MikeD's in good hands in the A-10

Doug Taylor · April 11th, 2003, 00:30

Hey Mike-

I know you got shot at in Afghanistan so it's nothing new to you, but I thought I'd share some A-10 photos fresh from Iraq:

The 'hog's one tough machine!

sbav8r · April 11th, 2003, 02:03

Like someone else said "and they think the X35 can replace this beast, no way!"

Doug Taylor · April 11th, 2003, 02:11

X-35's for pretty boys.

Just like the rumor back in college was them putting the F-16 as a FAC aircraft. Riiiight!

Mike Lewis · April 11th, 2003, 08:00

Hey MikeD, did you pick the A-10 or did you manage to luck out out and get chosen for it?

I can think of no better fit than MikeD and the A-10. (Well, since most of the aircraft I pictured MikeD flying have been retired from the inventory...) Knowing MikeD, I just can't picture him sitting in the cockpit of a computer-assisted, tactical-laser equipped JSF with his VR headset on...

Doug Taylor · April 11th, 2003, 10:14

You mean like one of those ascot-wearing F-16 guys that call themselves "fast movers" and refer to the aircraft as the "Viper"?

I'm sure MikeD hops in the A-10 with about three days of stubble on his face, blurbs a movie quote from "Catch-22" and blasts off!

MikeD · April 11th, 2003, 17:01

[ QUOTE ]
Hey MikeD, did you pick the A-10 or did you manage to luck out out and get chosen for it?

I can think of no better fit than MikeD and the A-10. (Well, since most of the aircraft I pictured MikeD flying have been retired from the inventory...) Knowing MikeD, I just can't picture him sitting in the cockpit of a computer-assisted, tactical-laser equipped JSF with his VR headset on...

[/ QUOTE ]

Picked it out of pilot training.

I'm up for reassignment soon, you should see what my Preference Worksheet for assignment looks like.

MD

MikeD · April 11th, 2003, 17:05

[ QUOTE ]
You mean like one of those ascot-wearing F-16 guys that call themselves "fast movers" and refer to the aircraft as the "Viper"?

I'm sure MikeD hops in the A-10 with about three days of stubble on his face, blurbs a movie quote from "Catch-22" and blasts off!

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm constantly amazed how much you remember about the old (and still current) me, Doug. In fact, I constantly get the annoyed eye from the squadron senior officers due to my Don Johnson (or Homer Simpson) 5 o'clock shadow look; and hair that borders on the edge of legal.

We had the DM airshow a couple of weekends ago. Since there wasn't anyone else available, I got selected to stand in front of the A-10 static display and answer all the public's questions. The Friday prior, I was specifically told to make sure I had a shave, and to try and make an effort for, just one day, to look like an officer of the United States Air Force, rather than some mercenary that happens to fly A-10s.

Maybe my CO will endorse my Thunderbirds application.....

MD

BJ · April 11th, 2003, 17:11

MD,

Yeah, your the professional military officer of the year now. Although, remember the shot in the mobility line last year

I never thought of you as Homer Simpson before, but that's funny.

The hog's amazing....of course not everyone in the Air Force and its leadership will admit it. A couple years after this war, they'll try to do away with her again for the X-35. The X-35 has got some nice features, but it's not a hog. The viper has alot of nice features, but it can't do the hog's job...just ask the guys on the ground.

-BJ

highspeed · April 11th, 2003, 23:09

I saw a TV news story about those pictures. I guess one of the 2 female A-10 pilots from the 75th squadron was flying a mission over Baghdad and got shot up.
The show also mentioned that she is the first pilot to land the A-10 controling only with manual reversion? Do you know if this is true MikeD? How hard would that be to do without hydralics?

On a side note MD, do you know of any AF pilots who are partially red-green color deficient? I'm still looking for a long shot. Thanks.

BJ · April 12th, 2003, 01:51

Highspeed,

It's funny you mention that about the news story...20/20 I think. Her commander said that she was the first person to land in manual reversion. I think he tokened it with "and not wreck the plane". I know of 2 people that tried landing in man rev during the Gulf War....one of them died, the other I thought landed safely. Today at work, an "old-cranium" mentioned that he knew of 3 that had attemted to land. Maybe there was damage to the ones that landed and that's how he was able to make that comment.

