Clark Griswold

GD it you're right.

Concur Was pretty sure that would be the pretext / story / excuse. Well, we'll need an investigation, a study group all while the bear eats his kill. True Copy that, good on 'em. NEO - are we gonna need it to get civilians out of Europe or just to the adjacent countries? If they won't accept refugees (in the 100s of thousands or million plus), where do they go? New security footprint in Europe? If they invade, still an if, do we return to a sizeable US forces forward based deterrence posture? One that is land power centric, how do we pay for it or do we rob Peter to pay Paul? That's just the military / security part, does anyone in power today have the balls to go full Cold War and choke out the regime of Putin by other means? Full spectrum DIME warfare but not going hot.

If we (the Administration) are serious with the statement that the Russians are about to invade, why aren’t we surging this weekend for the inevitable refugee flows, reinforcing NATO members near Ukraine, etc… Put your money where your mouth is, this seems like Obama’s red line statement regarding chem weapons employment then no response after that when we said they used them on civilian targets deliberately Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

That we are unworthy of being the leader of the supposedly free and advanced world. Not sure there is one if we do nothing if an invasion occurs and we navel gaze. Goodbye post WW2 world order, goodbye Pax Americana world order. That's not a call to aggression or trying to humiliate Russia in this situation, I think the public comments for years on Ukraine joining NATO have been unhelpful but we have stupidly over decades painted ourselves into a corner by setting ourselves up for an inevitable conflict with Russia as they feel threatened (the "they" being the authoritarian government in power at whatever time in Moscow) by the expansion of security, political and economic organizations that would undermine said authoritarian government in Moscow. Unless you are willing to risk disaster in poking the bear, then don't poke the bear. Our "leaders" want to chastise Russia, expand alliances to their near abroad and former/current client states but then balk and dismiss at actually risking and sacrificing to execute this strategy. If the Neo-cons and Interventionists were real about this they would look back at what we did after WW2 to prevent a fait accompli of the Soviets/Communists taking over Europe. We put 5% of our GDP into the Marshall Plan to rebuild Europe and get the democracies back on their feet, we spent the money, kept West Berlin from falling and here's the line no further and we will bear any burden and pay any cost. That's 180 out from where we are now. FWIW I've argued here for supporting Ukraine to resist Russia if she invades them, I hope that doesn't happen but what I really want is for us to get our shit together and realize this is a new Cold War, we can't trade with our enemies and let them economically prosper because that funds their aggression against us and our allies and that engagement really doesn't change them but isolation can weaken or topple them. Rant complete.

Another worthwhile pod from Angry Planet on Ukraine https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/angry-planet/id1023774600?i=1000551080666 Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Bullshit, Putin asked for an ITS on his troops and those guys were red for SAPR & LOAC, expect them back after they file a voucher and get their next DTS travel request thru

Yup - she’s getting up in her years and injecting poison into your face to tighten it up on a regular basis probably doesn’t help either Her cognitive decline is mild but detectable, for various reasons the Dems have not swapped out their players on the field but scary as some of the ones on the bench waiting to get put in the game are to me it’s time for them to take they’re places, right or left, if you are 75 or older you don’t need to be in the seat and at least you need to be setting up for your graceful departure Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Watched This Week on ABC, Pelosi was on and spoke a bit about it but it was not confidence inspiring Last guest was a Nixon aide talking about the 50th anniversary of Watergate and serving for Nixon. He commented on the historical symmetry to a degree of Putin and Xi at the Olympics together with Nixon’s China visit but Biden nowhere near it, kinda ominous

