All Activity

Unless you've got some inside info, last I saw Macdill 46's are pushing 2030.

I have no relevant advice to offer (I wish I did). Just curious how it went?

I hope FL doesn’t end up on the short end of this stick. The last thing any state needs is a bunch of dumbass NYC-ers moving their way.

I think the big hump for many to get over is the significant paradigm shift - peer warfare has rapidly changed and airborne C2, as we know it, is essentially obsolete (at least until we destroy a lot of adversary capabilities). So, we’ve had to look at other means to gain battle space awareness, ITW, data passage, etc. So again, yawn to the E7 getting shitcanned; G550s (or similar) to support the non-peer stuff.

Life is about trade offs. The easy counter to this is what kind of ground footprint required when we are talking about expeditionary basing. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Completely feel this. Wasn't sure what narrative statements held the most weight on the 215 specifically. It was tough cutting fat on statements i felt were strong. Relied heavily on my personal letter and letter of rec to capture other things that weren't captured on the 215. I also left block 19 blank. Like you said, it seemed as if it shouldn't be there. Last years 215 i saw from previous applicants had a number 19. Remarks but no box to write in. But my 215 was due to the squadron yesterday so it's in gods hands now. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Nor sure her motives, could be the economic footprint of supporting a smaller platform or could be legit performance concerns Didn’t catch all of her comments but if I were a staffer or mil liaison working for her, I’d make the argument for an E-7 not just for the combat C2 mission but for long range patrol and monitoring, peacetime to contingency planning. Air and surface surveillance. The Arctic, maritime regions and maintaining a watch on long range patrols and joint ops occasionally being conducted by the Russians & Chinese are all examples of how not just in WW Taiwan how a long range multi sensor capable platform fits into the team. Just dreaming and if money grew on trees… Develop a MAX 7 based platform, the MAX is not a NEO but worth it for domestic considerations. Referencing the defunct E-10 project, develop a GMTI capability plus long range EO/IR. Develop this with the Israelis, leveraging their capes into a domestic modern platform (if not using the G550 based platforms) Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Curious what everyone’s thoughts are on the new AF215 format? It seems like plenty of space for rater and senior rater comments, but once you get going you quickly realize that not much fits compared to year’s past when the comments were narrative bullets or old school bullet format. Also, there’s a new section for applicant comments (block 19) that wasn’t on last year’s AF215. The font size is super small so it almost seems like block 19 was never meant to be there. What type of info are others including that isn’t captured in your personal statement or elsewhere in your package?

The E2D is great for current day; weird, a senator doesn’t know shit.

Copy and understand, I believe @ClearedHot mentioned in this or another thread the Israeli AWACS based on the G550, same platform for the new Compass Call, I could see that as a selling point for logistical support and their jet has some very high end capes True, I’m just thinking the politics factor can trump the military capabilities factor here if not addressed Just as emotions often over power logic, it has to be considered https://breakingdefense.com/2025/06/air-force-cancels-e-7-wedgetail-citing-survivability-and-cost-concerns/ From the article: During a Senate Appropriations Committee hearing this morning, Sen. Lisa Murkowski, R-Alaska, raised concerns that the E-2D might not be able to match the E-7’s capabilities, and cited prior statements from Vice Chief of Space Operations Gen. Michael Guetlein that a space-based capability wouldn’t be available until the early 2030s. “We just haven’t heard, in my view, sufficient justification for the cancellation of such a critical program,” Murkowski told Air Force leaders. Jobs, money, prestige, etc… politicians want their constituents to have their fair share plus whatever else they can get. I want my Congressman to do the same, I think trying to meet her plus other politicians half way on this while developing the orbital systems is the best way.

I don’t understand why a system, the E-7A, that is already operational with other air forces requires so much development investment, is so expensive to acquire, and has such a long lead time. I suppose the Air Force monkeyed with the requirements too much but still, should have been off-the-shelf.

Those are all excellent reasons to NOT stick with the E-7 shitshow. E-7 would have been nice about 15 years ago, but obviously we’re well past that and it’s very sensible to drop that hot pile of garbage (from a programatic POV) in favor of better tech.

It’s not about smaller plane, biz jets can fly higher and faster which makes their sensors more useful. Also, Boeing is terrible at producing aircraft now.

Not every SIB has a corresponding AIB.

Yeah if the Bobs change their minds and continue supporting a manned/unmanned aircraft a smaller plane might be better / more budget friendly Probably could acquire more, plug more gaps as required, support more CAPs, possibly ACE employ, etc… I think the 73 for admin/legal/acquisition/political reasons just might be more likely to happen with less drama If Boeing and the ABM career field really want this aircraft to happen, methinks going forward they need to show how viable/useful the E-7 LOS C2 of unmanned systems could be, that’s a new capability plus the traditional C2 that makes the platform relevant IMO Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Finally a relevant Elephant Walk, and not just for a Wg/CC flex or photo op.

Yep, by no means does anyone who knows anything think space is uncontested; just stating adversary tech, combined with our emerging tech, has made manned ISR rapidly not relevant in a peer fight. If we’re talking other than peer fight, or day 69 of the peer war, totally a place for it.

WTF, she can go fuck herself. How about SCOTUS just shitcans the entire NFA, considering it’s blatantly unconstitutional.

Good point, shouldn't have said manned...but for those who think space based assets are "safe." Having aviation platform based AWACS still is viable.

For sure. I don’t think manned ISR should go away, but for those “non-WW3” situations, something like a G550 (or U2 if available) is a much better option. @StoleIt What does that article have to do with the topic at hand? And yes, in peer war, manned C2ISR is substantially less survivable and capable than several other unmanned technologies, including space.

For those that think manned C2ISR is at a higher risk than space based: https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/technology/china-strikes-hard-chinese-satellite-pulverizes-starlink-with-a-2-watt-laser-36-000-km-from-earth/ar-AA1HbXzq

...and the Senate Parliamentarian ruled we can't get rid of taxes on NFA arms in a budget bill ... apparently taxes are off limits in budget bills now...

Imagine putting all of those AWAC aircrew into one container.