Clark Griswold

Requirements still being determined for A-X it seems https://www.flightglobal.com/news/articles/usaf-firming-a-x-requirements-for-a-10-warthog-alt-423999/ How this gets money with all the other big acquisitions currently going on or planned is the 64 billion dollar question

From back in the day... LABS, Low Altitude Bombing System, demo video with a B-47

Copy, I wouldn't stop at 5+ or 5.5 (upgrading or developing) but try to develop simultaneously with 6, this is of course happening with all the other acquisitions so that's no big deal, not at all... /s. Now with other people's money... there is a possibility... Not wishing, suggesting and not holding my breath either. All of this (asking for access to US technology and being told no) should lead the financially, technologically and industrially capable Allied nations to come together to burden share & develop jointly but we all know how that works. Still, variety is the spice of life and seeing some other 5th Gens out there is a risk I hope they (Japanese, Indians, Euros, Israelis, etc...) consider taking...

Not sure and quick Google-Fu pass revealed nothing up front to that question but I would imagine that the USG holds the right to license production / export of technology. We (USG) were the sole customer and likely will be the Sun around which they orbit from now until forever, if it really started to happen they would get with the program. Question for the forum and @brabus specifically, if 6 gen is the new hotness and the operational environment is changing to an extent that 5th Gen is the baseline and to dominate we will need to be above that, wouldn't an incremental change / progress be better / less risky / viable than trying to leap to the next generation? Not sure where I heard this but a commentator was speaking about the two different acquisition philosophies of the AF and Navy and it seems the Navy's Incremental Improvement Strategy vs. the AF's Aggressive Improvement Strategy, in the long run is more successful (USN strategy), as an 11F do you think that or think the leap to the next level is better? Big picture for airpower not just to the capabilities of the particular airframe/system. Nothing passive-aggressive in that question but looking back at the end result of efforts to leap to the next technological generation in some of the AF's big acquisition programs of the last 25 years, we got some great planes but way less of them than we wanted and for way more than we planned to spend in development / procurement in both time & money. For 5 to 6 generation, it seems an interim stop at "5.5" with an enhanced F-22 or new F-23 is expensive yes but less risk. Googling it and like 5th Gen, there's not a definitive list of attributes but from what I discern, 6th Gen means: - more range - no vertical tails - a DE weapon (or ability to have one) - further signature reduction (particularly IR) - control of unmanned wingmen A tailless FB-22 seems with an update to existing subsystems / features should meet these

Valid point(s). If the Japanese are willing to slide 40 billion bucks across the table to make this happen, let's not get in their way. Assuming they would buy in volume (replacing their 15 & 4 fleet with 22s). My argument for the 23 is that it attracts a different constituency to argue for it versus Lockmart, while it may seem counter-intuitive from Lockmart's perspective a Raptor restart is more detrimental to their effort to get the way bigger job underway, 35 development/delivery. It would also light a fire under them to get the cost down and quicker if there was a real 5th gen alternative to the 35.

It's probably a bridge way too far (YF-23 restart/test/development and eventually F-23 production under a Japanese partnership) but apart from continuing to pile all the chips on the F-35 bet, the West / Allies have to start something new for an LO alternative to the F-35. Not bashing the 35 but competition keeps the animals nimble and quick, monopoly not so much. No argument on requirement creep (test or operational) bogging down the whole effort but in my estimation the Japanese want the F-22 for mainly air superiority, is it possible to state in the requirements air superiority initially with the ability to be expanded later to air to mud, electronic attack, etc...? The software will be built to accept updates without having to re-engineer the basic software engine, the physical platform designed with X % of space / weight / electrical generation / environmental control / etc... reserved for additions... a modular design as opposed to an integrated design. Methinks this would cut the development time and lower initial risk for development.

Not a bad outside of the container idea but as the author states the F-35 mafia is strong and the MIC is not interested in Raptor restart to compete with F-35 procurement so go take an alternate route and let Japan buy the YF-23 design and test data and develop a Japanese Black Widow. We've offered to other allies planes (copyright and design) for ones we didn't buy (ref F-20 offered to India & Taiwan), offer the YF-23 with a partnership in development with NG and spruce up our fighter industrial base by getting work and recent design/production experience so Lockmart and Big B aren't the only games in town.

Thread revival FAILURES OF IMAGINATION: THE MILITARY’S BIGGEST ACQUISITION CHALLENGE How we define requirements, select solutions and buy them, the ultimate Rube Goldberg machine...

