On 9/1/2019 at 1:58 PM, FutureRaptor said:

 

Source? Other than Pierre Sprey?

Those of us actively in the program.

On 9/4/2019 at 6:03 AM, brabus said:

.fix your shit or I’ll rec to congress to cut the buy significantly and spend the money with Boeing. 

And we threat Boeing that LM will be making KC-46? 

1 hour ago, Sim said:

And we threat Boeing that LM will be making KC-46? 

LM is trying to sell the MRTT to the US.

 

https://news.lockheedmartin.com/2019-06-20-Lockheed-Martin-and-Airbus-reaffirm-tanker-partnership-at-2019-Paris-Air-Show

14 hours ago, LookieRookie said:

LM is trying to sell the MRTT to the US.

 

https://news.lockheedmartin.com/2019-06-20-Lockheed-Martin-and-Airbus-reaffirm-tanker-partnership-at-2019-Paris-Air-Show

Had the USAF selected that after Boeing’s first appeal, they’d be employing by now.

https://dsca.mil/major-arms-sales/poland-f-35-joint-strike-fighter-aircraft

Another member of the club.

Article on F-35 sales to the KSA:

https://warontherocks.com/2020/01/the-united-states-shouldnt-sell-the-f-35-to-saudi-arabia/

Author is against it but gives a balanced look with pros along with cons listed.

My two unsolicited cents, no.  

1 hour ago, Clark Griswold said:

My two unsolicited cents, no.  

The Saudis export extremist Sunni Islam all throughout the world … broader Q: why should we even consider them an ally.

Hard no. 

Somebody who did an F-15S exchange tour once told me that one of the Saudi pilots had taken hard copies of the -34-1-1-1 and 3-1 to Kinkos and left them there to be scanned onto a thumbdrive... so that he could have the manuals on his computer at home. Apparently, this was just one incident in a long line of incidents of this sort, and the RSAF (and DoD!) did nothing about it.

I get that there's a balance between selling hardware to gain access to oil, and resigning yourself to the fact that some of your secrets are going to get out as part of that process, but I don't understand for a second why you would take that risk with the F-35. I hope the partner nations speak up on this. 

1 hour ago, Steve Davies said:

access to oil

Access to Saudi oil isn't hugely important to the US. In 2018, 59% of oil was produced domestically, 20% imported from Canada, and ~5% of our oil was imported from Saudi Arabia and that's been on the decline for years. (Source: EIA) We could pretty easily supplant them with imports from other countries (Canada, Mexico, or Venezuela would all work) or domestic production. I'm not going to pretend to be an expert on the intricacies of our relationship with them but oil is not the primary driver. Europe does get significant amounts of oil from SA though, so maybe it is about oil just more about not disturbing supply for allies as opposed to ourselves. Like I said, not an expert. To be clear, I also think SA is no friend to the US and we should seriously reevaluate our relationship with them. 

2 hours ago, Ghost of James Post said:

The Saudis export extremist Sunni Islam all throughout the world … broader Q: why should we even consider them an ally.

Habit I think but as the generations change on both sides I think that habit is dying.  

The recent events culminating with the students at Pensacola and beyond I hope have moved the decision makers to formulate a new strategy with the KSA.  Not nearly as close with back up contingencies to mitigate problems if they go full retard, I would put them at half right now.

Dodging the slight of not offering them the 35 would require a bit of diplomatic two step but is feasible, quietly telling to just stop asking.

The anecdote @Steve Davies relayed would likely be repeated a 1000 fold at some point,  China/Russia eventually getting access to ALIS or ODIN, when that replaces ALIS.

https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/31861/replacement-for-f-35s-troubled-alis-cloud-based-brain-rebranded-odin-and-is-still-years-away

 

There is about a zero to negative chance we sell F-35’s to an Arab AF.


Sent from my iPhone using Baseops Network mobile app

Agree with all, LO is mainly about giving an offensive advantage and I think keeping some of our "Allies" mainly defensively strong but with enough offensive power to keep certain enemies at risk is the best / least bad option.

Russia is looking for export customers for the Su-57 and have mentioned UAE, probably not too far that they would try to tempt the KSA with an offer.

https://nationalinterest.org/blog/buzz/russias-su-57-stealth-fighter-coming-soon-persian-gulf-97532

Hey, China: Supersonic F-35s droppin' nukes.

"ALBUQUERQUE, N.M. — A mock B61-12’s strike in the dusty Nevada desert successfully completed the first in a series of flight tests with the U.S. Air Force’s newest fighter jet, demonstrating the bomb’s first release from an internal bomb bay at greater than the speed of sound."

https://share-ng.sandia.gov/news/resources/news_releases/b61-12_flight/

 

Edited November 26, 20205 yr by torqued

 

F-35 ramp strike report released and broken down. Pretty interesting.

Spoiler alert…overdid the shit hot break, didn’t have enough power, and similar to the Eglin guy he got caught up with the auto throttle (APC?) thing. 

The medical evac of the LSO is crazy.  Hell of a decision to give up 100+knots for 100 feet of altitude.  Wonder how the helo got the required fuel to make it to the Philippines.  

The LSO sitting on the carrier would have been higher than on the Osprey 🙂

21 minutes ago, uhhello said:

The LSO sitting on the carrier would have been higher than on the Osprey 🙂

I guess they figured he already cheated death once. No need to tempt fate with an Osprey ride! (Kidding…kind of).

9 hours ago, uhhello said:

The medical evac of the LSO is crazy.  Hell of a decision to give up 100+knots for 100 feet of altitude.  Wonder how the helo got the required fuel to make it to the Philippines.  

No Shit...I'd love for an actual doctor to share some knowledge.  Is the pressure differential from 20' to 100' AGL enough to justify doubling the time it takes to transport a critically injured patient to a trauma center?  Sounds like some serious buffoonery.    

As a 60G guy, with some prior EMS experience, I'm scratching my head too.

In terms of the fuel - I know the Coastie 60s have some substanial modifications for carrying additional fuel. I don't believe the Navy models carry that much, to get them beyond 500NM with reserves at least, but I could be wrong. They do have the ability to fuel up on ships capable of taking them, or doing HIFR (Helicopter In Flight Refueling), in which they hover next to a moving vessel, take up a fuel hose, and then connect the hose to provide fuel while flying - which seems like a nightmare to someone who does HAAR pretty regularly. Both of those would obviously extend the time to get someone to the beach, though.

EDIT: Unless the details about the altitude variation are incorrect, and for whatever reason the 22 guys were adamant at flying an enroute altitude which would cause issues for a head injury.

Edited February 23, 20232 yr by Lockjaw

53 minutes ago, Lockjaw said:

As a 60G guy, with some prior EMS experience, I'm scratching my head too.

In terms of the fuel - I know the Coastie 60s have some substanial modifications for carrying additional fuel. I don't believe the Navy models carry that much, to get them beyond 500NM with reserves at least, but I could be wrong. They do have the ability to fuel up on ships capable of taking them, or doing HIFR (Helicopter In Flight Refueling), in which they hover next to a moving vessel, take up a fuel hose, and then connect the hose to provide fuel while flying - which seems like a nightmare to someone who does HAAR pretty regularly. Both of those would obviously extend the time to get someone to the beach, though.

EDIT: Unless the details about the altitude variation are incorrect, and for whatever reason the 22 guys were adamant at flying an enroute altitude which would cause issues for a head injury.

Yeah been around the block as well transporting head injuries and it was ALWAYS keep it as low as possible.  I can't imagine being told keep it below 100'.  Very strange.  Probably not being relayed correctly.  I googled my ass off and can't find any articles about the evac.  

Not sure where that specific altitude figure came from, but beware if it was part of the aforementioned WC video.  He straight-up makes things up, to include having definitively stated that the AIM-9X that took out the Chinese balloon had no warhead.  His videos recently have become fiction at best, embarrassing self-promoting drivel at worst..

Edited February 23, 20232 yr by KODAK

The Navy H-60s can fly the 500-ish miles to shore, the difference between them and the USCG helos is that the Coasties can go practically that far and then fly back.  Less than 100 feet isn’t a problem with the helo’s altitude hold.

The altitude is interesting though. Ward has a tendency to “elaborate” on what he knows so I’m not sure how accurate that is.
 

The guidance given to me from the corpsmen was to keep head injuries low; my understanding being because the lower pressure with increase in altitude could exacerbate hemorrhaging for head wounds. That said, I can’t imagine the slight pressure difference from 50 to 150-200 feet would be that significant. I’d really love to hear from a flight doc on this one. 

I was Aeromedical Evacuation when I was enlisted a long time ago. When we had head injuries on board, we would request the lowest possible cabin altitude from the flight crew. BigRed is correct in that it has to do with intercranial pressures.


Sent from my iPhone using Baseops Network mobile app

24 minutes ago, herkbum said:

I was Aeromedical Evacuation when I was enlisted a long time ago. When we had head injuries on board, we would request the lowest possible cabin altitude from the flight crew. BigRed is correct in that it has to do with intercranial pressures.

I think everyone gets that, the question is does the pressure differential (.05 PSI), from 100' to 20' justify doubling the transit time to a trauma center.