Clark Griswold

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

But they would have to be willing to use it, methinks they don't want Ukraine to be assimilated by the Russian Borg but are not going to do anything kinetic or material if they are attacked Not throwing spears but I doubt the NATO members of Western Europe would put blood and treasure on the line for Ukraine, a non-treaty ally. Now Central and Eastern Europe might as they know where this train ends if they let it get out of the station.

Read this a day ago, she's not pulling any punches. It's time to push back on him. As to what to do not whether or not to do it, training and equipping Ukrainian forces for guerilla / insurgency replete with the tool and versed in their tactics might give the Russians pause. Keep the conventional support coming but start getting ready for Red Dawn. Mines, IEDs, weapons caches, etc.. https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/blogs/ukrainealert/guerrilla-tactics-offer-ukraines-best-chance-against-putins-invasion-force/

Sometime this fall in a conference room

Thread bump When did AETC stop assigning T-1 grads to the B-1 / B-52?

https://www.france24.com/en/live-news/20211222-people-keep-coming-crisis-hit-turks-queue-for-bread Another place to worry about

Ward Carroll mentions in the video his dad also had a friendly shoot down incident but 6.9 second Google search came up with nothing - anyone know about dad’s blue on blue incident? Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I don't have an answer to those questions you asked, I'm not sure that there is a quantifiable number of casualties I or anyone else could say in terms of risk you could determine that would sway whether or not it is a mission we should do based on that percentage or risk. I think the threshold is whether you are willing to take combat casualties or not, if I were the POTUS making the call i would be willing to risk American lives for this mission, not brazenly, stupidly or carelessly but with the highest seriousness that this is America risking blood and treasure for the principle of a world not ruled only by force and self-interest. I'm not naive and nor foolish to think evil will ever be completely vanquished nor blind to the fact that our opponents are not necessarily evil or completely bad, they have their reasons for pushing their agendas the way that we do but from our perspective that's not enough to justify doing what they want to the way they want to do it. In this life and on this world, nations fight when there is no other way to solve our differences. I'm not ever gonna think they have the right to invade and take Ukraine, there is no cajoling or rationalization to persuade me of that, we have the power to stop them and the fight there is important to maintaining the balance between powers and the systems & relationships we have established that have generally been beneficial to the world. But on that happy note I found this podcast on the subject worth the time on my commute: https://mwi.usma.edu/mwi-podcast-a-looming-showdown-over-ukraine/ Realistic assessment of the situation I fear.

Yup, they wear us out with feints and bluffs then when winded they just push us over. I'm sure the brain trusts of Russia/China have considered this and the just slight backup of maritime delivery right now, frankly I'm kind of amazed they haven't moved yet, if they ever wanted to or if I were their advisor I'd tell them to. My answer to that is the grim realization that Cold War 2.0 is in full swing, it's time to face that and make the call whether or not to commit the USA plus reliable allies to long term strategic and conventional deterrence and denial military operations with associated economic, diplomatic and cultural efforts to isolate the aggressive autocracies and their proxies scattered around the world. The practical first step to that in relation to the crisis du jour we are discussing, potential Russian aggression, is a sizeable long term US led military mission to the Baltics, Poland and Ukraine. Pre-positioning and overseas basing while expensive solves some of the logistical problems you mentioned, demonstrates resolve, hopefully deters aggression and imposes cost on our enemies. But to your point, yes to using Commercial Lift versus military airlift when possible.

Some open source on the Russian deployment to the Ukrainian border https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2021-11-25/mud-could-help-decide-timing-of-any-russia-move-against-ukraine 100k there now, probably need another 100k there with gear and vehicles Rhetorical questions: Could they move 100k in a month from other theaters in say 4-5 days to reinforce an invasion? Could their airborne corps affect an operation to seize an objective (city, airport, port, etc…) to create an outsized effect during Days 1/2 of an attack to put the Ukrainians on their heels? Long range fires - could they destroy the Ukrainian Air Force and IADS on Night 1/2? What does the world do after a successful invasion? Assuming eastern Ukraine (all territory east of the Dneiper River) is seized? Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Probably not appropriate for a wedding reception Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I know it’s out of character with our recent record but light a candle We have no choice really unless we wish to be reduced to some sort of second tier power If not us who? Who stands against the aggressive and strong for those who are to be their victims? Our power is not infinite but neither are our responsibilities, we can stand up to the encroaching powers Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Like it or not, Ukraine while not a member of NATO would be considered a capitulation as it has become an ally of the West and particularly the US. Finland is not a NATO member and Russia has threatened and intimated them in recent history, if they attacked and we did not thing it would be interpreted as cowardice encouraging further aggression. Treaty and formal alliances are important but everyone knows the score and where the lines of the Western, Free, Developed world exist, allowing the eastern autocracies to aggress with no answer is just about the same as an attack on formal alliances. Not defending them as they are not a member of NATO but saying that because of that we did not defend them while the bear attacks them seems quibblish and unbecoming... I didn't help that lady as that 250lb dude was attacking her as she was not my wife... I'm not a warmonger nor a monster seeker looking for new adventures for the US to get into but when it is obvious the winds of war are gathering and that our role that we have told others we play in the world would call for us to act then we should, if not stop telling others we are the beacon of liberty and the defender of freedom. If that is true, then stop offering false hope and poorly placed faith in us, it's a shitty thing to do. Admit your just like every other nation and go about our business, the truth may not be pretty but at least it avoids the stench of lies. If we choose to act, call together the allies we have that are reliable and go into the fray with us routinely. Don't waste time trying to get those who can and should fight but won't, bureaucracies and diplomatic bullshit will waste precious time as the initial fight starts and they will delay to give the Russians time to get so far west that they will hide behind the excuse of the fight is over so let's not bother with it. Don't call on NATO, it's a self-licking ice cream cone system now mostly concerned with the preservation of the institution. Go big, go strong and don't try to out finesse this. Intimidate and be ready to cut loose with everything just short of a nuke, communicate to the Russians that we consider the use of tactical nukes as an attack by the Russian Federation upon the United States requiring a retaliatory response, if this comes to fisticuffs then we settle it with conventional weapons only, if you use a nuke, you will regret it. Anyway, armchair general analysis and recommendation: - Declare an international crisis forming simultaneously with a national security threat on our southern border. 4 theaters in crisis requiring multi-year, coordinated, coherent response: Ukraine-Baltics / Straits of Hormuz / Taiwan / Southern US border Immediately deploy 50,000 boots to Ukraine, tell NATO members to deploy 50,000 troops now or we leave NATO, privately of course, if they balk, do it and begin immediate redeployment from their countries and send any members in training or on exchange tours home. We're serious, no more of this. - Use what we have now but come up with an 18 month plan of action to get the whole of DoD pointed to the new heading. - Call for an increase in end strength of 35%, immediate reform to statutory, policy requirements to get more tooth and less tail. - Activation of Guard units as required, 2 year call ups. - Call Congressmen standing in the way of modernization and divestment of legacy capes, make a Faustian bargain to swap missions/equipment not needed for missions/equipment needed perhaps in quantifies or redundancies not necessary but necessary to get the new gear, people and training. We may need only X of the new F-69 but we're gonna buy X+75 to make Congressman Porkchop happy so he'll get the bills moving. - Others ideas not likely to ever get done but be bold and decisive, not holding breath....

I get it, I'm sick of freeloaders with the money, tech, industry and the military age male population to help secure the free world but don't as they benefit from the system and international political and security conditions that exist now thru the sacrifice of blood and treasure, thru expensive and difficult continued vigilance to deter aggression. I see how this appears tenuous but allowing the weak to be bullied, conquered, assimilated, etc... when that weak state is not geographically close, economically significant or culturally tied to us but it is. It is the principle that we don't leave our friends and allies out to dry. That where it matters, where aggression would threaten the free world, to the rules based order, we and others will fight for it. That we are the powerful nation that is willing to act on the principle that others deserve the right to live as they wish without being dominated unwillingly by others and that we will fight with those being oppressed to prevent that. We approached, encouraged and publicly supported Ukranian democracy, reform and turn to the West, this drew the ire of Russia and now as the storm clouds gather, we abandon them? Seems unbecoming to a nation that prides itself on being the shinning city on the hill and the guarantor of freedom. I don't believe in poking the bear but running from it is not acceptable either. I don't think your son, mine or any American should be sacrificed in a war, conflict or military operation that is not fought to win but that rightfully skeptical sentiment given our recent debacle in withdrawal from Afghanistan should not stop us from fighting or deterring a fight that is not an unsolvable problem like nation building in places where a nation really only exists on a map. I'm not naive, I know our power is not infinite and not every conflict is our responsibility, we have to choose wisely where we have to or should intervene. If Ukraine is invaded or Russia takes other aggression towards them beyond what they are doing now, I believe we should help them. Just my two cents.

The why is the same as why the British retook the Falklands, if they did not no one would respect or fear them, they would face a never ending series of challenges around the world and be reduced to something much less than deserving of their heritage. Like it or not we are on stage as the protagonist, the defender of the global commons and the one global power that defends a rules based system that albeit imperfect is infinitely better than the vassal-tribute system pushed by Russia-China. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk