Slap, I got a cure. Rinse with Bourbon 12 times a day.
It won't help but you won't care. :D
(Get well, Podner)
You are *not* getting a hug...
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Cliff
Aww, shucks... I didn't know you cared, Ken! ;)
I duz -- but it's totally like play-tonic. Not to say you can't get the random kiss to make sure the ungodly are paying attention. ;)
Quote:
One of the awesome parts of air-to-air fighting is that you are constantly faced with a different problem precisely because the other guy is also trying his best to kill you. Good air-to-air pilots understand the human dimension and try to use it to their advantage. There's a good deal of art to it...
Unquestionably and most of you guys almost certainly do that one on one bit at altitude far better than would I. You even excel at the small groups in conflict thing. The problem I've noted is when multiple groups doing different things on the ground intrude in the air oriented bubble, things sometimes get connfoozed and much the skill set falls into the non productive (sometimes even mildly counterproductive... :rolleyes:) realm. Skill sets have specificity by definition.
Quote:
I think that's true in any military effort, though- TTPs exist as a starting point, and how far beyond them you get depends on how capable you are at progressing.
Totally true. There are green suiters with skill sets not amenable to close combat or even generic land warfare. To include, regrettably, some in high places.
Quote:
Interesting point on the implementer mattering...
That's really the only thing that is slightly more important than good or at least adequate Intel -- the wrong guy in the job will almost inevitably make flawed decisions. The Military personnel system with its strong tendency to make like Peas in the Pod militates (bad pun...) a median personna. Mediocrity is akin to median. We need round pegs for round holes -- you can put a square peg in a round hole but it's less than optimum and it'll be smaller than desirable...
Quote:
Good intel is a must. I still argue that knowing the end state you want to achieve should be the starting point... even if you can't know EXACTLY how to get there it is probably best to have a direction.
And I certainly agree. I suspect Warden, Slap and pvebber can also agree. the issue then becomes which of us is the designated Elector of Directions...
The implementer, acting on the Intel available...
Be careful up there... ;)