Leaderboard

All the briefs I’ve gotten on it and why it is or isn’t a good idea require a vault to even start the discussion. The limitations of 5th gen to operate in the 2030+ battlefield is a dirty secret most don’t want to talk about; nor should they be discussed open source.

Lol right. One of the few places where an overwhelming majority of your experience is on the "JV team." Also, I've consulted with the OFPs and they think the F-4 was a better fighter than the F-35 could ever hope to be. Brb, gonna go hit up Pierre Sprey...

Dude...I'm right here...you don't have to talk that way behind my back like that. 🙂

I flew the MC-12 for 13 months... and the rampant enlisted aircrew that felt they were in change (and leadership that didn't fix it) helped make that a shitty assignment. Of course, there was plenty of other things in the MC-12 that were FUBAR.

The more i learn about the X band, it’s capes and limitations, the more i realize that the thought that stealth is required to operate in the contested battle space more than 10 years in the future is an outdated and very limited viewpoint.

FIFY. FWIW, I wouldn't say that Jennifer Smith "caused" any of the shenanigans. She has whatever right to complain about whatever she wants to complain about. It is the spineless senior AF leadership that capitulated to the demands of the PC warriors that caused The Purge. They could have just as easily responded to TSgt Smith's Congressional complaint differently (although it would have required a warrior fortitude to over-ride the political pressures), and it wouldn't have happened at all. That same group fails to understand that they, even today, hold all the power to fix the trajectory of the AF toward the ditch. But, hey, if Mark Welsh says that his dad never sang dirty songs, and that means there's no historical tradition of it, then I guess we can just disregard these 50 years worth of songbooks I have copies of and flush heritage down the toilet at the altar of social justice.

I think the way of the future night one stuff is very cheap throw away small stuff that can swarm en mass. Cheaper the better and the more the better. Can’t sustain the 200+ mil per copy you got 40 sams?! Cool. I got 5000 hand grenades that can fly, reorganize, and overwhelm your iads. Kill 400 of them. Good on ya. I think we’re at the pre-wwi “battleship is king” tech kind of area. Stealth won’t be king forever and could get exposed by a billy Mitchell type employing way less expensive weapon system.

The point is why would you spend the same or more money on a "4.5 gen" fighter when you can have a 5th gen fighter for the same cost? Would you have supported buying "3.5 gen" F-4s for the same price (at a 1:1 ratio) of brand new F-16s/F-15s back in the 70s? This is the same argument that occurs every generation of aircraft...somebody thinks the "new fangled stuff" is bullshit, overpriced "night one" tech we'll likely never really need, etc. and upgrading "old faithful" fits the bill better. I'm not arguing we fly Block 30 Vipers until 2050 (we won't), I'm saying we need to spend our money on technology with greater capability/survivability longevity than what a 4.5 gen fighter can ever give us. This discussion cycle will continue when 6th gen comes out and a camp of people will be arguing for purchasing new 5.5 gen F-35s for the same price as a 6th gen F-69. I love the F-16, but I'm also pragmatic about the subject. Everyone here needs to have a little trust/faith in their bros working with the science and technology world, assessing and ranking future requirements, and steering core function groups in the best direction they know with the current information. I assure all of you there is an amazing amount of things that exist in the shadows and there are very good, smart bros working on all of our behalf to make sure the right moves are made. This includes the way forward for current 4th gen fighters and keeping them safe and relevant within the constraints of technology, threat advancement, and budget.

It’s an “aileron roll”! Sheesh!!

Merry Christmas/Happy Holidays all! Hope everyone has a good one today!

I know it's still a few days away, but I want to wish everyone a very happy Christmas, and all the best in 2019! Cheers! M2

Do u even barrel roll bro?

Sun Tzu said there is no instance of a nation benefitting from prolonged warfare. Best part about IDE/SDE is learning from the curriculum that we are in fact, doing this wrong. The great mystery to me is how we teach people the right thing yet so many graduate and immediately do the wrong thing. All of the generals responsible for our failures have read that quote. Yet here we are.

