonstrate SOME of the capabilities it has that no other plane can do. But only SOME of those extra capabilities. Enough to keep the voters and the congressmen happy that this is a cool program worth spending money on, but not so much that the enemy knows exactly what to expect just by visiting a few of the right airshows and taking notes.

CJ

Elite Joined: Aug 30, 2005 Posts: 663 Status: Offline

Dozer - Best of luck as you stand up the 90th in the great white north and bring a truly fantastic aircraft into service.

Newbie Joined: Sep 26, 2006 Posts: 1 Status: Offline

Here's my 2 cents about the buffoonery I've seen in this thread.

I'm an active duty crew chief. I am a service member. I am a combatant. However, first and foremost, I am a citizen, a father, and a husband living in America just like many of you who are interested in the F-22. For those of you who pulled the "civilians pay your salaries" card, I say shame on you. I pay taxes too. My taxes help pay for Medicare and Social Security, two more government programs with questionable management. They got plenty screwed up without any involvement from the military. We're all in the same boat people.

The F-22 is an investment that I'm putting money into that's going to protect my home, your home, and everyone else's. I've touched F-22s, seen them up close, even lent tools to their crew chiefs. I don't know how fast they'll go, I don't know how high they'll climb, I don't know how many Gs they'll pull, and I don't care. I don't run the program, and neither do you. (I'm talking to you, idesof.) I have faith in the military leaders who were appointed by the civilian leaders who were elected by the citizens, military and civilian, of the United States. You don't tell your plumber how to do his job. You don't question his education level when he's at your house in the middle of the night fixing a leak. Why would you question mine or anyone else's that you don't know or observe on a regular basis?

Next, I would encourage a statistician to make a pie chart showing the percentage of dishonest, dangerous, stupid, lazy, brilliant, hard working, or average people in the military. Now make one for civilians. I'd bet they'll be the same. I'm sure you'll find similar results if you were to examine percentages of people with tendencies to shoot their mouths off in public about things they have no intimate knowledge of or control over. (That's for you again, idesof) Let's all note that this whole thread started when one person shot his mouth off about something which we now know he had no specific knowledge of. That's just as dangerous as OPSEC violations in my opinion.

Last, I'm nobody's property. I chose to serve my country, and in doing so I serve myself as a citizen of my country. I serve the Constitution, but I don't think any of you are the Constitution. I didn't volunteer to be subordinate to ANYONE except the NCOs, SNCOs, officers, and civilians appointed above me. Last time I checked John Q Taxpayer has not been appointed over me. Let's also bear in mind that I was a civilian until I enlisted and I will be again an 13 years or so. Military service is a temporary condition, not a terminal one for those who aren't unfortunate enough to make the ultimate sacrifice. The ONE and ONLY difference, in my humble opinion, is that I swore an oath to give my life for my country if the need should arise. That gives me no superiority over a civilian, and it gives no civilian, other than those in my chain of command, superiority over me.

Looks like someone made good use of the jump-to-conclusions mat. Laughing

Veteran Joined: Mar 12, 2005 Posts: 384 Status: Offline

:: Message removed by moderator. Apparently there has been a misunderstanding. ::

Elite Joined: Jul 20, 2005 Posts: 1031 Status: Offline

Man...seeing people acting this way really trashes this website. I think everyone should set their ego's aside and take a breath. Been insulted by someone else? Try letting it roll off your shoulder. The boards are a lot nicer when everyone ignores bad comments.

As far as OPSEC goes...Meathook is right on with his post.

Personally I would say that any question you ask about a program has potential OPSEC considerations. If you don't like being told that you don't need to know, then don't ask the question. All the info that ANYONE outside the Air Force would NEED to know about the Raptor program is publicly available. Aside from that comment, it is fun to gain further insight into the program. I personally have first hand knowledge/experience with the Raptor program/aircraft and would share very little because I'm not sure what can and cannot be released.

Again, not trying to insult anyone! Take care,

Check

abc123, yours was one of the most intelligent and best written responses I've seen in this thread (and on this forum). Thanks.

Elite Joined: Aug 30, 2005 Posts: 663 Status: Offline

abc123 well said. Welcome to the forum.

Newbie Joined: Sep 27, 2006 Posts: 1 Status: Offline

Personally I think the bottom line to all of this is that everyone needs to remember that pilots are involved. Pilots love to show off their planes and love to talk about how great their plane is (whether it be a Cessna 152 or a Block 42 Falcon). In this situation we have something of a greater problem, fighter pilots. These are the pinnacle of when it comes to talking about their planes and their own personal capabilities that they have. Don't worry, some where, at some time, the great airshows will continue all in thanks to the balsy fighter pilots who love what they do and what they fly.

Elite Joined: Jul 20, 2005 Posts: 1031 Status: Offline

I'll ask Dozer's replacement what we might see from him in the skies and let everyone know.

-Check

F-16.net

Forum: F-22A Raptor

Say bye-bye to great Raptor airshows