brabus Posted March 8 Share Posted March 8 Oh look, another retired GO talking out of his ass, I’m shocked! 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Danger41 Posted March 8 Share Posted March 8 By this logic, I’ve seen unmanned cars and the Boston Dynamics robots that could replaces armored vehicles and soldiers so let’s get rid of them. It’s the same stupid line of reasoning that thinks AI will solve everything. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chuck17 Posted March 8 Share Posted March 8 (edited) 7 hours ago, Clark Griswold said: This article is 50% relevant (maybe)… https://warontherocks.com/2024/03/drones-the-air-littoral-and-the-looming-irrelevance-of-the-u-s-air-force/ Ugh - Barno. He's in the same book with Bobby Farley... Tell me you're a two dimensional thinking ground pounding outta depth rube without telling me. Nevermind, it's in the title of the article. There is no such thing as "air littorals" - that'sa made up subdivision nonsense term used by those incapable of thinking over the next hill, and used to justify imaginary lines of control ON THE GROUND on some map. There's just "air"... Thats the whole point of the USAF. F-35's countering drones? WTF dude. While everyone is scrambling to try and counter the drone threat, I'd offer if there's one service that's not ready to counter drone warfare, its the crunchies on the ground. Not the ADA guys mind you, but the infantry platoons that will be at the pointy-home-built-drone-end of the spear... Don't waste your time -- Schools love touting their retired three stars, whether they are capable of rigorous objective unbiased thought or not. Chuck Edited March 8 by Chuck17 spellin 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kaputt Posted March 8 Share Posted March 8 I guess he’s missed that the Ukrainians are still desperate for F-16s and that the Russian victory in Avdiivka was able to be completed by the Russians achieving air superiority in that region. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nsplayr Posted March 8 Share Posted March 8 (edited) 20 hours ago, Chuck17 said: There is no such thing as "air littorals" Lol, air littorals. I can never hear that word and not think "clitoral warfare" and laugh. Edited March 9 by nsplayr 5 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clark Griswold Posted March 8 Share Posted March 8 Stirring the pot a bit fellas… it fires up the cadre and keeps us just the right amount of assertive Concur with the prevailing sentiments but I do think we need to get more public and actually doctrinally state that the USAF wants to lead the other services in rapid deployment and advancement of all UAS, small to large and controlled to autonomous Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Danger41 Posted March 8 Share Posted March 8 I can’t find it quickly but this drone obsession makes for good, consumable videos but the real killing in ground combat is still being done by artillery. Good video out there of a high ranking Army general discussing that a month or so ago. I’m absolutely not saying drones don’t have a role or shouldn’t be used, but they aren’t some panacea that will solve the ills of the world. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
busdriver Posted March 8 Share Posted March 8 This is standard retired Army general nonsense. Translation: give the USAF's money to the Army. There is a cousin of this in each service's brand of retired general. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
contraildash Posted March 8 Share Posted March 8 I always love it when active/retired Army guys go after Air Force spending. Ironic since the Army has traditionally been the biggest offender of wasting tens of billions of dollars on things like: -terrible uniforms -The Future Combat Systems program -cancelling programs....and then cancelling the replacement programs --RAH-66 and then FARA --Crusader Cannon and then the replacement program Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brabus Posted March 9 Share Posted March 9 Army: O-6+ are mostly complete retards Air Force: O-6+ are mostly pussies Navy: O-6+ are mostly closet C-suite at Grindr Marines: Actually kind of have their shit together, but are too poor to do much 1 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Majestik Møøse Posted March 9 Share Posted March 9 On 3/7/2024 at 8:17 PM, Clark Griswold said: This article is 50% relevant (maybe)… https://warontherocks.com/2024/03/drones-the-air-littoral-and-the-looming-irrelevance-of-the-u-s-air-force/ Weird way to say the Army can’t defend itself against quadcopters. They’ll respond the same way they always have, by shooting more Patriots at sky debris which will result in the death of friendly aircraft. The lesson that the US Army should be taking from Ukraine is that a poorly equipped but motivated army can defend itself in flat, featureless territory against an army 5x the size if that larger force is unable wield air power to attack strategic centers of gravity. 2 7 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
busdriver Posted March 9 Share Posted March 9 33 minutes ago, Majestik Møøse said: The lesson that the US Army should be taking from Ukraine is that a poorly equipped but motivated army can defend itself in flat, featureless territory against an army 5x the size if that larger force is unable wield air power to attack strategic centers of gravity. Bravo sir, well said. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