Meaningful deployments that actually matter. The stupid PowerPoint builder deployments need to go, but they aren't the only ones. Even stupid flying deployments need to go. You can only move the same pallet of literal garbage, or the same vehicles back and forth, before you start to wonder why you're there away from home. How about also admitting that a 365 is actually a remote (i.e. PCS), and not an ITDY? Yeah, I may have volunteered for the military and the deployments associated with it. But if you take away the meaning from the work, and don't increase pay to compete with the civilian sector (that generally doesn't need that meaning or sense of patriotism), well, don't be surprised when people don't volunteer to stay any longer. Maybe getting into wars with no realistic and achievable end goal is also strategically stupid to the overall health of the military, and a huge drain on national resources. Sent from my SM-G960U using Tapatalk

Anyone feel sorry for Donnie? He obviously wants us to. Poor little man, all alone...

Was it not an enlisted SARM troop that effectively caused the cleansing of every flying squadron several years ago?

Enlisted aircrew is why this will never happen. Ever.

Clearly we are not talking about the same thing here.

Or look back to the 80/90s at how long we had Century series fighters still flying in CONUS Guard units. Or how long it took to totally phase out the Phantom from our ranks when it had long been proven inferior to every other aircraft in our toolbox. We’re they part of a national defense strategy? Absolutely.... one that realizes the Montana Guard isn’t going to be doing the merge with Flankers over Bismarck. There was still a useful spot for them to perform. The 15X is the definition of requirement creep because all these “wouldn’t it be nice if....” The fact we are talking about spending more money than on Lightning just to get a fresh jet 15 should immediately sound insane. Especially since whatever “cost of operation” math trick you do we don’t just stop flying our old worn out beat up planes tomorrow when we sign the contract. It’d be one thing if they were coming down saying “hey we updated the C a bit to replace components that simply don’t exist anymore, it’s 45 mil a copy and won’t take a bunch of new training” but they aren’t after that. This whole idea looks exactly like the perception that if you’re not a fighter pilot you’re a second class citizen that was my dad’s Air Force. We are flying 50+ year old aircraft across the spectrum in critical low density high demand positions some of which are retiring with no replacement, and what do we commit money to fixing... a fighter jet so it can chase down a lost Cessna that strayed too close to a restricted area with a bitchen new AESA Radar.

In RPAs we just invited our Es and even named some of them. I promise you there is nothing in a fighter pilot song book a loadmaster hasn't asked permission for from his wife at least once. I mean that as a compliment.

Well, not in that thing I don't. I have the paperwork to prove it. 🙂

@ClearedHot

To be fair, its not the guys with stars that actually approve us to go to war, or to keep us in said warfare. That said, it is up to those same dudes to accurately advise the folks that do make the decisions to send us to war. That part is what appears to have been forgotten.

Pulling G’s and pushing the edge of the envelope is kind of a necessary task to gain and maintain proficiency in air to air. Artificially lowering g limits doesn’t seem like a good way to produce and keep the best flying force in the world. But beyond that, and perhaps more importantly and to the point (according to Boeing’s sales pitch of the F15X), 30-40 year old eagles with old tech and worn out structures cost a lot more per flight hour to operate and maintain than a new build F15X with fresh components, with easier mx and higher capes to boot. If the new jets will pay for themselves in a decade (ie cost less in acquisition/operating costs than refurbing/upgrading C models over a decade) as Boeing claims, why inject a ton of capital into an old beat up jet just to keep it flying when it would cost taxpayers less to get a better replacement product. Regardless of whatever G/op limit you propose (which isn’t realistic anyway), the c models will need a lot of money to stay flying. If I had a 1980 crown vic with 400,000 miles on it, I’d probably be better off buying a new crown vic with all new parts assembled from the factory as a whole rather than buying new individual components trying to keep the old hooptie driving, especially if I had to go in and do some serious frame work. Lastly, the ANG isn’t exactly the JV of the Air Force. They do more than just sit stateside alert, and in many cases fly more than their AD counterparts. All that said, I don’t have any of the details for costs, capes, etc., and I’m guessing most on this board don’t either. I’d like to think that if it’s fiscally responsible to replace C models with the X and if it fits within our national defense plan over the next couple decades, it’ll happen. Conversely if it ends up being too much money for technology that will be obsolete, I’d like to think we won’t get it, despite a career Boeing guy being the secdef.

I was in a community that had both callsigns and enlisted aircrew. Naming nights were a blast (from what I recall), the E's just didn't attend...YMMV

Enlisted Aircrew have about as much in common with a SARM troop as a fighter pilot does with a Force Support Officer.

Hold on, let me go consult with the Old Fighter Pilots FB group, they all seem to be experts on how shitty of a jet the F-35 is...and how great of an idea this will be.

This is a good discussion and worth highlighting for any youngins reading. First off: it is douchey for a boss to expect crew members TDY to work their queep while on the road. To expect that is an admission that you either can't manage suspenses or you've placed too much responsibility on one individual. If you find yourself in a situation where you're expected to work office stuff while TDY, you have a choice. Like Standby and Joe have said, if you agree to do so, you do so willingly. You have a choice. You're not going to receive paperwork or something for being TDY and not working an awards package/OPR/etc. But choosing to do so could mean "punishment" in the form of your douche boss (that we can all agree shouldn't be asking in the first place) not "pushing" you for jobs/strats/awards, etc. Nothing you can do to stop that, and it will have effects down the road if you're interesting in making a career out of the AD AF. On the other hand, if you're trying to advance in rank/position for whatever reason, and you have a douche boss that asks you to work office stuff while on the road, you'll probably keep yourself in the running by doing so. Again, as Standby and Joe said, you do forfeit any reasonable right to complain when you knowingly participate. The good news is that crew dogs are in a buyers' market right now. You are all but guaranteed to make O-4 these days as long as you have no derogatory info in your records, and that should take you to your UPT ADSC. You can fly the shit out of your aircraft and push this stuff off and not have much to worry about, especially if you plan to get out anyway.

What's there to get? You extrapolated your personal bad experiences at Travis into being a MAF-wide problem, and how life is better being in U-2's. Which, I'm sure your new life is a great experience and all, but the problem was never the MAF, it was your priorities. I somehow managed to exist in the same MAF as you, at the same time, and had a much different experience. Because I had different priorities. It reminds me of the dudes who choose career over family and then bitch and then complain about how the Air Force ruined their marriage and estranged them from their kids. Like, no dude, that's your own damn fault.

If you play into that game it’s your fault.

No, it doesn't. Those who seriously think it does make sense (especially at that price tag) do not have enough knowledge on "future us" and "future them," either via lack of read-ins, lack of understanding of said read-ins, and/or lack of understanding of future capes on other platforms (including non-fighter platforms). Bottom line, while buying Block 70 Vipers or F-15X seems like a good move to replace our aging fleet, it is not for many reasons. If we had infinite resources, then sure lets buy a bunch of each, but we don't, so as Danger said: spending $80K on a full resto on an old and busted 69 mustang will still never make it a 2019 Corvette ZR1. Lipstick on a pig and all that (and yes, that's a dig at my Ford friends!)

Had a sqd cc say something similar to me once. I looked at him like he had a dick growing from his forehead. And they wonder why pilots go find other work.

My thought: $1.2B for 12 old airplanes...what a steal. If only we had purchased more Raptors when they were $140M a copy.

I grew up in the Herk and had a nickname I was given at Nav school. Really only used by the guys I played softball with, but carried it thru UPT and beyond. Wasn’t given an official callsign until we switched to MQ-9s and I was a Lt Col. Now everyone knows me by my callsign. It’s all about your community. Sent from my iPhone using Baseops Network mobile app

