Clark Griswold

No way, it's all good...

Thread Revival https://www.janes.com/article/29948/cad-images-suggest-strike-version-of-shenyang-j-31 Strike version of the J-31.

Drunk POS vs wife, the results are awesome...

Yep, the odds are somewhere between not in a million years and not ever ever going to happen.. but interesting none the less... My two $0.02, the LAAR would be a good mission for the Guard/Reserve. Keep the planes and aircrew qual'd and current, break the glass and spin up when needed.

Yep, it does not have the longest legs but that could be fixed, Conformal Fuel Tank. More money, but fixable. The Scorpion lists 150 NM to station - 5 hours on station - 150 NM home with a reserve so it may be the answer. LAAR Requirements: Rough field operations. Defensive package. Armored cockpit and engine. Long loiter time. The aircraft must be able to fly 5 hour sorties (with 30 minute fuel reserves). Range. The aircraft must have a 900 nautical mile (1600 km) ferry range. Data link capability. Intelligence, Surveillance and Reconnaissance (ISR) capabilities. Weaponry. Looking at all of them and considering the financially austere future, I think it makes more sense to look at light jets for LAAR. The turboprops are good in uncontested airspace but once there is a significant threat they may need to be pulled back from the FEBA / AOR. If we decide to purchase more than a few for Partner Capacity Building training mission, we'll need an asset that can take part (realistically) in a conventional campaign also. Light combat jets like the L-159, Scorpion, M-346, etc.. seem to be a better overall investment than the pure COIN aircraft like a A-29 or AT-6. Be good at several missions rather perfect in only one.

L-159 Advanced Light Combat Aircraft CAS, COIN, Light Strike and more survivable than the turboprops.

More escalation... https://www.cnn.com/2013/12/13/politics/us-china-confrontation/index.html?hpt=hp_t2 https://freebeacon.com/chinese-naval-vessel-tries-to-force-u-s-warship-to-stop-in-international-waters/

Yes it is suspect or bat shit crazy, take your pick, but the article only references an article in the China Times reporting on comments from the former Chinese UN ambassador, a lot of bluster and hyperbole but is indicative of how seriously the regime sees this, if it goes to a point that they can't back down because of losing face we better maneuver to either bloody their noses or let them have a show of force without changing anything in reality. This official, Zukang, is known for speaking his mind and not being very diplomatic (irony), proceed with caution. More suspect fodder... https://theaviationist.com/2013/08/12/future-japan-air-war/

https://www.infowars.com/china-japan-conflict-could-lead-to-world-war-iii-warns-former-un-ambassador/ Not the most authoritative source but the drumbeat gets louder and louder...

Excellent

Interesting scenario but like Majestik Møøse I thought the little advanced capability given to the AN/APG-77 radar was unsat, it's designed for LPI operation so for at least the beginning of the BVR fight the 22's will have the advantage, not saying the Chinese couldn't detect them, specifically with their OEPS-27 EO system but it's better than the sim gives it credit for... More quibbling: All 6 AMRAAMs miss? Really? Still interesting

Good read and read the Col Gerber's FP article that drove the critique... not sure if the Army is just going to continue to criticize Air-Sea Battle or co-opting is the new line https://breakingdefense.com/2013/10/army-shows-cheek-elbows-its-way-into-airsea-battle-hearing/

Probably about 12k per hour when heavy... reference seems reasonable as the -46 is roughly equivalent to the 767-300ER in max takeoff weight but a bit smaller Some more numbers from another forum, seems pretty close to the -135

Posted in another thread but relevant here also, Chinese Sharp Sword UAV makes first flight Drumbeat keeps going... From a good article referenced here on how and why China launches wars occasionally "Chinese Premier Zhou Enlai explained that the 1962 war was meant to “teach India a lesson.” Paramount leader Deng Xiaoping used the same formulation in 1979 when he became the first Chinese Communist leader to visit Washington and told America’s then-president Jimmy Carter that “Vietnam must be taught a lesson, like India.” I guess Japan is going to be "taught a lesson"

First flight today of the Sharp Sward UAV... Drumbeat continues... which country will they use as a punching bag for a show of force demonstration?

Makes sense on why the plug got pulled. Not to detour too far off from the F-35 topic of the thead but googling more on the Comanche after your comment, I found this Time article here. And these two paragraphs seem particularly relevant to the F-35 saga: They continually piled on requirements by the bucketload and relied on technologies which did not actually exist – so many gadgets that the engines couldn’t get the thing off the ground and so many design changes that the ink never really dried on the blueprints. And then they tried to fix these problems by adding more time and money (see above). Perhaps the lesson is that military tech programs should exercise design restraint, establish strict budget and schedule constraints, and rely on proven technologies to deliver necessary capabilities on operationally relevant timelines. This formula is much lauded among defense acquisition experts and leaders, but was clearly not implemented by the Comanche team. They spent 22 years doing the opposite. As before, the dye is cast for better or worse.

Interesting discussion. Not to just focus on systems, but why not an updated and more robust version of the RAH-66 Comanche? 5th Gen fixed-wing VSTOL may be a bridge too far but a very capable low signature attack helicopter that is survivable in a contested environment (medium threat) could be a financially viable option. FAS reference on the Comanche so take it with a grain of salt but looks / looked pretty capable. 9 years on, with enough effort in development, probably could be better or lead to a better design.

Copy all. Just considering the idea, it would seem that a jet like the proposed Sea Gripen would work well for what the Marines have traditionally looked for. Granted Sea Gripen is just a proposal right now with little or no work done towards it but seems like a good fit for USMC fixed wing tactical needs. But getting the new boats to fly them off is some between unlikely in the extreme to never ever going happen and converting an LHA / LHD to STOBAR flight ops would be pricey to put it mildly.

Question for Swanee: Just looking at the dimensions of an LHD, using the USS Bataan as an example, which is about 850 feet x 105, pretty close to the size of some smaller carriers operated by the French or Brazilians, why didn't the USMC build straight deck pocket carriers and look for a light strike fighter that could do STOBAR operations to keep it simple? Serious question as it would seem a lot less technically difficult and still be Marine owned and operated? Agreed - the dye is cast for better or worse but why did USMC Aviation keep going with the idea of VSTOL fighters after the known performance limitations of the AV-8 and the lift-fan limitations/problems with the B model?

But for the kind of money that sequestration is going to force us to save, it is very likely to be retired along with some others unfortunately (A-10 & F-15C). https://www.airforcetimes.com/article/20130923/NEWS/309230019/ https://www.defensenews.com/article/20130915/DEFREG02/309150004/

This could be the first sign of the apocalypse

2 Don't like it but it's the truth.

https://www.dodbuzz.com/2013/09/17/air-force-may-scrap-kc-10-tanker-fleet-general/ https://www.defensenews.com/article/20130915/DEFREG02/309150004/ Not just the KC-10 but the A-10 and F-15C also... but back to the KC-10, unfortunately it is probably done as I don't think they have upgraded but 2 of the KC-10 flight decks. 777 tanker would make a great replacement but not gonna happen...

I don't think America will devolve into Bartertown run by Master Blaster but I think that a default, either by passing the deadline on the 17th and not being able to fulfill all obligations, not just interest on our debt, would cut the purchasing power of the dollar at least by a third. It would be a default in the mind of the market even if the interest would be paid. The day after for a default would be like others except with a 1000 point drop in the market and credit cards no longer being accepted but debit transactions still going thru. Basically, we're still functioning just operating with less money and credit no longer accepted, I just want to limit the damage that I am coming to believe is going to happen. I watched this movie a while ago, Collapse, and while I think the subject of the film, Michael Ruppert and his theories have to be taken with a big grain of salt, he addressed the idea of survival on the land following the collapse, basically if you're not already there it won't help. As I live in the 'burbs, I am thinking about preparing for the Great Recession part 2 and if it gets to Mad Max, it will be better to be in an area you know with people you know with strength in numbers, but I put the chance of that very very very low.

Thinking of a basket of currencies: Euros, Canadian Dollars, British Pounds, Japanese Yen, Swedish Krona, etc... probably thru an ETF or a foreign currency CD. This is only an ejection seat option as I agree that if we defaulted, it pretty much is the financial equivalent of a zombie apocalypse coupled with a Sharknado and it might only save some value but it might preserve more than just having dollars