Learning aerobatics is alot different then learning to fly at 85 kts straight and level. Things tend to change when lives are at hand, especially the instructors. I guess you'll just have to wait and see.

Im sure we will see, acrobatics is constant unusual attitudes. Im going to see if I can get my instructor to teach me to do an extreme power on stall today, it should be good experence.

quote:

I joined to be a pilot not a soldier

rppearso, you just do not see the whole picture. When pilots get shot down, and they do, they better be soldiers or they are dead.

Look up the history of Army aviation after the split with the Air Force and read about what Army pilots have done. Warning -- this will cure ignorance!

Your talking about the army air corp. There is a difference between getting the required training for what you do and being told to do something you dident sign up for. A downed pilot better be able to run and really good at land navigation, but a pilot should be good at navigation anyways.

The interpertation I get from the soldier first mentality is doing something you dident sign up for or being forced to sign on longer than you intended to without that knowlage up front. The fact that I had to fill out a dream sheet was the first indicator.

In war, a pilot that cannot survive on the ground, won't ever fly again.

Being a soldier first, at least gives a downed pilot a better chance of survival in order to fly another day.

This should be a no-brainer.

I think the disconnect is in what it means to be a soldier first does it mean to tolerate unnessisary BS or to do what it takes to get where you want to be without interference from above. Your right gunny, but the soldier first mentality im refering to is pulling legal admins out of the office to pull guard duty just so they can "earn" there deployment ribbon even though thats not what there MOS does.

Keep in mind being diliberatly pulled to do something that is not you job for the sake of "earning" your ribbon is much different than if you building were attacked and you had to use your soldier skills to defend your self.

quote:

does it mean to tolerate unnessisary BS

Obviously our SME (subject matter expert) hasn't really experienced the corporate world yet. You have to put up with BS everywhere you go.

As for admins doing guard duty......if you're an E4 and below, expect to do some dirty work. It comes with the territory and everyone had to do it. More motivation to make rank.

When you finally get out and get a real job, do you think you're gonna get all the "easy" jobs at first? Probably not, the jobs that the older guys don't want, you're gonna get as the new guy. Just like when its time to pick who is going to work overtime tonight, they're not gonna ask the guy who has been there for 20 years to work over when they got a fresh zitty faced college grad to work overtime.

Pulling guard duty and mess crank is an essential duty for military members. Never heard a ribbon was awarded. But then again, if it helps pretty up the uniform and thats all it stands for....

Napoleon Bonaparte said,

"A Soldier will fight long and hard for a bit of colored ribbon."

The only people in the military that are authorized to not fire offensively, are Corpsmen and Medics, as it is a violation of the Geneva Convention. They are to defend themselves and their patients.

You somehow think, rrpearso, that legal admins aren't near the front line, or on convoys that might require them to engage the enemy. How is an Infantrymen going to get his Power of Attorney signed? He is essential in the fight, not the REMF, so the REMF can take his handbag of carbon copies and rubber stamps to him. If combat essential personnel are engaged in the fight, Legal Admins are still Soldiers. The U.S. Army requires a sentry know how to operate or be familiar with his/her personal weapon, and know their General Orders, in order to stand a post. Seeing as those two skills are CTT (Common Task Trained) to ALL soldiers, they are more than qualified to do it, and indeed signed up for it. FACT.

Ok I got the clarification I needed. BTW, when I was hired on at the company I work for we work by the project and my project has not required me to do to much overtime other than when I have to go to the arctic circle. Im not sure I ever will experence the corporate world you speak of because I only have 3 years left to get my PE licence and I have gotten a substantial raise and a window office in a years time. Once you become a licenced professional engineer you dont have to many worrys of unemployment or being talked down to jobs especially if you couple that PE with a masters of science or a PhD. I refused to take a job unless it was directly under a chemical engineer PE, it took me a year to find a job but it was well worth it.

Thoes are the only jobs not authorized to fire but is everyone else required to fire? Would I get in trouble if I refused to fire my weapon and I wasent a medic or a chaplin?

Gunny I wish I had kept the link to the article I found about the marine unit that was doing that. The ribbon was just a general deployment ribbon, but they dident think legal admins were "earning" it because they sat at a desk, of course if I were the JAG officer I would stand up for my helpers because without legal aids it makes a lawyers job much harder and if some over zealous general or col kept pushing it I would just resign my commission because thats unethical behavior.

No, refusal to fire your weapon while engaged with the enemy is consciencious objection. It can also be viewed as failure to obey a lawful order, refusal of duty, or worse case, cowardice before the enemy.

If you "freeze" up, which one of my superiors did in a firefight, its somewhat understandable. Eventually, they will fight, as their life depends on it. Its instinct. If they do not, and just allow themselves to be overrun or killed, they were cowards. You'd be surprised how well fear motivates people.

can you actually be sent to jail for being a consciencious objector if you fail to fire your weapon or if you diliberatly fire to miss.

Kiddo...

What do you mean by an "extreme" power-on stall?Are you refering to an accelerated stall and are you expecting to do one? If so...that stall is acutally an instructor demonstrated stall as it's considered a high risk manuever that can quickly lead into a spin if prolonged. PART of the purpose of the demonstration is to teach the student how to recognize the characteristics leading up to this stall so that they may AVOID them.

All student performed stall manuervers are for the purpose of developing good stall RECOVERY techniques. If you are doing these manuevers for any other reason than this I'd have to question that you are responsible and mature enough to be in a plane.

Now...on to this:

can you actually be sent to jail for being a consciencious objector if you fail to fire your weapon or if you diliberatly fire to miss.

I'm not going to answer that as I'm not an expert on military law. Instead I'm going to ask you this.

What are the moral and ethical responsiblities of the consciencious objector to those that are serving along side him/her? If their deliberate act of refusing and/or misfiring leads to injury, death or capture of one or all of their fellow marines or soldiers, what resposiblity do you believe this cons. objector bears?

Yes that is correct you can go into a spin if the recovery is not made but my instructor thinks im competeant enought to do it. Never assume that because someone does not tolerate abuse they are immature or incompetent

If someone started in the military and realized it was a mistake and was forced into a situation they dident want to be in wouldent that be the fault of the commander if the individual made there intentions/request clear, that would mean that the commander knew about that individuals dispostion to begin with and put them in that position anyways.

Take a breath...Relax. Now, let's try using some punctuation. I think at least part of that run-on sentence was a question. Though one can't be too sure.

Just because you're immature and incompetent doesn't mean you can't use proper grammar and spelling. You're a college graduate, come on. I know they tried to teach you this. Maybe it was a little difficult, since you were probably hazed in college as well. But at least you completed college (yeah, right).

Ok that doesent make any sense. The picture that is trying to be painted is that im a dumb cluck because my political opinions dont match yours. So you pick things out like my grammer and spelling to try to discredit my acomplishments or intellegance that back up my main points because im not just a grunt that follows orders without question, I in fact question everything.

You make yourself look like an idiot through your grammar and spelling mistakes. Common words like "intelligence" or "accomplishments" you butcher. I'm surprised you haven't said that you're a "collage" graduate. It's hard to believe that anyone with your grammar and spelling skills could possibly be an engineer. You must have slipped through the cracks somehow, or you're just lying. I'd wager on the latter. I'm sure the instructor on "MS Flight Simulator 2002" is reeeeaaaallll nice. Good luck getting that certificate!!!

*sigh*
Kiddo..Once again you miss the point. First of all, I don’t ASSUME anything about you. My opinion of you has been formed based on your own words written by you in this forum. You have a classic case of victimitis. You always defer responsibility. The world you live in is a 1 dimensional in which you are the center. That’s unfortunate as you are trying to learn a skill that puts you in a 3 dimensional environment…flying. Yes, you may learn to execute each maneuver well; however problems will develop when you become the PIC and won’t have the instructor on board. Since you won’t be able to recognize any mistake as your own, (it just had to be that instructor) you won’t be able to correct them. The good news is that you are young, appear to belong to a supportive church and you have an instructor that may see possibilities in you that you haven’t recognized yet. The bad news is none of that will do any good until YOU look hard and long into yourself.

Kiddo…I didn’t ask that last question of you to ambush you. I honestly was interested in what your answer would be hoping that you wouldn’t just defer once again.

How is it a Commander's fault, that you failed to defend yourself and your unit, by not firing or intentionally missing a likely and identifiable threat?

You make no sense. Running away makes more sense than not engaging the enemy, or intentionally missing.(Albeit equally illegal to retreat without orders.) I put a man through the Military Judicial system for failing to fire at an enemy, and I took great pride in doing so. Who do you think you are to endanger the lives of my men, or myself? So, yes, it is illegal, and you will reap what you sow. When my life is on the line, you better fire at the enemy, and aim to kill. When your life is on the line, and you suddenly decide its not what you signed on for, and you don't shoot back, its just cowardice. Its also completely against instinct, FIGHT or FLIGHT. And flight involves no aircraft in this sense. Your failure to fight costs lives. If you start causing the platoon to take casualties by not engaging in your sector, you are just as big a threat as the approaching hostiles. Best bet is to suck on the barrel of your own weapon, and let a Soldier man your post. Or find out what a hopped-up grunt on a power-trip and fighting for his life would do.

Me, personally, I would develop the situation. If it seems a better chance to dead weight you, so we can exfil, I'll deliver you right there. If we are doing okay, I'll just relieve you of your ammo and keep fighting, and prosecute you when complete, and back at the FOB. I have experience in the latter.

So what do you prosecute someone under, if you flee its disertion but to freeze up...? I imagine the penalty would be a discharge?