Skip to content
View in the app

A better way to browse. Learn more.

Baseops Forums

A full-screen app on your home screen with push notifications, badges and more.

To install this app on iOS and iPadOS
  1. Tap the Share icon in Safari
  2. Scroll the menu and tap Add to Home Screen.
  3. Tap Add in the top-right corner.
To install this app on Android
  1. Tap the 3-dot menu (⋮) in the top-right corner of the browser.
  2. Tap Add to Home screen or Install app.
  3. Confirm by tapping Install.

All Activity

This stream auto-updates

  1. Today
  2. I like watching crooked cops squirm
  3. Nothing will change until the mission doesn't get done in a messy and embarrassing way
  4. 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.
  5. 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.
  6. 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
  7. 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.
  8. 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.
  9. Yesterday
  10. 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.
  11. It’s the Navy way.
  12. 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.
  13. They were spooning. That's gay.
  14. Tulsi Resigns Effective 30 June Guess we're invading Cuba in July 🤔
  15. "hard to replace". Give me a break.
  16. ...and not a single pilot died. Worth it.
  17. 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.
  18. 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.
  19. 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.
  20. 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.
  21. Seems like a lot.
  22. 26-10 1x AC-130 2x B-1 2x B-52 1x OA-1K Guard 1x HC-130 2x MC-130 1x EA-37 4x F-15E 2x RC-135 2x RQ-170
  23. Stuck the landing
  24. I’m an equal opportunity hater - fuck em both!
  25. One of the things I miss about the 717 is no LGA or JFK.
  26. The MAF wins DG in that discipline.

Account

Navigation

Search

Search

Configure browser push notifications

Chrome (Android)
  1. Tap the lock icon next to the address bar.
  2. Tap Permissions → Notifications.
  3. Adjust your preference.
Chrome (Desktop)
  1. Click the padlock icon in the address bar.
  2. Select Site settings.
  3. Find Notifications and adjust your preference.