Clark Griswold
-
Posts
3,035 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
39
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Gallery
Blogs
Downloads
Wiki
Posts posted by Clark Griswold
-
-
-
Recon Sabres
F-100 Slick Chicks
-
2
-
-
I don't mean to be rude or anything, but I really don't want to get into a back and forth internet thing. I just use the vote buttons.
Fair enough
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk-
1
-
-
11 hours ago, Best-22 said:
In general I downvote bad faith arguments and people who exclusively post content that echoes Russian talking points. I don't bother engaging with gearpig or bashichuni, but I don't know you so I'll assume you're a reasonable person. I don't really have a lot free time to go in circles arguing on the internet. I appreciate the user's who take the time to counter the disinformation though and post things a little more grounded in reality.
The last thing I downvoted for example: if you look at the authors other work it seems he only writes stories about how Ukraine has no chance and how the US shouldn't help Taiwan in a conflict. It seems that author would prefer the US lets Russia and China bully their neighbors while we sit at home on our hands. He's been posting with shaky logic and half truths since the start of the war about how Ukraine is doomed and we should just make concessions to Russia. It's very obvious that guy is pushing an agenda and is not an unbiased reliable source.
To answer your question: I argue for a rules based international order, and supporting our allies.
Are you saying that I or others who are arguing for a controlled cessation of hostilities with Russia likely still illegally and wrongly still holding large portions of Eastern Ukraine are arguing in bad faith with some sympathy or love for Putin / Russia or only the author I quoted?
Will disagree respectively on the author (Davis) as being a sounding board for Russian propaganda, he's been critical / not a simp for the Russian military and it's performance in Ukraine:
Putin's Ukraine War Was Truly an Early Military Disaster - 19FortyFive
An excerpt from this article he ends on:
To find the best ways to end the war on terms that most benefit Kyiv, it is crucial to understand the good, the bad, and the ugly of Russia’s conventional capacity. The objective will be to avoid Russian strengths and exploit their weaknesses. Next, we will turn our attention to a balanced assessment of Russia’s conventional power.
I don't see or read a sycophantism in his work but a professional honesty that may not be what we want but still valid to consider.
-
Series of articles arguing for an armistice and negotiated settlement to the Ukranian War:
3rd in the series, 1 and 2 linked in the page
The Hard Truth: Ukraine Has No Realistic Path to Victory Over Russia - 19FortyFive
Just to add to the discussion.
I argue for my position with no enthusiasm but only because I think it is the least bad and best in the long term.
-
1
-
-
Same reaction
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk -
Transgender ‘Muslim Woman’ Demands Ex-Boyfriend Return His Frozen Testicles https://www.breitbart.com/social-justice/2023/08/15/transgender-muslim-woman-demands-ex-boyfriend-return-his-frozen-testicles/
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk -
6 hours ago, Lawman said:
Access to the Sea of Azov and the Kirch straight bridge are really the make/break on this offensive. If they can do both and effectively cut off access to Crimea they set themselves up very well for a negotiated settlement where they walk away with gains that would otherwise need to be purchased through force of arms.
Laying siege to a city like Sevastopol would take a lot of resources and time and sap it from other fronts. Worse, fighting in a city like Sevastopol would generate a lot of unsustainable casualties both in personnel and vital equipment (IFVs etc). It also never looks good to onlookers and that’s the support base. City battles being measured in months, I doubt they would make that play when the open field war of position/logistic lines is an option.
Sent from my iPhone using TapatalkConcur with the idea of cutting them off and then beating them in logistical support for a better position for a tenuous settlement to a likely frozen conflict, I hope they can but judging from what the Russians have built to defend their positions in occupied Ukraine, I am dubious it could be done or done at an acceptable cost in blood and treasure, but if the people of Ukraine and their government decide it is in their interest to continue to fight, then fight on.
My tin foil hat side is suspicious that Ukraine is in a damned if you do damned if you don't position vis a vis their aid from the US / some Europeans. We want them to continue to fight so we tell them to not sue for peace or they risk being cut off, they'll need aid to recover, deter and probably have to have to fight the Russians again when they likely will try round 2 so no matter what they have to fight, or is that too cynical.
Kofffman and Zeihan have been good to listen to on commutes, they concur with an isolate Crimea strategy and roll up
-
1
-
1
-
-
Corruption is a major problem in Ukraine. Check.
Some people may be pressured to keep aid flowing in order to keep some Ukrainians quiet about certain American financial/political issues. Check
At the end of the day, Ukraine is still fighting against an unjustified invasion by one of our "competitors," and stopping that sort of thing is in our interests and the interests of basic justice.
It’s (Ukrainian war)become a proxy war between the globalist left (not meant derogatorily) and the sovereignty focused populist right (again not derogatorily) in Western particularly American politics.
I think both things are true at once but which do you prioritize?
I suspect we need to call it (supporting counter offensive Ukrainian operations) but not quit supporting the Ukrainian state.
They’ve taken back about 100 sq miles of territory at an unsustainable loss rate against the Russians so far, the Ukrainians know this hence the anecdotal stories like the above conscription bribery ones.
I’m not for ever recognizing that territory as Russian and not for treating Russia in a antebellum manner until Putin is gone but it seems to me that we are approaching the point of negative returns if we push, encourage, support and resource continued Ukrainian offensive ops to reclaim territory.
Free Ukraine has to be long term viable and I think the cost in blood and treasure to retake more territory probably works against that.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk-
2
-
1
-
-
55 minutes ago, Biff_T said:
Bartini's design was interesting but all you really need are a few waves to render it useless. I do like how he ran with a totally different idea. It would have been shocking to have seen one of those show up to the fight. Lol
Oh yeah, it's not for mil ops or likely any application but grist for the mill...
The floatplane concept C-130 might have to be it as I doubt the Bobs or Congress want to divest something to develop and acquire a new amphibious platform... seriously doubt there is appetite for anything totally new and getting more money for it.
I am an optimist though when you look at this concept, if really develop it with all the capabilities needed into it, landing gear, docking thrusters, lifting pontoons, etc... this could be a relevant platform.
-
3 hours ago, Lawman said:
I feel like there is a real lesson to be learned from the cartel drone subs out there.
Expendable resupply vehicle that would force somebody to burn a lot of effort to find it or use it to build a wider intel picture. That seems like the perfect way to augment resupply of guys doing their best impression of the coast watchers where airdrop or other methods might show too much of your hand. But before somebody goes over the top with capabilities this like so many other things doesn’t need to be overbuilt. Stay with something that isn’t intended for the hard threat mission like the SDV, just something that will boat it’s way to your friendlies without shouting to the world a trail of breadcrumbs.
Maybe something small enough it could be hand rolled off the back of a small amphibious ramp equipped logistics platform… dropped far enough from an island chain to swim without giving away their position or to just stash its self and wait.
Sent from my iPhone using TapatalkCocaine logistics
“Cocaine Logistics” for the Marine Corps - War on the Rocks
Open Source Intelligence: Atlantic Drug Submarine May Be Related To Pacific Example (forbes.com)
Drop off unmanned resupply vehicles off the ramp in water or low alt, rise lather repeat
More floatplane porn....
http://www.douglasdc3.com/float/float.htm
Give it to Basler Turbo Conversions for full update, profit
-
1 hour ago, bfargin said:
Clark, any thoughts on parlaying some of Bartini’s ground effect ideas (Biffs shared video above) into any sea plane plans. It wouldn’t have altitude to use defensively but, if it could do 300 to 400 knots at 50 to 100 feet off the deck efficiently while carrying huge loads, it could still prove pretty handy. He dreamt big, but I’d guess there’d still be some serious utility from many of his ideas both commercially and militarily.
