April 22Apr 22 10 hours ago, busdriver said:Hogs have a BFM requirement now.The RTM is a zero sum game, put something in, you must take something out.True, I would just try to make accomplishing those beans as easy as possible to accomplish, there is a bit of pencil whipping to that I’ll admit but with everything trade offs, compromise, risk acceptance, etc… are facts of life.
April 22Apr 22 RTM adjustment isn’t that onerous. Starts with DOC statement - primary vs. secondary missions. You make CSAR, CAS, SCAR (e.g. Counterland) primary missions and OCA/DCA secondary. Secondary missions do not need to get much love on the RTM. Good example is F-35 can knock out all CAS reqs in a 2 week training phase per year. Similarly, ANG vipers in this hypothetical could do about 4 weeks of A-A focused training and call it good for the year.
April 22Apr 22 Just to clarify for the heavy guys: Fighter RTMs all have 96 sorties. So two sorties per week, over a 48 week training year. So they calendar determines the size of the pie. It was a big "ah-ha" moment for me when I figured that out.48 minutes ago, brabus said:Similarly, ANG vipers in this hypothetical could do about 4 weeks of A-A focused training and call it good for the year.That's about what we were talking about at ACC back then.
August 13Aug 13 Interesting readhttps://theaviationist.com/2026/08/12/brrrrt-acts-plan-to-save-the-a-10s/Just buy Superhornets and replace the venerable Hawg
August 13Aug 13 15 hours ago, Clark Griswold said:Interesting readhttps://theaviationist.com/2026/08/12/brrrrt-acts-plan-to-save-the-a-10s/Just buy Superhornets and replace the venerable HawgWhy Superbugs over a Block 70/72 Viper or Eagle EX?
August 13Aug 13 3 hours ago, StoleIt said:Why Superbugs over a Block 70/72 Viper or Eagle EX?Block 70/72 Viper - Gas, weapons load, cost ($80M).Eagle EX - While they can carry bomb, they are mainly missile trucks and they are expensive ($97M each).Superbugs are oddly cheaper ($73M each).
August 14Aug 14 8 hours ago, ClearedHot said:Block 70/72 Viper - Gas, weapons load, cost ($80M).Eagle EX - While they can carry bomb, they are mainly missile trucks and they are expensive ($97M each).Superbugs are oddly cheaper ($73M each).Block 70/72 Vipers have conformal fuel tanks.
August 14Aug 14 5 hours ago, Sua Sponte said:Block 70/72 Vipers have conformal fuel tanks.And STILL don't have enough gas...
August 14Aug 14 Maybe the superbug is better than the Viper or 5EX, but in the world we live in that production line is done. So the only new build options are the OA-1K, F-35, F-16V, or F-15EX.Also, not seeing how an upgraded Viper with conformals and 2-3 bags would be fuel limited compared to an F/A-18E/F.
August 15Aug 15 On 8/13/2026 at 12:15 PM, StoleIt said:Why Superbugs over a Block 70/72 Viper or Eagle EX?https://www.twz.com/a-10-pilots-compelling-case-for-replacing-warthogs-with-super-hornetsI found BURT’s argument persuasive and before I had read it I thought the Rhino was probably the right aircraft for the AF’s attack mission set with self escort capes.Just my two cents but I think a carrier suitable jet would have the trade space in weight / structural strength for mods to optimize for Attack while retaining true self defense capabilities.Delete or mod carrier landing gear, wing folding, etc… and methinks you could get more gas, armor, redundant or extra systems, etc…. also, with the original baseline Rhino being a carrier based fighter, it probably would be well suited for land based ACE expeditionary ops with mods, already has an APU for instance and has demonstrated road based dispersal ops. Edited August 15Aug 15 by Clark Griswold
August 15Aug 15 On 8/14/2026 at 5:20 AM, ClearedHot said:And STILL don't have enough gas...Wanna focus on that point, as with -47, range is key. Our recent experience with Iranian TBMs, drones, etc… I think reinforces that operating outside of the threat rings or with enough setback for warning/defense is paramount.That IMO drives a growth in size and logistical footprint (maybe) of any platform, so be it. With that in mind, I think that drives you back to the advanced rhino with CFTs and other updates, signature reductions, etc…If king for a day, rework the already strong wing and expand idea of enclosed weapons pods, fixing the 4 degree canting placement for drag reduction.
August 15Aug 15 5 hours ago, Clark Griswold said:Wanna focus on that point, as with -47, range is key.Our recent experience with Iranian TBMs, drones, etc… I think reinforces that operating outside of the threat rings or with enough setback for warning/defense is paramount.That IMO drives a growth in size and logistical footprint (maybe) of any platform, so be it.With that in mind, I think that drives you back to the advanced rhino with CFTs and other updates, signature reductions, etc…If king for a day, rework the already strong wing and expand idea of enclosed weapons pods, fixing the 4 degree canting placement for drag reduction.I believe #1 priority is stealthy fuel tanks like they recently introduced to the Raptor. F35 already has a lot of gas...wing tanks will be a great force extender.
August 16Aug 16 7 hours ago, ClearedHot said:I believe #1 priority is stealthy fuel tanks like they recently introduced to the Raptor. F35 already has a lot of gas...wing tanks will be a great force extender.Might already be operational https://www.middleeasteye.net/news/israel-and-us-modified-f-35-jets-enable-iran-attack-without-refuelling-sources-say
August 16Aug 16 12 hours ago, Clark Griswold said:Might already be operationalhttps://www.middleeasteye.net/news/israel-and-us-modified-f-35-jets-enable-iran-attack-without-refuelling-sources-sayBeen in test on the Raptor for some time.Closest View Yet of F-22 Raptor With Stealth Tanks and Stealth Pods
August 16Aug 16 4 hours ago, ClearedHot said:Been in test on the Raptor for some time.Closest View Yet of F-22 Raptor With Stealth Tanks and Stealth PodsNiceMy main quibble and the point(s) BURT made well in his article in support of the Rhino was the expeditionary capability inherent in it vs the -35 for a replacement if the AF wants to preserve the Attack community which I obviously support Changing the argument or adding to it should be the need for an AF expeditionary strike fighter focusing on the attack mission set.A force forward based to redeploy quickly to complicate enemy targeting and survive, to interoperate with the main branch leading the PACOM theater seamlessly, etc…Saving the Hog would be great but ultimately the mission and operational conditions have moved on and in particular the tyranny of distance necessitates new iron.
Create an account or sign in to comment