Clark Griswold

True but in defense of the MRTT it carries more passengers, 290+ vs 50+ for the 46, 110+ in a contingency configuration. Just my two cents, the correct answer is both of them for the USAF Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Unfamiliar with the KE-3… About the same fuel as a -135? Modern cockpit and avionics at delivery? Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Yup, switched to the Bus from the 73, the MAX is good the Bus is great I’m not usually for corporate welfare but I’ll just advocate here for some corporate welfare… buy 75 more or so -46s, come up with a new configuration to unfornicate the design to the maximum possible and help Boeing get its legs underneath itself again We’re committed to it, replace the 135 with the 46, don’t call it a replacement for the -10 but buy the -330 NEO for the Y and get cranking on NGAS… for that I’d quietly ask NG if the B-21 could also have KC-21 variant Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

No extra gas but 8% fuel savings, will have an automated boom system too https://www.ainonline.com/aviation-news/defense/2024-07-24/airbus-a330-multi-role-tanker-transport-goes-neo More gas, more range, less bullshit Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

A bit old but if KC-Y is still being considered this is the way https://breakingdefense.com/2023/11/airbus-exploring-development-of-future-tanker-based-on-a330neo/

Brochure on the 777 tanker https://bemil.chosun.com/brd/files/BEMIL085/upload/2007/05/KC-777.pdf Not gonna happen but grist for the mill. Since we’re discussing big tankers and potential missions for them, this is a video showing all the choreography that the RAF had to do to get a Vulcan down range in the Falklands War. I think you can make an argument that more, smaller tankers give more redundancy than one or two big tankers but I think also you can say in the fog of war you might have more success with fewer variables to control. If/When a contingency arises in the Far East, we might be doing our own version of this. 25 to 45 big tankers would really be helpful then…

On site. I’m not one for excessive oversight but keeping them on a shortish leash might be helpful. Go pros, FDRs, quality/standardization checks with mil instructors, etc… solid pay for CFIIs for IPT, 75k to start, pass probation period, say 6 months, pay bumps up, second year guaranteed 100k+ for x number of student training hours flown, etc… This would be to off load some of a hypothetical phase 2 of my COA, intro mil flight training in a PC-21. Phase 3 then T-7s or T-54. If the AF won’t buy the -54, then a ME course in a light twin, type training course with some extra sims, a LOFT phase, call it good. Plane porn just because

If IPT were done at a military base with direct oversight do you think the quality control could be maintained?

Related item: Navy having T-45 problems https://www.twz.com/air/t-45-goshawk-navy-jet-trainer-fleet-grounded

Concur All you hear is Pacific Pivot, Great Power Competition, Tyranny of Distance, etc… from AF “leaders” and they then divest a platform suited to all of those problems/challenges in the expected title fight… Just as a PACAF GO said he wanted the E-7 now with no acquisition shenanigans or BS to replace the E-3, we need a message from the top saying we need a strategic tanker now or a strategic concept now. I say concept as while I’m always gonna say this new iron or that, I get that is likely a bridge too far in financially difficult times (8% budget cuts and the rest) Concept to me would be new overseas basing, FMS and long term posture on west coast / sovereign pacific territory Australia, NZ, Guam and a rotational presence in the PI. Some that already happening but just continuing this idea on this post… KC-45 fleet if new iron were to be had would be my suggestion if Australia would host a new PACAF base(s) A bit more fuel and interoperability with the RAAF Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

We might be there, taxes are high and wallets stretched thin, if I lived there I would tell them hell no to paying for this. Tell the wealthy bleeding hearts there is no law stopping them from self funding this other than the law of common sense, when I see Newsom et al write a check for 100k+ out of their pockets for these utopian ideas I’ll be surprised

6 gen

Tangent: What a shock, paying for health care for people who are here illegally is a really bad financial idea https://redstate.com/wardclark/2025/03/13/medi-cal-fail-providing-health-care-for-illegal-aliens-is-breaking-the-program-n2186631

Yeah, that’s not a good plan. Not shooting the messenger just commenting on the situation.

Triage or publicly ask Congress for supplemental funding for reasons a, b and c… this is how we got here, here’s what we want to do to Make UPT Great Again and here’s how we are going to do it. I suspect Triage is going to be the answer Congress would approve so honestly I’d look for where operational risk is possible and reprogram money It would likely be a vertical cut versus horizontal to maximize savings, so much old iron has already gotten the ax we’re getting down to the family jewels Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I think we’re starting to get to another point CAF wants one thing MAF (maybe AFSOC, AFGSC) might want something else in their new pilots Points expressed here are singular data points but enough of them become useful data clusters Is the single advanced trainer useful to try to bring back or go to in the everyone goes to T-7s after civ training model? Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Gotcha, I share that same reservation on going from a Baron to an afterburner The SGTO has to be a truly random sample rather than the cherry picked, not saying something you don’t know but for the thread… This doesn’t have to be hard (sts) or risky… 1 - basics in a civ program, intro to mil flying in a turbo that has a performance range to transition into aerobatics, form, low level then track… T-7s for some, T-54 for others… 2 - basics in a civ program and an extensive program in a PC-21. Assignment to follow. 3 - extensive civ program with 3 different phases, then T-6. Assignment to follow, good luck. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Cool I can see that and the tactical mindset is what I want heavy crews to get too. This is how I see to get there. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I can take ribbing but I’m not calling for something not flying or exotic I see MX experience beyond what we have now as desirable but the idea that anything beyond basic serving is unrealistic, just my opinion Pilot training when I went thru did a good job but looking at the future and comparing the two, I think additional phases and expanded training into non-traditional areas will pay dividends Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I just threw that in for fun but honestly if the AF gave me the keys and all these kids were going to get was the civ time in a program then go to a supersonic capable, 7G jet… I’d give them as much seat time as I could Would landing a seaplane give directly translatable experience and knowledge to handle a T-7? No but it would be more aviation experience handling multiple factors in 3 dimensions requiring strong fast response cognitive skills interlinked to hand/eye/seat of the pants that would likely lead to faster neurons in most students. Probably would only take 2-3 weeks and the guys would likely wanna do it But yeah it would be a very tradeable part of a good pre mil flying program for me, cool but not necessary Icon A5 in Florida with weekends off. An enjoyable phase of training… Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

How is it that the AF so broke that it can’t afford a one for one swap out of existing iron or a new version of UPT incorporating some civ time that seems feasible to produce a graduate generally deemed to have an equivalent amount of training that UPT historically has been given? What math are the Bobs throwing out there for all of this? Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Copy that More time is better than phoning it in If the AF wants to go to only one trainer so be it, don’t agree but if so then buy a sizable and diverse civilian training experience to develop them before going to a high performance jet… Basic, acro, multi, seaplane and STOL by contract with mil oversight during training 0.1% chance for that much pre mil training flying (if the straight to T-7 COA happens) but one must post what one thinks… Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Not sure @hindsight2020 is IPT just pass/fail or graded on a scale? Included is n MASS then? Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I fear trying to “save/fix” the world makes you destroy yourself I hope a generation of leaders figure this out soon Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Heard something similar to that also, that an upper deck was not cargo conducive and would have probably ended up as wasted space Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk