Clark Griswold

Good Lord... 90 CAPs? https://www.airforcetimes.com/story/military/2016/03/07/rpa-flights-increase-70-day-training-and-bases-grow-too-welsh-says/81454190/ After reading that I was reminded of a quote from "Under Siege" - cheesy movie yes but appropriate: "...we're puppets in the same sick game. We serve the same master, and he's a lunatic and he's ungrateful. But there's nothing we can do about it."

Yup - very interesting indeed. Another favorite of the Herc variants out there is the JC-130 recovering CORONA canisters and Fulton recovery system volunteers Pick up happens at 1:50. Follow on: I see clips from the Air Force of previous years from when we didn't stress out and weren't ruled by yes men who avoid risk because flying airplanes and doing the mission is secondary to MICT, TMT, etc... I can't imagine the AF of today being able to even conceive of doing cool shit like this. We're going to catch in mid-air space canisters and balloons floating cables to pull dudes off the ground / water and winch them into the plane, no sweat. I think the ORM score for this is about 69,000,000 which may require waiver.

Got to give a pound of flesh sometimes to the AF... ABQ isn't bad and if the AF has a giant boner to keep the RPA enterprise basically HQ'd in the SW of America for remote training areas then Kirtland is not a bad place for it: town is adequate, snow skiing in the winter, decent scenery... don't live there but have passed thru a few times for business and this seems like something the AF could be persuaded to supporting... Vegas... maybe but as an FTU location that would probably go over like a fart in church with the shoe clerks for all the distractions possible. Don't get me wrong, if Clark Griswold was allowed to decide this arbitrarily I'd reward those RPA folk with an awesome location for an FTU / spiritual HQ as a consolation prize since a lot of them were non-vols.

Hopefully so. I am just repressing memories of mid-shifts and would do anything (including spending millions as a taxpayers) to avoid them. Just a suggestion for basing RPAs to maintain AD CAPs: Anderson, Hickam, Elmendorf, Vandenberg, Beale, Nellis, Creech & Cannon (unfortunately too much invested), Kirtland, Tinker, Columbus, MacDill, Robins, Langley, Puerto Rico (Ramey AFB)

"I see" said the blind man. Thanks. Maybe that is better from the resourcing infrastructure cost but I would still argue for a mostly distributed strategy. Span the time zones and try if you can not only for QOL but to seed the base for Congressional support / friends to the RPA enterprise (if it is ever needed). There's the Operational strategy of not being concentrated and vulnerable with all eggs in one basket, the HR strategy of offering many basing options for QOL (homesteading for example) to encourage retention in the career field and the Political strategy of more congressional districts / senators having a base with an RPA operation there - all politics is local; it may cost a bit more but ultimately it is not always a cost minimization problem.

Pardon my ignorance but what do you mean by dwell in the selected COA?

DC-130 drone launching / controlling Herc https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lockheed_DC-130

Restart on thread. Gearbox fixed (for now) but not yet approved/certified, new gearbox from GE is the long term fix. http://www.defensenews.com/story/defense/show-daily/eurosatory/2016/06/17/a400m-cracked-gearbox/86040066/ Short article on A400 for the USAF and/or USMC. http://www.thinkdefence.co.uk/2011/11/is-a-usaf-or-usmc-a400-realistic-or-an-airbus-pipe-dream/ Follow on articles: http://www.janes.com/article/56673/analysis-america-s-future-airlifter-the-european-a400m http://www.dw.com/en/airbus-eyes-us-military-for-a400m-cargo-plane/a-18513332 http://www.industryweek.com/transportation/airbus-us-will-be-biggest-a400m-military-plane-customer Now, I think there is an opportunity here. EADS & LM have programs with issues and having more customers will help both, get a reciprocal purchase agreement as an A400M runs about 180 mil a copy and an F-35A runs about 150 mil a copy, we buy 80 A400Ms, France and Germany buy 100 F-35As, about an even swap in costs. Frame this as part of a European Capacity Building strategy for self-defense / reliance wth other deals to follow. You can pay for it / encourage it by starting a plan to draw down permanent basing in Europe by 30%, this gives them a reason to get to at least 2% GDP per NATO standard on defense and gives a consolation prize of some FMS for the Euros while simultaneously doing the same for the US. Europe can more credibly defend / deter against aggression, we both get FMS benefits, we reduce our European footprint but still keep the door open and we get a new mobility capability. Win - Win.

