brabus

The problem is you're thinking internal carriage only. You can load it up far more than a Viper when using external hardpoints. Which in your example is no problem in a CAS war like we fight today. IADS takedown, deep strike through an IADS, etc. it'll only carry 2x2000 LB bombs (or more of other weapons out there), but anything not requiring LO will allow the F-35 to carry a pretty hefty payload for a fighter. But I do agree with you on the 200 rds of gun...that just sucks. Tons of ways, none of which will be talked about here. Open source media, reports, and etc. is not a smart way to base opinions on things like this.

Completely agree. BUT, there are some shows they are apparently "desired" and not "required." Also agree. They are definitely the "very few," but I was just saying the situation I talked about absolutely will happen in those "few" situations. Either way, I don't disagree with anything you said, just bottom line of the topic is I think it's wrong to think ONLY RPAs will take down an IADs. As if the IADs will be completely dismantled prior to any manned fighters going in. I think a day like that is well into the future and manned fighters will still have quite a while before they won't have to worry about contending with IADs because UCAVs went in first and smoked everything.

I'm aware. Hence why "can we get CALCM's to target X,Y,Z?" is one of the first questions asked in MPC, and of course naturally we get denied 99% of the time. Oh well, always worth asking. My comments had absolutely zero to do with CALCMs, TLAMs, HARPY, etc. And yes, as I'm sure you're aware, the AF is willing to not wait on the aforementioned and go straight up manned fighters out the door night one into an IADs. Definitely not in every scenario, but they certainly will in some.

I'll buy the fact about the fusion problem. Things being more complicated to replace, update, etc. is just something that goes along with getting more advanced stuff. Yes it's easier to slap a new radar into a legacy fighter, but there's good reason why we need new planes and not just constant upgrades. Not to say I don't want an AESA radar right now, but you can only upgrade so much on a 20+ yr old fighter. The increased PITA of sensor fusion, etc. upgrades is worth having those things to begin with. Just because money is spent on A/G upgrades does not mean the jet is suffering A/A. The Raptor is doing just fine in the A/A realm. Yes. Do you think complex IADs aren't trained against by manned fighters today? Do you really think the AF won't send manned aircraft flying through multiple MEZs to get the job done? Additionall, the operative phrase in you statement being "a RPA can do it instead." I'm not blind, maybe in 20 years, but for now the job simply cannot be done via RPAs alone. Not now, not anytime in the near future. Yes technology continues to evolve and maybe we'll have a RPA only solution to that problem down the road, but there is nothing on the shelf that solves this problem without manned assets.

Well, as long as there is legit flying in the JPARC and the Big R down the road, it's still not a bad deal. But hell, I'm about to take Homestar's advice and step out in front of a bus wearing 5 reflective belts...someone has to pick up the flag.

Agreed. You have to talk to ANC to get into the airspace and you have to talk to them to get out of the airspace, or have Range cancel for you if it's a VFR day. Nothing better than "negative, you can't enter the airspace because it doesn't start until 5 min from now." Really, because there's so much traffic in the Alaskan interior. Nothing like having to come back with 15 miles space between 2 ships when its IFR. Unbelievable...I never thought flying overseas would be so much easier and less of a PITA, but every time I come back to here I'm reminded of just that. At least when you're in the airspace it's pretty bad ass.

Sounds like you ended up going to the party.

That's most likely the cause. Well at least I don't have to waste energy looking both ways while crossing the street, cars will just see me since I have a reflective belt on. At least it seems to work for all the Airmen. By the way, when did parents stop teaching their kids looking both ways before crossing the street might be a good idea? I'm guessing somewhere around 18-20 years ago.

Unfortunately, yes. Now there's even signs posted on doors around base stating "Disco belts mandatory, blah blah." It's from "well above" the CTS, but not outside of the Wing if you catch my drift. Can't say I'm surprised even the least amount. Apparently reflective belts are the mission at Eielson, not RFA. Literally, leadership is saying you will not be allowed to do Eielson's primary mission if you don't wear a reflective belt.

Where are you getting your info...WOMs? Agreed...and their limited A/G ability does not detract from their A/A ability, so there's no reason to "make them A/A only." Right...good luck with that hypothesis.

I absolutely think we need to restart the line and procure more Raptors, but to the Marines for CAS? Complete waste. I know this is a big IF, but if what I've seen holds true for the F-35, that aircraft will be a lot better suited for the Marines than a Raptor (not to say either is a better choice over a Hog, upgraded hornets, etc). I'm with Beerman, get rid of this expensive problem called STOVL, but simply give the Marines the F-35A and call it good. Regardless, like Beerman said, it'll never happen.

Sure, I guess that's how the airspace in Oklahoma operates. You have to realize Oklahoma is not representative of the rest of the world, or even other parts of America. Bottom line is MOA rules can be very different depending on where you are, so before flying IMC in a MOA, I'm just advocating people actually check out the local regs on it...or you can take the chance and scoff it, but that's up to you. That sucks dude. We fly VFR quite a lot, but again, guess it depends on the community and where you're flying. I agree though, the hard-on for IFR can be ridiculous sometimes. Good thing the "max extent" verbiage is bendable...have a reason for flying VFR and who's to say you're wrong?

I agree you are still under an IFR clearance, but most, if not all MOAs, you will be required to be talking to some sort of controlling agency while IMC, which may be center or a tactical control agency if local regs allows. Maybe I misunderstood your intent, but I don't think you are legit to just go cruising around IMC whenever you want just because you still have an open IFR flight plan. You're going to have to talk to somebody to get clearance or in some cases, "use all possible sources" to clear the airspace before you transition through IMC. Thought I think the biggest point is this can be very different depending on where you're flying...Oklahoma is not the same as Asia, is not the same as Europe, is not the same as Alaska, etc. Obviously restricted areas are a different animal.

There were at least a couple dudes who did that, but also were just checking the ALFA container (they were told by leadership preds was the new ALFA thing and everyone was going to do one, so might as well check the container now, rather than later) and thought they'd get there #1 fighter choice out of it. Clearly that worked out well for them. Hopefully they learned their lesson, believing higher leadership that eating a giant shit sandwich now will "totally hook you up in the future dude!" is not the way to go.

I like how he "didn't see the ferris wheel until he hit it." WTF...either you're completely blind or you really like to stare inside the cockpit for gratuitous lengths of time. Glad nobody was hurt though.

Agree homestar, but then again, what is the promotion rate to Maj without a masters? On the surface, this actually sounds like a "good deal" (still super retarded to have to do it, but sometimes you gotta play) in the fact you can knock out both masters and PME at the same time instead of getting a full masters as a Capt, and then having to do the full ACSC as a Maj. Am I missing anything?

I saw a dude the other day wearing that uniform and his capt rank was brown. So, guessing that is correct...based off my sample size of two anyways.

No, I specifically referenced the "BMW dude" if you will. I also clearly stated I know that doesn't apply to everyone. Call me an asshole, but I am not a supporter of handouts, and my opinion doesn't change just because you're in the military. My argument was you already get extra money for having dependents, so why do SOME people expect even more? Again, for those who have a difficult time reading, I fully understand there are plenty of good people in the military who need some help and are not like d-bag, generic "BMW guy."

Damn straight, fucking nonners (that's for the CC working his ass off on the line).

It's completely their choice. Yes, you could just go fly the two patterns, land and call it good. There is not a requirement to re-fly already graded items, but items that will be flown anyways (takeoff, departure, etc) are all fair game...you just don't have to do another ILS for example if you already knocked that out prior to the EP. You also could go fly a completely different mission and just add the patterns at the end, but once again, the entire ride is fair game technically, but that doesn't mean the EP must grade you on already graded items, it just means he has the option (so just because you flew a great departure last time doesn't mean you won't get a downgrade for a heinous departure flown this time).

Well said! And that's what it's all about. Doesn't matter if you're an A1C or a Capt...you can get your shit together and make it work within your personal financial means.

Yep...I'm aware of the costs. I definitely am a supporter of the "with dependents" additions because we do need that extra money. I guess I came off more callous than I intended...I just don't like seeing my money (or anyone elses for that matter) taken to pay for someone else who can't afford child care, but drives a BMW (seen it). I know that's not representative of everyone out there needing CDC stuff, but regardless of rank, members should be able to make it work with smart financial decisions...and that does include not having 5 kids when you're only an A1C. Like everything I suppose it depends and there are truly good people out there who need some help, I just wish there was a good way to sort between them and BMW dude.

No, I was saying financing their childcare period is crap. They get extra money for having children through things like COLA, BAH/OHA, BAS, etc. That extra money should be used wisely to pay for dependent related costs...that's the whole point of "with dependents" additions.

We already give higher BAH, COLA, etc. for "with dependents." People can choose to use that extra money wisely or they can get a bigger house they don't need. Either way, there's enough of that already and we don't need any more extras. People just need to be responsible. It's not always a choice dude. Not saying there's not some merit to what you said based on SOME people, but your statement does not apply to everyone with kids.

Secondary problem: He's a comm guy, aka a member of the second most worthless and under-performing career field I've ever seen (right behind Finance). Always a battle...thanks Comm.