Either way, it's pretty impressive that she landed it. I don't think that I've ever heard anyone brief that they would land in man rev. Someone today said that it would depend on the aircraft, being that they all react differently when in man rev.

-BJ

aloft · April 16th, 2003, 23:21

The pilot of that particular Hog on that particular sortie is an acquaintance of mine, Kim Campbell. In addition to being one badass fighter pilot, she's also a product of Civil Air Patrol here in California.

Doug Taylor · April 17th, 2003, 01:58

Manual reversion is a pain in the ass in any aircraft -- except the -88. The story is, is that the -88 is a derivative of the DC-9. The "DC" in "DC-9" stands for "Direct Cable". pitch, roll and yaw control, for the most part, is manual control tabs.

So when you're flying .78 and you want to crank into a 25 degree bank, you'd better have worked out that morning!

April 17th, 2003, 08:02

Forgive my ignorance, but what is manual reversion?

BJ · April 17th, 2003, 11:03

Doug, you're joking about the DC thing aren't you? If not, that's impressive and something I would never have guessed.

The way the flight controls work for the A-10 is that we have a dual hydraulic system, one off each engine. Each of the hydraulic system will operate the ailerons, elevators, and rudders. The feel on the stick is an artificial system created by pulleys and springs. Manual Reversion is a worst case scenario for us when we lose both hydraulic systems. Like Doug said about the direct cables, those cables go directly from the cockpit to the flight controls. You can control the aircraft, but it make it difficult. For example, when you push the power up the nose will really climb and vice versa. The aircraft trim will still work though. Like I said before, most people brief that they will eject instead of land in manual reversion. One of the problem with landing the aircraft is that when you pull the power back on landing, the nose will drop. Also, it's pretty difficult to counteract winds. For even a worse case scenario, landing single-engine manual reversion adds all sorts of control problems and is even "not recommended" according to the Dash-1.

Predominently, the A-10 community will use manual reversion to get out of badguy land so that we can eject. It was a pretty ballsy move on Cambell's part to land it. Good on her though.

-BJ

Doug Taylor · April 17th, 2003, 11:28

Nah "DC" is "Douglas Corporation"!

But if you look at the power quadrant in a DC-9 and -88/90 series aircraft all of those levers connect to a jungle of pulleys and cables which control different features.

But yes, the -88 has manual (non-hydraulic) pitch and roll control.

BJ · April 17th, 2003, 12:39

I figured as much, but I know the day I assume something and call someone out on it, I'll eat my words. Like you said before....talk about what you know and don't tell someone off who's more experienced in an area.

That is interesting about the -88 though. When you're talking pitch and roll control are you talking actual control or just a backup? I'd be surprised if it were actual.

-BJ

cmsuav8r · May 2nd, 2003, 20:43

You gotta love the good ole titanium tub.

MikeD · May 2nd, 2003, 20:53

[ QUOTE ]
You gotta love the good ole titanium tub.

[/ QUOTE ]

Well...that depends. The titanium tub surrounds the cockpit. The front windscreen is bulletproof too (and birdproof). The canopy over the cockpit, however, is plexiglass like the front windscreen of a 172. So, when low level and in the turns we do to keep sight of what's going on on the ground, if you take a round up through the canopy, the titanium bathtub becomes a titanium catchers' mitt.....with your pink body in the middle.

Center_Mid · June 30th, 2003, 23:49

This has nothing to do with manual reversion. Just out of curiosity, are you a ring-knocker, ROTC, ANGie, or an OTS guy (I never heard of any OTS nickname)?

Dry wit and no-######## perspective on USAF? My guess is OTS.

MikeD · July 1st, 2003, 10:24

[ QUOTE ]
This has nothing to do with manual reversion. Just out of curiosity, are you a ring-knocker, ROTC, ANGie, or an OTS guy (I never heard of any OTS nickname)?

Dry wit and no-######## perspective on USAF? My guess is OTS.

[/ QUOTE ]

100% correct. Ex enlisted gone officer, but often wondering why.

wizard96 · July 1st, 2003, 10:44

100% correct. Ex enlisted gone officer, but often wondering why.

[/ QUOTE ]

MikeD just a question. How old were you and when did you become an officer? If you remember from a previous posting on a different thread I tried but was ineligible because of my age. When I graduated from Riddle I was going to do the OTS track since I didn't qualify for flight I saw no point in continuing with the Air Force. I too had spent 4 1/2 years enlisted.