What at @Lawman man said
The other thing I see is how many of these monster in ground effect platforms could you have? I see a reborn R3Y platform as being more affordable to procure and deploy in numbers, able to do more missions and service more island FARPs during a high intensity conflict more often than a huge in ground effect platform(s).
Historical photo, seaplane and submarine refueling:
Posted this to stir the pot on what the CONOP would be for short, medium and long range operations for a seaplane.
The Air Force develops the aircraft, Navy the resupply submarine or semi submersible base ships and the USMC develops the mobile ramps, docks and bridging equipment that can support amphibious operations.
-
Just some more posts on the G111T - this (seaplane revival) is a path to establishing more defense links with the Aussies
-
An oldie but goodie and this will never happen ever but... take the Convair R3Y Tradewind as a basis / inspiration and build a new platform using the Europrop TP400
Give it a little fatter longer hull, integrate landing gear into the new hull like the US-2 and keep the cargo door / ramp on the bow...
I know this is day-dream territory but if you want a dramatic statement and gain in capability, a program to create a rapid, fast, capable platform would signal and deter an aggressor in a large, maritime theater.
We have advanced engineering, manufacturing capability and supposedly a focus on this type theater, how long would it really take to fast track and develop this? Assuming the resources were to be made available...
-
-
1 hour ago, Lawman said:
Anybody that questions palletized ramp offload vs other options, go compare a Sherpa/Osprey/47 onload and offload of cargo to a C-12 or Dornier. Not pax’s and luggage I mean pallets of commo and tough boxes they need to do a job at a location. A single forklift can do the work in minutes that takes at least an hour because no only do you have people shuffling up a set of stairs with a yeti cooler of crap at a time, they can’t just turn around and back out. Also compare them as jump platforms or airdrop cargo because let’s face it that’s gonna be a big part of your customer option.
Unless you can get a pallet sized sliding door on the side we shouldn’t even entertain the idea of a logistics platform that can only be loaded by hand. If it can’t be loaded up with a 10-15K fork loader it’s going to cost time and sortie rate as we unpalletized stuff that was delivered by big ramp aircraft to stick it in this and take it to a location only accessible by seaplane that then has to be unloaded again.
If it’s being unloaded in a zodiac, try putting one of those through the door of the previous listed planes. Let alone carry the motor of it without accidentally dropping it down the stairs. And a rear ramp gives you an option to simply low pass and push floating supply pallets to be recovered to the beach by the receiving group.
Sent from my iPhone using TapatalkNo doubt as to your points on the strength of / probable necessity of having a ramp and door system vs standard or roll-up only doors.
So that's the 6.9 billion dollar question(s) - Do you need a fixed wing amphibious platform and does it have to have a ramp and door system for roll on / off & air drop?
Probably not something to be discussed here but given the way the USMC and USAF are planning on major distributed ops, yes to both. Observing the Ukranian-Russian war, munitions expend rates will drive high resupply needs in most modern conflicts between capable opponents.
A smallish fleet of US-2s and amphibious Twin Otters while developing a US designed / produced platform in a hurry?
DARPA's interested in this and they want it supersized vs something 130 sized
DARPA wants a heavy cargo plane that can land at sea (defensenews.com)
-
Yup, one of their guys write for WOR and ii pulled it from the his article
https://warontherocks.com/2021/11/a-japanese-seaplane-could-be-the-difference-maker-for-the-u-s-military/
I think if we’re serious about having this capability then sooner is better than later hence the advocacy for existing designs
The biggest thing about the US-2 or what would be the big platform would be whether or not it needs a ramp to offload X pallets, containerized X system or a vehicle(s) and would it need to be able to do this beached or afloat?
Define the requirements
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk -
2 hours ago, Lawman said:
Look everybody can agree the PBY is a classic design that has beautiful lines, but even in the time it was flying it was nowhere near the best flying boat available, just the most iconic.
There have been a host of designs since then more suitable to tasks/mission sets we are now taking about. Not to mention a lot of understanding about aerodynamics or structural engineering for such designs. If this is first and foremost a logistics platform, using a sea borne scout plane as the base of design is a horridly bad idea.
