Jump to content
Baseops Forums
Catbox

What's wrong with the Air Force?

Recommended Posts

10 hours ago, Prozac said:

Why does a pharmacy tech need to be a uniformed military member? Seriously. That question applies to any number of jobs. 

Same reason the US is still in Afghanistan, with no end state in mind and zero incentive to ever win.  ForeverWar feeds the jobs program that is the Defense Industrial Complex.  

As another poster pointed out- once you realize the purpose of the DoD is to spend taxpayer money, everything starts to make sense.

 

  • Upvote 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
It was the single largest loss of Marine aircraft in an attack ever. If I remember right. 

 

It was also over in minutes. Not before Marines on the flight line led by the squadron commander (who was KIA) dropped whatever they were doing to stand too and fight. Those Marines were reinforced by Rangers from TF 3-10 and the insurgents basically died fighting in place.

 

They took out every Harrier in the squadron (9 at the base) with a platoon size element that snuck through the post incident identified serious security hazard of a shanty town allowed to build up next to the perimeter fence. Dudes were wearing a cobbling together of stolen Coalition uniforms and sneakers/small arms with a bunch of grenades they used to demo the aircraft. Once they got a fire going, the moved to the next in succession. Doesn’t take long for aircraft in parking to end up like this 7e67ad8de4228cb8dd3d19500a463aa3.jpg

 

It didn’t help the night of the attack it was near zero illumination and crap ceilings. So complacency of “nothings going down tonight, let’s play some Xbox” was in full effect.

 

After that we finally got some level of security with T walls and an active security force in the towers at Mustang Ramp in KAF. We obviously completely forgot all those lessons though after my last trip to Taji.

 

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Lawman said:

 

It was also over in minutes. Not before Marines on the flight line led by the squadron commander (who was KIA) dropped whatever they were doing to stand too and fight. Those Marines were reinforced by Rangers from TF 3-10 and the insurgents basically died fighting in place.

 

They took out every Harrier in the squadron (9 at the base) with a platoon size element that snuck through the post incident identified serious security hazard of a shanty town allowed to build up next to the perimeter fence. Dudes were wearing a cobbling together of stolen Coalition uniforms and sneakers/small arms with a bunch of grenades they used to demo the aircraft. Once they got a fire going, the moved to the next in succession. Doesn’t take long for aircraft in parking to end up like this 7e67ad8de4228cb8dd3d19500a463aa3.jpg

 

It didn’t help the night of the attack it was near zero illumination and crap ceilings. So complacency of “nothings going down tonight, let’s play some Xbox” was in full effect.

 

After that we finally got some level of security with T walls and an active security force in the towers at Mustang Ramp in KAF. We obviously completely forgot all those lessons though after my last trip to Taji.

 

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Loved flying over that house directly on the fence every day and picturing a dude stepping out with an RPG and making things interesting

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Expeditionary Mindset - Complete loss of SA on the peacetime aspect when you are captured because you strayed across a border during an exercise in a military vehicle. How do you handle yourself? Thinking of Navy P-3 crew who declared an IFE and landed an ISR asset in China. They received specialized training for peacetime that I was fortunate enough to attend as well.

Most countries will quickly realize SrA Hung and SSgt Ball are just finance troops. They strayed across the border because both were playing Fortnite on their phones or using the  Polish Tinder app.

 

Edited by HarleyQuinn

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How many aircraft has the USAF lost to ground attack since the Vietnam War?

A look back at ground attacks on USAF Air Bases, Aircraft Destroyed/Damaged, Casualties, and Evolution of USAF Air Base Defense during the Vietnam War (1964-1973).

- Total Attacks; 475.

- Aircraft Destroyed/Damaged; US Aircraft Destroyed 75/US Aircraft Damaged 898 and RVN Aircraft Destroyed 25/RVN Aircraft Damaged 305.

- Casualties; US Casualties KIA-155/WIA-1702 and RVN Casualties KIA-154/WIA 504. 

- Data from 10 USAF Air Bases; Bien Hoa (BH); Binh Thny (BT); Cam Ranh Bay (CBR): Da Nang (DN); Nha
Trang (NT); Phan Rang (PR); Phu Cat (PC); Pleiku (PK); Tuy Hoa (TH); Tan Son
Nhut (TSN).
- Type of attacks: Standoff (m); Sapper (SAP); Standoff and Sapper Multi-
Battalion (MBN); Sabotage (SAB); Automatic Weapons (AWP).

 

https://media.defense.gov/2010/Sep/21/2001330253/-1/-1/0/AFD-100921-023.pdf

 

 

 

Edited by waveshaper

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Lawman said:

 So complacency of “nothings going down tonight, let’s play some Xbox” was in full effect.

I had internet in my CHU in Iraq and B-Hut in Afghanistan. The internet was really good in Afghanistan.  Got on top of my CHU in Iraq and slapped a 4 ft antenna on top and never had to go to the Community Center. You think I'm rolling out of my CHU with my M-9 with my baby momma on video chat looking all good? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I had internet in my CHU in Iraq and B-Hut in Afghanistan. The internet was really good in Afghanistan.  Got on top of my CHU in Iraq and slapped a 4 ft antenna on top and never had to go to the Community Center. You think I'm rolling out of my CHU with my M-9 with my baby momma on video chat looking all good? 

 

The shit people forget is Bastion wasn’t the first attack. It was the 4th.

 

Salerno, they hit it and got plastered. Just a poor combined attack and timing basically blowing their wad on the VBIED and then strolling in after the shock and audacity effect had already worn off.

 

Frontnac, they hit well and got in but had no clear goal other than “attack!” Ended up dead but took the chow hall with them.

 

Shank... huge VBIED cement truck. But they hit the bazaar and really only killed a lot of Afghans.

 

After each of those we did... pretty much nothing.

 

After Bastion people suddenly remembered this was a war and actions like the brigade at KAF put the pathfinders on the line in the dark because we had no idea if we were next. T walls instead of a cheap unguarded chain link fence. Crew chiefs were launching aircraft strapped, because of anything is more vulnerable than a parked aircraft it’s a parked aircraft with an APU and engines running. Really it was a wake up call to stop pretending just because you could go to the boardwalk and get ice cream you weren’t in a war zone.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Lawman said:

Really it was a wake up call to stop pretending just because you could go to the boardwalk and get ice cream you weren’t in a war zone.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

What do you have against ice cream on the boardwalk? 🤣😂 But seriously, I appreciate your perspective because it gives me even more ammunition against shoe clerks who not only think they know what they are talking about, but don't even have the clearance to know how things really work. 

Edited by HarleyQuinn

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Couldn't find a better place to put this; I wonder if Gen Johns will cite himself as a contributing factor to the issue by driving out a lot of experienced pilots from his time as AMC/CC.

https://www.militarytimes.com/news/your-military/2018/11/07/congress-names-aviation-crisis-panel-members/?utm_campaign=Socialflow+MIL&utm_source=twitter.com&utm_medium=social

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Lawman said:

After Bastion people suddenly remembered this was a war and actions like the brigade at KAF put the pathfinders on the line in the dark because we had no idea if we were next. T walls instead of a cheap unguarded chain link fence. Crew chiefs were launching aircraft strapped, because of anything is more vulnerable than a parked aircraft it’s a parked aircraft with an APU and engines running. Really it was a wake up call to stop pretending just because you could go to the boardwalk and get ice cream you weren’t in a war zone.

I don't understand how any one can consider a "conflict" like Afghanistan a "War" zone.  Yes stuff is exploding, people are dying, but I'm sorry when you've been at it this long it can't be considered a War any more.  It's like the 3 star making a plea to a auditorium full of pilots that are approaching their ADSC to please stay in because we are needed to keep releasing bombs, support the war etc etc.  I'm sorry but when I've been deploying to that conflict for my entire 12 years in, when that conflict was already 6 years old the whole point becomes lost. 

This isn't an excuse for people to get complacent, because that can easily mean you are risking others and your own lives while out there. But calling this long term live action shooting range a "War" gives it too much credit.    

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, DirtyFlightSuit said:

I don't understand how any one can consider a "conflict" like Afghanistan a "War" zone.  Yes stuff is exploding, people are dying, but I'm sorry when you've been at it this long it can't be considered a War any more.....

This isn't an excuse for people to get complacent, because that can easily mean you are risking others and your own lives while out there. But calling this long term live action shooting range a "War" gives it too much credit.    

Afghanistan is definitely a war.  What is the timeline when a war becomes a conflict in your mind?  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The "modern" Indian Wars lasted from the end of the American Civil War to almost 1900. Afghanistan still has a was to go if it wants to meet that benchmark

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In my mind you try to win a war.  There is no timeline.  

When all you’re doing is maintaining the status quo...I’m not sure what the hell you call that. 

  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, MooseClub said:

In my mind you try to win a war.  There is no timeline.  

When all you’re doing is maintaining the status quo...I’m not sure what the hell you call that. 

politics

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 hours ago, uhhello said:

Loved flying over that house directly on the fence every day and picturing a dude stepping out with an RPG and making things interesting

Was always interesting driving around to other side of base through sniper alley with that house right there as well. There were a bunch of locals (I think, they had afghan style clothing) contracted to remove the old Russian mines that were within a rocks throw from the fence. For 4 months I was always on high alert, no one else in the crew can ever seemed to care but it had the makings of a great attack. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, MooseClub said:

In my mind you try to win a war.  There is no timeline.  

When all you’re doing is maintaining the status quo...I’m not sure what the hell you call that. 

Moose does a much better job of explaining my lack of respect for what we are doing in that region of the world.  Give me a clear obtainable objective and maybe I'd agree its a war.  But we are just spending blood, and treasure for nothing.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, MooseClub said:

In my mind you try to win a war.  There is no timeline.  

When all you’re doing is maintaining the status quo...I’m not sure what the hell you call that. 

Fair enough.  I won’t quibble with semantics, and I concur with the frustration.  I still think AFG is a war; using your definition: one side is trying to win.  And succeeding.  It’s just not our side.  To me that doesn’t make this “not war” it makes us dumb.

We seem to think WW2, which was historically anomalous, is the standard “war” and drawn out, ambiguous, sporadic fighting is abnormal and unworthy of study.  But it’s all war.  We’re just bad at it.  Not trying to put words in your mouth, that spear is aimed at USAF PME.

And I don’t blame politicians, I blame our generals.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, tac airlifter said:

And I don’t blame politicians, I blame our generals.

I blame both. I will also raise you the O-6s whispering stupid nothings via PowerPoint in between rounds of using up knee pads

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, tac airlifter said:

 

And I don’t blame politicians, I blame our generals.

The military objective was to dismantle AQ in Afghanistan and deny the opportunity to use Afghanistan as a safehaven for attack planning against the homeland. We won the war in a few months.

The problem is when politicians decided that democracy and a strong central government was important in Afghanistan. That is not an objective that can be achieved with warfare alone. Any general that thinks that is a reasonable objective is more politician than military leader.

 

Edited by one1
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, one1 said:

The military objective was to dismantle AQ in Afghanistan and deny the opportunity to use Afghanistan as a safehaven for attack planning against the homeland. We won the war in a few months.

The problem is when politicians decided that democracy and a strong central government was important in Afghanistan. That is not an objective that can be achieved with warfare alone. Any general that thinks that is a reasonable objective is more politician than military leader.

 

This.

And this is very much a war to the other side. You can't consider it "not a war" just because the enemy doesn't play to your strengths. They are most definitely using violence to achieve political objectives. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As long as the American public allows themselves to believe that the current conflicts cost them nothing more than an occasional “thank you for your service”, nothing will change. 

  • Like 1
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Prozac said:

As long as the American public allows themselves to believe that the current conflicts cost them nothing more than an occasional “thank you for your service”, nothing will change. 

^exactly

Stuff in the Middle East couldn’t be further from the minds of typical Americans. My assumption is most politicians (and honestly prob many generals) are more than happy to keep their “wars” by in large out of the public eye. Status quo and keeping the machine rolling is much easier that way. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, one1 said:

The military objective was to dismantle AQ in Afghanistan and deny the opportunity to use Afghanistan as a safehaven for attack planning against the homeland. We won the war in a few months.

The problem is when politicians decided that democracy and a strong central government was important in Afghanistan. That is not an objective that can be achieved with warfare alone. Any general that thinks that is a reasonable objective is more politician than military leader.

 

This is where the military worship throughout the nation has unintended consequences. We should’ve gone hard with the diplomatic solution over a decade ago and doing the FID type missions to augment it*.

The government doesn’t want to ever just tell DoD “no”. Problem is that the military is a hammer but we need to paint a portrait. You can use a hammer to construct the picture frame, but at some point you need to use a brush.

*If you want to kill your way out of it, commit to that. I personally don’t think that’ll work but have a clear end state and put resources towards achieving it.

An interesting book on the subject is “War on Peace” by Ronan Farrow. The book worships diplomacy a bit too much in my opinion, but it’s very interesting.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now



×