Jump to content

Clark Griswold

Supreme User
  • Posts

    2,555
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    38

Everything posted by Clark Griswold

  1. Yeah but they (the PLAN) can give the appearance of one while the other Lines of Effort are worked. Simultaneously with my hypothetical rapidly deployed air/naval/info blockade would be coordinated actions with all the other bad kids in the classroom (NK, Iran, Russia, Venezuela, Cuba, Turkey, TNCOs, VEOs, etc) and a massive Cyber / Financial attack. The strategy would be distraction in too many places to react militarily in a timely manner NK begins shelling SK islands and minor kinetic actions, fires a missile or two over Japan. Iran begins miming the Straits of Hormuz, harassing and seizing civilian vessels, gets the Houthis to launch new attacks against Yemen and KSA. Russia gets really aggressive in the Baltics and over the Baltic Sea. Venezuela and Cuba release enormous numbers of migrants with support to get them to the US borders, ditto x 10 for Turkey & Russian releasing / pushing ME & African migrants into Western Europe. TNCOs in Mexico and Central America do the same with migrants and destabilization of governments, might even get the ruling classes to abandon their countries, if we will tolerate the Taliban they might tolerate an almost overt narco-mafia state. Assist covertly VEOs for a high profile attack or two, etc.... I would also lean heavily on American businesses in China and sympathetic leftist woke politicians and entities in the US & Europe to argue for a diplomatic solution versus military action, they could also use the debt coercion they have established with their predatory lending in Belt/Road projects to quickly garner support for their position, debt forgiven for support during the crisis arguing for the position of the PRC, etc... Cyber and Disinformation Campaign, dump T-bills and give the stock market a shock, etc... All the Tom Clancy stuff is to just paralyze the OODA loop capabilities of the current regime, too much for them all at once.
  2. The timing is good from their perspective, attack could mean putting Taiwan into check versus checkmate to let them capitulate and give the US / Democrat-Globalist administration a way out without a military response to PRC aggression. If I were the PRC I would enforce a sudden naval, air and informational blockade of Taiwan. Tell the world that this is done and not to interfere and that the PRC would use its full capability to include nuclear weapons against any other nation interfering, if I were the Chinese public relations guy I would make the English translation use the same words as Kennedy’s televised speech during the Cuban Missile Crisis. That’s their angle is to muddy the situation and claim it’s like the CMC and that they have a historical analogous position to use military coercion to change the situation on the island and to threaten retaliation against any interfering power. I don’t think they do but that’s the way I would play it. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
  3. Same. Just my two guessing cents but I think it's even money that the PRC that they will begin actions / invade before or timed with the upcoming mid-terms. https://www.breitbart.com/asia/2021/10/01/record-38-chinese-pla-aircraft-enter-taiwans-air-defense-zone/ They're probing and testing responses, military-diplomatic-economic-informational, to gauge second order effects when they invade. How will the markets react, how will Western media react, how will third countries react, etc...
  4. Australia - not a free country anymore https://www.theblaze.com/news/government-unvaccinated-australians-lose-freedoms#toggle-gdpr
  5. Potentially but there are tech solutions that can probably mitigate or solve issues involving the slow low signature nature of the target Raytheon has a radar that seems ideal for Scorpion: https://www.raytheonintelligenceandspace.com/news/advisories/raytheon-intelligence-space-launches-new-compact-aesa-radar-any-platform?utm_source=twitter&utm_medium=organic&utm_campaign=AIRDOM&utm_content=_AFA&utm_id=55388813175538883177140&linkId=132696991 Get a software feature to synch the radar and MX-20 sensor and now you got vis ID at 15+ NM easy Out of range of the aforementioned Stinger but that level capability (sensors and speed) would give the ability to scan and secure a typical TFR in an affordable platform Choir preaching but the sermon continues Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
  6. Scorpion jet with stingers vice sidewinders Your welcome America Do we want security or not? Do we want capabilities or not? Not everything has to a gold plated 300 million dollar jet burning thru 40k an hour. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
  7. The Anglosphere is dying. https://www.theblaze.com/news/new-zealand-kfc-smuggling-covid
  8. True True again. FSW vaporware just doesn't look right, give the first design a straight or slightly swept wing and it might look feasible. The engine pods should be moved further in, almost mounted on top of the fuselage, blended in. Keep the screens I suppose like the 117 had.