Recommend watching "Collapse" featuring the late Michael Ruppert. Rupoert had an interesting life, obviously was very intelligent and somewhat disturbed that ultimately led him to take his life and prior to that have some hospitalization for mental health. All that said, his thoughts on how & why an advanced economy could crash and the preparation of individuals or smaller, viable sections of the larger unsustainable whole were interesting.

Not an unlikely outcome but one most hope. Referencing the CPIP and some of it's main points with humble suggestions: http://www.af.mil/News/ArticleDisplay/tabid/223/Article/633740/acc-charts-path-for-remote-aircrews-units.aspx - Approximately double the number of RPA flying squadrons. Concur - do that in the ARC with dual qual waivers galore, spreading the love and offer AD positions to give new choices to those assimilated by the Borg. - Create a new wing to normalize organizational and command and control structures relative to other weapon systems. - Standardize the squadron, group and wing structure. Concur - Assign RPA units in new locations to potentially include overseas locations. Concur: Recommend a new base in Poland, expand in Sigonella or to Aviano, and in the Pacific if we can just get the tip in, Australia. - Decrease the heavy burden of persistent in garrison combat operations by increasing RPA manning and associated resources by 2,500-3,500 Airmen. - Define career tracks for officer and enlisted RPA operators and maintainers. - Study the promotion and professional military education selection rates for RPA officers. - Study the feasibility of a single specialty code for RPA maintenance personnel. Concur - Streamline processes to better enable Reserve component forces to support the mission Concur x 2 - offer the mission with either dual qual or easy transition back and forth between manned and RPA quals (like 3 year tours then in-house requal in the manned platform) and there are a lot of ARC units / members that would direct Droids

Since Star Trek is turning 50 and this is decent list, Spock says... What you want your cake and eat it too? Every time zone on US soil with a Droid base, a GA companion aircraft for brief escapes to dance the skies on laughter silvered wings... that's not that hard to do Air Force.

Copy that. Aviation Week says it will be in the 30 ton payload class with 5000 HP motors, with a wider body than a Y-9 or the 130. http://aviationweek.com/defense/new-chinese-airlifter-could-enter-service-2020s I guess they passed on the An-70 with propfans for the benefit of their domestic aviation base development.

No doubt, saw an HC-27J a few months ago, looked good in Coastie colors but me still thinks the Guard should be flying it. There's a market and requirement for a common light tactical airlift in the US amongst the military & public safety agencies, ala the JCA. Forest service, CG, Military and with some of our usual friends, too bad we couldn't heard all the cats together to settle on one. Switching gears to Chinese airlift, saw the Y-30 concept, A400 clone or just inspired by?

Just the end of an arc, the naive dreams of baby boomers and the shitty leaders they have turned out to be is causing the discussion of what comes next, if comes to that. Hopefully not, I feel obliged to say that, but it might. I would rather see American Democracy prove more durable/reliable/responsive than the people currently running it. The original Colonies had a system of governance that worked and was satisfactory for the majority of its existence up until that point that it wasn't good enough anymore, things can change quickly and in unpleasant fashion when just the right conditions coincide, even with the trappings and comforts of modern life, people will only put up with so much. Ditto - for the Guard (Air and Army) if we really, really got concerned with breakdown in authority, building a military around the operational concept of dispersed basing (particularly for Aviation units) could be effective preparation if you really considered it possible (my WAG on that for the US is 1 chance in 10). If you're not physically, logistically and operationally tied to prepared bases and could legitimately operate from ad hoc bases set up on roads, parking lots, fields, etc.. you can survive when the lights and phones don't work anymore. Dispersing is a defensive strategy but just being able to operate could be the advantage, still has a big logistics tail but still impressive.

I wish I could refute your prediction but if you look at the track record of the AF and in the criteria for basing FTUs (remote, desolate and likely to induce binge drinking) that is probably it. I would humbly offer for discussion and suggestion Kirkland AFB, NM for a schoolhouse and MCE campus with LRE and MX on aircraft training done at an out base, in my plan I would offer an off site location at KGNT, Grants-Milan airport. A little shorter than 8k (7100) but that could be fixed / waived and the students (11X types that will continue to get assigned to RPAs) get to fly a GA aircraft to LRE events (only 50 NM away), 18Xs are along for the ride too. KGNT is well away from the Class C airspace and human civilization but still close to the ranges. Kirkland has plenty of playmates for the syllabus to train with and while Albequerque is not perfect, it beats the F out of Clovis. QOL improved by decent location, low cost manned flying mission attached at least to the FTU, FTU collected with other MWS's and Ranges for training - not perfect location but not bad either.

Delta Hotel

No. The problems the shoe clerks have created are now coming home to roost and in typical fashion, rather than just doing what needs to be done and write a big enough check, admit their mistakes and CHANGE when conditions warrant it they prefer to put the lash to force, deny their is a problem and give each other a high five when the system some how manages to creak along. So flying that third line for a few months is going to somehow overcome years and years of getting deeper and deeper into the hole? The number varies but let's settle on 700 fighter pilots that the USAF is short of, I would say to get a fighter pilot with the right experience and knowledge they want it takes 3 to 4 years, as a heavy pilot my knowledge is limited but as a WAG but seems reasonable. Now let's say they could get by with only filling 500 of the 700 cockpits/shelters/staff positions, so you need 500 x 4 or 2,000 man-years of MPA orders, that comes to about $352 million, or a little more than 2 F-35A Joint Shit Fighters or fly 400 heavy aircraft 40 hours less per year over 4 years and you will get the savings to pay for it. Re-program the money after doing your mea culpa to Congress and fix this. A 4 year statutory order will attract takers; long enough for a lot of them to get 7305+ points, under 5 years to assert USERRA and if you throw a bonus for those 4 years at 25K, you will get the 11Fs you need immediately all the while you are executing Operation Get Well on 11Fs, surging UPT / IFF / FTU and returning all 11Fs you can get out of the RPA career field without destroying that too. This is a complicated web to unravel without causing harm in another area at the same time but Big Blue putting its money where its mouth is and using the resources it has, ARC Fighter Pilots to solve the immediate problem while working like a crazy man to solve the long term problem is the only way to get this done. No guilt trip speeches or High Velocity Analysis efforts, just commit the resources and get it done.

From another thread, it was brought up to spread the love from Guam to Puerto Rico to eliminate the needs for mid-shifts. The article says you have to have another flying mission there already, to be considered for these new bases, open up: Anderson, Hickam, C-Springs (associate unit), Ft. Worth (tenant unit on the NAS), Dobbins (new or moved Reserve unit), Shaw (new or moved unit with the possibility of dual qual aggressor AT-38 for a long tour there) and a new unit in Puerto Rico. All of these new or moved units should be pulled from Creech, it is a cancer eating at the morale of the AF. Follow on - for the new wing/groups at a bases without an MQ-9 presence currently, select Beale and Moody for new operations. Basing for the RPA community needs to follow a few guidelines: QOL is huge as the job can be soul crushing and causes low retention. Geographical spread is important to cover the 24 hour Z day without having to operate from 2100 - 0500 local. Sovereign US soil is probably to the best solution (not the only) to avoid the controversy of RPA kinetic operations.

Sorry - should have been clear, that was just a continuation on the tangent of inputting this into an exercise (breakdown in civilian authority).

Yup - can you depend on your soldiers/airmen/sailors/marines? Were they paid? What is the political leaning of their commander? Does Intel suspect they cold be flipped?

Valid. Of late the threat of an EMP still seems plausible but the Cyber attack possibility of incapacitating the government for some period of time is getting more real or Cyber manipulation / blackmail, real or manufactured. This could be an interesting inject from White Cell in Military / LE exercise practicing DOMOPs - your first world AOR just became loosely / not governed, proceed.

Yeah but we swore an oath to support and defend the Constitution - my pontificating is trying to "formalize" how to tell when our pols are code 3 and we (the military) may have to act independently to uphold our oath - I am thankfully confident this has a low chance of ever happening but beyond the discussion of not obeying illegal orders how could the civilian government set boundaries that if it crossed (written before a governance crisis) that the military could act not to run the country but to restore conditions so a civilian authority could reestablish order? Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

No argument on that, as it is done at sea I think in some ways it is an out of sight out of mind thing for why the CG doesn't get the resourcing it needs.