Sent from my iPhone using TapatalkConcur, I love the lines but if this is to actually happen another design is probably / have to be it.
My druthers, the amphibious requirement is two parts, a short range containerized delivery capable platform and a long range people and unpalletized cargo platform. I caveat those to advocate for two already flying designs with some reasonable mods:
Amphibious variant of the War Tractor with a new cargo pod capability:
Pod attached between the pontoons capable of air drop or combat offload
US-2 in ANG colors
-
New PBYs
https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/aviation-company-relaunching-pby-5-as-modern-military-aircraft
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk -
1 hour ago, hindsight2020 said:
A bit tribal knee-jerk for someone complaining about tribalism, from where I sit. Lighten up, it's just a meme. Not everything is a conspiracy theory against herbies.
Furthermore, the reason for the buff being in 38s historically had nothing to do with your perceived grievance. I got 1000 hours snoring in that contraption (when not sitting red ball for a whole duty day with engines running), cool factor is not a word I'd ever use to describe anything related to that thing.
See the irony behind your indignation, is that you presume buffs would drop top of the stack in the MAF track. That shows you really have been removed from the UPT enterprise for a long time. These kids are smart, and they ask questions, it's not an unknown to them.
As to the second piece, again the irony is a gunship driver has less tactical degrees of separation from actual weapons employment and combat SA picture than a Buff guy. That may not be as well known to the Toner types, but all they have to do is ask someone without an inferiority complex about that.
And since we can't have fun we might as well go for the punchline: none of it is gonna make a lick of a dent in the pilot production deficit. The 11B sideshow is just that, an immaterial round-off error in the context of total yearly production, especially given the carve out of the majority of the 11B in the first place.
Not saying anything negative against the B-52s and I would agree with your take that the BUFF would or will not be a top pick from the crew tracked.
I don't think it's a conspiracy against herbies but an open policy decision, these guys get a flight hours and these guys get an Atari level simulator. No conspiracy but an explicit policy choice.
Not a butt hurt herbivore here but one who thinks not standing up for our communities and those who are going to follow us is a not a good idea nor the right thing.
I'll agree to disagree.
-
2 hours ago, dream big said:
If Gunships come from the T-1 track why couldn’t Buffs? It’s not like you learn weapons employment in the 38. Is the 38 really going to make or break an inbound Buff pilot? Honestly curious!
Nothing, this is just the psychology of high school cliques at work here and if it's not a fighter but has some cool factor to it let's let only our tribe have it. #not-a-bit-cynical
-
7
-
-
latest rumint from the SophistryNEXT! idea factory: Buffs to get axed off FBF and into MAF-Next sim-only land with the rest of the (former)T-1 track.....but not B-1 and B-2s. OOoof, talk about weirdness at the 11B dinner table over on the holidays.
That community is the unironic embodiment of the Rime of the Ancient mariner.
Meanwhile the (legacy) IFF mafia:
Super! You’ll (B-52 bound studs) have lots to talk about
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk-
1
-
-
Are the UFOs real or a really good disinformation tool brought out strategically to distract?
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk-
1
-
-
Every candidate at his level has and will push whatever flavor the current administration touts (right now: woke); so all else equal, I’d rather have a relatively apolitical and quiet Air Force fighter pilot at the helm that will advocate for air power than another indecisive and incompetent Mark Milley.
But if he sings the popular song even if he knows (I suspect) that it’s wrong then what does that say about him?
That he’s morally flexible or he’s a nihilist who is just trying for the next ring of the ladder?
At what point does a person who becomes a GO say this is enough and for that next star saying some bullshit is not worth it and I’ll just tell them no?
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
History Friday
in Squadron Bar
Posted
Yup I watched several of his vids, interesting stuff
His channel: (43) Not A Pound For Air To Ground - YouTube
This was an interesting what if: