AF Honchos Fired

[Lawman]

I just had lunch with an Infantry BN CO who was alloted 300rds per man for pre-deployment training. These kids will be in Iraq in six weeks!.

Side note.... That is disturbing. Ive gone through more rounds than that at the range in less then an afternoon and I dont own anything with a fun switch.

 

[Bevo16]

Well, I'm not the one making the claim that a weapon system has to be actively engaged in OEF/OIF to be considered on "active service". :icon_cry:

Right. That's me.

You are the one that thinks comparing the F-22 to Trident submarines makes sense. You don't see any glaring differences in those two weapons systems? How about the fact that the Trident class of submarines has been in service for more than a quarter century. They were also designed to fight what was seen as the "next" war, or prevent it from happening.

Trying to equate thousands of strategic nuclear patrols from the Cold War to present day with flying a loose formation with a 50 year old bomber is just plain lame. I laughed out loud when you posted that picture of the F-22 with the Bear. You could not have made my point any better.

I am sure that there are some really outstanding pilots in the Air Force with true warrior mentalities. Nobody is saying otherwise. It's not a crime to notice your brother's imperfections, and doing so does not mean that you think think you are perfect. There is are plenty of areas in the Navy that could be tightened up. At least we have not fooled ourselves into buying a jet that is to expensive to actually bring into combat while simultaneously putting a flight of the same aircraft on what seems like permanent loan to NASCAR and Hollywood.

 

[Mumbles]

The SSGN conversion is probably the best idea that has come to fruition in the USN in a long time. 154 TACTLAMS = Arsenal Ship

 

[wink]

The vast majority of the time on this forum people are able to discuss USAF issues without it turning into a legitimate monkeysh*t throwing fight.

I think that in general the people who are actually engaged in the business of flying and fighting don't have any actual problems with brother services. The majority of the ignorant words like that come from people who haven't spent a day on active duty even working around people from other services. I know that I had some pretty ignorant beliefs about how other services operated based on the biases we all get where we are raised as officers and warriors. Once I got to operate with the Navy, Army, and Marines on an operational basis I shed a lot of those biases. I realized that there were ways that the USAF did it wrong, and some ways that other services did it better. No shame in that so far as I'm concerned. I'd like to think there are some Navy guys that think similarly after working with USAF types.

Of course there will be good natured ribbing...it's tradition...but I'd like to think that beyond that, guys with the gold-colored wings would respect the contributions made by the guys with the silver-colored wings and vice versa. Hell, it's no different than the 'hate' that exists between Tomcat and Hornet guys who rag each other incessantly -- right up to the point that the AF guy walks into the bar, and then they both unite to make fun of the blue-suit guy. An hour later, they're probably all blitzed and shooting each others' watches like they were always close buds.

Both of our services have highly skilled people that do an impressive job with the mission they're charged to do. Both of our services have people and organizations that make ridiculously embarassing decisions or mistakes and open us up to ridicule from the other side.

So if you really believe this then why are your panties in a bunch? Every other Navy guy is just having fun but a couple squids on an internet forum get your dander up. You said it. Mission planning, in the brief and throughout the mission, it is mutual respect and professionalism. I have never seen anything else. Reread your post and take a chill pill.

BTW, my reference to the F-22 dying was meant to imply the new COS might not be in the mood for pushing for 100+ aircraft the boss says he doesn't want, seeing as how it may have been a reason the former COS got fired.

 

[jarhead]

anybody who has been up against the F-22 or briefed on it understands what it brings to the table. I used think it was a waste of $$ but my mind was changed ... I don't think the AF needs 500+ right now but a couple 100 will do fine. Like the SSBN's, the F-22 is a deterrent.

using some of the criteria in this thread ...

does the USAF/USN/USMC need to be spending the $1 trillion dollars for ~2500 F-35's right now? I mean, the A-10's, F-18's, F-16's are doing a good job ... why spend all the money when it could be going to the ground troops fighting the current war, or to UAV's and transports ... things we need right now?

why is the Marine Corps still wasting billions of dollars on the AAAV (or EFV)? We're not assaulting any beaches right now. Right there's a shitton of $$ for ammo, etc.

S/F

 

[Harrier Dude]

does the USAF/USN/USMC need to be spending the $1 trillion dollars for ~2500 F-35's right now? I mean, the A-10's, F-18's, F-16's are doing a good job ... why spend all the money when it could be going to the ground troops fighting the current war, or to UAV's and transports ... things we need right now?

Because our current jets are wearing out at the cyclic rate. They need to be replaced. By the F-35? That's debatable, but our leadership is dead set on it. After seeing some of it's capabilities, I believe they're right.........along the lines of your F-22 defense.

why is the Marine Corps still wasting billions of dollars on the AAAV (or EFV)? We're not assaulting any beaches right now. Right there's a shitton of $$ for ammo, etc.

Separate debate, but the EFV was designed for future threats as well, and I think it's too far down the procurment track to make cancelling it worth it. Don't know that for sure, though.

 

[phrogpilot73]

Separate debate, but the EFV was designed for future threats as well, and I think it's too far down the procurment track to make cancelling it worth it. Don't know that for sure, though.

Not to mention that it's incredibly capable, and a hell of a lot faster in the water than the AAV. Deterrent is a key piece - the threat of an amphibious assault by the Marines is what enabled the big left hook maneuver that was pulled.

 

[Flash]

Separate debate, but the EFV was designed for future threats as well, and I think it's too far down the procurment track to make cancelling it worth it. Don't know that for sure, though.

When does it become too much though? Sometimes you gotta say uncle, and if the contractor knows that they are going to get a payday no matter what, where is the incentive to keep down costs?

Not to mention that it's incredibly capable, and a hell of a lot faster in the water than the AAV. Deterrent is a key piece - the threat of an amphibious assault by the Marines is what enabled the big left hook maneuver that was pulled.

Capable when it works, but it won't even be fielded until 2015 at the earliest.

With skyrocketing costs, going from $8.4 billion 1025 to $13.2 billion for 593 so far (60% more for little more than half the vehicles), where do you draw the line? Do we even really need the EFV in today's enviroment? If we do, then why not take something a little less capable that will get to the field faster and cheaper?

http://www.iht.com/articles/ap/2008/04/29/america/House-Hearing-GAO-Report.php

This comes up over and over with defense procurement. We all want the latest and greatest weapon systems for our respective services, but you have to take into account costs too, which doesn't seem to happen. If not, the Marines will end up like the Army and get some of their 'necessary' weapons systems cancelled, like the Comanche and Crusader.

People laugh at the Super Hornet but it came in on time and on budget, and has been in active service for a few years now. Even though it was 'evolutionary' and not 'revolutionary', maybe that needs to happen a little more often. It ain't going to be funny when the Marines end up with no EFV and carrier decks are filled with Super Hornets.

 

[Lawman]

Not to mention that it's incredibly capable, and a hell of a lot faster in the water than the AAV. Deterrent is a key piece - the threat of an amphibious assault by the Marines is what enabled the big left hook maneuver that was pulled.

If they can get it to work.

My Uncle was well connected with the project through its infancy. Yes its killer fast allowing it to be launched from beyond the horizon and select when and where it wants to land. But in close in sandy conditions they actually have to slow down to speeds that an AAV can beat due to problems with sand injestion shutting down the water jets.

 

[insanebikerboy]

...Trident class of submarines.... They were also designed to fight what was seen as the "next" war, or prevent it from happening.

Isn't that part of what the F-22 is designed to do as well?

 

[snake020]

http://www.af.mil/news/story_media.asp?id=123106344

So if I get canned during my next assignment does that mean I get an end of tour medal too?

Nice to see that SECDEF Gates isn't giving him the DDSM though.