Cool To expand further it would be one of several new / repurposed platforms that could perform the UCAV Tactical Coordinator Mission Manned Light Fighter Manned C2 - Sensor High Flyer KC-46 / E-7 additional capability Manned Rotary Wing platform with this capability If this is a capability to be performed by different platforms at different times and different conditions then a common pod based cape with a common software for platforms like light fighter and tanker with the C2 platforms having it organic and likely in a more robust form as I see it as part of their primary mission sets, the former platforms it would be a alternate mission set but that is just a thought with no testing / real analysis. If implemented it could be the optimal solution is very different. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Another idea… yeah I know... If standoff and LOS are at a premium then you have to go high to keep in contact with your flying A-69 Terminator UCAVs. This violates the author's idea of a cheap and plentiful platform(s) but a high flyer at 60,000' has LOS to over 250 NM. https://www.everythingrf.com/rf-calculators/line-of-sight-calculator Maybe a compromise and a two seater high flyer that has other mission capes

Ha - means better conditions for a defense I’m not saying an invasion would a traditional armored column thrust then dismounted infantry ala a WW2 type fight but… some of it would be similar to that More mud is better and better for Ukraine Any infrastructure they have that would enable rapid movement should be ready for immediate self demolition and anything to bog down the aggressor Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Gotta get things going before the ground thaws and the roads/fields turn to mud Blitzkreig works only if the infrastructure/conditions support rapid movements to punch thru and outflank Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Concur Valid points, for my two non-influential cents this is an idea worthy of a test & concept proving project (if there is not a classified one currently running now - no idea, not even remotely connected to that world). Try it on multiple platforms, light fighter / bomber / modified biz jet, variety of conditions. Gather data, profit. This (a US produced light fighter) needs to be part of the portfolio of affordable systems we produce and sell to less economically capable allies and partners to continue those relationships we made with supplying systems like the F-5, A-37, Hawk SAM system, etc... Manned light fighter, UCAV, Manned light attack, Drone swarm / Swarm defense, etc... One other stray thought on the article and the idea proposed by the author is kinda chicken or egg question to me? What system is this going to control? One developed simultaneously or one developed after some data and experience gathered controlling RPAs we have now (MQ-9s or MQ-25s)? Light Fighter has potential, ideal for ANG / Reserve service, FMS, etc...

Valid points but to discuss the concept the author proposes (light fighters specifically for this role) is that he is cost conscious in the future budget environments. Light fighter fleet with advanced C2 capability for UCAV employment is probably more affordable than large platform C2 fleet, inferring that from his total argument(s) made in his article and I also think it provides a level of redundancy / resilience to the overall mission capability when the shooting starts. Not to be cold but somebody is likely to get shot down, if you have an inexpensive and many fleet vs an expensive and few fleet that overall capability survives long enough to help the Joint Team achieve the objectives vs being destroyed on Night 1 or 2 and now what? As to our acquisition strategy, we have stumbled but we have to fight over the range of conflicts not just the high end fight. Not saying you are saying we should only focus on that just stating my belief it is a bitch of a problem to correctly spread resources over constantly changing operational requirements, it's always going to be lagging somewhat.

So do you think a heavyweight is needed? Something like a Superhornet or 15EX? Modified Growler might work or if we wanna repurpose what we have, modified Strike Eagle, with a crap load of money for the software/hardware needed but if you could locate that in pods with the capability of interacting and using what the Mudhen has now that might enable rapid fielding Purpose designed platform would be great but unless the size of the fleet was pretty large it would suffer the curse of small numbers and big price tag for a specialty aircraft Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Legit critique as to SCS but in fairness most fighters, land or carrier based are gonna have trouble operating there with their existing ranges and the inherent vulnerability of tankers and other support assets as the PLAAF grows in A2AD and A2A capes with weps like PL-15, SA-400, etc... all that till the IADS, A2AD threat is suppressed, most of the fireworks initially till all that is done will be at long range with stand off weps lobbed at anything of value detected Not to quibble but I will debate the level of survivability they could possess and given the intention of how they are to be used, in a type of stand-off tactical coordinator role, they (they manned part of their manned-unmanned team) will likely only be slightly to modestly inside the WEZ as the unmanned players they could be controlling will be getting up close and personal with the threat or target to be attacked. They could fill other roles if the loyal wingmen are attrited or as needed: sensor node, weapons truck, jammer, etc.. in the big fights and in the other missions like homeland defense, uncontested ops, training, etc... they make dollars and sense as they will not be overkill and thus avoid opportunity cost problems in the overall budget, they will enable savings to afford bigger better toys needed for other missions where the requirements are higher. I thought the same thing, business jet modified for this role too. More crew, more space for gear, more fuel, more range / endurance, etc... but without getting close to anything classified, it would depend on the capability of the links, range of the links, to the unmanned platforms. If they can operate at a range great enough that the platform is out of the WEZ, then a non-tactical platform could work, if not I see the need for something that could turn at 5+Gs and accelerate above M1 to defend itself as it had to get inside a WEZ to do its mission or close enough to be attacked by leakers. That is the $69,000 question, the capability of the links in a heavy EA / EW environment to make this concept work, that can not be discussed on the BO SCIF's pages. I think the idea of a modified T-7 seems the most practical to me for this platform (if acquired) like the AT-6B for AOW because of the piggybacking on an existing program / aircraft. There already exists a logistical supply network, maintenance, operational knowledge, trained crew, etc... Concur on the assessment of intellectual ability and airmanship / flying ability.

Good deal, I googled his bio and read his abbreviated CV from Bogi Dope, sounds like a 20 lb. brain type. I hope the concept he's promoting (manned/unmanned teaming) can throw a life line to Scorpion as it is already flying and has done this, albeit probably at level of capability less than envisioned in his article but its a starting point to expand from. https://theaviationist.com/2018/08/10/interesting-video-of-the-textron-scorpion-cockpit-in-manned-unmanned-teaming-demonstration/ An improved Scorpion could also fit this role probably, might need higher performance with other capes integrated into it (ECM, A-A radar, expanded comms capabilities, etc..). Probably a bigger, heavier aircraft and more expensive to accquire/operate then but likely still very affordable. Just a thought but Scorpion is likely adaptable to an unmanned version or optionally manned, that could bring an economy of scale to the procurement (both manned/unmanned platforms sharing 69%+ parts) to get a platform built for this and other missions, not just adapted from another platform designed for another.

Light Fighters... interesting article and worth a read IMHO. https://warontherocks.com/2022/02/the-light-fighter-is-the-air-forces-manned-unmanned-team-solution/ Author leaves room for discussion for what I would call mission requirements vs platform requirements, that is what is the mission and then what is the platform required or capable of meeting those technical / performance requirements. How many UCAVs / UAVs would it need to control, at what distance, how resilient to EA to that supplied link, how much organic capability for offense/defense for this platform, etc... most of that I think would be a result of what the cognitive load is determined to be put on the crew, I think a two crew platform is necessary if in control or directing more than 2 unmanned vehicles. Highly scientific WAG but reasonable I think. Stretched and modified version of the T-7 could work Range / Endurance is the original sin I could see adapting what is already a modestly sized jet but high bypass engine option, CFTs, stretch to add internal fuel might fix that. Launch, ingress 500 NM with an hour on station, supersonic dash for self protection, carry two defensive missiles.

Cool - let's call it here. Points made and all good.

You and I are probably about the same age, I remember the WMD speeches and promises, I thought Hussein had to have them and that the invasion of 03 was the right thing, the only thing to do. Time has educated me on the hubris of our leaders, their basic human flaws that have enormous consequences when amplified thru their official decisions and that we should not be too cautious acting on the world stage but very realistic I'm torn, I think "they" who I don't have a pithy acronym for are not being fully honest about the situation, they have other motives at work (wag the dog, MIC scheming, Ukraine colluding with Bidens, insert other conspiracy sounding idea here, etc..) but there is the real threat forming across the border and if the Russians attack and win, our credibility gets a kick in the balls and the current liberal rules based international order takes another hit. I rationalize it and think even though "they" are lying hypocrites who don't really deserve our respect and political power, they have it and the situation is still there to be addressed with Ukraine / Russia. Our institutions are much less than they used to be, but they are ours, I don't exactly trust them but follow them because there is no alternative. No love, just practicality. They may not want or say they don't want US forces in theater (assuming hostilities erupt) but methinks we would have to become directly involved to prevent total collapse. @FLEA @DirkDiggler Your welcome, they were great insights from Germans into their psychology and issues with being a powerful country dealing with cultural / historical issues.

Read these two articles from WOR related to your point on Europe / Germany specifically: A MILLENNIAL CONSIDERS THE NEW GERMAN PROBLEM AFTER 30 YEARS OF PEACE WHY GERMANY BEHAVES THE WAY IT DOES It's probably time for a new security organization in Europe for collective security underwritten by the USA / UK. Avoids the distraction of including and dealing with members that are unlikely to act on a collective defense call up unless they were actually under attack. Finland, Baltics, Poland, Romania, Bulgaria, Czech Republic, Slovakia, Hungary, etc... New organization purpose built and mission statement for neutrality, collective defense, sovereignty and no out of area kinetic operations. If a new nation of Western Ukraine comes from this crisis (Ukraine west of the Dnieper and to the Black Sea) then it would be included too. Would need a US / UK boots on the ground, fighter tails based in country, etc... type of deterrence commitment, probably in the range of 50k and 150 jets in bases and distributed from the Baltics to Bulgaria, but would be acceptable to this tax payer. Basically, a fence to section off Western Europe, acknowledging they are not interested in deterring Russia and would in all likelihood not risk blood and treasure for Eastern / Central Europe. Not an insult to them just reality, it's time to acknowledge it and move on.

No one trusts the Deep State Press Corparatist Globalist Media Tech Complex anymore. The debacle of Afghanistan, the bitter taste of Iraq, the Libyan misadventure, the mixed results at best of Syria all while denying we are being overrun on our southern border by foreigners and they (said referenced corrupt hypocritical power structure) do nothing about that while expecting Americans and particularly the less than 1% who serve in the military or would if called upon to get on board with a conflict to defend a principle (which I support) to fall in line and fight for someone else's country while they do not defend ours. I'm not for Putin overrunning Ukraine and think we but particularly the Europeans should stand up on their hind legs and say not one inch or soldier across this border, but I'm not surprised "they" can't generate that necessary percentage of public support, given their track record and present action / inactions. That reporter was just channeling the frustrations of the majority of Americans, fight for Ukraine but not defend our borders? Not surprising it eventually peculated out to challenge the official talking points delivery machine.

False flag event with near simultaneous cyber attacks Little green men along side separatist militias in the Donbas launching coordinated attacks supported by long range fires guided by UAV spotters Large conventional combined arms thrust from the north to link up with advancing forces in Donbas and establishing a Line of Control either on or east of the Dneiper River Diplomatic push to create Eastern Ukraine / New Russia and bog down the International Community while consolidating new territorial gains Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Concur I’m frustrated by free riders enjoying the benefits of a world not wholly ruled by might where the weaker have rights that are mostly respected but it’s the world we live in and our leadership class seems willing to tolerate it so here we are Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Can't argue with you on those points, this is a pickle Not a treaty ally but we made assurances 25+ years ago to get them to de-nuclearize to get to what we thought would be a better post Soviet arrangement, don't really have direct interests in their nation but at a very high level strategically / globally allowing them to be overrun undermines the semi-fair and basically decent rules based order that America has led for decades with every alternative to this order worse. This should light a fire under the asses of the planning and strategy 20-lb brains in the Puzzle Palace to develop capes, systems, training and relationships with nations at the periphery of our influence and inside the threat rings of our enemies I know there are some systems and support we can share now and are but as we are going into the turbulent 20's, we need to rapidly field systems that are affordable, attrittable with a level of technology that we are not overly concerned with being compromised. Likely unmanned in some cases, designed to be mainly operated by allies and partners to deter aggression and/or suppress constant needling aggression against them. Vaporware UCAV from Deal of the Century would be an example: No LO, weapons truck, unmanned, zero length launch capable, etc... launch it, they direct.it or we surreptitiously direct it and have a cape that raises the cost of aggression without the footprint that our current forces/systems bring