Andrew Ross is a pilot at a major airline flying the Boeing 787 domestically and internationally. Andrew has served as a union representative, committee chairman, and is a member of the National Education Steering Committee for the ALPA. He has also served as an airline check airman and is a Gold-Seal Flight Instructor. Andrew is also a member of the National Intercollegiate Flying Association (NIFA) Board of Directors, furthering collegiate aviation education through competition all over the US. Andrew holds his masters degree in organizational leadership with a focus in non-profit management and executive coaching and counseling from Lewis University. He currently runs his own coaching and consulting firm. He is also a published author.

Cesar "Rico" Rodriguez's first operational assignment was flying the Fairchild Republic A-10 Thunderbolt II at Suwon Air Base, South Korea; in 1985 he was selected to attend the Instructor Pilot Course at Randolph Air Force Base, Texas then spent the following three years as an AT-38 Instructor Pilot at Holloman AFB, New Mexico; in 1988 he transitioned to the McDonnell Douglas F-15 Eagle and was assigned to the 33d Tactical Fighter Wing at Eglin AFB, Florida. Rodriguez flew missions in support of the U.S. invasion of Panama in 1989 and following service in Operation Desert Storm served on the staff of 9th Air Force at Shaw AFB, South Carolina then attended Air Command and Staff College at Maxwell AFB in Montgomery, Alabama. Beginning in 1995 he was Chief of Force Requirements and Executive Officer to the Commander of U.S. Air Forces Europe at Ramstein Air Base, Germany then returned to operational flying as a pilot and Chief of Safety with the 48th Fighter Wing at RAF Lakenheath, UK; he next served as Assistant Chief of Safety at Air Combat Command Headquarters at Langley AFB, Virginia and then attended the Naval War College in Newport, Rhode Island. In 2002 he was assigned as Deputy Commander of the 366th Operations Group at Mountain Home AFB, Idaho and also deployed to Kuwait in support of Operation Iraqi Freedom serving as Operations Group Commander for the 332d Air Expeditionary Wing, the largest flying unit in Central Command. His final assignment was as Commander of the 355th Mission Support Group at Davis-Monthan AFB, Arizona; he retired in November, 2006. His numerous awards include the Legion of Merit, three Distinguished Flying Crosses and the Air Medal with 11 oak leaf clusters.

On the afternoon of May 11, 1996, Valet Flight 592 pushed back from gate G2 in Miami after a delay of 1 hour and 4 minutes due to mechanical problems.There were 110 people on board: 105 passengers, mainly from Florida and Georgia, and a crew of two pilots and three flight attendants. At 2:04 PM EDT, the DC-9 took off from runway 9L (now runway 8R) and began a normal climb. At 2:10 p.m the passengers started to smell smoke. At the same time, the pilots heard a loud bang in their headsets and noticed the plane was losing electrical power. The sag in electrical power and the bang were eventually determined to be the result of a tire in the cargo hold exploding. Seconds later, a flight attendant entered the cockpit and informed the flight crew of a fire in the passenger cabin. Passengers' shouts of "fire, fire, fire" were recorded on the cockpit voice recorder (CVR) when the cockpit door was opened. Though ValuJet's flight attendant training manual stated that the cockpit door should not be opened when smoke or other harmful gases might be present in the cabin, the intercom was not functional and informing the pilots of what was happening was difficult. The flight data recorder (FDR) indicated a progressive failure of the DC-9's electrical and flight control systems due to the spreading fire. Kubeck and Hazen immediately asked air traffic control for a return to Miami due to the increasing smoke in the cockpit and cabin, and were given instructions for a return to the airport. One minute later, Hazen requested the nearest available airport. Kubeck began to turn the plane left in preparation for the return to Miami. Flight 592 disappeared from radar at 2:13:42 PM, the exact time that it crashed. Eyewitnesses nearby watched as the plane banked sharply, rolled onto its side and nosedived into the Francis S. Taylor Wildlife Management Area in the Everglades, a few miles west of Miami, at a speed in excess of 507 miles per hour (441 kn; 816 km/h). Kubeck lost control of the plane less than 10 seconds before impact. Examination of debris suggested that the fire had burned through the floorboards in the cabin, resulting in structural failure and damage to cables underneath the instrument panels. The NTSB report on the accident stated, "the Safety Board cannot rule out the possibility that the flightcrew was incapacitated by smoke or heat in the cockpit during the last 7 seconds of the flight." At the end of a fifteen-month investigation, the National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) determined that the fire that downed Flight 592 developed in a cargo compartment below the passenger cabin. The cargo compartment was a Class D design, in which fire suppression is accomplished by sealing off the hold from outside air. Any fire in such an airtight compartment would quickly exhaust all available oxidizers and then burn itself out. As the fire suppression can be accomplished without any intervention by the crew, such holds are not equipped with smoke detectors. However, the NTSB quickly determined that just before takeoff, 144 expired chemical oxygen generators, each slightly larger than the size of a tennis ball can, had been placed in the cargo compartment in five boxes marked COMAT (company material) by ValuJet's maintenance contractor, SabreTech, in violation of Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) regulations forbidding the transport of hazardous materials in passenger aircraft cargo holds.[a] Failure to cover the generators' firing pins with the prescribed plastic caps made an accidental activation much more likely. The investigation revealed that rather than covering them, the cords attached to the firing pins were simply cut or duct-taped around the cans, and Scotch tape was also used to stick the ends down. SabreTech employees indicated on the cargo manifest that the "oxy canisters", which were loosely packed in the boxes that were each sealed with tape and bubble wrap, were "empty". ValuJet workers then loaded the boxes in the cargo hold in the mistaken belief that the devices that they contained were just empty canisters, thus being certified as supposedly "safe" to transport on a passenger aircraft, when in fact they were neither simple oxygen canisters, nor empty. Chemical oxygen generators, when activated, produce oxygen for passengers if the plane suffers a decompression. However, they also produce a great quantity of heat due to the exothermic nature of the chemical reaction involved. Therefore, not only could the heat and generated oxygen start a fire, but the oxygen could also keep the fire burning. The fire was worsened by the presence of two main aircraft tires (one of them mounted on a main wheel) and a nose tire and wheel that were also included in the list of materials shipped as COMAT. Investigators determined that one of the oxygen generators was likely triggered when the plane experienced a slight jolt while taxiing. As the aircraft taxied and took off, the generator began accumulating heat, soon setting fire to its surroundings. Laboratory testing showed that canisters of the same type could heat nearby materials up to 500 °F (260 °C). The oxygen from the generators fed the resulting fire in the cargo hold without any need for outside air, defeating the cargo hold's airtight design. A pop and jolt heard on the cockpit voice recording and correlated with a brief and dramatic spike in the altimeter reading in the flight data recording were attributed to the sudden cabin pressure change caused by one of the wheels in the cargo hold exploding due to the heat. Investigators also determined that in this process, the fire began to destroy control cables that ran to the back of the aircraft, which explained why the pilots began losing control before the plane crashed; the NTSB concluded that the aircraft was under positive control by the pilots until the time of the sharp right turn and dive immediately prior to impact. Smoke detectors in the cargo holds can alert the flight crew of a fire long before the problem becomes apparent in the cabin, and a fire suppression system buys valuable time to land the plane safely. In February 1998, the FAA issued revised standards requiring all Class D cargo holds to be converted by early 2001 to Class C or E; these types of holds have additional fire detection and suppression equipment.

Watching Top Gun Scott Kartvedt watched Top Gun in 1986 just like many other young men but then went on to be a Navy pilot, something many of us just dreamed of. He applied to and was selected to the elite Blue Angels air demonstration team where he served as the number seven, six, and number five solo pilot before returning to the fleet. There, he served during five combat deployments flying 91 combat missions and accumulating over 6,300 flight hours, 658 carrier arrested landings on eleven aircraft carriers. Led to a Navy Career Throughout his career, he faced near-death experiences, lost men and women he served with, and led squadrons through battle, all while developing a culture of excellence everywhere he went. He went on to command VFA-83, an award-winning FA/18 Squadron, and served as the Navy’s first commanding officer of the only F-35C Stealth Strike Fighter Squadron in the US before retiring from the Navy and returning to civilian life. Going Full Throttle into Civilian Life After that, he began his second career as a professional pilot. He became an inspirational speaker and instructor and served and still serves on the Board of Directors for the Blue Angels Foundation. Scott also joined the Patriot Jet Team, the only civilian jet demonstration team in North America, as their number 5 pilot. And Onto the Big Screen Through that position, he had the opportunity to train some of the actors and fly as a stunt pilot in the new Top Gun Maverick movie, bringing his journey full circle. You'll laugh, you'll learn, you'll cry, and you'll soar at full throttle through Scott's story of a life lived at high-G, and you won't want to stop reading until you get to the final page.

Dan Verdoorn started his flying as a young child, riding his bicycle to the local airport and watching airplanes take off and land from outside the fence. Finally, a pilot in a J-3 Cub asked him if he wanted to go for a flight, and that was the beginning of a lifelong love affair with aviation. Dan worked his way up in the construction business and is now the owner of Celebrity Custom Homes in Lone Tree, Colorado. But building homes isn't his only handiwork: he has built several aircraft, and has owned even more! Dan definitely has earned the title of Home Builder!

During the Vietnam War, with two years of college, Tom Speer was facing the draft. Out of curiosity, he visited a Marine recruiter and saw a photo of an F-4 and was hooked. The recruiter sent him to take numerous tests - which he aced - and he signed up to be a Marine Aviation Cadet. He had a bit of incentive when he received his draft notice! Tom attended Navy/Marine flight training and was selected to fly jets. He was dogged in his pursuit of flying the F-4, turning down other jet offers until he prevailed. After F-4 training he was sent to Chu Lai, South Vietnam for his combat tour. Returning from Vietnam he finished college and flew F-8s in the Marine Reserves, retiring as a Colonel. At the same time, he flew for Eastern, and honored the strike. Following Eastern, he was hired by United Airlines, and was selected to manage the SOFIA (Stratospheric Observatory for Infrared Astronomy) project, flying 747s at high altitude for NASA scientific research. Tom now flight instructs on Beech 1900 aircraft.

Captured by Love shares the real love stories of 20 Vietnam War POWs. Some had wives who started a movement that changed American foreign policy. Others came home and had to start over, while five single men met the loves of their lives. Despite their unique differences, all these couples have been happily married 40 to 65 years. You’ll be swept up into some extraordinary tales such as: • Carole boldly gave her husband’s POW-MIA bracelet to John Wayne―he wore it for years! • Pan Am stewardess Suzy wore a bracelet for POW Bill Bailey, whom she did not know. But she prayed for him daily, and miraculously met and married him when he came home. • After eight years in prison, one POW said to his wife in his first phone call upon his release, “Hi Jane. It’s Tarzan.” You will laugh and cry when you learn why. Former POW Lee Ellis and love expert Greg Godek take you on a dramatic journey of faithfulness, passion, excitement, resilience, and practical love lessons from these couples.

Sully Sullenberger: "I'm very glad that the Federal Aviation Administration has ensured the safety of the traveling public by wisely denying the waiver request by Republic Airways to cut in half the pilot experience requirement. U.S. airlines have attained an extraordinarily good safety record, with no fatal crashes in more than 13 and a half years." Sorry, Sully, not true. An Atlas Air B767 flying for Amazon crashed on Feb 23, 2019, killing the three crew members. The first officer, who caused the crash, had 5073 flying hours. He had falsified his flying history and lied about failing seven check rides. The 2009 Colgan Air crash that was the impetus for the 1500 hour rule was caused by a captain with a history of three proficiency check failures at Colgan. In July 2017 Air Canada Flight 759 had two pilots with more than 1500 hours each. They missed crashing into several aircraft on a taxiway, clearing the closest plane by 14 feet. If they had crashed, the death toll would have eclipsed the Teneriffe crash. The crash was averted by a United Airlines pilot telling them they were lined up on a taxiway. In December, B777 UA1722 took off from the Kahului Airport at 14:49 local time, where it was met with stormy conditions. Looking at data provided by FlightRadar24.com, the aircraft reached 2,200 ft approximately a minute after departing. However, it quickly began descending just north of the island's Baldwin Beach Park. At 14:50, the calibrated altitude of the aircraft was just around 775 ft as the aircraft dropped over the waters along the coast of Maui. From CNN Business: Five recent near-collisions on US runways, including one more this week in Boston, have prompted federal safety investigators to open multiple inquiries and a sweeping review. Boston Air traffic controllers stopped JetBlue flight from running into a departing private jet as it was coming in to land on the evening of February 27 night in Boston. The FAA is investigating the incident. The two planes involved in the apparent close call at Boston Logan International Airport came within 565 feet (172 meters) of colliding, according to Flightradar24's preliminary review of its data. According to a preliminary review, the pilot of a Learjet 60 took off without clearance while JetBlue Flight 206 was preparing to land on an intersecting runway," the FAA said in a statement. "JetBlue 206, go around," said the controller in Boston Logan's tower, according to recordings archived by LiveATC.net. The FAA says its air traffic controller told the crew of the Learjet to "line up and wait" on Runway 9 as the JetBlue Embraer 190 approached the intersecting Runway 4 Right. "The Learjet pilot read back the instructions clearly but began a takeoff roll instead," the FAA said in a statement. "The pilot of the JetBlue aircraft took evasive action and initiated a climb-out as the Learjet crossed the intersection." Burbank Last week, the National Transportation Safety Board said that a crew of a landing Mesa Airlines CRJ900 "executed a pilot-initiated go-around" as a SkyWest Embraer E175 was taking off from the same runway. A go-around is a routine measure to abort a landing on the approach. The NTSB says neither airplane was damaged and nobody on board was hurt. LiveATC.net recordings from the time of the incident chronicle confusion over whether the SkyWest flight was off the runway at Bob Hope Burbank Airport in California. It's unclear how close the two planes came to a collision. "Is he off the runway yet?" asked one unidentified voice. "We're going around," responded the crew of the Mesa flight. "The Mesa pilot discontinued the landing and initiated a climb out," said a FAA statement, which is also investigating the incident. "Meanwhile, the SkyWest aircraft continued with its departure, which prompted an automated alert to sound on the flight deck of the Mesa aircraft," the FAA said. The controller instructed the Mesa crew to turn to a course that took it away from the other aircraft." Austin A Southwest passenger jet and a FedEx cargo plane came as close as 100 feet from colliding on February 5 at the main airport in Texas' capital, and it was a pilot -- not air traffic controllers -- who averted disaster, a top federal investigator says. Controllers at Austin's airport had cleared the arriving FedEx Boeing 767 and a departing Southwest Airlines Boeing 737 jet to use the same runway, and the FedEx crew "realized that they were overflying the Southwest plane," Jennifer Homendy, chairwoman of the National Transportation Safety Board, told CNN. The FedEx pilot told the Southwest crew to abort taking off, she said. The FedEx plane, meanwhile, climbed as its crew aborted their landing to help avoid a collision, the FAA said. Honolulu On January 23, there was an incident at Daniel K. Inouye International Airport involving a United Airlines 777 jet and a smaller, single-engine cargo plane at the Hawaii airport. The United jet improperly crossed a runway, while the cargo aircraft was landing, the FAA said. At the closest point, the aircraft were separated by 1,170 feet. The cargo aircraft involved in the incident is a smaller Cessna 206 turboprop operated by Kamaka Air, which ferries goods between the Hawaiian islands. The airline did not immediately respond to a request for comment. The NTSB announced the investigation the day after Billy Nolen, the acting FAA administrator, directed his agency in a memo to "mine the data to see whether there are other incidents that resemble ones we have seen in recent weeks." New York - JFK On January 13, a close call between an American Airlines and Delta Air Lines flights sparked alarm. The crew of a Delta Boeing 737 aborted its takeoff, ultimately stopping within 1,000 feet of the taxiing AA's Boeing 777, the FAA said. No one was hurt in the incident, which took place around on a Friday evening. Air traffic controllers had "noticed another aircraft crossing the runway in front of the departing jetliner," the FAA said in a statement. "According to a preliminary analysis, Delta Air Lines Flight 1943 stopped its takeoff roll approximately 1,000 feet before reaching the point where American Airlines Flight 106, a Boeing 777, had crossed from an adjacent taxiway." According to Delta, its flight -- a 737-900 bound for Santo Domingo, Dominican Republic -- had 145 customers and six crew members on board. Audio recordings detail swift action by an air traffic controller kept the airplanes from colliding as they drew closer. "S--t!" exclaimed the controller from the tower of John F. Kennedy International Airport on Friday night. "Delta 1943 cancel takeoff clearance!" All of these crashed were averted by - predominantly - devine intervention. Sully's successful outcome was clearly the result of devine intervention that had the Hudson River devoid of the normal plethora of ferries and boats. The aircraft did not suddenly sink even though the Ditching Switch was not used. Here is another opinion about the 1500 hour rule.

From Air Line Pilots Association: In September 2016, Capt. David Whitson (United) was diagnosed with acute myeloid leukemia, a condition in which white blood cells that manage the body’s immune system form abnormally. The then B-787 first officer was treated at the Texas Oncology–Baylor Charles A. Sammons Cancer Center in Dallas, Tex., where he spent an initial 30 days undergoing tests and chemotherapy. “I had a mutation called FLT3 that put me at high risk for not reaching remission and also in a high-incidence category for relapse even if remission was achieved,” he recalled, adding, “My best shot was to have a bone marrow transplant, also called a stem cell transplant. Without it, I had a 5 percent chance of survival.” Whitson was released from the hospital for a brief break. During this period, doctors conducted a bone marrow biopsy and discovered that the pilot’s cancer was in remission, a condition necessary to achieve before a bone marrow transplant could be conducted. Whitson and his doctors quickly found a donor. “It was hard for me to wrap my head around the fact that a complete stranger would be willing to give me bone marrow stem cells and potentially save my life,” he acknowledged. Whitson endured additional rounds of chemotherapy and a full-body radiation scan to ensure his body was ready and on Dec. 21, 2016, received the transplant. Within several days, his new immune system was up and running. Thirteen days after the transplant, Whitson was released from the hospital. He noted that prior to the transfusion of stem cells his blood type was B+, but today it’s O-. In addition, the DNA in his blood is different from that in his body. Whitson encourages everyone to donate blood. “I needed more than a dozen blood and platelet transfusions during my treatments,” he said. The United pilot also urges those interested to join the national bone marrow registry at bethematch.org or www.dkms.org. “There’s a lack of diversity within the registry, and minorities are greatly needed,” he shared. “Every day is a gift,” Whitson remarked, who credits ALPA’s Aeromedical Office for advising him and helping him jump through the necessary hoops to acquire his special issuance medical certificate and return to the cockpit. He also gave a nod to his medical benefits, noting, “I was on long-term disability for more than two years, and my medical insurance was excellent. Thank you, ALPA!”

Named Tennessee's Outstanding Young Man for service to his community, state and country, Bud Willis has been well recognized for his first book, Bluestocking, released in 2009, now in its second printing. A native Tennessean, Willis grew up in Tullahoma, and graduated from Tennessee Tech University, Cookeville. There, Bud served as editor of the campus literary magazine. His professional career extended through 34 years in the securities industry as Partner with J.C. Bradford and Company. As a successful business man, public speaker, and humorist, his spirited Southern writing style engages readers quickly, with pathos, humor, and new knowledge regarding the lives and labor of young, Marine pilots serving in the mid-60's in Vietnam. Bud's memoir Marble Mountain is available on Amazon.

Scott Dworkin is an aerial photographer, contractor, and photojournalist based outside Los Angeles, California. He has had a lifelong passion for aviation and photography, and after honing his skills as a photographer for many years, he decided to combine the two interests professionally in 2010. Since 2010, Scott’s work has been published in numerous international aviation magazines and websites. As a photographer and writer, he has flown with and covered every branch of the US Armed Forces, as well as worked with many Department of Defense contractors, civilian aviation outfits, and law enforcement aviation units. Scott embedded with the US Air Force 452nd Airlift Wing from March Air Reserve Base in California, traveling with them to Afghanistan to cover their aeromedical evacuation missions. He also traveled around the United States extensively, documenting various other military and civilian units in action. Scott is one of only a handful of civilians in the world who is privileged to fly as an aerial photographer in high-performance military aircraft. Scott’s freelance work led to him being hired by the 412th Test Wing, Air Force Flight Test Center at Edwards Air Force Base, California, as a full-time flight test photographer. While there, he provided aerial multimedia, both air-to-air and air-to-ground coverage, including still photography, high-definition videography, high-speed video, and postproduction. Scott routinely flew in various air force aircraft to document ordnance and weapons testing, drop tests, aircraft flight performances, and other operational missions. He delivered the final products to the Air Force Flight Test Center, the Department of Defense, and various other customers. While at Edwards, Scott was trained in accordance with Air Force Instruction flight aircrew rules and regulations and was qualified as aircrew in numerous aircraft. He attended the USAF Physiology Training Program at Beale Air Force Base in California. In addition, he was granted the designation of US Navy Project Specialist, and with that carried Navy Aviation Physiology Training and Aviation Water Survival Training Program qualifications. Scott was recruited by and worked as a contracted flight test photographer/videographer for the Naval Air Warfare Center Weapons Division, Naval Test Wing Pacific at Point Mugu and China Lake in California and other locations. The creation of Mach 91 Aerial Photography and this book are the culmination of Scott’s dream and passion to deliver the finest quality, dramatic aerial photography possible, to bring the aircraft to life in its natural environment, and tell the story of the men and women who serve. He is the author of Becoming The Rhino. Scott Dworkin is an aerial photographer, contractor, and photojournalist based outside Los Angeles, California. He has had a lifelong passion for aviation and photography, and after honing his skills as a photographer for many years, he decided to combine the two interests professionally in 2010. Since 2010, Scott’s work has been published in numerous international aviation magazines and websites. As a photographer and writer, he has flown with and covered every branch of the US Armed Forces, as well as worked with many Department of Defense contractors, civilian aviation outfits, and law enforcement aviation units. Scott embedded with the US Air Force 452nd Airlift Wing from March Air Reserve Base in California, traveling with them to Afghanistan to cover their aeromedical evacuation missions. He also traveled around the United States extensively, documenting various other military and civilian units in action. Scott is one of only a handful of civilians in the world who is privileged to fly as an aerial photographer in high-performance military aircraft. Scott’s freelance work led to him being hired by the 412th Test Wing, Air Force Flight Test Center at Edwards Air Force Base, California, as a full-time flight test photographer. While there, he provided aerial multimedia, both air-to-air and air-to-ground coverage, including still photography, high-definition videography, high-speed video, and postproduction. Scott routinely flew in various air force aircraft to document ordnance and weapons testing, drop tests, aircraft flight performances, and other operational missions. He delivered the final products to the Air Force Flight Test Center, the Department of Defense, and various other customers. While at Edwards, Scott was trained in accordance with Air Force Instruction flight aircrew rules and regulations and was qualified as aircrew in numerous aircraft. He attended the USAF Physiology Training Program at Beale Air Force Base in California. In addition, he was granted the designation of US Navy Project Specialist, and with that carried Navy Aviation Physiology Training and Aviation Water Survival Training Program qualifications. Scott was recruited by and worked as a contracted flight test photographer/videographer for the Naval Air Warfare Center Weapons Division, Naval Test Wing Pacific at Point Mugu and China Lake in California and other locations. The creation of Mach 91 Aerial Photography and this book are the culmination of Scott’s dream and passion to deliver the finest quality, dramatic aerial photography possible, to bring the aircraft to life in its natural environment, and tell the story of the men and women who serve. Scott is the author of Becoming The Rhino. Scott's website is https://www.mach91aerialphotography.com/ Scott Dworkin is an aerial photographer, contractor, and photojournalist based outside Los Angeles, California. He has had a lifelong passion for aviation and photography, and after honing his skills as a photographer for many years, he decided to combine the two interests professionally in 2010. Since 2010, Scott’s work has been published in numerous international aviation magazines and websites. As a photographer and writer, he has flown with and covered every branch of the US Armed Forces, as well as worked with many Department of Defense contractors, civilian aviation outfits, and law enforcement aviation units. Scott embedded with the US Air Force 452nd Airlift Wing from March Air Reserve Base in California, traveling with them to Afghanistan to cover their aeromedical evacuation missions. He also traveled around the United States extensively, documenting various other military and civilian units in action. Scott is one of only a handful of civilians in the world who is privileged to fly as an aerial photographer in high-performance military aircraft. Scott’s freelance work led to him being hired by the 412th Test Wing, Air Force Flight Test Center at Edwards Air Force Base, California, as a full-time flight test photographer. While there, he provided aerial multimedia, both air-to-air and air-to-ground coverage, including still photography, high-definition videography, high-speed video, and postproduction. Scott routinely flew in various air force aircraft to document ordnance and weapons testing, drop tests, aircraft flight performances, and other operational missions. He delivered the final products to the Air Force Flight Test Center, the Department of Defense, and various other customers. While at Edwards, Scott was trained in accordance with Air Force Instruction flight aircrew rules and regulations and was qualified as aircrew in numerous aircraft. He attended the USAF Physiology Training Program at Beale Air Force Base in California. In addition, he was granted the designation of US Navy Project Specialist, and with that carried Navy Aviation Physiology Training and Aviation Water Survival Training Program qualifications. Scott was recruited by and worked as a contracted flight test photographer/videographer for the Naval Air Warfare Center Weapons Division, Naval Test Wing Pacific at Point Mugu and China Lake in California and other locations. The creation of Mach 91 Aerial Photography and this book are the culmination of Scott’s dream and passion to deliver the finest quality, dramatic aerial photography possible, to bring the aircraft to life in its natural environment, and tell the story of the men and women who serve.

I'd like to tell you about a great new podcast called Air Traffic Out Of Control. The show brings you curated ATC recordings that are funny, interesting and downright unbelievable. The show publishes a full episode every Wednesday and short 'fly by' episodes throughout the week. Check out Air Traffic Out Of Control wherever you listen to your favorite podcasts As we start a new year, I'm reviewing my goals for 2023. Goals should be SMART: Specific Measurable Achievable Relevant Time-bound My goals for 2023: Increase podcast frequency Shop out script Launch speaking business. Mentors: Hurler Weaver Jason Harris Waldo Waldman Lee Ellis Nicole Malachowski Jessica Cox Dave Carey KC Campbell Complete novel Guns Away Complete Crash and Learn Write memoir TEDx talk

The cornerstone of courage is optimism. In 1992, at the end of the Cold War, Steven Myers became the first American since Charles Lindbergh in 1931, to pilot an aircraft into the Russian Kamchatka peninsula. There he formed one of the first post-Soviet era joint ventures - a pioneering, expansive, business enterprise with the potential to transform the lives of the people of the Russian Far East. Steve's remarkable true story recounts the dramatic adventure, courageous entrepreneurship, and intrigue in the creation of a breakthrough business in a remote corner of the world, a wonderous place few people have been to or know anything about. The underlying theme of the story is the clash of two vastly different cultures: Americans, with go-for-broke, entrepreneurial “can do” attitudes, and Russians with a long, painful history of constraining rules, risk aversion, and fear. After years of hard work, just as the enterprise is about to achieve breakthrough success, an unexpected warning by US government agents alerts Myers that his life is in danger if he continues with his business activities in Russia. How he reacts, and what he does next, provides a gripping, dramatic climax to the story. A timeless exploration of human conflict, determination, and power, this audiobook will inspire adventurers, aviators, entrepreneurs, business leaders, politicians, and diplomats to push past their fears and take command of their dreams. After all, “the cornerstone of courage is optimism”. Steve's website is www.stevenmyers.com. His article describes being the oldest Captain upgrade paired with the youngest First Officer on the B777. An article Steve recently wrote for Fear of Landing.

Dave Carey was born in Greensburg, Pennsylvania, in 1942. He entered the U.S. Naval Academy in June 1960, and was commissioned an Ensign in the U.S. Navy on June 4, 1964. Carey next attended flight training at NAS Pensacola, Florida, and was designated a Naval Aviator in 1966. After completing A-4 Skyhawk Replacement Air Group training he served as an A-4 pilot with VA-163 at NAS Lemoore, California, and deployed aboard the aircraft carrier USS Oriskany (CVA-34) from 1966 until he was forced to eject over North Vietnam and was taken as a Prisoner of War on August 31, 1967. After spending 2,022 days in captivity, LCDR Carey was released during Operation Homecoming on March 14, 1973. He then returned to flying status and served as Operations Officer, Maintenance Officer, and Safety Officer with VF-126 at NAS Miramar, California, from 1974 to 1979, followed by service as Commanding Officer of Fleet Composite Squadron 7 from 1979 to 1981. His next assignment was as Commanding Officer of VF-126 at NAS Miramar from July 1982 to 1984, and then as Commanding Officer of the Naval Amphibious School, Director of the Navy's Leadership and Management Effectiveness Program, and Lead Facilitator in the Leadership and Management Seminar for Prospective Commanding and Executive Officers at Coronado, California, from 1984 until his retirement from the Navy on January 1, 1986. Since his retirement from the Navy, Dave has been a professional speaker, consultant, and trainer. He is the author of the book "The Ways We Choose, Lessons for Life from a POW's Experience".

As a Captain, John F. Barton Jr. has been a Captain on the Boeing 767-300/757 and 737 Aircraft. He taught as an instructor the Boeing 777 aircraft, at the United Airlines Training Center from 1997 till 1999, He began his flying with a Major International Airline as a Boeing 727 first and second officer. His most recent position is Captain on the new Boeing 737-900 aircraft flying out of San Francisco. Captain John F. Barton Jr. was chosen by his airline Flight Operations to “Captain” the historic chartered flight (prior to taking office) of President Barack Obama and family on January 1, 2009 from Honolulu international airport to Chicago International. Only the Obama family, Senior Advisor Valerie Jarrett and daughter, Secret Service, and limited press were on the flight. Captain John F. Barton Jr. has dedicated his life to the political fight for American jobs in the aviation sector, and has worked with the DOJ, Congress, and Senate to achieve these goals. In 2012, Captain John F. Barton Jr. helped work the timeline in Washington, D.C. with Senators, and Congressional representatives, and committees on the Hill to expedite negotiations under the RLA. He developed a plan with Captain Heide Oberndorf to accomplish this task. They then worked closely with Patton-Boggs to accomplish this task; specifically Jon Yarowsky (Former Senior policy Advisor to President Bill Clinton); navigating the cumbersome RLA for collective bargaining. Together through networking they helped secure a contract in less than eight months through out of the box thinking and utilization of Congress.

Roger Johnson is a Captain with a major airline and a former Fighter Pilot in the USAF. He has been flying for 48 years and has flown throughout the world. He is the second generation of being trained and operating in the civilian, military, and airline realms of aviation with his father giving him his initial flight instruction when he was 15 years old. As a summer job while in college he towed banners up and down the South Jersey Beaches in a Super Cub and then entered the USAF after graduating from college. He went on to fly F-4s and F-16s for 14 years. Concurrently, while flying F-16s in the Air National Guard, Roger began flying for the airlines in early 1988. He was hired as a Flight Engineer on the venerable B-727 and then, after a year, went to the back of the DC-10. In !993 he was trained as a First Officer on the MD-11 and based in Anchorage, AK. After flying the MD11/10 for 16 years, as both a F/O and Captain, he was qualified as a Captain on the B-777 in 2009. In 2017 he decided to checkout in the B-767, whereupon he also flew the B-757. As of this writing he continues to fly the B-767 on domestic US routes of intra-Europe. Roger has been an instructor in the F-4 RTU, training new recruits in the aircraft and then went on to instruct in the prestigious USAF F-4 Fighter Weapons School. He also was a longtime instructor in his airline, 23 years, training crews on both the MD-11/10 and B-777. He was a FAA Designee on the MD-11 and a Standards Check Airmen on the B-777. Though his professional life has been rewarding, his personal life has reads like a Shakespearian tragedy. He has been married and divorced a few times, has five grown children, though one of them past away at 17 months years old due to an automobile accident. His hobbies include, SCUBA diving, snow skiing, and working out in the gym. He has a strong, non-judgmental or self righteous Christian Faith. Finally, both of his sons, are pilots; His oldest flying F-18s in the Marines and his youngest working on his ratings in the civilian pipeline. He has spoken on several podcast/radio interviews and is available for speaking engagements.

Operation Linebacker, the code name for the new interdiction campaign, would have four objectives: to isolate North Vietnam from its sources of supply by destroying railroad bridges and rolling stock in and around Hanoi and north-eastwards toward the Chinese frontier; the targeting of primary storage areas and marshalling yards; to destroy storage and transshipment points and to eliminate (or at least damage) the North's air defense system. With nearly 85 percent of North Vietnam's imports (which arrived by sea) blocked by Pocket Money, the administration and the Pentagon believed that this would cut its final lines of communication with its socialist allies. China alone shipped an average of 22,000 tons of supplies a month over two rail lines and eight major roads that linked it with North Vietnam. On 10 May Operation Linebacker began with mass bombing operations against North Vietnam by tactical fighter aircraft of the Seventh Air Force and Task Force 77. Their targets included the railroad switching yards at Yên Viên and the Paul Doumer Bridge, on the northern outskirts of Hanoi. A total of 414 sorties were flown on the first day of the operation, 120 by the Air Force and 294 by the Navy and they encountered the heaviest single day of air-to-air combat during the Vietnam War, with 11 VPAF MiGs (four MiG-21s and seven MiG-17s) and two Air Force F-4s shot down.[45] Anti-aircraft artillery and over 100 surface-to-air missile firings also brought down two U.S. Navy aircraft (one of which was flown by aces Duke Cunningham and William P. Driscoll). By the end of the month, American aircraft had destroyed 13 bridges along the rail lines running from Hanoi to the Chinese border. Another four were destroyed between the capital and Haiphong, including the notorious Thanh Hóa Bridge. Several more bridges were brought down along the rail line leading to the south toward the DMZ. Targets were then switched to petroleum and oil storage and transportation networks and North Vietnamese airfields. There was an immediate impact on the battlefield in South Vietnam. Shelling by PAVN artillery dropped off by one-half between 9 May and 1 June. This slowdown was not due to an immediate shortage of artillery shells but rather to a desire to conserve ammunition. U.S. intelligence analysts believed that PAVN had enough stockpiled supplies to sustain their campaigns throughout the autumn. The intensity of the bombing campaign was reflected by the sharp increase in the number of strike and support sorties flown in Southeast Asia as a whole: from 4,237 for all services, including the RVNAF, during the month preceding the invasion, to 27,745 flown in support of ARVN forces from the beginning of April to the end of June (20,506 of them flown by the Air Force). B-52s provided an additional 1,000 sorties during the same period. The North was feeling the pressure, admitting in the official PAVN history that "between May and June only 30 percent of supplies called for in our plan actually reached the front-line units." In total, 41,653 Linebacker missions dropped 155,548 tons of bombs. In addition to interdicting the road and rail system of North Vietnam, Linebacker also systematically attacked its air defense system. The VPAF, with approximately 200 interceptors, strongly contested these attacks throughout the campaign. Navy pilots, employing a mutually supporting "loose deuce" tactical formation and many with TOPGUN training, enjoyed a kill ratio of 6:1 in their favor in May and June, such that after that the VPAF rarely engaged them thereafter. In contrast, the Air Force experienced a 1:1 kill ratio through the first two months of the campaign, as seven of its eventual 24 Linebacker air-to-air losses occurred without any corresponding VPAF loss in a twelve-day period between 24 June and 5 July. Air Force pilots were hampered by use of the outdated "fluid four" tactical formations (a four-plane, two element formation in which only the leader did the shooting and in which the outside wingmen were vulnerable) dictated by service doctrine. Also contributing to the parity was a lack of air combat training against dissimilar aircraft, a deficient early warning system, and ECM pod formations that mandated strict adherence to formation flying. During August the introduction of real-time early warning systems, increased aircrew combat experience and degraded VPAF ground control interception capabilities reversed the trend to a more favorable 4:1 kill ratio. Linebacker saw several other "firsts". On the opening day of the operation, Navy Lieutenant Duke Cunningham and his radar intercept officer, Lieutenant (j.g.) William P. Driscoll became the first U.S. air aces of the Vietnam War when they shot down their fifth MiG. On 28 August, the Air Force gained its first ace when Captain Richard S. Ritchie downed his fifth enemy aircraft. Twelve days later, Captain Charles B. DeBellevue (who had been Ritchie's backseater during four of his five victories) downed two more MiGs, bringing his total to six. On 13 October another weapons officer, Captain Jeffrey S. Feinstein, was credited with his fifth MiG, making him the final Air Force ace

by Robert L. Sumwalt It's no secret. When a flight crew's attention is diverted from the task of flying, the chance of error increases. Over the years there have been dozens of air carrier accidents that occurred when the crew diverted attention from the task at hand and became occupied with items totally unrelated to flying. Consequently, important things were missed. Things like setting the flaps prior to takeoff, or extending the landing gear before landing. Things like monitoring altitude on an instrument approach, or using engine anti-ice for takeoff during a blinding snow storm. In 1981 the FAA enacted FAR 121.542 and FAR 135.100 to help curb the number of these accidents. Commonly known as the "sterile cockpit rule," these regulations specifically prohibit crew member performance of non-essential duties or activities while the aircraft is involved in taxi, takeoff, landing, and all other flight operations conducted below 10,000 feet MSL, except cruise flight. (Click here to go to FAR 121.542 and 135.100 .) It's unrealistic to expect a crew to fly together for several days and never discuss anything except items related to flying the aircraft. In fact, experts have demonstrated that in order to be most effective, crews need to talk -- even if it is just merely "get to know you" sort of chat. The sterile cockpit rule is a good rule because it clearly defines when it is time to set aside non-essential activities and tend strictly to the task at hand -- that of safely operating the aircraft. In spite of the existence of the sterile cockpit rule over the past decade, pilots have continued to have accidents and serious incidents that perhaps could have been prevented. For the most part, disobeying the rule is not intentional. It just happens. But as this review shows, the consequences of non-compliance can be very serious. Truly, the sterile cockpit needs to be cleaned up. This reviewer used the ASRS database to find specific examples of problems related to non-compliance with the sterile cockpit rule. We carefully reviewed 63 reports that had been previously coded by analysts as having some relevance to the sterile cockpit rule. Here is a synopsis of the problems that we found that could be attributed to sterile cockpit violations:48% were altitude deviations 14% were course deviations 14% were runway transgressions 14% were general distractions with no specific adverse consequences 8% involved takeoffs or landings without clearance 2% involved near mid-air collisions due to inattention and distractions. The Culprits The way in which the sterile cockpit rule was broken in each report was tallied and analyzed. Some reports contained more than one culprit. Many of the reports contained acknowledgments like this: "If we [had] adhered to the sterile cockpit, this situation probably would not have occurred." (ACN 118974) Following are the four most common reasons for non-adherence to the sterile cockpit rule: Extraneous Conversation The most habitually cited offense was extraneous conversation between cockpit crew members. Cited one First Officer: "Although VMC on the approach, the new special weather was... [indefinite ceiling, 200 obscured, visibility 1-1/4 mile in ground fog], snow falling and some snow on the runway...I was flying and Captain viewing PIT stadium and various sights out the window, chatting incessantly...Captain then reviewed procedures for short ground roll on snow covered runways and returned to miscellaneous conversation." The crew believed that they then landed without contacting the tower and receiving landing clearance. After some serious soul searching, this reporter continued "...the potential for disaster scenarios should be apparent...The bottom line: lack of professionalism. Captain habitually rambled from push back to block-in through a four day trip. This was the first of two incidents on the same day...Below the line: lack of courage. F/O and F/E were not willing to ask the Captain to please shut up so we could fly the airplane." (ACN 102595) The Captain of an air carrier aircraft admits to conversation not pertinent to flying duties: "...Both the F/O and I became distracted because of a conversation that was started before the level-off. At 4300 feet our altitude alert system went off...Our sterile cockpit procedures should have eliminated this problem if properly followed." (ACN 168474) Five reports detailed extraneous conversation with jump seat riders. The ability to ride on an air carrier's jump seat is quite a valuable privilege, but it is important that the additional cockpit rider not be allowed to create distractions. A look at two of these reports: "While descending into a broken deck of clouds, unannounced traffic appeared at 12 o'clock and less than a mile, climbing up our descent path. In my best estimation we were on a collision course. I immediately, without hesitating, instinctively pushed the aircraft nose down and to the right to avoid impact. The Captain was engaged in a conversation with [somebody] on the jump seat." (ACN 167026) And in the other ASRS submission: "This very senior Captain was about to leave on a Scuba diving trip and talked nonstop to the female jump seat rider upon discovering she was also a diver...This [altitude deviation] could have been prevented entirely if this particular Captain...[had paid] attention to his job and observe[d] some approximation of the sterile cockpit below 10,000 feet." (ACN 119289) The connotation "extraneous conversation" does not always have to imply just those persons on board the aircraft. Look at how extraneous chatter with air traffic controllers introduced problems for these crews. Air traffic controllers, take notice: "We turned base to final. Tower talked about mutual acquaintances and local weather. On final, at about 2500 MSL, we realized we lined up for the wrong field...First mistake: getting involved in conversation with [the] Tower operator..." (ACN 108035) And in another incident: "At the outer marker...with thunderstorms in progress, reported wind shear and heavy rain ...the tower insisted on knowing if our gate was open. We told him we were too busy to find out, he persisted with claims of needing to know where to put us on the ground once we landed. We attempted once to try to contact the company but failed due to frequency congestion... We were distracted by the tower's request for non-pertinent info during the sterile period... This [practice]...(of the controller needing to know if a gate is open at the most intense and critical phase of flight) must not be continued. It is an unsafe practice and deters us from conducting a safe flight." (ACN 114244) Distractions from Flight Attendants Distractions caused by flight attendants visiting the cockpit or calling on the interphone were noted in almost one quarter of the reports in our data set. This was our second highest source of deviation from the sterile cockpit rule. "As aircraft approached Runway 18, Flight Attendant 'A' entered cockpit with coffee for the crew. Crew attention momentarily diverted...Aircraft penetrated hold line approximately six feet for Runway 18...Small single engine aircraft on final for Runway 18 was instructed to go around by Tower...Probable cause of this was short taxi distance to hold line and crew's interruption by [the] Flight Attendant." (ACN 149054) In another incident, the crew was surprised when they lined up with the wrong runway -- and doubly surprised when they noticed they were in an unplanned formation with a jet landing on the same runway! "...Flight Attendant came into the cockpit and asked what gate we were going into as we had a passenger with a wheelchair going to another flight...I advised approach we had our traffic [in sight]. Approach now cleared us for what I thought was a Runway 26L visual approach, call tower at the outer marker. As we proceeded to Runway 26L, which was the closest runway to our arrival side,..I looked over [at] my First Officer and out his side window and saw the [other jet] at our altitude, approximately 100 feet away...I'm sure that, with the Flight Attendant interruption, I heard what I expected to hear, 'cleared to the left runway.' " (ACN 98883) Non-Pertinent Radio Calls and PA Announcements Several reports we examined indicate that problems arose when non-pertinent company radio calls and PA announcements were made below 10,000 feet. Remember, below 10,000 feet if it's not directly related to flight safety, it's in violation with the sterile cockpit rule. "Beautiful day making approach into familiar station, Captain elects to make a PA announcement to passengers while flying the aircraft. Resulting distraction of the passenger announcement [caused us to over-shoot]... altitude 500 feet." (ACN 54741) While being vectored in a busy terminal area, the Captain in the following report called on the company radio frequency to notify maintenance about a minor cabin discrepancy. As the reporter soon discovered, his absence from the ATC frequency caused an overload with his First Officer. Several ATC radio calls were missed. The controller growled a little, they lost their landing sequence, and the pilot's pride was hurt. But a valuable lesson was also learned. "...My thinking, however irresponsible it was, was that I should call maintenance with this item to save us time on the ground...I realize that the incident and this report is the result of very poor cockpit management on my part...It was most unwise and unfair of me to put the work load I did on that Controller and the First Officer...I hope I have learned the importance of giving my undivided attention to Approach Control, as opposed to reporting maintenance items [while flying below 10,000 feet]." (ACN 92145) Sight-seeing Nowhere does Webster's define "sight-seeing" as an activity that is essential to the safe operation of aircraft. When sight-seeing is conducted by flight crew members below 10,000 feet, not only is it potentially dangerous, but it is illegal, as well. Two reports demonstrated that a cockpit full of sight-seeing crew members is an ASRS report looking for a place to happen -- possibly even an accident. "Assigned the PORTE SID from SFO. I missed the 4 DME turn point due to preoccupation with a [special purpose aircraft] below and to our right, landing at NAS Alameda. The Captain (flying) missed it too...Bay Departure queried us and advised us to maintain visual separation from [another aircraft] off OAK, paralleling us below and about 2 miles to the right. Preoccupation with the visual environment caused us to neglect the IFR procedure." (ACN 189397) In another incident report: "...Descending through 5000 feet to my assigned altitude of 4000 feet. The Captain discontinued his running commentary of the sights...to state that we were only cleared to 6000 feet." (ACN 83932) Recommendations and Considerations The sterile cockpit rule was designed to help minimize many of the problems that we just annotated. Judging from these reports, a safer operation can be achieved by simply abiding by the rule's guidelines. In the Beginning A good time to establish the desire to maintain a sterile cockpit environment is before beginning a trip. In briefing cockpit and cabin crew members the captain can politely say, "I think the sterile cockpit rule is really important, so we'll adhere to it. Okay?" Setting the Standards During the preflight briefing the captain should also inform the flight attendants how they can determine if the flight is above or below 10,000 feet. Many companies have already established procedures for this, such as a "10,000 foot PA announcement," or a call to the flight attendants on the interphone. However, these procedures require one crew member to be "out of the loop." And as evidenced by literally thousands of ASRS reports, the potential for problems (such as misunderstood clearances and altitude deviations) increases when a crew member is out of the loop. Some airlines have installed a cockpit-controlled "sterile cockpit light" that can be illuminated when descending below 10,000 feet and extinguished when climbing above 10,000 feet. For those who develop company procedures, consideration should be given to developing something that doesn't create its own set of distractions. With the increased use of two-crew member cockpits this consideration is increasingly important. Unexpected Entry Unexpected calls or cockpit entry by flight attendants during the sterile cockpit period can be distracting and potentially dangerous. It is recommended that the Captain, during the pre-departure crew briefing, emphasize the importance of the sterile cockpit rule and request that flight attendant calls or entry during this time be undertaken only for reasons of great urgency. As one reporter resolves: "The next time a flight attendant enters a sterile cockpit, I will immediately ask if there is an emergency." (ACN 109249) High Altitude Airports Another reporter offered a good suggestion involving high elevation airports, where 10,000 feet MSL for the sterile cockpit boundary may be too low. "The First Officer and myself were involved in a conversation with the company pilot riding jump seat. Although I subscribe to the sterile cockpit rule below 10,000 feet, I failed to realize that, due to Denver's high field elevation, 17,000 feet MSL would have [been] a more appropriate time to discontinue our conversation and be sure that our affairs were in order...Unfortunately, because of our conversation, I failed to slow to 250 knots until passing Kiowa...The main reason I am filing this report is that I was habitually using 10,000 feet MSL for focusing my attention on the terminal/approach procedure and maintaining a sterile cockpit. A better method would certainly be 10,000 feet AGL or 40 to 50 miles from destination." (ACN 65327) Low Altitude Flight This reporter, a commuter pilot who often has cruise altitudes below 10,000 feet MSL, offers a similar worthwhile suggestion following an altitude deviation. "I believe this situation occurred because our cruise altitude was 8000 feet, and we were accustomed to conversation and other activities along the route and were not observing the 'sterile cockpit' environment. Would suggest that, in these flight circumstances where cruise altitude is less than 10,000 feet, crews make a specific DME mileage their beginning for 'total concentration-sterile cockpit' procedures." (ACN 173707) No person about to undergo major surgery would think too kindly of the surgical team who failed to sterilize themselves and their operating instruments before the operation. After a series of air carrier accidents and serious incidents, the traveling public feels the same way about their crew members. Keep the sterile cockpit "clean." Your fellow crew members and passengers are hoping that you will.