MikeD · July 1st, 2003, 11:00

[ QUOTE ]
100% correct. Ex enlisted gone officer, but often wondering why.

[/ QUOTE ]

MikeD just a question. How old were you and when did you become an officer? If you remember from a previous posting on a different thread I tried but was ineligible because of my age. When I graduated from Riddle I was going to do the OTS track since I didn't qualify for flight I saw no point in continuing with the Air Force. I too had spent 4 1/2 years enlisted.

[/ QUOTE ]

Was 26 when I went to OTS. Did the first two years of AFROTC in 89-90, but there were no pilot slots and I got a missile slot, which I didn't want, so I left. Applied twice to OTS and was accepted conveniently 3 months after getting layed off.

wizard96 · July 1st, 2003, 12:39

Was 26 when I went to OTS. Did the first two years of AFROTC in 89-90, but there were no pilot slots and I got a missile slot, which I didn't want, so I left. Applied twice to OTS and was accepted conveniently 3 months after getting layed off.

[/ QUOTE ]

Not that it matters for me now since I'm 34 but how did you overcome the age restriction at 26? I was 26 1/2 if I went to OTS and they said I was ineligible for a flight slot. I take it you went to OTS in 1990? I remember starting in 1989 that flight slots were few and far between. They were admitting 5 students per class instead of the 35 I've been seeing before the draw down. I was stationed at Columbus AFB for 3 1/2 years so I was familiar with the class sizes. I've been reading the postings and have seen your comments so I know that as with everything in life nothing is what it seems. Thanks MikeD

MikeD · July 1st, 2003, 15:36

[ QUOTE ]
Was 26 when I went to OTS. Did the first two years of AFROTC in 89-90, but there were no pilot slots and I got a missile slot, which I didn't want, so I left. Applied twice to OTS and was accepted conveniently 3 months after getting layed off.

[/ QUOTE ]

Not that it matters for me now since I'm 34 but how did you overcome the age restriction at 26? I was 26 1/2 if I went to OTS and they said I was ineligible for a flight slot. I take it you went to OTS in 1990? I remember starting in 1989 that flight slots were few and far between. They were admitting 5 students per class instead of the 35 I've been seeing before the draw down. I was stationed at Columbus AFB for 3 1/2 years so I was familiar with the class sizes. I've been reading the postings and have seen your comments so I know that as with everything in life nothing is what it seems. Thanks MikeD

[/ QUOTE ]

OTS in 1997. Did ROTC in 1990 when there was no pilot slots. At that time (97) the entry age into UPT was 271/2 to start.

wizard96 · July 1st, 2003, 17:43

OTS in 1997. Did ROTC in 1990 when there was no pilot slots. At that time (97) the entry age into UPT was 271/2 to start.

[/ QUOTE ]

DAMN I WAS LIED TOO!

April 11th, 2003, 00:30	#1
Doug Taylor Agent Smith Join Date: Dec 1969 Location: KSDL Posts: 40,430 Blog Entries: 1	MikeD\'s in good hands in the A-10 Hey Mike- I know you got shot at in Afghanistan so it's nothing new to you, but I thought I'd share some A-10 photos fresh from Iraq: The 'hog's one tough machine!

April 11th, 2003, 02:03	#2
sbav8r Junior Member Join Date: Feb 2003 Location: Santa Barbara, CA Posts: 195	Re: MikeD\'s in good hands in the A-10 Like someone else said "and they think the X35 can replace this beast, no way!"

April 11th, 2003, 02:11	#3
Doug Taylor Agent Smith Join Date: Dec 1969 Location: KSDL Posts: 40,430 Blog Entries: 1	Re: MikeD\'s in good hands in the A-10 X-35's for pretty boys. Just like the rumor back in college was them putting the F-16 as a FAC aircraft. Riiiight!

April 11th, 2003, 08:00	#4
Mike Lewis Shadow Administrator Join Date: Jul 1998 Location: Between KFCM and KMSP Posts: 6,227	Re: MikeD\'s in good hands in the A-10 Hey MikeD, did you pick the A-10 or did you manage to luck out out and get chosen for it? I can think of no better fit than MikeD and the A-10. (Well, since most of the aircraft I pictured MikeD flying have been retired from the inventory...) Knowing MikeD, I just can't picture him sitting in the cockpit of a computer-assisted, tactical-laser equipped JSF with his VR headset on...

April 11th, 2003, 10:14	#5
Doug Taylor Agent Smith Join Date: Dec 1969 Location: KSDL Posts: 40,430 Blog Entries: 1	Re: MikeD\'s in good hands in the A-10 You mean like one of those ascot-wearing F-16 guys that call themselves "fast movers" and refer to the aircraft as the "Viper"? I'm sure MikeD hops in the A-10 with about three days of stubble on his face, blurbs a movie quote from "Catch-22" and blasts off!

April 11th, 2003, 17:01	#6
MikeD Administrator Join Date: Feb 2003 Location: Pinal Airpark Posts: 6,897	Re: MikeD\'s in good hands in the A-10 [ QUOTE ] Hey MikeD, did you pick the A-10 or did you manage to luck out out and get chosen for it? I can think of no better fit than MikeD and the A-10. (Well, since most of the aircraft I pictured MikeD flying have been retired from the inventory...) Knowing MikeD, I just can't picture him sitting in the cockpit of a computer-assisted, tactical-laser equipped JSF with his VR headset on... [/ QUOTE ] Picked it out of pilot training. I'm up for reassignment soon, you should see what my Preference Worksheet for assignment looks like. MD

April 11th, 2003, 17:05	#7
MikeD Administrator Join Date: Feb 2003 Location: Pinal Airpark Posts: 6,897	Re: MikeD\'s in good hands in the A-10 [ QUOTE ] You mean like one of those ascot-wearing F-16 guys that call themselves "fast movers" and refer to the aircraft as the "Viper"? I'm sure MikeD hops in the A-10 with about three days of stubble on his face, blurbs a movie quote from "Catch-22" and blasts off! [/ QUOTE ] I'm constantly amazed how much you remember about the old (and still current) me, Doug. In fact, I constantly get the annoyed eye from the squadron senior officers due to my Don Johnson (or Homer Simpson) 5 o'clock shadow look; and hair that borders on the edge of legal. We had the DM airshow a couple of weekends ago. Since there wasn't anyone else available, I got selected to stand in front of the A-10 static display and answer all the public's questions. The Friday prior, I was specifically told to make sure I had a shave, and to try and make an effort for, just one day, to look like an officer of the United States Air Force, rather than some mercenary that happens to fly A-10s. Maybe my CO will endorse my Thunderbirds application..... MD

April 11th, 2003, 17:11	#8
BJ Junior Member Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: Arizona Posts: 37	Re: MikeD\'s in good hands in the A-10 MD, Yeah, your the professional military officer of the year now. Although, remember the shot in the mobility line last year I never thought of you as Homer Simpson before, but that's funny. The hog's amazing....of course not everyone in the Air Force and its leadership will admit it. A couple years after this war, they'll try to do away with her again for the X-35. The X-35 has got some nice features, but it's not a hog. The viper has alot of nice features, but it can't do the hog's job...just ask the guys on the ground. -BJ

April 11th, 2003, 23:09	#9
highspeed Junior Member Join Date: Sep 2001 Posts: 119	Re: MikeD\'s in good hands in the A-10 I saw a TV news story about those pictures. I guess one of the 2 female A-10 pilots from the 75th squadron was flying a mission over Baghdad and got shot up. The show also mentioned that she is the first pilot to land the A-10 controling only with manual reversion? Do you know if this is true MikeD? How hard would that be to do without hydralics? On a side note MD, do you know of any AF pilots who are partially red-green color deficient? I'm still looking for a long shot. Thanks.

April 12th, 2003, 01:51	#10
BJ Junior Member Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: Arizona Posts: 37	Re: MikeD\'s in good hands in the A-10 Highspeed, It's funny you mention that about the news story...20/20 I think. Her commander said that she was the first person to land in manual reversion. I think he tokened it with "and not wreck the plane". I know of 2 people that tried landing in man rev during the Gulf War....one of them died, the other I thought landed safely. Today at work, an "old-cranium" mentioned that he knew of 3 that had attemted to land. Maybe there was damage to the ones that landed and that's how he was able to make that comment. Either way, it's pretty impressive that she landed it. I don't think that I've ever heard anyone brief that they would land in man rev. Someone today said that it would depend on the aircraft, being that they all react differently when in man rev. -BJ

April 16th, 2003, 23:21	#11
aloft Old Skool Join Date: Sep 2001 Location: Inside your OODA loop Posts: 6,812	Re: MikeD\'s in good hands in the A-10 The pilot of that particular Hog on that particular sortie is an acquaintance of mine, Kim Campbell. In addition to being one badass fighter pilot, she's also a product of Civil Air Patrol here in California.

