Vertigo Posted February 13, 2015 Share Posted February 13, 2015 Completely incorrect. Formatting height means centerline pallets only. Lack of aft lavatories means it has problems with flying pax too. Hello comfort pallet that must be moved up to the cargo door every stop to be serviced. The KC-10 is a tanker/transport machine. The KC-135 is a great tanker. The KC-46 is overall ok. 18 pallet positions vice 6... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
deaddebate Posted February 13, 2015 Share Posted February 13, 2015 (edited) You can listen to Gen Welsh's "Air Force Update" (and the other speeches) at 2015 AFA Air Warfare Symposium at:http://www.airman.af.mil ): The future of the United States Air Force rests on the degree to which we can continue to recruit, retain, and develop individuals committed to the profession of arms and USAF Core Values.Break apart that sentence. The PACE can really only affect the last third of their own vision, which is Developing Airmen. Recruiting and Retention are primarily dependent on individuals determining the value of their benefits and weighing them against their patriotism. Obviously Recruiters have some discretion in who they process and send to MEPS, and Commanders have authority to separate folks at the end of their terms. However that can only remove the bad, it doesn't keep the good. (see these threads for more discussion: And ). So PACE's own program for molding Airmen into the Profession of Arms / Warrior Ethos leadership mentality subconsciously acknowledges their limitations in benefits and then ignores it. This is the pinnacle of an Air Force that fails to understand its' Airmen. Thankfully, these ideas live in a small corner of AETC, and I hope they continue to only live there. Everything I wrote above evaluates only one significant part of his speech, but it is not the majority. He also talks about modernization, current conflicts, budget challenges, technology development, total force restructuring. Essentially, it is what he said he wanted to talk about--the mission. It is a good speech with extreme relevance to todays' Air Force, but my takeaway was what I wrote. CMSAF Cody also spoke, but it didn't have anything ground-breaking so I've got nothing to comment that hasn't already been said about the various programs. SECAF James spoke this morning but the recording hasn't been uploaded yet. Edited February 13, 2015 by deaddebate Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ThreeHoler Posted February 13, 2015 Share Posted February 13, 2015 18 pallet positions vice 6... And you can't put a single ISU 90 into any of those pallet positions, unless you restrict it to centerline only. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vertigo Posted February 13, 2015 Share Posted February 13, 2015 And you can't put a single ISU 90 into any of those pallet positions, unless you restrict it to centerline only. Even 1 isu 90 is 100% more than you can put on a 135. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HossHarris Posted February 13, 2015 Share Posted February 13, 2015 0 + (100% of 0) = 0. 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Prosuper Posted February 13, 2015 Share Posted February 13, 2015 Even 1 isu 90 is 100% more than you can put on a 135. If we had ISU 90's back in 1955 and if Gen Lemay wanted the KC-135 to be a cargo hauler they would have built the airplane to handle them. I wonder if we had 463L pallets back in 1955. But it has done its job of what it was designed to do since 1955 with some upgrades. We were still using water injection up to 1994 when AMC said enough of that. At least it is RVSM capable. FYI, the original contract was won by Lockheed with a paper airplane but Boeing was ready and LeMay did not want to wait. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
busdriver Posted February 13, 2015 Author Share Posted February 13, 2015 Seems to me a KC-135 replacement is all about number of booms in the air and available offload. Why are we talking about cargo? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lloyd christmas Posted February 14, 2015 Share Posted February 14, 2015 I wonder if we had 463L pallets back in 1955. The 463L system was implemented in April, 1963. That's where it gets its name. L stands for logistics. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vertigo Posted February 14, 2015 Share Posted February 14, 2015 You're a fucking idiot. I've loaded plenty of ISU-90's on a -135. You mean isu-60s Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Homestar Posted February 14, 2015 Share Posted February 14, 2015 You're a fucking idiot. I've loaded plenty of ISU-90's on a -135. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Azimuth Posted February 14, 2015 Share Posted February 14, 2015 (edited) You mean isu-60s No I read that wrong, ISU-70's. Seems to me a KC-135 replacement is all about number of booms in the air and available offload. Why are we talking about cargo? The KC-135 replacement is all about having better cargo/passenger/AE carrying capability than the -135, have a MWS/Countermeasures to be colocated with CAF aircraft in the AOR (less drone time = more fuel to offload), and be able to onload fuel as well. Edited February 14, 2015 by Azimuth 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
McDonut Posted February 14, 2015 Share Posted February 14, 2015 (edited) He says he loves to talk to the many Airmen he meets, but the most common topics are sequestration, compensation, retirement, health care, and benefits in general. He says we should refocus discussion to our mission, equipment, and capabilities. He compares his conversations and the Air Force to the Marines ability to focus on the mission. I'd love to talk to him about the mission, equipment, and capabilities. Do you ever think he would able to talk to me? Probably not, because visits are carefully orchestrated (see JQP: http://www.jqpublic-blog.com/degraded-dogs-ponies-lying-game-air-force-vip-culture/ Now I understand why he might say that--his job is primarily to make us the best Air Force possible, to fight and win America's wars. Unfortunately, the concerns of the Airmen regarding their families and their benefits will decide the future manpower and readiness of the volunteer force. We've heard from the various defense officials and committees multiple times that the DOD is competing with civilian organizations for talent. Well, this is what that competition looks like. And you'd be right, his job and the Airman's job is to make the best Air Force possible. It's Congress' job to set benefits properly, and they do that with the guidance from upper AF leadership. If he didn't want to deal with Airmen asking about benefits and other bull**** all the time, then he should spend some time telling his peers to stop saying s*** like this http://www.military.com/daily-news/2014/03/26/generals-say-troops-understand-need-for-pay-cuts.html. Edited February 14, 2015 by McDonut Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TarHeelPilot Posted February 14, 2015 Share Posted February 14, 2015 U-2 I saw that too. Hell of a point.... <*sigh*>.... And the C-130? Let's write off the J model since the C-130 has been around since the 50's. All of the current U-2S's were built in the 1980's except 3 aircraft...a few years older than the B-2, to offer some realistic perspective. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JarheadBoom Posted February 14, 2015 Share Posted February 14, 2015 18 pallet positions vice 6... And those 18 pallet pallet positions will be even more contour-restricted than the -10, which is already pretty restrictive. 767-200SF pallet contour chart This doesn't even take into account the requirement for an emergency access aisle... unless AMC is planning to drop the requirement to be able to access the cargo in an emergency (i.e. cargo leak, fire, etc.). [/threadjacking] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vertigo Posted February 14, 2015 Share Posted February 14, 2015 And those 18 pallet pallet positions will be even more contour-restricted than the -10, which is already pretty restrictive. 767-200SF pallet contour chart This doesn't even take into account the requirement for an emergency access aisle... unless AMC is planning to drop the requirement to be able to access the cargo in an emergency (i.e. cargo leak, fire, etc.). [/threadjacking] Totally agree. I'm not saying this jet is the be all end all. But you can't discount the upgrade in cargo capacity over the 135. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HU&W Posted February 14, 2015 Share Posted February 14, 2015 Totally agree. I'm not saying this jet is the be all end all. But you can't discount the upgrade in cargo capacity over the 135. The real question is, how many G's can it pull? 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sky_king Posted February 14, 2015 Share Posted February 14, 2015 The real question is, how many G's can it pull? Is it a better CAS platform than the F-35? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
baileynme Posted February 14, 2015 Share Posted February 14, 2015 Is it a better CAS platform than the F-35? Still trying to find out if they put in the flamethrower feature I suggested but they won't respond to my emails. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
di1630 Posted February 14, 2015 Share Posted February 14, 2015 Back to Gen Welsh. I had very high hopes. He seems like he'd make a great politician or Lockheed spokesperson as his speeches are great...but I was hoping to see something more. I know his job is tough and he's done a few things to reform, but overall, not real impressed. I'd rather see a 4-star utter unpopular truths than play politics. This is sad because I imagine he was one of the best prospects. Other views? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dupe Posted February 14, 2015 Share Posted February 14, 2015 Back to Gen Welsh. I had very high hopes. He seems like he'd make a great politician or Lockheed spokesperson as his speeches are great...but I was hoping to see something more. I know his job is tough and he's done a few things to reform, but overall, not real impressed. I'd rather see a 4-star utter unpopular truths than play politics. This is sad because I imagine he was one of the best prospects. Other views? I don't think the CSAF has as much power to change the AF as people think he has. Quite a bit of what we see as "bureaucratic crap" is actually the execution of some federal law. For example, awesome queep job of Unit Voting Monitor is actually the AF and DoD's implementation of The Uniformed and Overseas Citizens Absentee Voting Act. On top of that, the CSAF will get to go battle Congress every time he wants to erase a GO billet or move an airplane to a different base. As an example, a developmental squadron I was in had two A-10s dedicated to A-10 developmental test. To increase test efficiency, we wanted to move those airplanes to Davis Monthan where there are quite a few more aircraft in the test fleet. That move was blocked by Congress as "trying to move aircraft outside of a BRAC." My one critique is that I wish Gen Welsh would do more to shape the Air Force culture. We still have the same rusty OPR and assignment system. We're still deploying dudes into "rated-required" billets where being rated isn't actually a criteria. We're still trying to accomplish all the same manpower intensive work as if we had a force 50% bigger than we actually have. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SuperWSO Posted February 16, 2015 Share Posted February 16, 2015 Gen C Michael Mosely provides a good review of what happens when SECAF and CSAF continue to push an agenda (more F-22s) that doesn't line up with the bosses priorities. Oh, and don't misplace nukes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Azimuth Posted February 16, 2015 Share Posted February 16, 2015 Gen C Michael Mosely provides a good review of what happens when SECAF and CSAF continue to push an agenda (more F-22s) that doesn't line up with the bosses priorities. Oh, and don't misplace nukes. Bob Gates book "Duty" explains in detail why he was pissed at Mosely (and really the USAF). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Duck Posted February 16, 2015 Share Posted February 16, 2015 I have always looked at Gates crusade against the Air Force as one of the many driving factors behind our recent personnel/manning problems. What do you all think about him? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Champ Kind Posted February 16, 2015 Share Posted February 16, 2015 Maybe the things he saw in the AF were some of our biggest blights.... botched acquisition programs, hopeless bureaucracy, senior leaders with a severe sense of entitlement, ridiculous personnel programs, and some pretty highly-publicized embarrassments. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KState_Poke22 Posted February 16, 2015 Share Posted February 16, 2015 I have always looked at Gates crusade against the Air Force as one of the many driving factors behind our recent personnel/manning problems. What do you all think about him? In general I liked Gates because he was never afraid to stand up to the President (Bush and Obama) and make his case heard. However his cutting of the F-22 seems like a really bad decision in hindsight. We'd likely be less dependent on the F-35. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now