  9. Stealth A-10s Not sure FSW and LO mix but keeps the original outline. And on the Attack Aircraft theme another render of the Quiet Attack Aircraft concept from the early 70s
  10. Wilco Yeah, the platforms are the bacon to be brought home by Congressman Porkulus and as our short cycle political system works on the premise of "What have you done for me lately?' vs. "Is this the right / best thing to do?" it will need to be considered when trying to keep the force relevant for the next fight(s). Just to get it done, do we need to request new / modified iron to get Congress interested as that will generate more spending that they can take credit for? If so, will that drive us to cheap(er) solutions but ones that we can change out relatively quickly if we find them wanting? Divestiture of the Hog just brings out the emotions in the churn of what to buy, get rid of, change. I think it is (mistakenly) interpreted as the AF not caring about the 19 year old in a TIC, aviation/military reporters wanna feed that belief the AF is only concerned about fast jets, air to air and techno solutions to give certain segments of their readership the confirmation of what they believe and don't like about the AF. Anyway, if money grew on trees I'd wanna see the A-10 units converted F-16s while in the background, the yet to be seen but discussed new 4+ gen fighter would also get an attack variant developed simultaneously. Noting too ambitious but one that widened the low speed envelope, expanded range/loiter, probably better EW suite, etc...
  11. Excellent questions to answer to justify or not the Hog. My two cents is that the mission risk is mainly in losing a cadre of fighter / attack pilots geared towards the Attack Mission Set with particular focus on CAS. Is that enough to justify the Hog being upgraded and sustained, maybe maybe not. If I were AFWIC, I would consider out of container ideas like a future attack community distributed around the threat environment, high-medium-low, and look to OT&E on that concept. High - most expensive and highest demand in requirements, platform probably needs to piggy back off an existing program with technical specifications and improvements applied. Attack variant of the F-35? LO weapons pods, CFTs, etc… Medium - medium price and mission requirements, it needs to address the criticism that the Hog could not survive in a medium threat environment and still deliver a solid attack platform with persistence / lesser AR requirements. This would also need expeditionary capability to fit into Indo-Pacific plans. Probably a Gripen or Superhornet modified to get more attack and less fighter out of the platform, not perfect but feasible methinks. Low - first gen UCAV and AT-6s There’s always a chance of the peer in peer fight but fighting proxies and rogue states is still more likely. A mix of manned / unmanned platforms will prevent overkill and the opportunity cost of being over invested in the few and exquisite platforms. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
  12. So I saw this quote from the ACC chief in AFA's magazine: China is our…pacing threat. If we’re going to keep pace with what they’re doing … you’re not going to do it by refurbishing a fleet of 40-year-old, single-mission, 210-knot airplanes. You’re just not, regardless of how much they’re loved and the great performance they’ve done. - Gen. Mark D. Kelly, commander, Air Combat Command, offering his view of the long-term effectiveness ofkeeping the A-10 in the combat air forces, Air Force Life Cycle Management Center Life Cycle Industry Days streaming seminar, Aug. 3. He has a point and with that I'm not saying the other side doesn't have a point on preserving the A-10. But are we really talking about preserving single mission / focused mission set squadrons? The A-10 is a unique platform in the mix that ACC has a single focus, ditto for the F-15C I guess. Would the A-10 community make a better case if they pursued recapitalization vs refurbishing the A-10? New airplane same mission focus vs keeping the Hog? New platform could defeat the arguments against their survivability in a contested environment and relevance to the big fight scenarios.
  13. The Aussies like Japan, SK and anyone else there with the means and desire to not have a Chinese boot in your ass one day need to go ahead a nuke up. Yeah the first years will be scary but no more than now, we’re too comprised by short sighted interests who would and do turn a blind eye to their aggression and atrocities now, I don’t think it’s a sure bet we would come in a timely manner. Have your own gun and a good police department in your neighborhood, with both your own deterrent and a larger force to call on your chances of not being turned into a puppet state or being cowed increase dramatically. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
  14. https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/42395/it-looks-like-a-c-130-seaplane-is-finally-happening Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
  15. Yup, constant propaganda can set a train in motion not easy to stop. I think it was Shirer in Rise and Fall of the Third Reich said WW2 in Europe past a point was inevitable as a generation of Germans had grown up / accepted that their problems and frustrations were the results of others and that they deserved to take by force and settle scores what was rightfully theirs. Even if their leaders wanted to slow or stop the train, their public and power structures that support and enable authoritarian regimes would not accept anything but aggression. Paraphrasing and it’s been 20+ years since I read that tome (highly recommended btw) so forgive any unintentional changes to that idea but I could see how this could happen. Saw two videos pop up in my feed speculating on Chinese potential aggression. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
  16. That channel on YouTube is awesome, I was too young to remember Burt Sugarman’s Midnight Special tv show but the bands and comedians he would have were incredible. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
  17. True the threats only grow but can you have survivability & relevance with affordability? If you make it slower with better legs can you save enough overall to give it enough defensive capes to engage a defended target or moderate threat environment? Rhetorical questions but I think possibly, just need to keep it focused on what it is supposed to do and not let it grow in mission(s). Anyway, if we're bullshitting about remaking old airplanes into modern platforms then for light attack / observation I want the F-84F to get reborn with a new motor and systems: Love the funky 50's jets.
  18. Yup, that one has made the rounds but is worth an encore I like it but a two seater model / single seater with GIB spot with an extra fuel tank would have been better IMHO but still great Yeah, but what is the requirement now post Iraq / Afghanistan for a LAAR? To be able to survive only the low threat environment or given the change in the operational environment / growth in grey zone conflict does it need to be able to survive / defend & retrograde against say SA-22 and greater threats? Just my two cents, it's 4th gen capes without the 4th gen logistical footprint or operational support (AR) needs for missions requiring target development / post strike loiter. If so, a light fighter optimized for attack / observation with as low as an RCS as can be made / sustained given the fiscally modest requirements this platform would have is the answer. High bypass non-afterburning turbo fan, decent radar but not top o' the line, open mission systems, primarily designed for internal weapons carriage, organic EW system, etc... The Northrop MRF-54E, the inspiration for the Russian Checkmate methinks, might be a good starting point:
  19. Concur - if only... What a PA-47 in Euro camo might have looked like And just to close the loop on Mustang what if's, found this guy's jet powered racing Mustang concept: F-51 Mustang Concpet Airplane on Behance Need to work on the exhaust layout I think but looks like good vaporware
  20. Concept carrier based PA-48 Enforcer with dual-contra props:
  21. Concur on your Chief & Indian point, Gen Milley back in the day before the current debacle of Afghanistan expressed correctly frustration with the inability of the DoD to quickly get to a solution for what I would call important but not premier weapon / mission systems https://federalnewsnetwork.com/dod-reporters-notebook-jared-serbu/2016/04/army-chief-says-hell-fix-ridiculous-handgun-acquisition/ Quoting him from the article: "The technology’s been around for five centuries, and arguably it’s the least important weapons system in the Department of Defense inventory.” I would have extended that idea for the LAAR for the AF but not as a least important weapon system. Not a premier system but one important and urgent enough to allow an exception to policy via legislation to have proceeded VFR direct to solution, ditto for MRAPs, JCA, etc... The care and feeding of this mission (equipment, people, skill sets, experience, etc...) was and remains a good set for the Guard (Air and Ground). Anyway, like Cato saying "Carthage must be destroyed." repetitively, the AF needs a manned light attack / observation platform and the US needs to retain some percentage of its military, diplomatic and assistance capabilities OT&E'd for LIC-COIN-NEO-Stability Ops. Just an unpleasant fact of life in a world with scarcity, competition and conflict.
  22. Aren't going to fight or not fight like we did for the past 20 years? We need to fight problems sometimes but not necessarily "fix" the place. I'm not for a part 2 of Afghanistan the Venezuelan edition or some other equally quixotic effort but methinks we may not want to get involved but we will have to prevent the formation of a world order we really really don't want. Anyway, fighting wars / executing operations short of major conflict in the developing world, failed states or ungoverned spaces (low intensity, counter insurgency, counter terrorism, etc...) is going to have to be done, sometimes by us sometimes by our allies / proxies / PMCs.
×
×
  • Create New...