You simply schedule with for the 67% that are there. Same way we do it in the U-2, where the 99 RS been deployed non-stop to the Arabian Peninsula since Saddam invaded in 1990; Osan for over 40 years; and our other location for over 40 years. Yes, continually to all three locations, simultaneously. If an event like a Naming is well done, people will show up and have a great time. As alluded to, "namings" may not fit a particular squadron or mission culture. And one thing to note is that, in my conversations with U-2 pilots older than me, they didn't have callsigns... much less "naming ceremonies"... in earlier years. This includes guys that came out of pointy-nosed jets in the Vietnam era. To digress into a historical context... I went through UPT in '85-'86, there was definitely no naming ceremony at Laughlin back then and very few IP's had a callsign. I was an exception since "Huggy" had been what people called me since middle school. One example, the current AF Vice Chief of Staff General Steve 'Seve' Wilson was a young FAIP in the squadron then, and I'm guessing he got his callsign after he went to the B-1. I only recall a handful of MWS guys coming back to ATC/AETC with a callsign during my FAIP years (86-89). One of the few I recall was a guy named "Buc" due to using the BUC Start on an F-16 that lit off at less than 100' AGL. Cowboy Keck (F-4, F-15) was another... but those that know Cowboy can probably assume he was given that callsign in the womb. When I arrived at RAF Alconbury in 1990, there were two A-10 squadrons there and a fair number of those guys had callsigns. I have no idea if they had big naming ceremonies (I've posed the question to a couple of old A-10 guys I know), but callsigns were certainly established. I would guess that actual naming ceremonies in fighter squadrons began to occur a little before my time (circa 1982)... but that's just my impression from talking to old-heads. The bottom line is that "naming ceremonies" are a relatively recent addition to the USAF pilot culture. Personally, I think they are a great thing and I've had a great time participating in them during my time. There's probably a great story about "the history of namings" that some academic at Air University should write a paper on, using lots of taxpayer dollars to research it.

We have camaraderie. We get our families together for squadron activities and parties all the time. It's just that Monday-Friday after work I like to go home to, you know, my family and stuff. Nobody wants to hang out at a bar drinking after work for no good reason. Not having stupid drinking games in the squadron is definitely not what is wrong with the MAF.

I like Mattis. Good American. But anyone who wants us to stay in Syria has to go. Full stop. Best case scenario, Assad reasserts control over the entirety of Syria and it goes back to a country that stays quiet and causes few problems. It boils down to a fundamental difference in philosophy. Mattis is on the W Bush, Max Boot, Neocon view that America needs to intervene in however many countries it takes to convert the world to globalist democracy. The only problem with this philosophy is that it hasn't worked since WWII. Trump does not have the intellectual nuance to elucidate this point, but he seems to understand it somewhat instinctually. Mattis is ten times the man Trump wishes he could be, but he's wrong, and if he can't change his views on our foreign strategy, he needed to go. We need to get out of Syria before it loses the one centralized figure capable of maintaining control (Assad). That is, unless you think Iraq and Libya are models to be recreated elsewhere...

Unilaterally withdrawing from Syria may not be the best short term move but it may be the best long term move, not for the fight against ISIS, Al Nusra, Iran / Russia action in the ME, etc... but in the fight against the Swamp, Deep State, Globablists, etc... that the worm has turned and a sizable portion of America thru their elected representation be it in the Legislative or Executive branch is not going resource with blood and treasure endless conflicts that have no readily achievable goals or relevant goals for America, no matter if there are laudable side effects to a Pax America enforced order. Like it or not we have hit the end of our ability to protect X number of others, to deter for X number of others, to fight for X number of others, not really for a lack of material resources but spiritual resources to be willing to do so. Explain in a clear way to the forgotten people of the Rust Belt, Bible Belt, Urban Jungles... that denying victory / deterring Russia, Iran and their proxy Alawite pawn in Syria which has no natural resources we purchase, no strategic role in trade, defense or significant cultural position to America is a reason we should spend 15+ billion a year bombing random jihadis half-way around the world when we have 8,000+ fighting age males massing on our border and demanding entrance or else... explain how this time, this operation will resolve something, will lead to a situation that is marginally better for them or for us, explain how just another 15 billion over there versus spent over here on anything is better... Indeterminate involvement may have some positive effects for others, some are probably worth defending but America's resources are finite. Even though the material cost for this particular operation is / was not onerous per year in the grand scheme of things, the fact that it would be never-ending has caused the American Nationalist movement thru its somewhat brash and inarticulate standard bearer to say no more. No matter if you believe we should be militarily engaged in many places around the world, the fact that 67+ million Americans said no more, should give you pause.

Really? Mach, you can PM me with questions about lifestyle of a Guard Fighter Pilot.

"Attempted" aileron roll was more like it. But the MIF is Fair (3+) so "barrel dive" is good enough. No fighter/FAIP follow-on, press to next block. LOL