All Activity

Maybe, but this very thing also was extremely close to happening (all the work and most of the staffing had been done to make it a thing)…and then the A-10 resurrected itself for the 5th time. Based on that, I think it’s decently likely they will implement something like I stated, BUT it won’t be with years of overlap. The most likely will be a core group of dudes trained (who knows, maybe they’ll make another XYZ TASS) and they will propagate to the current CAF while it gets added into B courses and normalized on RTMs. This will take longer than desired, but it will happen, and we just have to hope nothing goes down during the conversion period…and if it does, America will make it happen, even if under less than ideal settings.

I’m too lazy, so here is AI… Cuba is considered a national security threat by the U.S. government primarily due to its proximity to the U.S., its intelligence alliances with adversaries like Russia and China, and its support for hostile actors in the region. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cuban_Missile_Crisis here is a link to the Cuban missile crisis for a brief synopsis on the historical threat associated with Cuba. Let me know if you have any more questions!

Wish I was as well written and in the know as some of the followers of this thread so I thought I would just let things stew for a while (didn't help) and see how this contracted Flight Academy issue would work out. My information comes from first hand accounts but may not be indicative of other contracted flight academies. In this particular case, one AF Captain back at the home AFB is tasked with keeping contact with that home base's TDY students as an additional duty and not as a primary job. Essentially there is no day to day monitoring of the civilian flight academy's performance or treatment of the students. The result is this flight academy in this particular case has to a large extent abused its students. Stretches of 12 days or more of being scheduled on duty, literally no regular scheduled days off each week, and the instructors have been abused too, and told to quit or be fired if they didn't like the non-stop 12-hour days. In some cases this has built up a huge animus towards the students . There is absolutely no consistency amongst the cfi's except that they all operate under FAR's. Instructional rides sometimes last up to three hours in the peak of heat in a small, hot cockpit. Can't remember if I ever in my career had initial instructional rides longer than an hour and a half. My understanding is it took a couple RAF guys, more senior in rank than the second lieutenants to call back to home base and threaten an IG complaint. That worked for a while but the civilian boss had other ideas. It's not unique that this Flight Academy is trying to push the Air Force students through as quickly as possible, and cheaply as possible, using new, young cfi's and schedulers that have no clue about duty days. And the word is out, every flight academy is different and some, like CAE, are top tier and very professional .Others have sent initial solo students out in planes that have had engine failures and were not fixed.( yes solo student had an engine failure on departure after it had supposedly been fixed.) Suffice to say, these flight academies, from Atlanta to Southern Florida to Texas and Arizona , sourcing instructors from every corner of the globe in no way shape or form will deliver a consistent, across the board equal product back to the respective home bases --from what I am seeing and hearing. I would love to hear this is just sour grapes from a couple students and I'm not getting a proper perspective.

Can someone explain why Cuba is a national security threat?

You guys can't possibly be this unlikable in the office, right? Actually what he said, if you must translate his already clear quote, was: "I could see the Republicans and Democrats both abusing this." And what a wonderful day for you, even Ted Cruz says the Republicans aren't on board with this: Cruz said about 45 of the 53 Senate Republicans were attendance and "at least half of them were blasting the attorney general and they were pissed." "They were screaming at the acting attorney general," he said. "There were multiple senators who were yelling at the attorney general — and it was not calm, it was yelling — and they were saying this feels like self-dealing." Now since you insist on making it partisan, when is the last time the Democrats revolted over a Democrat president being sketchy? Serious question.

The last of the glamour hires. I had high hopes for Bondi, but Gabbard and Noem seemed doomed from the start. Gabbard is isolationist to a fault, and Noem is a clown.

I like watching crooked cops squirm

Nothing will change until the mission doesn't get done in a messy and embarrassing way

Change block 30/40 DOC statement to reflect CSAR as primary mission - could be done this year if they wanted to. Has nothing to do with force posture. And ironically, Korea would be a likely place to conduct CSAR if that war ever occurred.

That's because depsite the perception, Big Blue doesn't control OCONUS force posture. As others have alluded, make CSAR a strategic priority, then it will get the attention it deserves.

Good points, new build Vipers with mods, options to specialize in these missions would be my choice, if not Superbugs. Chance of that happening: zero point zero…. CFTs, look at engine mods or options to get more on station time, stretched or D model airframes if possible (new) for more fuel / gear or a WSO to direct CCAs, CCAs optimized for these missions, maybe a probe & drogue AR setup as was offered to the IAF with CCA AR support, etc… the justification for this Christmas list is the INDOPACOM theater with the distances to be covered, the capability of the main adversary, the high probability of significant losses, etc… The optimized CCA paired with an optimized 4+ gen for dedicated CSAR/CAS is key methinks, bringing support while the traditional platforms are coordinated, faster and longer (giggity) immediate response

The central question was never whether Iran was a challenging environment. Nor was it whether Iran posed a serious threat, had the potential for nuclear weapons if they put their minds to it, fired ballistic missiles, or occasionally conducted special operations that targeted western citizens. All of that is true. The question was whether those conditions compelled the methods chosen — or whether they were invoked to justify choices that were poorly aligned with the United States’ own stated objectives.” He (smartly) doesn’t mention the clear “unstated” objective: to distract from other political difficulties that were becoming unmanageable. Once evaluated by that criteria suddenly everything starts to make perfect sense.

Interesting how your takeaway point here is that “I could see the democrats abusing this” as opposed to “I see active abuse occurring right now in only one party that I do or do not agree with.” Making invalid hypothetical comparisons is a fallacy.

Great analysis. Your friend writes well and seems genuinely strategically savvy.. most notably in that he avoids saying the quiet part out loud: “Conclusion The central question was never whether Gaza was a challenging environment. Nor was it whether Hamas posed a serious threat, employed tunnels, took hostages, fired rockets, or embedded itself among civilians. All of that is true. The question was whether those conditions compelled the methods chosen — or whether they were invoked to justify choices that were poorly aligned with Israel’s own stated objectives.” He (smartly) doesn’t mention the clear “unstated” objective: to completely evict the Palestinians from the area. Once evaluated by that criteria suddenly everything starts to make perfect sense.

It’s the Navy way.

The Rhino is a great jet, but also unnecessary for the task at hand when the AF already has a lot of Vipers, planned through 2047, a SPO, etc. From a program and financial perspective, it does not make sense to procure Rhinos…as good of a jet as it is.

They were spooning. That's gay.

Tulsi Resigns Effective 30 June Guess we're invading Cuba in July 🤔

"hard to replace". Give me a break.

...and not a single pilot died. Worth it.

The Senate had a meeting with the AG. Reports say it didn't go well. Sounds like they're going home and taking their ball with em. No Reconciliation Bill. Maybe Congress starts growing more spine.

If an A-10X is not possible then BURT’s argument finds another reason here https://www.twz.com/a-10-pilots-compelling-case-for-replacing-warthogs-with-super-hornets 7 squadrons, all F models, CFT equipped. CSAR, CAS, BAI, DCA prioritized in that order.

Some Guard squadrons, Kunsan, Osan, Aviano - start it right now. It can be done without any more iron or new squadrons activated. This is the easy button for big blue, but they still won’t do it.

We've been down this road, and similar paths, constantly and consistently since the 1970s. I'll believe that Big Blue is serious about CSAR (and CAS) beyond the A-10 when the following things occur: 1. SPECIFICALLY, in-writing, designate a MINIMUM of FIVE squadrons (of the MDS of their choosing) that will take CSAR as a PRIMARY mission. These squadrons will take dedicated, three week (or longer) TDYs to Moody AFB to learn, refine, and become proficient in the CSAR mission so that when the last Hog flies West, the mission is so deeply ingrained in the PRIMARY focus that no stress or strain can erase it. Why 5? I'd argue that's the absolute minimum number for a somewhat regular AFFORGEN deployment rhythm. Welcome to the world of low-density, high-demand. Who's going to want to go into no-kidding combat without Sandys? They will also publish the recurring training events that will prove to the entire CAF that the commitment of NEVER leaving a comrade behind on the field of battle is alive, well, and preserved in the United States Air Force. This won't happen, because it hasn't happened. In order to do this, those five squadrons will have to give up other missions in order to focus on CSAR. It isn't a pickup game, and if we relegate it as such, we're breaking faith with our own. Period, dot, full-stop. So, what can we ask that F-16, F-15E, or F-35 squadron to give up in exchange for keeping CSAR alive at such a pace that our own don't lose faith in our ability to come snatch them from the Valley of the Shadow of Death on the worst day of their lives? Draw the line in the sand. Demonstrate the commitment. Spoken words are hollow. Write it. Sign your name to it and accept the accountability for the decision. If we're not willing to do that, to that level, then we have to get serious in another way. Alternative COA: Give the mission in its entirety to the US Navy. Carriers are near the fight and are mobile. Sign it all over if we're not willing to do what it takes and maintain the mission at the standard that was forged in the skies over Vietnam. The mission has been tinkered with and tossed around a few times, and every time that's happened, it hasn't been good. We had to relearn the TTPs in Desert Storm, and that only happened because enough A-1 vets were retained in the young Hog community to keep the idea alive. Draw the line and go big, or punt on fourth down. Doctrinally, the USN is the closest to the USAF CSARTF in terms of composition, so push it all over there. Zero's perfect solution because I have the pens: Get serious about what war has really been over the last forty years, and the elements that will endure REGARDLESS of the war we want to fight. Our track record on predicting future conflict is pretty terrible, so (as they love to say at Air University) use the past as prologue and keep the things that you've always somehow needed, even if you didn't want them. Get serious about the USAF commitment that's existed in this manner since the original Sandys made it clear that they would walk through Hell in a gasoline suit to bring a comrade home. That means extending the A-10 until 2035, with all that's needed for such sustainment-- depot, WIC, FTU, test, and spare parts. That timeline gives the service time to develop a proper follow-on A-10X. You can even bolt-on some after-market add-ons to make it a VERY formidable F/A-10X and take the low-end counterair vs the low-slow toys so that the super expensive machines can focus on their high-end fights. Better yet, call it the ATTACK-MULTI-role FIGHTER, or AMF. You could field it in no time since you've got a foundation that you know works-- put some new versions of the -34 on there that get 15K lbs of thrust or more, add on every means of plug-and-play munition, EW, and comm suite that already exists, and of course, keep the gun. Done. On the ramp by 2035 so that the last of the c-models can take their place in the boneyard. We need the pickup truck in an era where everyone just wants the sports cars. EVERY conflict since Desert Storm has proven that. Bottom line at the bottom is that there is a numbers game that we're losing and will continue to lose so long as we don't accept the harsh reality before us. Budgets aren't big enough to field an entire fleet of exquisite and VERY expensive fighters. You can't field an NFL team with all quarterbacks, but it's also damn near impossible to field a winning team without those high-speed, highly paid leaders who pass and carry the pigskin. You need linemen. You need knuckle-dragging brawlers. There's already not enough to go around, and the trend is continuing downward. If you're going to transfer the mission, DO IT RIGHT, and START DOING IT NOW so that the new guys can learn from the experts. If you think it's a pickup game and that you can re-learn it on the fly after your one upgrade ride four years ago, you'll be joining Jack in the Esfahan Hilton. We're already late.

Seems like a lot.