• Please take a moment and update your account profile. If you have an updated account profile with basic information on why you are on Air Warriors it will help other people respond to your posts. How do you update your profile you ask?

    Go here:

    Edit Account Details and Profile

Our Air Force(s)?

goosegagnon2

goosegagnon2

Member
Warning:This is completely random and is not meant to **** on anyone's pancakes :)

I was doing some logical deductions about today's military. Over easter some friends and I discussed the Air Force and why it should not exist. I broke it down like this, to make it simple to read...

-The Navy has its own "Air Force" with air-air, air-ground and support assets that make it a formidable strike force anywhere in the world.

-The Marine Corps has its own "Air Force" as well, more close air-support oriented and is large in its own right. Using both helicopters and fixed winged aircraft.

-The Army essentially has its own "Air Force" that conducts air-assault, lift, attack (althought the attack capablities is in flux now) scout, and close air-support missions as well, only they have limited fixed-wings assets.

-The Coast Guard has its own "Air Force" to conduct patrols and search and resuce missions. Although small they do have an important mission.

The Navy has its own "Air Force" for its mission
The Marine Corps has its "Air Force" for its close air support mission
The Army has its own "Air Force" for its ground forces
The Coast Guard has its own "Air Force" for its search, rescue, and patrol mission

So now, Tell me WHY do we need an Air Force?:watching3

So now as elementary as it seems, and from what I have seen in the past, more and more troops are flying coach in charter airline flights to the desert rather than in C-17s or C-5s. The Air Force does lift operations and strike missions. Although it still conjures the inquiry as to why so much of the defense budget is eaten by the Air Force. So, getting a little radical here, lets completely get rid of the Air Force, split the budget between the rest of the services, build a few more carriers, give the close air support aircraft to the Marines and Army.

The only reason I think the Air Force really should exist is because they supply the food, weapons, and stragetic lift operations. The Air Force does more than this, as they do have strike aircraft as well, but what for? Shear volume? There is more strike aircraft needed only because the Navy doesn't have the shear number of aircraft to knock out all the targets? Also now with countries that do not let U.S. Aircraft fly out of its bases, Saudi Arabia and others tagged with the impractical use of long range flights from bases in the U.S.---> It becomes more and more difficult for the Air Force to complete its "mission." I am not against the Air Force at all, I have an uncle in the Air Force and considered going the Academy at one time. Am I the only one that has thought this? This is completely random, and probably has tons of holes in it. But I am interested. So lets hear it.:D
 
illinijoe05

illinijoe05

Nachos
pilot
Ever heard of a thing called the nuclear triad/triangle
-Ballistic missle submarines
-ICBMs (AF)
-Strategic Bombers (AF)
They also run lots of satelites. And they do most of the armys close air support.
 
Riper Snifle

Riper Snifle

OCC 194 TBS C 03-07
What about strategic bombing with the B-1, B-2 and B-52 bombers?? What about mid-air refueling like the KC-135 that serves all the branches of the U.S. armed forces and fellow members of NATO?? What about AWACS, that extends the radar intercept capabilities of air assets?? The airlift section carries a lot more world wide then troops and food, imagine getting wounded in Iraq and you had to take a boat ride home, every member of the armed forces wants a quick ride to the best hospital, and the Air Force has ferried a lot of wounded all over the world. If you did away with the Air Force you would still have to divide up its responsibilities to the other branches which takes them away from their concentration on their current duties. It is an interesting discussion, one which I am sure Congress has all the time among others. My OSO was grumbling one day about all the cut-backs in the Marines, and that if it was up to Congress they would simply do away with the branch. The Marine Corps remains for two main reasons- it is so popular with the American people and if you got rid of the Marines, you would have to put Army Soldiers on ships to replace them, so why not keep the current system where you have a branch that specializes in amphibious warefare? The current system seems to be here to stay for quite some time.
 
batman527

batman527

Banned
goose has a point here. Any mission conducted by the Air Force could theoretically be conducted by the other branches. If the budget for the AF was split among the other branches, then obviously the other branches could perform the missions generally left to the AF right now. It's possible that eliminating the AF and recommissioning the Army Air Corps would streamline the AF's current close air support role because of the elimination of inter-service coordination and operate much like Marine CAS does now. The army could also pick up all the interdiction and Air to Air capabilities refueling capabilities, space command, etc. etc. etc... Also, if the money was spent to create more carriers for the Navy, a much more mobile force would be created. It's an interesting idea, although maybe not one that will ever be given serious consideration. What it comes down to is this, though: any capability that the Air Force now posesses that the other branches do not could be easily transfered to the other branches by doing a paint job on the AC's tail.
 
goosegagnon2

goosegagnon2

Member
Air supremacy.... hot women.
Click to expand...

The Navy and Marines can get both.

-Ballistic missle submarines
-ICBMs (AF)
-Strategic Bombers (AF)
They also run lots of satelites. And they do most of the armys close air support.
Click to expand...

Ballastic missle submarines--->Navy
ICBMS------>NASA
Satelites----->NASA

What about strategic bombing with the B-1, B-2 and B-52 bombers??
Click to expand...

If you haven't checked things lately, Strategic bombing might become a thing of the past. There will always be a need for it, not as large though. With precision guided weapons today things are different.

What about mid-air refueling like the KC-135 that serves all the branches of the U.S. armed forces and fellow members of NATO?? What about AWACS, that extends the radar intercept capabilities of air assets??
Click to expand...

Doesn't the Navy have a form of all of these? And why does the Air Force need to have them? Put everything on a damn carrier and make it float, or atleast make Air Force guys carrier qual. Keep the large refulers on shore, like Maritime guys.

My 2nd cousin flies the KC-135 he told me its nothing more than a huge ass civilian airliner with a tank that jets get to breast feed from :)

The airlift section carries a lot more world wide then troops and food, imagine getting wounded in Iraq and you had to take a boat ride home, every member of the armed forces wants a quick ride to the best hospital, and the Air Force has ferried a lot of wounded all over the world.
Click to expand...

I thought I already said this in the form of the food, weapons, and stragetic lift operations, thanks for getting specific for me though. Just make Navy guys do it...is there any difference? Probably not.
 
S

Swmtb

Sneakin'
goosegagnon2 said:
Ballastic missle submarines--->Navy
ICBMS------>NASA
Satelites----->NASA
Click to expand...

Last time I checked, NASA does not control ICBMs, nor all of the US' satellites for that matter.

Why does the AF have all sorts of toys/capabilities? They have $$$.
 
HueyCobra8151

HueyCobra8151

Well-Known Member
pilot
This is nonsense.

You didn't even list the Air Force's largest responsibility: Materiel research and acquisition. AFMC (Air Force Materiel Command) is the most highly funded part of the Air Force and has the second most personnel.

Strategic Bombing capability is still an important asset to maintain. As well as dedicated Air Superiority (another thing you didn't mention).
...

Besides...who the hell is going to run the Space A Travel counter so I can go f**k off in some other country when I am on leave?
 
Lawman

Lawman

Well-Known Member
None
Brett327 said:
Highly exaggerated on both accounts, especially the latter.

Brett
Click to expand...


Hang around the Medical Corps more often ;)

My Dad was a med tech, I think I know why now.
 
AllAmerican75

AllAmerican75

FUBIJAR
None
Contributor
eddie said:
And why do they have all that $$$? Aha, the Catch-22 at work!
Click to expand...

Because they are better at b!tching and moaning to Congress about why they need a big ass, expensive plane, and why it needs to cost X amount of billions to procure it.
 
SMUstangs

SMUstangs

Registered User
Who else would play with the UFOs? Area 51? Air Force One? Although, we all know that US Navy Pilots are the BEST in the world...perhaps our Commander and Chief would go for it? After all, who wants some AF hack flying you around even if it is a 747...LOL. What if we made them all flight attendants?

Speaking of flight attendants...

"Ever tell you guys about the two flight attendants from Perth? They were sisters."
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top