SOCNET

Go Back   SOCNET: The Special Operations Community Network > General Topics > The Lounge

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #21  
Old 25 January 2015, 09:31
Silverbullet's Avatar
Silverbullet Silverbullet is offline
Administrator
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Bunker
Posts: 15,213
The general is a piece of garbage for sure, but does anyone else see the irony in John McCain calling for someone to be investigated for claiming a person is commiting treason?
Reply With Quote
  #22  
Old 25 January 2015, 09:49
The Fat Guy's Avatar
The Fat Guy The Fat Guy is offline
The Sagacious One
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Pushing string down the hall
Posts: 14,195
Quote:
Originally Posted by Oldguy View Post
I think this AF wet dream is what made them decide to keep the A-10.

http://www.urbanghostsmedia.com/2014...hway-of-death/
The A-10 was in the throws of being tossed over to the Army before DS/DS. We worked them all across the border. It was a sight to behold. From 10k ft, a puff of smoke from a spec in the sky and carnage right in front of you. After the ADA was destroyed, they flew along convoys like this until they expended all ammunition.

It goes to show that we spend billions on things that fuel the USAF ego and not stuff we need to kill shit.
__________________
No one will take better care of us, than us: Suicide Hotline: 1-800-273-8255
Reply With Quote
  #23  
Old 25 January 2015, 10:16
Art Brown Art Brown is offline
On the Extract Bird
 
Join Date: Jun 2014
Location: Marathon Fl
Posts: 285
From friends and colleges served in OIF/OEF it seems that the A10 was as dogface friendly as was A6 Sandies in VN. Spooky was highly appreciated also
Reply With Quote
  #24  
Old 25 January 2015, 10:24
Hot Mess's Avatar
Hot Mess Hot Mess is offline
In Vino Veritas
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Where you vacation
Posts: 11,102
Quote:
Originally Posted by EchoFiveMike View Post
Kinda thought that went without saying.

No F35, no post-retirement hookers and blow, paid for by Lockmart. S/F....Ken M
I was thinking no jobs in X Congress persons district, but sure, hooker and blow are cool too.
__________________
Come on boys, you got to do it right, pray to the moon in the middle of the night
Reply With Quote
  #25  
Old 25 January 2015, 10:31
Macka's Avatar
Macka Macka is offline
Confirmed User
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: SOCNET-Northeast
Posts: 2,367
It seems like hat old adage "We are going to solve all problems, whether they exist or not".
__________________
Freedom costs a Buck 0-5
Reply With Quote
  #26  
Old 25 January 2015, 12:39
Rotor Strike please Rotor Strike please is offline
Been There Done That
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Off the Grid
Posts: 1,614
I'd say roll some of the A-10's over to AFSOC and bring back the Air Commandos of old. The rest can be put into storage at DM for spares. Big Blue can waste its own money on F-35, and SOCOM picks up some new capability to link with Gunships and Rotary Wing.

Paint them up all night camo, and bring on the Night Hog!

If Air Commandos can conduct interdiction missions in Vietnam with WWII aircraft, why not now?
__________________
.
Reply With Quote
  #27  
Old 25 January 2015, 13:22
gavin's Avatar
gavin gavin is offline
Unemployed Stunt Double
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: On a plane...
Posts: 7,058
"I don't want this, but you can't have it."

The Air Force has a history of obstructing the Army's attempts to get unwanted USAF platforms, and then getting rid of the platforms themselves.
__________________
Life’s barely long enough to get good at one thing. So be careful what you get good at.
Reply With Quote
  #28  
Old 25 January 2015, 13:30
Justaclerk's Avatar
Justaclerk Justaclerk is offline
Drawing my cutlass
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: South Florida
Posts: 7,840
For those interested here's a synopsis of the boondoggle known as the F-35 (from Aviation Week & Space Technology, subscription required).

Quote:
Opinion: Joint Strike Fighter Debate Enters New Phase

Aviation Week & Space Technology Jan 15, 2015

Bill Sweetman

“If you don’t follow the defense business closely, then you can be excused for believing that the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter (JSF) is in trouble,” a Lockheed Martin consultant wrote five years ago, a few weeks before the program office director was fired in disgrace. His replacement found that the published schedule was 3-4 years adrift from reality.

Today, you could be excused for thinking that most of the F-35’s troubles are behind it. The schedule set at the end of May 2013 may survive its second anniversary, a first for the program. The Marines will likely declare initial operational capability this year, come hell or high water, and the latter is unlikely to be an issue at Arizona's MCAS Yuma. Progress reportedly is being made on sorting out the engine problem that caused last June’s runway fire.

It looks as if the F-35 could meet its key performance parameter (KPP) requirements, but that is a narrow definition of success. Development cost and schedule, and acquisition and operational expenses, were not KPPs. Those numbers are stabilizing (it would be a disaster were they not) but are not what the program aimed for.

Programmatic risk has become a reality that users must accept. The Netherlands is buying 37 aircraft rather than the planned 85; the money that would have acquired 60 F-15s for South Korea pays for 40 F-35As. The U.S. Air Force has put its badly needed F-16 upgrades on ice and is suffering readiness issues: The F-35 fleet, with a deficient diagnostic and logistics system, has a big appetite for experienced support people.

Cost will drive more JSF stories this year. The program has 700-plus international sales on its books, and relies on them to achieve planned production rates before 2020, but fewer than 5% are covered by signed contracts. Getting firm orders is an increasingly urgent matter. Denmark’s decision is due this year, as is a U.K. defense review that may indicate whether and when Britain plans to acquire most of its on-paper 138-aircraft fleet.

F-35 customers looking at budgets and schedules will want to know what the Block 4A/4B upgrade package will contain. Block 4A development starts next year and 4B becomes operational in 2024, making it the best capability before 2026. The wish list includes nuclear capability, Norwegian and Turkish cruise missiles, Brimstone and Meteor for the U.K., AIM-9X Block 3 for the U.S. Navy, “5th to 4th” communications and close-air-support systems for the Marines. Nobody is perfect, so 4A/4B will also fix discoveries from operational testing. Customers had better be ready to compromise.

The second class of risk, as the programmatic issue closes, is operational. Counter-stealth technology went from theory to big green pieces of hardware in 2013 with the appearance of Russia's 55Zh6ME radar complex, comprising a VHF active, electronically scanned array (AESA) networked with higher-frequency radars. Last year saw claims of stealth detection by the infrared-search-and-track community and radar developers, and the appearance of China’s analog to the 55Zh6ME. Nobody argues that stealth is dead, but has the operational advantage of the F-35 been eroded?

Expect more of the same in 2015: China is building its new, bigger Type 055 destroyer—it will not be surprising to see a low-band AESA on its aft deckhouse. Everyone and his aunt is selling digitized versions of the veteran Russian P-18 radar—counter-stealth on the cheap. In response to concern over low-band threats, Congress has extended the F/A-18/EA-18G production line and, with it, the debate over the future makeup of the carrier air wing.

The Marines will continue to mitigate operational risk by developing ways to use the short-takeoff, vertical-landing F-35B. The latest concept of operations seeks to place ships and main bases outside the range of mobile missiles while keeping refueling and rearming points close to the targets. Survival depends on moving those forward strips faster than the adversary can target them.

The Marines’ plan highlights that the F-35 represents the continued preeminence of tactical fighters in the budgets of the Pentagon and other customers. That is not a program or operational issue but a strategic risk. The Third Offset strategy has already generated one paper that calls for reduced emphasis on 600-mi.-range fighters and more investment in bombers and UAVs. The Navy’s debate over its air wing, and the possible role of extreme-low-observables and long-range UAVs is part of that discussion, but will become more important as the Long-Range Strike Bomber program gathers speed.

We have passed at great cost through much of the era of programmatic risk with the F-35. Now, we are looking more at operational risk, with strategic risk on the horizon.
__________________
Quote:
Death is a farcical pile of bullshit.

I refuse to participate.

The Oatmeal
Quote:
...it could be raining pu$$y and troops will complain and blame the leadership for not providing an equal ration of a$$holes

Billy L-Bach
Quote:
In Special Forces we had a saying: "Work hard in silence, let your success do the talking."

Tracy
Reply With Quote
  #29  
Old 25 January 2015, 13:32
MountainBum's Avatar
MountainBum MountainBum is offline
Vivat Fraternitatis
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: OCONUS
Posts: 926
Quote:
Originally Posted by ET1/ss nuke View Post
F22 and F35 require so much airframe down time per flight hour that they could never amount to more than a supplement to more numerous but less capable and cheaper platforms.
Not to mention fuel burn. Always fun when you ask for playtime from a fastmover and get an irritatingly low response before they need to go suck the tanker. I imagine it's extra atrocious on these birds.
Reply With Quote
  #30  
Old 25 January 2015, 14:20
Art Brown Art Brown is offline
On the Extract Bird
 
Join Date: Jun 2014
Location: Marathon Fl
Posts: 285
This general's statement made in the manner described is one of if not the major argument I have with disclosing information by attribution to Anonymous, who does not have authorization to speak publically.

In most private business that can get you fired or even arrested, sort of like insider trading.

Why has it become the acceptable manner to rat out somebody, some business, or something? Is there no honor left at the level people like this general work? I know its just the way things are now, but doesn't mean that is the way it should be.

If supposedly trusted individuals think it is their right to make public statements without being held accountable, then we the people are fucked.

Rant over
Reply With Quote
  #31  
Old 25 January 2015, 14:28
smp52 smp52 is offline
Confirmed User
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: So. Cal
Posts: 1,552
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rotor Strike please View Post
I'd say roll some of the A-10's over to AFSOC
Concur. Either transfer the A-10 to SOCOM, or if someone in the Marine Corps wanted to hedge their risk against the F-35, they'd pick em up and figure out how to get a Naval variant. Even if they wanted to use as "trainer" platforms to teach CAS to keep a capability around. Don't know if it's feasible. The USMC is buying both B/C models of the F-35, where the C model was bought because the B (STOVL) platform was close to the axe. That is a lot of money for Marines in two birds.

The USMC has stated multiple times it wants to keep it's amphibious assault capabilities alive, but there is a gap in sustained firepower. The LCS was supposed to have the NLOS system. NLOS failed and was axed. Zumwalt class was supposed to meet the Naval gunfire requirements; it doesn't - only three are being made and no rail gun yet. EFV with the 30mm bushmaster was axed and it's back on the drawing board. UCAVs have potential, but instead of being lean and mean programs, there is a ton of gold plating and bloat happening there, too. A UVAC coupled with current Griffins and Small Diameter Bombs would be neat. We're also worried about "swarm" scenarios from multiple smaller boats in tight places like the straights of Hormuz and looking at improvements to ship defense systems. Would a Naval A-10 type air platform provide dual purpose insurance against land and water targets?

Regardless, right now this still leaves the F-18C, Harriers, and Cobras as CAS platforms for the Marine Corps.

The F-35's 25mm gun pod (B and C Naval models) isn't ready for integration with the system and won't be online for IOC until 2018ish based on some recent news reports. Plus, the round count is in the 220 range as compared to the A-10 which has over a thousand rounds of ammo.

I get having the technology edge over an enemy, but what I don't understand is putting all eggs in one basket. During our conflicts since Desert Storm, the simplicity, cost effectiveness, and lethality of the A-10 has been proven. Maybe the current variant isn't as survivable against newer MANPADS, but then is the F-35 the answer? How much lethality are we trading off? There is still something to be said about overwhelming firepower when situations dictate cute cutting edge technology doesn't cut it.

2 cents/musings from an acquisition engineer perspective.
Reply With Quote
  #32  
Old 25 January 2015, 15:46
SN's Avatar
SN SN is offline
Old and Broke
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: The GREAT State of Texas
Posts: 4,764
It's east to blame the AF,Navy,USMC; but former Sec Def gates has to get some of the credit (blame) for killing anything remotely competing with the airplane built in Texas(IIRC).
__________________
FISHDO
Reply With Quote
  #33  
Old 25 January 2015, 16:06
Lagunaroy Lagunaroy is offline
Confirmed User
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: Padre Island, Texas
Posts: 263
Quote:
Originally Posted by Justaclerk View Post
For those interested here's a synopsis of the boondoggle known as the F-35 (from Aviation Week & Space Technology, subscription required).
Sweetman's articles and comments are consistent over the years. Always negative, his comment about " Key Performance Parameters" is telling. Ask the program office if those KPPs are a narrow definition of success. They have to report that to Congress.

Lot of misinformation on this program in this thread. Might be worthy of its own. I won't clutter this one with facts.

To quote Ron White, "I had the right to remain silent, I just couldn't".
Reply With Quote
  #34  
Old 25 January 2015, 17:19
DirtyDog0311 DirtyDog0311 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: South
Posts: 7,385
Quote:
Originally Posted by SN View Post
former Sec Def gates has to get some of the credit (blame) for killing anything remotely competing with the airplane built in Texas(IIRC).
I've always hated that pompous piece of idiotic shit even since his days as Pres of TX A&M. The first time I ever heard him speak I knew what a fucking corrupt dipshit he was. When he was named SecDef the final glimmer of hope I had for this country died.

He (in conjunction with others) got rid of the F22 and the A10 -- IMO, Two of the best platforms for any future wars in the USA. Because I'm sure in his mind we'll always be fighting goat raping cave dwellers in sandy environments and real threats like China will never happen. Hell, I'd imagine he'd lobby to even SELL our F22s to China just like Clinton sold our nuke/ICBM tech to China in the 90s. That's the level of fucking idiocy/incompetency/corruption this clown is working with.
Reply With Quote
  #35  
Old 25 January 2015, 17:44
Spinner's Avatar
Spinner Spinner is offline
Pele's Bucket of Fire?...never heard of it
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Chicagoland
Posts: 13,462
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Fat Guy View Post
The A-10 was in the throws of being tossed over to the Army before DS/DS. We worked them all across the border. It was a sight to behold. From 10k ft, a puff of smoke from a spec in the sky and carnage right in front of you. After the ADA was destroyed, they flew along convoys like this until they expended all ammunition.

It goes to show that we spend billions on things that fuel the USAF ego and not stuff we need to kill shit.
I seem to recall also that the Air Force was prepared to give the A-10s and their mission to the Army, only they weren't willing to include the most potent weapon on the aircraft, it's nose mounted gatling gun.

The Air Force has always been overly protective of their Key West mandate to provide CAS, only to give it short shrift when the time comes to carry it out. That's no reflection on the fine AF crews who fly and maintain the A-10, merely on Air Force leadership.
__________________
"This is supposed to be a happy occasion! Let's not bicker and argue over who killed who!"
Reply With Quote
  #36  
Old 25 January 2015, 21:10
SN's Avatar
SN SN is offline
Old and Broke
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: The GREAT State of Texas
Posts: 4,764
Quote:
Originally Posted by Spinner View Post
I seem to recall also that the Air Force was prepared to give the A-10s and their mission to the Army, only they weren't willing to include the most potent weapon on the aircraft, it's nose mounted gatling gun.

The Air Force has always been overly protective of their Key West mandate to provide CAS, only to give it short shrift when the time comes to carry it out. That's no reflection on the fine AF crews who fly and maintain the A-10, merely on Air Force leadership.
Actually, it was the AGE equipment they did not want to give up. They also were going to dump as much depot costs on them as they could.
__________________
FISHDO
Reply With Quote
  #37  
Old 25 January 2015, 21:24
Lagunaroy Lagunaroy is offline
Confirmed User
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: Padre Island, Texas
Posts: 263
Quote:
Originally Posted by SN View Post
Actually, it was the AGE equipment they did not want to give up. They also were going to dump as much depot costs on them as they could.
Bingo!
Reply With Quote
  #38  
Old 25 January 2015, 22:21
Gray Rhyno's Avatar
Gray Rhyno Gray Rhyno is offline
Authorized Personnel
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: NoVa
Posts: 9,564
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Fat Guy View Post
We worked them all across the border. It was a sight to behold. From 10k ft, a puff of smoke from a spec in the sky and carnage right in front of you. After the ADA was destroyed, they flew along convoys like this until they expended all ammunition.
I remember watching the A-10s working the Iraqi trench lines before we crossed over in '91. It looked like there was a laser pointer mounted in their nose. Good times.
__________________
"The most HSLD stuff ever taught was the basics. So-called 'advanced training' is often no more than the very fluid and expert application of those basic skills." - SOTB
Reply With Quote
  #39  
Old 25 January 2015, 22:26
Justaclerk's Avatar
Justaclerk Justaclerk is offline
Drawing my cutlass
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: South Florida
Posts: 7,840
Quote:
Originally Posted by 0699 View Post
Good times.
Not for the Iraqis.
__________________
Quote:
Death is a farcical pile of bullshit.

I refuse to participate.

The Oatmeal
Quote:
...it could be raining pu$$y and troops will complain and blame the leadership for not providing an equal ration of a$$holes

Billy L-Bach
Quote:
In Special Forces we had a saying: "Work hard in silence, let your success do the talking."

Tracy
Reply With Quote
  #40  
Old 25 January 2015, 22:35
Gray Rhyno's Avatar
Gray Rhyno Gray Rhyno is offline
Authorized Personnel
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: NoVa
Posts: 9,564
Quote:
Originally Posted by Justaclerk View Post
Not for the Iraqis.
Fuck 'em.
__________________
"The most HSLD stuff ever taught was the basics. So-called 'advanced training' is often no more than the very fluid and expert application of those basic skills." - SOTB
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Our new posting rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On



All times are GMT -4. The time now is 16:05.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
Socnet.com All Rights Reserved
© SOCNET 1996-2018