Is is ok to try to stop people from breaking the law to sell Americans things they want? Yes - reference illegal drugs, fake / counterfeit / stolen goods / child pornography / etc... and spending billions of dollars is one of the ways we keep an orderly law abiding society where your freedoms, property and personal protection are provided. The law and order argument or a society with the rule of law is the real reason for our prosperity and hence the reason why everyone wants to come here or other countries with strong rule of law / low corruption, which is basically the opposite of their nations. If you ignore the law and just shrug when it is broken very soon you will be just like the countries these people flee from. The free market is great but it only exists when it has a place where rules are enforced and standards are universally applied. Disregard it and we will inevitably decline to place where factions impose their will on others other than by the rule of law adopted and applied thru democratic means with boundaries to protect minority political views and ensure basic rights. You assume that one these people will contribute more in taxes than they will receive in services, that is highly unlikely as they are likely to be in low wage occupations, have a higher chance due to the nature of their occupations to become disabled, use more services than the native population as they immigrate and establish themselves in the US and yes, if leaders, cultural and political, from countries where people come from say hostile things not only "mean" to the US but to Western Civilization we should think twice about allowing large numbers of them in. It is naïve to an extreme to believe there is not some residual affinity for the mother country and it's culture / politics. Not racist but realistic, societies particularly free & tolerant ones are fragile things in reality and can be damaged easily, we need to be very prudent and cautious with ours. As to excluding people from around the world from the American Dream, not everyone can come here. We have finite opportunities and finite ability to absorb and it is not me by myself to decide that but us as a nation thru our democratic process. More jobs not less are going to become automated, we have enormous amounts of our own population we callously gave up on and a tight labor market is better for more people in a nation rather than a saturation of workers putting a disproportionate amount of power in the hands of employers.

1. Not sure if all adjoining urban areas are fenced, if not then they should be to the standard of the San Diego Fence & Security System. Pushing them into rough terrain may not stop all but you don't have to score 100% on a test to have a good score / passing grade. Pushing illegals crossers into open desert / rough terrain will deter, drive back some and impede those that attempt. Aggressive patrols that apprehend and assist will get the majority of attempts, some will slip thru but it will turn into a manageable trickle. 2. Military Patrols will add more coverage (boots, air and electronic surveillance), deter TNCOs with some military equivalent capabilities and equipment and use our military to actually defend in daily operations our borders, not someone else's. If anything, it increases military readiness as we will daily perform missions to ensure our sovereignty and security. Our military exists to not just deter aggression and win conflicts abroad but primarily at home, just because we have not had to do this using military forces in a while doesn't mean we should not now, it is that bad in some places on the SW border. 3. Immediate return to country of origin or processing station to relieve pressure on local detention facilities, could be expensive but so are F-35s, which one on a daily basis would do more to maintain sovereignty, deter and remove threats to the USA? 4. No argument that E-Verify needs investment and effort to implement but I reject the argument that criminal illegal aliens (committing ID theft and fraud) trying to fool this system and that sometimes they will be successful in their criminal activity is a reason to give up. Also, it is not a victimless crime, if I cheated on my taxes I doubt anyone on this forum we be ok with that, why is it ok for illegal aliens to commit a financial crime but not for citizens to? US Attorneys may not want to but they work for the US Attorney General and if he makes it a priority with the intention to make some examples, it will have a deterrent effect. Give someone a 10 year sentence with the news widely broadcast in multiple languages and in foreign press, word will get around the US is not screwing around anymore. 5. Disagree. This is military readiness and our primary mission to secure the homeland, we do it in a variety of ways and this is one of them. 6. Not nativism, just sovereignty. I keep coming back to that concept as it is the basis of freedom actually, we control our lands, laws and destiny not others. If we can't or won't we are not a free nation anymore but just Marty McFly to the Biffs of the world doing their homework. It is different than 1907 for several reasons: - The magnet of the welfare state. - The culture of 1907 did not tolerate the divisiveness of grievance culture, the antagonization of identity politics and the false accusations of racial & ethnic bigotry towards immigrants as they are legally being allowed and supported in immigration to the USA. - The pernicious and subversive actions of somewhat hostile foreign governments in exporting populations to the USA, encouraging non-assimilation but political activism for benefit of their mother country, essentially setting up a remittance and advocacy colony in our nation that will divide and destroy our politics for years to come. - The immigrants of 1907 were closely culturally aligned with the existing native population, ergo it was possible (although not easy) to assimilate relatively large numbers of them in a reasonable time. You can assimilate people from very, very different cultures but only in far smaller numbers and over a longer period of time versus people that are culturally similar that will more readily fit in. This is not racism it is just realism. I think you overestimate the benefits that are touted and I think are false for tolerating a class of people who work for subsistence wages, in aggregate it is a wash at best and likely a minor net loss when you factor the amount of social services they consume as they make little money and you underestimate the net social and cultural cost of having an unstable poor population that are used and abused by wealthier native peoples for financial gain. Besides, what does that say about a nation that tolerates that? There is no moral argument persuasive to me that thinks it is ok, moral, good or acceptable to allow worker exploitation because it provides my nation with cheaper goods/services while simultaneously decreasing the wage bargaining power of the lower & working classes of my own nation. It is immoral. The cost I argue is too high to pay, it immorally exploits the illegal immigrants, it exploits the poor and working class of this nation, it allows the corrupt and apathetic ruling classes of immigrant exporting nations to not address the systemic problems with their nations, cultures and economies by exporting the people that eventually would get sick and tired of being sick and tired and it leads to the erosion of our nation. It's an all of the above situation, illegal crossers at the border and visa overstayers are the problem Agree with you 100% on the rejection of jus soli citizenship, it is without need nor rationale in the modern era.

