well it is true that we air force types could use more weapons training, but who doesnt need more weapons training? i mean, we have a fixed budget and we spend the money training for our actual jobs primarily, and then spend money and effort training for contingency scenarios when the time permits. so, even though my primary job is flying, the marine and army guys will always have some comment to say because we arent trained as proficiently as them with small arms. its absolutly absurd that you guys still dont understand that different services have different jobs.
i'm a flyer, and they trained me to fly very well and give me opportunities to maintain that proficiency so when i fly combat missions i can do it well. small arms will never be my primary focus because i would only have to use my M9 in a survical situation. i know, you guys have the attitude that "at any time a terrorist can jump out of the bushes so you better be ready" and there is some truth to that. but there are only so many hours in the day to train, and we spend alot of time training for airborne situations that you dont understand. when i'm giving a marine a ride into al asad and we lose an engine and while handleing the emergency and the radios and the systems losses we take small arms fire.... well at that moment i think the marines in the back care more about my piloting ability than when the last time i shot was.
usmc grunt, you recieved the answer to your original question. i know your wife is frustrated that we dont shoot more, so am i. but all in all the af has given me the appropriate amount of training for the job i do in combat, and i say this after 3 tours in combat.