« White House No Longer Considering Former Lobbyist for Key DOJ Position | Main | POGO Testifies in Congress Today »

Feb 26, 2009



I agree with both the Article and the blog comment reply positive aspects and from my novice, uninformed and/or and/or very limited expertise within this area of expetise.

Hopefully our commendable brave and courageous pilots have not been duped, hoodwinked and/or otherwise deceived and have the best of the best Representation, Support and Guidance to NOT!! be subject to any undue concerns within this Article.

As to some extent a novice,uninformed, wishful and/or hopefull effort of expression and view of the Transparency and/or "Oversight and Accountability' efforts and endeavors is a mention for the review and consideration aspects is to some extent to express a somewhat abstract view of to some extent to wishfull and/or hopefull expression as I do not have the expertise information would seemingly be of a product sufficiently equal to or ten times better to the positive aspects and at 1/10th the cost.


While I haven't seen the video, I highly doubt the comments offered by F-22 pilots as depicted in the story constitute an endorsement in violation of USC and DOD regulations.

I once was part of a small arms weapon test group and our after action reviews were recorded. There were several reasons but the important ones related to showing/explaining to engineers who weren't present what it was we were talking about. It's hard for a trainer to go to an engineer and explain why, for tactical reasons, a gas tube needs to be moved one-sixteenth of an inch or why you'd like a little less weight and where you believe ounces can be removed and not affect performance.

Furthermore, providing video and written comments is almost always a mandatory part of the process. If LM chose to use those recorded or written comments from the pilots, it's hard to find culpability.

The comments to this entry are closed.