April 17th, 2003, 01:58	#12
Doug Taylor Agent Smith Join Date: Dec 1969 Location: KSDL Posts: 40,430 Blog Entries: 1	Re: MikeD\'s in good hands in the A-10 Manual reversion is a pain in the ass in any aircraft -- except the -88. The story is, is that the -88 is a derivative of the DC-9. The "DC" in "DC-9" stands for "Direct Cable". pitch, roll and yaw control, for the most part, is manual control tabs. So when you're flying .78 and you want to crank into a 25 degree bank, you'd better have worked out that morning!

April 17th, 2003, 08:02	#13
Lurker Posts: n/a	Re: MikeD\'s in good hands in the A-10 Forgive my ignorance, but what is manual reversion?

April 17th, 2003, 11:03	#14
BJ Junior Member Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: Arizona Posts: 37	Manual Reversion Doug, you're joking about the DC thing aren't you? If not, that's impressive and something I would never have guessed. The way the flight controls work for the A-10 is that we have a dual hydraulic system, one off each engine. Each of the hydraulic system will operate the ailerons, elevators, and rudders. The feel on the stick is an artificial system created by pulleys and springs. Manual Reversion is a worst case scenario for us when we lose both hydraulic systems. Like Doug said about the direct cables, those cables go directly from the cockpit to the flight controls. You can control the aircraft, but it make it difficult. For example, when you push the power up the nose will really climb and vice versa. The aircraft trim will still work though. Like I said before, most people brief that they will eject instead of land in manual reversion. One of the problem with landing the aircraft is that when you pull the power back on landing, the nose will drop. Also, it's pretty difficult to counteract winds. For even a worse case scenario, landing single-engine manual reversion adds all sorts of control problems and is even "not recommended" according to the Dash-1. Predominently, the A-10 community will use manual reversion to get out of badguy land so that we can eject. It was a pretty ballsy move on Cambell's part to land it. Good on her though. -BJ

April 17th, 2003, 11:28	#15
Doug Taylor Agent Smith Join Date: Dec 1969 Location: KSDL Posts: 40,430 Blog Entries: 1	Re: Manual Reversion Nah "DC" is "Douglas Corporation"! But if you look at the power quadrant in a DC-9 and -88/90 series aircraft all of those levers connect to a jungle of pulleys and cables which control different features. But yes, the -88 has manual (non-hydraulic) pitch and roll control.

April 17th, 2003, 12:39	#16
BJ Junior Member Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: Arizona Posts: 37	Re: Manual Reversion I figured as much, but I know the day I assume something and call someone out on it, I'll eat my words. Like you said before....talk about what you know and don't tell someone off who's more experienced in an area. That is interesting about the -88 though. When you're talking pitch and roll control are you talking actual control or just a backup? I'd be surprised if it were actual. -BJ

May 2nd, 2003, 20:43	#17
cmsuav8r Senior Member Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: Warrensburg, MO/ KC, MO Posts: 583	Re: Manual Reversion You gotta love the good ole titanium tub.

May 2nd, 2003, 20:53	#18
MikeD Administrator Join Date: Feb 2003 Location: Pinal Airpark Posts: 6,897	Re: Manual Reversion [ QUOTE ] You gotta love the good ole titanium tub. [/ QUOTE ] Well...that depends. The titanium tub surrounds the cockpit. The front windscreen is bulletproof too (and birdproof). The canopy over the cockpit, however, is plexiglass like the front windscreen of a 172. So, when low level and in the turns we do to keep sight of what's going on on the ground, if you take a round up through the canopy, the titanium bathtub becomes a titanium catchers' mitt.....with your pink body in the middle.

June 30th, 2003, 23:49	#19
Center_Mid Junior Member Join Date: Jun 2003 Location: Seattle, WA Posts: 213	Re: Manual Reversion This has nothing to do with manual reversion. Just out of curiosity, are you a ring-knocker, ROTC, ANGie, or an OTS guy (I never heard of any OTS nickname)? Dry wit and no-######## perspective on USAF? My guess is OTS.

July 1st, 2003, 10:24	#20
MikeD Administrator Join Date: Feb 2003 Location: Pinal Airpark Posts: 6,897	Re: Manual Reversion [ QUOTE ] This has nothing to do with manual reversion. Just out of curiosity, are you a ring-knocker, ROTC, ANGie, or an OTS guy (I never heard of any OTS nickname)? Dry wit and no-######## perspective on USAF? My guess is OTS. [/ QUOTE ] 100% correct. Ex enlisted gone officer, but often wondering why.

July 1st, 2003, 10:44	#21
wizard96 Newbie Join Date: May 2003 Location: CT Posts: 29	Re: Manual Reversion 100% correct. Ex enlisted gone officer, but often wondering why. [/ QUOTE ] MikeD just a question. How old were you and when did you become an officer? If you remember from a previous posting on a different thread I tried but was ineligible because of my age. When I graduated from Riddle I was going to do the OTS track since I didn't qualify for flight I saw no point in continuing with the Air Force. I too had spent 4 1/2 years enlisted.

July 1st, 2003, 11:00	#22
MikeD Administrator Join Date: Feb 2003 Location: Pinal Airpark Posts: 6,897	Re: Manual Reversion [ QUOTE ] 100% correct. Ex enlisted gone officer, but often wondering why. [/ QUOTE ] MikeD just a question. How old were you and when did you become an officer? If you remember from a previous posting on a different thread I tried but was ineligible because of my age. When I graduated from Riddle I was going to do the OTS track since I didn't qualify for flight I saw no point in continuing with the Air Force. I too had spent 4 1/2 years enlisted. [/ QUOTE ] Was 26 when I went to OTS. Did the first two years of AFROTC in 89-90, but there were no pilot slots and I got a missile slot, which I didn't want, so I left. Applied twice to OTS and was accepted conveniently 3 months after getting layed off.

July 1st, 2003, 12:39	#23
wizard96 Newbie Join Date: May 2003 Location: CT Posts: 29	Re: Manual Reversion Was 26 when I went to OTS. Did the first two years of AFROTC in 89-90, but there were no pilot slots and I got a missile slot, which I didn't want, so I left. Applied twice to OTS and was accepted conveniently 3 months after getting layed off. [/ QUOTE ] Not that it matters for me now since I'm 34 but how did you overcome the age restriction at 26? I was 26 1/2 if I went to OTS and they said I was ineligible for a flight slot. I take it you went to OTS in 1990? I remember starting in 1989 that flight slots were few and far between. They were admitting 5 students per class instead of the 35 I've been seeing before the draw down. I was stationed at Columbus AFB for 3 1/2 years so I was familiar with the class sizes. I've been reading the postings and have seen your comments so I know that as with everything in life nothing is what it seems. Thanks MikeD

July 1st, 2003, 15:36	#24
MikeD Administrator Join Date: Feb 2003 Location: Pinal Airpark Posts: 6,897	Re: Manual Reversion [ QUOTE ] Was 26 when I went to OTS. Did the first two years of AFROTC in 89-90, but there were no pilot slots and I got a missile slot, which I didn't want, so I left. Applied twice to OTS and was accepted conveniently 3 months after getting layed off. [/ QUOTE ] Not that it matters for me now since I'm 34 but how did you overcome the age restriction at 26? I was 26 1/2 if I went to OTS and they said I was ineligible for a flight slot. I take it you went to OTS in 1990? I remember starting in 1989 that flight slots were few and far between. They were admitting 5 students per class instead of the 35 I've been seeing before the draw down. I was stationed at Columbus AFB for 3 1/2 years so I was familiar with the class sizes. I've been reading the postings and have seen your comments so I know that as with everything in life nothing is what it seems. Thanks MikeD [/ QUOTE ] OTS in 1997. Did ROTC in 1990 when there was no pilot slots. At that time (97) the entry age into UPT was 271/2 to start.

July 1st, 2003, 17:43	#25
wizard96 Newbie Join Date: May 2003 Location: CT Posts: 29	Re: Manual Reversion OTS in 1997. Did ROTC in 1990 when there was no pilot slots. At that time (97) the entry age into UPT was 271/2 to start. [/ QUOTE ] DAMN I WAS LIED TOO!

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode