Jump to content
Baseops Forums
Sign in to follow this  
matmacwc

Hurricane Michael

Recommended Posts

15 hours ago, Lawman said:

Yeah looking at this if we’re thinking “are we taking an unnecessary risk” I think the smart Lowest cost highest payoff universal move is building on site protection. 

HAS, Purpose built hangers, whatever... I think this might make a military that has 20 silver bullets parked in Missouri that cannot be replaced go “hey maybe I can spend some cash on a better garage for my stuff.”

 

for the cost of 1 B-2 or 2-3 Raptors..... what could you build...

When I was stationed at Camp Smith I remember someone telling me that PACAF looked at building HASes for the E-3s at Kadena but each HAS would cost $1 billion...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
When I was stationed at Camp Smith I remember someone telling me that PACAF looked at building HASes for the E-3s at Kadena but each HAS would cost $1 billion...


I mean... Wright Patt spent like 8 million dollars to build a bathroom on the golf course back in the 90s, so while it’s totally possible to spend that much I’m almost sure it’s because we’re stupid.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
  • Like 3

Share this post


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

Image result for eglin afb air space map

They don't "need" the overwater airspace as much as I need to fly direct from FLL or MCO to MSY or HOU.

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, torqued said:

They don't "need" the overwater airspace as much as I need to fly direct from FLL or MCO to MSY or HOU.

Uhh, yes, they do.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/14/2018 at 8:06 AM, Lord Ratner said:

I wonder how many F22s it would have cost to dig underground plane shelters. And no scoffing. If we can land on the moon, build a missile tracking base in a mountain, and drive floating airports all over the ocean, we could have built a few big basements for planes as small as fighters in hurricane land.

You’re a special kind of stupid aintcha?

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
You’re a special kind of stupid aintcha?
I guess so. I'm not sure which is crazier, this tunnel, which is clearly impossible given the water table and hurricane activity in the region, or that a bunch of educated adults who literally fly through the air on the magic of (decades-old) human innovation think that we couldn't find a way protect small airplanes from wind and water.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Port_Miami_Tunnel
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Asking if we have erred strategically in placing such a large fleet of expensive assets in harm's way is a valid question.  It's an ORM problem akin to a preflight ORM.  There is a level of acceptable risk with each mission and with each basing decision.  Looking to see if this risk was appropriately evaluated is pretty much what we do anytime there is an aircraft mishap.

We have plenty of AF assets in tornado alley.  Lots of others sit in other beach-side hurricane zones.  Some sit on earthquake faults.  But, just like any aircraft mishap, we need to look back and decide if the risk was worth the price.

In this case, it was potentially an extremely steep price.

  • Like 1

Share this post


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

Uhh, yes, they do.

I dunno. I kinda feel like the inconvenience of me always flying around that airspace far exceeds the necessity for someone else to fly in circles within it.

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, torqued said:

I dunno. I kinda feel like the inconvenience of me always flying around that airspace far exceeds the necessity for someone else to fly in circles within it.

If you're not getting paid by the minute, you're doing it wrong anyway.  

  • Like 2
  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I guess so. I'm not sure which is crazier, this tunnel, which is clearly impossible given the water table and hurricane activity in the region, or that a bunch of educated adults who literally fly through the air on the magic of (decades-old) human innovation think that we couldn't find a way protect small airplanes from wind and water.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Port_Miami_Tunnel

I’m glad someone mentioned this. There are tunnels in coastal cities all over the US, even with the high water table. Houston has no tunnels, but has underground walkways downtown. The issue would be controlling the flooding from a storm surge, but I’m sure that can be figured out...


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hell, I say reopen K.I. Sawyer in the upper peninsula of Michigan, turn and burn over Lake Superior. Learn to love snow and cold weather OP's. Or any other northern tier old remote SAC base.  

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
30 minutes ago, Prosuper said:

Hell, I say reopen K.I. Sawyer in the upper peninsula of Michigan, turn and burn over Lake Superior. Learn to love snow and cold weather OP's. Or any other northern tier old remote SAC base.  

Just don’t drink the water.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On ‎10‎/‎15‎/‎2018 at 7:44 AM, brabus said:

Consider the extra time, money, and depot absorption limfacs to push normal phase externally. Unlikely to be a palatable Plan A. The most cost effective and efficient way forward is likely in the realm of building HAS with weather driving the design (as lawman pointed).

One thing that surprised me about Eglin was why they didn't use all the existing Hardened Aircraft Shelters on the base/reservation to store stuff during hurricanes. I was stationed there 5 times in my career/lots of hurricanes/hurricane prep/evacuations of flyable aircraft and stuffing the broke birds/equipment in hangers, etc. Same fallible drill every time.

Edited by waveshaper
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/15/2018 at 10:21 AM, torqued said:

They don't "need" the overwater airspace as much as I need to fly direct from FLL or MCO to MSY or HOU.

The ROTC forum is a few pages back

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, ClearedHot said:


 

 


Are they all complete losses?

Time to reopen the line MAGA more Raptors... 5 more squadrons!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

  • Like 3

Share this post


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

Hell, I say reopen K.I. Sawyer in the upper peninsula of Michigan, turn and burn over Lake Superior. Learn to love snow and cold weather OP's. Or any other northern tier old remote SAC base.  

Or Loring. Guys will be back stabbing each other big time to get that gig! 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 hours ago, Breckey said:

Just don’t drink the water.

No thats Detroit, KI got water from Lake Superior unfiltered which exceeds the EPA standard.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hey guys, let's refrain from publishing numbers of damaged aircraft, rumint or otherwise, until the DOD releases that information publicly. Thanks!

  • Like 2
  • Upvote 3
  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...