Our Air Force(s)?

[zab1001]

We need a "half-star" on the thread rating scale to indicate "retarded".

 

[goosegagnon2]

Goose2, you didn't just get dropped by an Air Force chick this week did you?

Naw man, no such thing as girlfriends in college. I'm just on one of those "what if...." kinda sprees right now..although its getting harder and harder to defend...damn :icon_rage oh well :icon_smil

Nothing could be further from the truth. There is actually a shift away from the big ISR national assets (i.e. Keyhole series) towards air breathing assets like U-2, UAVs and follow on programs. They are more flexible and much less expensive to design, launch, operate than satellites.

Well that maybe true for the current situation. i.e Iraq and Afghanistan. What about larger nations. China is threat of the future, they have dedicated air-defense systems that would could knock out these aircraft..Now we are back to square uno?

 

[sevenhelmet]

China is threat of the future, they have dedicated air-defense systems that would could knock out these aircraft..Now we are back to square uno?

Not unless the satellites get shot down too.

 

[DanMa1156]

Not unless the satellites get shot down too.

It could happen... China's investing alot in these bad boys these days:

 

[Brett327]

Well that maybe true for the current situation. i.e Iraq and Afghanistan. What about larger nations. China is threat of the future, they have dedicated air-defense systems that would could knock out these aircraft..Now we are back to square uno?

Yeah, because Iraq had no IADS to speak of...right. Maybe that so called "Super-MEZ" around Baghdad was really just the innovative (and delicious) Iraqi follow on to PEZ candy - with a Mesopotamian theme, of course. I seem to remember ATO lines with both U-2s and UAVs for the duration of the conflict there (ONW/OSW/OIF).

Are you just randomly spewing out whatever nonsense pops into your head?

Brett

 

[Chubby]

It could happen... China's investing alot in these bad boys these days:

TIE fighters aren't the only things these days that can down a satellite.

They'd probably go more in the direction of this... http://www.designation-systems.net/dusrm/m-135.html ...before they hit up Darth Vader's garage sale.

 

[goosegagnon2]

Are you just randomly spewing out whatever nonsense pops into your head?

its the hydrocodone the doc gave me last week

 

[Flash]

We need a "half-star" on the thread rating scale to indicate "retarded".

I thought we were suppose to call them "special", have you lost your PC bearings down there in Chile?......

I think this is a very "special' thread.....:icon_roll

 

[Brett327]

I thought we were suppose to call them "special", have you lost your PC bearings down there in Chile?......

I think this is a very "special' thread.....:icon_roll

In that vein, Goosegagnon, please amend your profile statement to "Mongoloid at large."

Brett

 

[Flash]

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

Shouldn't the question be "Why do we need the Marines?"......

 

[zab1001]

I thought we were suppose to call them "special", have you lost your PC bearings down there in Chile?......

I think this is a very "special' thread.....:icon_roll

No, here you say "retardo".

No, I'm not kidding.

 

[goosegagnon2]

In that vein, Goosegagnon, please amend your profile statement to "Mongoloid at large."

damn...

Shouldn't the question be "Why do we need the Marines?"......

Cause they're cool and get more chicks than Navy guys

*edit* Just caught this post and adding to this one

Based on your own, ahem, "logic", wouldn´t it be even more efficient to tell the Navy, Marine Corps, Army, and Coast Guard to stop sinking money into their air wings and focus those resources on the branch that´s already dedicated to close air support, troop transport, SAR and patrol (hint: its name ends with an "AF")? After all, why support four mini-me versions of the USAF when you can just streamline the whole process and have one branch do all of flying? The only thing non-USAF pilots do that USAF pilots don´t already do is carrier aviation, and it´s not like that couldn´t be transferred somehow.

There´s redundancy to be found all over the military. Hell, look at the Marines- you can´t argue that their current mission in the GWOT doesn´t overlap greatly with that of the Army. Amphibious warfare is necessary, but the reality is that we haven´t done a hostile beach landing since Korea. They´ve become the uber-mobile modern ground force... just like the Army´s upcoming FCS units! So could the Army swallow up the Marines? Yes, in theory. Would it be a good idea? Hell no, for reasons we´ve already beaten to death in other threads.

Repeat the above paragraph with most SOC units, SAR, anything involving helicopters, the intelligence divisions of each branch, medical assets, etc.

This is the dumbest thread I´ve seen since that Integer guy was booted from the forum.

Dude it was JUST A THOUGHT. chill out. If its soo dumb, then why did you put an effort into your reply?

 

[TuxFlier]

just read this whole thread. wish i could have 10 min back of my life.

wow.

back to drinking.

 

[batman527]

I think this thread is actually more interesting than most. Makes sense to me in a messed up way, and I can follow the train of thought. It's not like he was calling for the AF's neck or anything, just thought he'd start an interesting discussion, and he succeeded, considering it's already up to three whole pages...

 

[mmx1]

My god.

Let's not all get fooled by Iraq into thinking that all future wars will be fought like this. If we strike Iran, you bet it won't be with piddly little strike fighters, but with B-1's and B-2's carrying tens of tons of bombs. Air Power is NOT all CAS.

Let's also not forget the B-1's flying station over Afghanistan to drop JDAMS on demand. Strike fighters are nice but they lack deep strike and interdiction. I'll defend the merits of the Super Hornet, but it doesn't stack up against a B-1/2 in terms of strategic bombing.

Moreover, Strategic Bombing is NOT on its way out, unless you equate Strategic Bombing with carpet bombing. If anything, precision munitions make strategic bombing more relevant because we now have improved ability to discern between civilian and military targets. It's blurry a bit because we now have strike fighters able to perform deep interdiction missions that border on strategic missions; and air superiority means our strike fighters can more or less roam freely. It would be a terrible mistake to assume that'll always be the case.

Give the ICBMS and satellite surveillance to NASA? I'd have a coronary. We mock the AF all the time, but they are a military institution. Caltech geeks running vital defense institutions? God help us. The Air Force is moving more into space (and informational) warfare and I'm in full agreement. They've always been the most technical of the services and we need geeks with lasers and computers as much as we need grunts with rifles. Gotta cover all parts of the spectrum.

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.

NO. Not just no, but HELL NO.
Giving the Air Force to the Army? It's bloated enough as it is.


Besides, without the Air Force, who'd run the Stargate program? Sam Carter in Dress Alphas? (Actually, that'd look pretty hot).