Enlisted airmen who work in some of the Air Force's most difficult jobs will receive from $900 to $5,400 less annually beginning next month as the service faces financial challenges that affect the ranks. Hundreds of service members will see cuts to their Special Duty Assignment Pay, known as SDAP, in fiscal 2023 -- which starts Oct. 1. Those monthly payments, ranging from $75 to $450, were an extra incentive "to compensate enlisted service members who serve in duties which are extremely difficult," according to budget documents. "The Air Force saw an overall reduction of over $3 million to the FY23 SDAP budget based on fiscal constraints," service spokeswoman Laurel Falls told Military.com. "Due to the reduced funding levels, SDAP rates for 44 functional communities saw reductions." In the fiscal 2023 budget, the Air Force is asking the federal government for 30,845 airmen to receive the more than $90.2 million worth of Special Duty Assignment Pay. It's a lower figure than the last two years, being cut by $1.5 million and around 500 airmen, according to budget documents. For 2022, the Air Force asked for 31,334 airmen to receive $91.7 million; in 2021, the service asked for 30,967 airmen to receive $90.8 million in Special Duty Assignment Pay. The Air Force is facing a $3 million shortfall to the Special Duty Assignment Budget for 2023, according to the service. Air Force Headquarters held a meeting this past November to address the problem prior to crafting the 2023 budget, Falls told Military.com. To avoid the cuts, lawmakers would have to reinstate the Special Duty Assignment Pay difference in the 2023 budget proposal before it's approved by Congress and signed into law by President Joe Biden. The military's annual budget could be finalized later this year. Dozens of Air Force career fields will be affected by the cut to Special Assignment Duty Pay. One of those is recruiters. Air Force Recruiting Service recruiters are set to lose their $75 in special duty pay each month for fiscal 2023, which would add up to nearly $900 a year in lost wages. Losing the pay could be a blow to recruiters' morale as they face difficult challenges brought on by the COVID-19 pandemic, economic inflation and a shifting workforce. Maj. Gen. Ed Thomas, the head of the Air Force Recruiting Service, promised recruiters he would push for the extra pay to be reinstated in the next fiscal year. The general "recognizes the unique challenges Air Force recruiters and their families experience and he is working to have the monthly $75 payment restored in the future," spokesman Randy Martin told Military.com Here's a list of all the Air Force's special duty pay that would be reduced in fiscal 2023, according to budget documents: Recruiters Basic Military Training instructors Human Intelligence debriefers Combat Controllers Pararescue operators Command chief master sergeants First sergeants Defense Attaché Office (DAO) liaisons Nuclear Enterprise airmen Air Force Office of Special Investigations (AFOSI) agents Air Traffic Control (ATC) supervisors Postal and National Defense Advisory Commission (NDAC) enablers Tactical Air Command and Control Party (TACP) operators Enlisted pilots and weapons directors Parachute instructors and those with test parachute program Flight attendants Mission system specialists Load masters USAF Honor Guards Special Reconnaissance operators Phoenix Raven Security Forces defenders Forward Area Refueling Point enablers Flying crew chiefs Defense couriers Airmen who support various commands Enlisted airmen who work with special government agencies Public affairs airmen assigned to recruiting squadrons Air transportation airmen Airmen assigned to special classified Air Force projects. PJ Roy Benavides: https://www.youtube.com/embed/i3nncd4sxaM Combat Controller John Chapman

Enlisted airmen who work in some of the Air Force's most difficult jobs will receive from $900 to $5,400 less annually beginning next month as the service faces financial challenges that affect the ranks. Hundreds of service members will see cuts to their Special Duty Assignment Pay, known as SDAP, in fiscal 2023 -- which starts Oct. 1. Those monthly payments, ranging from $75 to $450, were an extra incentive "to compensate enlisted service members who serve in duties which are extremely difficult," according to budget documents. "The Air Force saw an overall reduction of over $3 million to the FY23 SDAP budget based on fiscal constraints," service spokeswoman Laurel Falls told Military.com. "Due to the reduced funding levels, SDAP rates for 44 functional communities saw reductions." In the fiscal 2023 budget, the Air Force is asking the federal government for 30,845 airmen to receive the more than $90.2 million worth of Special Duty Assignment Pay. It's a lower figure than the last two years, being cut by $1.5 million and around 500 airmen, according to budget documents. For 2022, the Air Force asked for 31,334 airmen to receive $91.7 million; in 2021, the service asked for 30,967 airmen to receive $90.8 million in Special Duty Assignment Pay. The Air Force is facing a $3 million shortfall to the Special Duty Assignment Budget for 2023, according to the service. Air Force Headquarters held a meeting this past November to address the problem prior to crafting the 2023 budget, Falls told Military.com. To avoid the cuts, lawmakers would have to reinstate the Special Duty Assignment Pay difference in the 2023 budget proposal before it's approved by Congress and signed into law by President Joe Biden. The military's annual budget could be finalized later this year. Dozens of Air Force career fields will be affected by the cut to Special Assignment Duty Pay. One of those is recruiters. Air Force Recruiting Service recruiters are set to lose their $75 in special duty pay each month for fiscal 2023, which would add up to nearly $900 a year in lost wages. Losing the pay could be a blow to recruiters' morale as they face difficult challenges brought on by the COVID-19 pandemic, economic inflation and a shifting workforce. Maj. Gen. Ed Thomas, the head of the Air Force Recruiting Service, promised recruiters he would push for the extra pay to be reinstated in the next fiscal year. The general "recognizes the unique challenges Air Force recruiters and their families experience and he is working to have the monthly $75 payment restored in the future," spokesman Randy Martin told Military.com Here's a list of all the Air Force's special duty pay that would be reduced in fiscal 2023, according to budget documents: Recruiters Basic Military Training instructors Human Intelligence debriefers Combat Controllers Pararescue operators Command chief master sergeants First sergeants Defense Attaché Office (DAO) liaisons Nuclear Enterprise airmen Air Force Office of Special Investigations (AFOSI) agents Air Traffic Control (ATC) supervisors Postal and National Defense Advisory Commission (NDAC) enablers Tactical Air Command and Control Party (TACP) operators Enlisted pilots and weapons directors Parachute instructors and those with test parachute program Flight attendants Mission system specialists Load masters USAF Honor Guards Special Reconnaissance operators Phoenix Raven Security Forces defenders Forward Area Refueling Point enablers Flying crew chiefs Defense couriers Airmen who support various commands Enlisted airmen who work with special government agencies Public affairs airmen assigned to recruiting squadrons Air transportation airmen Airmen assigned to special classified Air Force projects. PJ Roy Benavides: https://www.youtube.com/embed/i3nncd4sxaM Combat Controller John Chapman