Clark Griswold
Supreme User
-
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Yeah but I doubt those two additional years of storage will be executed so… they got one year in the attic before being put on the curb The drone killer pitch and the on going fight(s) would be a legit reason to excess defense articles / foreign military aid these aircraft and parts to Ukraine.
-
-
It was the money (firm fix price contract) Good and surprisingly candid article on why SNC left the UJTS TWZWe Now Know Why Sierra Nevada Corp Canned Its Navy Jet Tr...SNC has provided a detailed explanation for why its clean-sheet Freedom Jet isn't competing to replace the Navy's T-45s.
-
That might be, rebidding with changed pricing and requirements to meet scrutiny, it surprised me (SNC deciding to punch out) as they were offering actual FCLP capabilities and meet the basic requirements. Seemed a strong case for that jet but apparently there’s some turd in this punch bowl that only the M-346N can stomach… I see the optics issue with the family relationship (distant) with the Yak but I think that’s manageable, it’s an Italian design.
-
-
Divested Breaking DefenseAir Force divests its few A-29s, explores 'future options...A set of three A-29 Super Tucanos are destined for storage after officials at the Air Force Test Pilot School opted against using the turboprops, a spokesperson for Edwards Air Force Base told Breakin
-
Globalists try a coup d'état in Poland, seems to be at an impasse https://redstate.com/wardclark/2026/10/30/poland-coup-attempt-prime-minister-donald-tusk-seizes-top-court-n2208841
-
Yeah, I see your point however with MRTT already flying the technical risk is low and fleet complexity manageable, I think.
-
True, the need for a very large fuel load for either offload and/or loiter while ideally the situation cools down is highly desirable AI Google says loiter for 4 hours at 1000 NM from launch and offload 110k, that’s time to decide whether to execute Wing Attack Plan R or not. #strangelove Tactical tanker is KC-390, Standard tanker is KC-46, Strategic Tanker is KC-45 (A-330 MRTT+). Build it in the Airbus plant in Mobile. Tactical and Strategic are each 20% of the tanker fleet, 60% are Standard tails.
-
Yup, heard the same. Things change, different operational environment now so time to adjust. The report pushes hard (sts) for the Blended Wing Body (BWB) and Collaborative Tanker Aircraft (CTA), as the long term solution I think they are right, short term a new paradigm is needed though. If king for a day, if the KC-390 and A-330 MRTT+ could be acquired with an appropriate last tranche of KC-46s, I’d spin down the -135 fleet for this new iron while BWB design which would double as NGAL was spinning up. Those two designs somehow being acquired in compliance with the Made in America laws/policies. It’s a two fold problem, two fold approach. Big tankers to launch from relatively safe hardened bases with 1000+ NM set back from operational areas, AR to the next asset who will then AR the strikers assuming more risk going modestly into the A2AD bubble. The BWB will likely simplify this paradigm a bit (reduced signature, better range/offload, better organic defense) but we gotta crawl before we run.
-
They would still go thru the full training program at airline X even with the type but it might make them more competitive to the hiring algorithm… The 787 tanker is a long shot but just for the interwebs. The A-330 MRTT NEO would be my recommendation (interim bigger wing tanker) but politics would likely be insurmountable. Still it brings up a good question, should the AF become more strategically oriented? That is focus on long range strike and effects, coming from a distance to mitigate the proliferation of short to mid range fires? I’m not saying the whole of the AF should be bombers and big fighters but part of the force design.
-
Big tankers Breaking DefenseUSAF should buy newly designed air refuelers to meet Chin...Although there’s a “temptation” to keep buying KC-46s, a plan to procure 75 more of the Boeing-made tankers should be an “upper limit” followed by a new, longer range tanker, the Hudson Institute’s TiFinish and fix the 46, interim big tanker 787 tanker while developing the BWB. Needs a cargo door but a looker, especially as a Guard tail.
-
Gotcha, their x post (JBSA) didn’t mention the hard landing and just seeing that part now from this thread. The venerable T-6 though is showing its age, 53% MC rate. https://www.airandspaceforces.com/air-force-mission-capable-rates-fiscal-2024/ I’d prefer a return to a jet based primary trainer but that ain’t happening, the T-6C is the easy button so press it Air Force.
-
Glad they got out, controlled ejection, new iron people (leaders lurking on this forum), AETC needs it ASAP.
-
One more T-7 render, aggressor