raimius Posted March 9 Share Posted March 9 (edited) Pretty stupid to argue F-35s are useless because they aren't the answer to $500 grenade carrying drones at 200agl. It's like arguing SSBNs are obsolete because they can't take and hold a hilltop. Edited March 9 by raimius 2 1 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stoker Posted March 9 Share Posted March 9 2 minutes ago, raimius said: Pretty stupid to argue F-35s are useless because they aren't the answer to $500 grenade carrying drones at 200agl. It's like arguing SSBNs are obsolete because they can't take and hold a hilltop. Yep, the F-35s aren't there to blow up a drone, they're there to blow up the drone factory, the drone depot, the drone unit's barracks, etc., etc. Just because we've been unwilling to take those steps against Iran for fear of escalation doesn't mean it won't work. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ClearedHot Posted March 9 Share Posted March 9 On 3/8/2024 at 6:34 AM, nsplayr said: Lol, air littorals. I heard the SEALs of the Sky were born there. 1 5 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clark Griswold Posted March 9 Share Posted March 9 (edited) 8 hours ago, Majestik Møøse said: Weird way to say the Army can’t defend itself against quadcopters. They’ll respond the same way they always have, by shooting more Patriots at sky debris which will result in the death of friendly aircraft. The lesson that the US Army should be taking from Ukraine is that a poorly equipped but motivated army can defend itself in flat, featureless territory against an army 5x the size if that larger force is unable wield air power to attack strategic centers of gravity. Excellent point, now someone more articulate than I on this forum needs to expand on that observation and offer a retort to the WOR article… On drones, RPAs and eventually UCAVs… we should have been testing more systems there ala the Spanish Civil War to get ready for the looming big one (maybe)… I’m still not sure continuing to arm and encourage Ukrainian operations to recover territory now held by Russia is the long term best strategy for the West / Ukraine but if your going to supply and support then get the most out of it that you can Edited March 9 by Clark Griswold Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BashiChuni Posted March 10 Share Posted March 10 6 hours ago, ClearedHot said: I heard the SEALs of the Sky were born there. nah bro thats in coronado Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pooter Posted March 11 Share Posted March 11 Love listening to the service that would play quite literally no role in a China/Taiwan conflict calling the Air Force irrelevant. Army is welcome back at the big boy table the any time they figure out how to field a weapon with a range relevant to anything happening in the pacific. As for the drone issue, the army could quit bitching and just buy a few thousand off-the-shelf RF jammers to embed with their troops. But sadly, countering literal RC toys whose RF frequencies are a quick google search away seems to be too complicated for them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lawman Posted March 11 Share Posted March 11 Love listening to the service that would play quite literally no role in a China/Taiwan conflict calling the Air Force irrelevant. Army is welcome back at the big boy table the any time they figure out how to field a weapon with a range relevant to anything happening in the pacific. As for the drone issue, the army could quit bitching and just buy a few thousand off-the-shelf RF jammers to embed with their troops. But sadly, countering literal RC toys whose RF frequencies are a quick google search away seems to be too complicated for them. Because we didn’t see that exact sort of single minded thinking happen with the Duke system only to be told to turn our stuff off whenever in vicinity of a heavy communications area… Sure let’s give Joe some high power microwave/DEWs to protect himself with… what could go wrong. Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brabus Posted March 12 Share Posted March 12 7 hours ago, Lawman said: Sure let’s give Joe some high power microwave/DEWs to protect himself with… what could go wrong. Makes getting flagged by Joe’s 240 in the chow hall not seem as bad in comparison. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nsplayr Posted March 12 Share Posted March 12 20 hours ago, Pooter said: Love listening to the service that would play quite literally no role in a China/Taiwan conflict calling the Air Force irrelevant. Army is welcome back at the big boy table the any time they figure out how to field a weapon with a range relevant to anything happening in the pacific. I hear ya, and I'm as much of an Air Force partisan as anyone, but Army ADA branch and HIMARS capes are super useful in INDOPACOM. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brabus Posted March 12 Share Posted March 12 37 minutes ago, nsplayr said: I hear ya, and I'm as much of an Air Force partisan as anyone, but Army ADA branch and HIMARS capes are super useful in INDOPACOM. Not to mention additional capes the Army provides in that AOR. It’s just a shame the DOD gives said capes/missions to a bunch of dumbasses (not to say there are no smart people involved, but they are an extreme minority). 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nsplayr Posted March 12 Share Posted March 12 1 hour ago, brabus said: It’s just a shame the DOD gives said capes/missions to a bunch of dumbasses… Ain’t that the truth 😄 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pooter Posted March 12 Share Posted March 12 4 hours ago, brabus said: Not to mention additional capes the Army provides in that AOR. It’s just a shame the DOD gives said capes/missions to a bunch of dumbasses (not to say there are no smart people involved, but they are an extreme minority). Lol maybe that's the problem, the army dudes I've talked to seem entirely unaware of how they fit into a pacific peer conflict.. if they've even spent time thinking about it at all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brabus Posted March 12 Share Posted March 12 (edited) 1 hour ago, Pooter said: Lol maybe that's the problem, the army dudes I've talked to seem entirely unaware of how they fit into a pacific peer conflict.. if they've even spent time thinking about it at all. Yep, that probably applies to 99% of the Army. I can count on one hand the number of Army dudes I’ve worked with who I think actually have a clue about what they can and should do in PACOM. I’m also primarily talking regular Army. Higher functioning SOF dudes are a different story. Edited March 12 by brabus 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