New stage in the Border Crisis, mass waves from Central America allowed to move thru Mexico uncontested: https://www.redstate.com/streiff/2018/04/01/mexico-allowing-direct-attack-u.s.-border/ Repeating the mantra: - Fences / Walls in strategic locations (adjoining urban areas, Points of Entry and major roads coming from the border) with augmented CBP patrols. - Military Patrols in rural locations with no ROE restrictions on engagement, arrest, detention & transfer to LE. - Expedited legal proceedings and no release on their own recognizance for illegal border crossers. - Huge fines for employment of illegal aliens ($50,000 per infraction), prosecution under RICO laws. It is conspiracy, tax evasion and enterprise level crime. Businesses under investigation will have privilege licenses suspended during investigation, under RICO the accused must prove first what assets are not / were not gained thru illicit activities. - Bounties paid to local municipalities for arrest/detention of illegal aliens guilty of or arrested for felonies. $10,000 per + flat rate reimbursement for days in detention will start draining the swamp quickly. Use National Guard to expedite custody to ICE, this is DSCA not military members in the CONUS performing law enforcement. - Reasonable period of reduced legal immigration with a merit point process and end to chain migration, reduce to allow assimilation then assess. If the left can stomach watching sovereignty being asserted and the rule of law re-established, then the political climate will become benign enough that a serious negotiation on the status of illegal aliens that have some sympathetic cases (DACA, refugees, long time resident non-violent illegal aliens, etc...) can be had. I can't speak for everyone on the right but you can't work with someone you know is lying, grandstanding, breaking and bending the rules and is trying to subvert our democracy as it stands now. Allow control to be asserted again and there is room for debate and negotiation leading to a compromise that all sides will find minimally acceptable, in other words a fair deal. Keep down this path and we are on the road to ruin...

Yup, there was no plan B even contemplated as far as I know. No doubt, anything open source or unclass released? This (the yuuugge increase) has been the most legitimate critique of the JSF / F-35 program IMO, it was so naively optimistic in its cost projections and had no automatic shutoffs if the program began to run away that we are now so deeply invested we can't stop even if the political will formed to. So playing Devil's Advocate, how do you exit a death spiral if a program / system grows in operational cost that it cuts procurement of tails which then rises the cost per tail rinse lather repeat? Can you cap the tails at X number (less than the original buy) and work with the contractor to minimize the growth in per tail cost to exit a potential spiral as gently as possible? Do you just rip the band aid off and prepare for the short term extreme pain? I still think the F-35 is going to be the backbone of ACC / USMC (not sure if USN is still really all in) and Allied tactical aviation arms, just how much of the future I think is still debatable.

Copy, I don't deny that QoL could be better at an AETC assignment vs. an AMC assignment (or other MAJCOM) but out of training for your operational skill and this is just my two cents you should want to perform your operational skill, particularly at the beginning of your career, in an operational assignment. Would you join a football team, go thru all the hell and practices and then not want to play in the game? No doubt the need to produce is greater but the Operational Mission comes first, the 3 meter target vs the 10 meter target. Basically the AF has to do both at the same time, to me that would be shifting resources from non-core missions / lower requirements to boost SUPT production while maintaining delivery of quality SUPT graduates. AMC (or any other Operational MAJCOM) may have personal challenges and costs but that is where the missions to defend the nation, defeat the enemy, deter aggression, support the team and secure our interests are being executed, the rush should be to be a part of that. It will be there after a FAIP assignment but it just seems odd to go thru the marathon to get a pilot slot, get thru SUPT and then not want to get to the mission. I did both. I got far more airmanship from being a FAIP. Roger, have not been an SUPT IP so I will respect your opinion and keep mine.

The needs of the AF and to fulfill our military missions for the Joint Force Team. Not sure if you are trolling or not but serious question: Do you think you will or would have more airmanship and particularly military aviator airmanship after a tour as a 3 year 1200 hour FAIP operating out of the same base and generally within about 1-2 hours flight time of that base and some CONUS TDYs or 4 year 2000 hour Instructor Pilot of an MWS (assuming heavy) who would have learned a new more complicated aircraft, more new mission sets, been on multiple overseas deployments, operated with different Air Branches & foreign AFs, mobility missions, alert force duty, large force exercises, business efforts, etc... ?

https://www.popularmechanics.com/military/aviation/a19620889/air-force-may-need-to-cut-a-third-of-f-35-fleet-due-to-high-operating-costs/ https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2018-03-28/tesla-says-cause-of-fatal-crash-not-yet-known-without-car-s-logs BLUF: The U.S. Air Force may have to cut its purchases of Lockheed Martin Corp.’s F-35 by a third if it can’t find ways to reduce operations and support costs by as much as 38 percent over a decade, according to an internal analysis. Does this crowd out the procurement of the B-21 then?

Yes, but is that what a SUPT graduate should aspire to? Maybe aspire is not the right verb but just my two cents that everyone just getting their wings at SUPT should be chomping at the bit to get to the operational side of the AF. No offense directed in anyway at anyone who did FAIP or will be FAIP'ed.

Palace Chase is the program you want https://www.goang.com/is-ang-for-me/air-force-to-ang BO has hiring opportunities listed in the Aviation Jobs and ANG/AFR sections. Good luck!

Don't know of a program to do that but I do know a former male nurse who became a pilot. He became an O in the Guard and went to UPT via that route. My guess is that there is no program.

Just getting older and more opinionated...or rotting...

Not a bad article but after reading this (and other articles like it) on the "problem" of the present day AF, I feel like every well intentioned reformer or reform advocate needs to realize that there are somethings that have happened not just in the AF but in society in general that are to be acknowledged and accepted to go forward productively. There are some fights that are not worth it, not winnable, not even a fight where something can be won and a distraction from that which is attainable and worth time, resources and effort. The "problem" of the present day AF is not a problem per se but a state of being that was arrived at after a particular (and on going) set of operations / conflicts, changes in society (some good - effort to include non-historically represented groups, some bad - egregious PC culture and emphasis on identity at the expense meritocracy and logic) and the corporatization of some aspects of the day to day administration of the AF. That said, there is plenty that could be reformed, changed and made to make an AF that is more mission focused, more challenging for its members and one that inspires an esprit de corps. I think it would be a harder AF to be in than it is now (I'm ok with that) and I think that is probably where to start because that is something we can do now, no money needed, no new laws to be passed. Just the will to do it and accept some of the potentially unpopular and uncomfortable results of dialing up the standards. On the article... 1. Dear Boss... My two cents, some of the "Dear Boss" sentiment is valid, there has been a growing gulf between the Line and Leadership of the AF, loss of confidence in AF leadership when from an operator's perspective we (the USAF) do not seem particularly responsive to a changed operational environment and an apathetic approach to retention. My other two cents, some of the "Dear Boss" sentiment is grandstanding and sanctimonious, only the author of whichever iteration of the "Dear Boss" letter can see the mediocrity & corruption and because said individual is so principled, so dedicated, so pure that they just can't take it anymore and they have to leave. Give me a break, at anytime in the existence of any established, conventional military force there have been cronies, REMFs, butt kissers, busy work and snipe hunts, etc... this is not to say those things are to be tolerated but they're like mosquitoes, you swat one and another arrives to meet the same fate, repeat the process or get eaten alive. Deal with it, annoying things and people are part of life, try to fix them, get rid of them or avoid them but don't expect them to ever go away completely. 2. PC Culture Partially accept some it. Fighting all of it is unwise, not winnable and not even a good idea. Most of it comes from above the DoD, Federal Government Policy for all Departments, Agencies and Bureaus and has to be implemented, unless it is specifically stated how X policy will be implemented, the AF (IMO) has prerogative to deliver X policy in a military applicable manner. The AF can take the best parts of the efforts to build an inclusive society that offers equal opportunity for all, encouragement (not exceptions) for those not historically represented and adherence to universally applied standards without denigrating those in the majority and assuming original prejudice in their attitudes. I saw this in a briefing from a GO on the day the transgender policy was changed for the DoD, he had one slide that clearly stated the policy, said we will treat all members in accordance with professional military standards and that was it. I am not really that on board with the policy but when it was delivered in a non-condescending, short, professional manner it did not generate excessive resentment, I left the All-Call with no more or less cynicism than before. Given the topic, that was probably as good as it was going to get. An example of how to do Social Actions Policy. 3. Warrior / Mission Culture If we want a warrior culture, a mission culture then look at the tools we have available and use them. That will be tougher standards, more rigor and fewer opportunities to leave the cockpit / ops station you are in (if part of the LAF). Be careful what you wish for, you may get it. I am ok with dialing up the heat, not that I am an Air Rambo, but I know that if we want to rid the AF of shoe clerks and meaningless schools, programs and fluff, that is in reality the only way to do it. Thinking that some Bro General is just going to come in, tell the Shoe Clerks to pound sand and that's it is naive thinking at its worst. Swords are forged in extreme heat then beat into shape, afterwards repeatedly scraped with a stone to make sharp, not a gentle process. If we want this type of AF (we do), we need only more strongly discipline and train ourselves. Not the most pleasant rant I've ever given on BO but my honest opinion. Any military or military unit you want to be part of should be tough to be part of, that is where the pride comes from, doing something that is hard to do and not everyone can do. If the AF changes the vector to this, the rest will take care of itself.

Knew Andy also. Dedicated officer, great pilot and good dude. Godspeed

Or a longer legged FB-22... if this is going to be twin engines and lower range go ahead and make an LO KC-21 with probe and drogue or an MQ-25 Stingray AR wingman

Article from WOR on how the AF got slow and below glide slope: https://warontherocks.com/2018/03/air-force-in-crisis-part-ii-how-did-we-get-here/ Worth a read but a cliff notes of his (Benitez) points: 1. The Air Force Got Too Small (People) Concur. Shoot to eliminate redundancy at the top first to save resources to build the base. More Indians, less Chiefs. Cut GO billets in half, Cut O-6 billets in half, etc... look for possible deferments in promotion with targeted retention bonus in critical career fields. Career Fields not just critically manned but critical to the military mission(s) of the AF. 2. The Air Force Got Too Small (Airplanes) Concur. While not addressed in this section of his article, it touches on morale which appears in several sections as it affects everything, an RPA companion aircraft, discussed ad nauseam and requirement is self-evident for airmanship and morale. He addresses 4th gen recapitilization, makes the argument for new 4th gen versus refurbished aircraft, better aircraft, better industrial base strategic utilization, better aircraft at about the same cost, agreed. Investigate a resurgence of a few good deal / golden apple programs to strategically retain key personnel, provide a solution to a requirement and ideally retain selected individuals for the full career. LAAR acquisition in respectable fleet size, ADAIR in desirable locales, flying graduate enrichment programs open to crew/single seat aviators as instructors, etc... I would also not forget about the support folks also, instead of emphasizing in-residence PME, I would look at expanded civilian career education opportunities for them with self-selection of schools/programs to be considered. 3. The Air Force Got Too Small (Lethality) Semi-concur. Argues for shorter rotations to AORs, 4 months preferred to 6 months, for a several valid reasons (experience distribution, QoL, etc..) and I concur but not concurring with looking to Navy / USMC for assistance in the Aerospace Control Alert Mission. They're tapped out anyway and don't like the idea of ceding mission. Internal redistribution of resources to expand capability in core missions seems better, resources from where in the AF is the sticky part (sts)...

Unconstrained by laws, lawyers, a sometimes duplicitous bureaucracy and an investigating and adversarial media... one man in control of a technologically capable and paranoid nation can do amazing / terrifying things...

I keep finding uses for this...