I think you overstate the Air Force's success. We just canceled the E-7, have no replacement for the RC-135 family, the T-7 is way behind, the Sentinel ICBM is going to gobble up a huge portion of the AF's budget, the fighter fleet is shrinking rapidly overall, we are short of pilots and maintainers, our munitions stockpile is woefully thin, flying hours are at levels that we used to make fun of other countries for having, and the C-17 fleet is very worn. No sir, I wouldn't call the USAF in a good spot at all. There are some bright spots but overall, it's nearly as bad off as the Navy.
"Millions for golf courses, but not one cent for A-10s!" The Zoomies seem real keen on finally killing off the beloved Warthog, because we "KNOW" with crystal ball certainty that it's gonna be China - and ONLY China - we might tangle with in a future conflict.
By every measure, the anti-A10 forces are unstoppable. The USAF never wanted the CAS job, even though the A-10 team was singularly focused on being "the best CAS they could be". World class and beloved by the grunts, if not the Generals.
Fine then - pawn them off to anyone - even the contractors (I can suggest a few companies) - but keep that capability available for a future skirmish. If there’s one thing Scoobs has learned following this board - a capability lost is not easily regained.
I agree that we should keep the capability of the A-10. USAF does not; they want to kill and bury the A-10. Congress would have to take action to force the issue.
This is exactly why there should be no Air Force. The Army needs an organic, integral air arm, which they have recreated with helicopters; so we have two air forces when we can only afford one.
The strike on Iran would never have happened if the Army still ran the Air Force. An Army 'organic, integral air arm' would be uninterested in global reach because they would be too focused on battlefield support.
"There are some bright spots but overall, it's nearly as bad off as the Navy."
Show me the corrosion.
If AF was as blasé as the Navy has become over the past two decades then you wouldn't have any birds capable of flying at all. Corrosion is even more unforgiving to aircraft integrity.
What troubles me the most is that both the Air Force and the Navy have been discarding capabilities for 30 years. Cancel the E-7, cover the mission with E-2s (and I’ll bet there’s no increase in the E-2 fleet). Retire the EF-111, get the Navy to provide jammers. Strip the ASW gear out of the S-3, give up on CV-based ASW….then throw the S-3’s away completely and rely on buddy stores.
Raw nerve with the S-3 saga... Perfectly good, paid-off airframes, most w >10,000 hours left. Fairly un-complex engine (TF-34, same as on A-10 and similar to many commercial regional jets.) Nice electronics & radar; good for surface surveillance. Useful for hauling cargo, depending on cube & weight... And then there's that tanking thing: "Cheap" (relatively speaking) gas in the sky.... But no... Send 'em to Davis-Monthan, and use expensive F/A-18s to pass fuel.
Ah yes, the E-7 / E-2 switcheroo. I've made a few laps around the pattern in the mighty War Hummer, and I've seen the Wedgetail up close - very different capabilities (Master of the Obvious comment right?)! E-7's got the speed, range, endurance & crew size to do what the USAF needs - and BTW its a proven platform that's already in service with many of our allies. So (at least for) now we're gonna screw them and pass in favor for some futuristic Trons From Heaven capability - I seem to have heard this tune before.
Tell Boeing to hook us up with the REAL "friends and family" discount, otherwise some Zoomies are gonna have start getting cool with a taking a growler in the back of the tube!
The problem, like with the frigate, is that the customer is doing a bait and switch. Instead of going with a minimum change/off the shelf buy with the FREMM, the Navy has redesigned the ship into a junior Burke and the first one is 10% complete and the design isn't!
As for the E-7, the Air Force wants a new radar and lots of other changes. No wonder the price has skyrocketed.
As an addendum to my prior remark: you know what does titillate me - expeditionary USMC E-2Ds! Once upon a time both the USN & USMC both operated “guppy” Skyraiders during the early days of AEW; give the Corps a couple squadrons worth to play with - OR bring back the USNR squadrons that used to do some much useful work.
E-7 is a B737 based airframe. Two engines are okay safety wise but 4 engines have been simulated to have better on station reliability.
E-7 is more like E-3 AWACs, replacing E-8 was to be replaced by E-10, also a B737, now OBE.
That said I am a SAC/KC 135 logistics support veteran there is plenty of life in the old airframe even though it may spend a bit longer in depot cycles. RC 135 has all the latest gadgets and new fuselage "warts" for new antennas!
Most if not all the refueling in SW Asia lately is KC-135, KC 46 may continue to have issues "seeing" the receiver.
Someone said "new ICBM".... I hope it works out better than MX/Peacekeeper. Maybe Musk can enter the ICBM world!
Every USAF production fighter since the F-15 has had a proposed hooked version. Maybe it's time for NAVAIR take a sincere look at the F-47 along with a place that can actually build it.
Most successful "shared" aircraft go Navy to AF, not AF to Navy. Sharing common sub-systems & components makes sense with F-47/FAXX. Plenty of space in STL & Mesa.
Meanwhile, more F-15EX's make sense cuz the nation still has a hot production line and supply chain, and we know how to build them. As opposed to all the paper airplanes and bespoke prototypes we've seen over the years.
Every Navy admiral and senior official ought to take a good, hard look at Gen "Raisin'" Caine's talk last week at the Pentagon press conf, and ask if they could deliver anything so focused, heartfelt and appealing. Cuz he knocked the proverbial ball outta the park and into the nearby river.
Meanwhile, give credit to SecDef Hegseth as well, for fulfilling his political role at that same press conf... The former Army major was Mount Vesuvius, and the press corp was Pompeii.
Concur 100% on both men's talks. Have to note the opposite: the comment section on a former F14 YouTube channel is perhaps the most wretched hive of spittle filled TDS commentariat I've seen this side of MSDNC...quite remarkable, actually. Oh, and the only person they hate more than POTUS is SECDEF...
I like the Tom-kitty channel on YT. Mooch has many excellent guests, and passes along plenty of good gouge. But I must confess that I don't read the comments (well, hardly ever). Unlike this site, where I do.
As for the Hegseth-H8 out there... I've never met the man, but he appears to be an agent of change. Thus he threatens many rice bowls. I didn't sit in on his employment interview w Trump, but I suspect that the guidance was to take over the vast DOD bureaucracy and NOT strive to build a bigger, more complex bureaucracy.
Hegseth wire-brushed the press corp last week, and deservedly so. They're so busy playing DC-killer-politics that they've been missing the history. Of course, though, the press thinks that they-themselves ought to be writing the history (a journalism major thing, I suppose). Mooch says that the Pentagon Press People are good at their jobs... and Hegseth sould've gone lighter... Yadda-Yadda... Yeah, whatever...
Meanwhile, I think Hegseth was p!ssed cuz press reporting on the DIA leak of the Fordow "first look" analysis wasn't journalism at all; it was tawdry stenography. That is, somebody in DIA had an agenda... Put out a low confidence document, maybe 18 hours post-strike, before the dust even settled, and pan the operation as a failure. Then the usual, compliant news-peeps would write it up... NY Times, even!... and create a negative narrative that will have legs forever. When the truth is that nobody really knows what happened down in the tunnels... Heck, here we are a week later, and I suspect that even the Iranians don't know what's going on down in the caves. From what I can gather, though, the bombs hit where our guys (and the gal?) aimed... And also... We knew exactly where to aim.
CDR Sal, as an ex USAF guy, the Air Force was "good enough"...thank the good lord. The rot in DoD is wide and deep. Military Senior leadership (active duty and civilian) AND the mid-level officer ranks are full of careerist members as a result of the incentive structures that started in earnest with Clinton and were largely uninterrupted by the second Bush terms (GWOT got in the way). Quickest route to getting back to "warrior ethos" is putting accountability back into the incentive structures...military and civilian. Unit / ship / program managers need to be held accountable for milestone breaches, military disasters (Afghanistan withdrawal), etc. This will take time...more than the current administration. In fact, another two terms would be the bare minimum to make a lasting impression.
C-Level Palantir types have consistently stressed that part of its success is putting their top-level suits, engineers, and programmers in the field with the troops that do the jobs. Immediate rapport between the groups with real-life, real-time feedback from the grunts. Short time cycle between getting the input, proposing solutions developed with the end users, and programming and production changes. Elon would approve. Is it any surprise that there is a strong connection between Elon Musk and the Palantir executives? The MIC crowd would like to stab Elon in the back.
I believe this attitude and practice are key factors in Palantir's reputation and success. I doubt you see that same from the big boys of the MIC mafia.
If we were a serious country given the success of the USAF and inertia of the USN then DOD would transfer NAVAIR and all naval aviation to the USAF. Let the Navy fully concentrate on naval warfare.
We all know that Naval Aviators are the best American pilots. Only the Navy/Marine Corp team has the pilots with the skill necessary to travel into space.
The navy is also the only branch of the military with the personnel able to survive for long periods of time in an alien hostile environment. A ship or submarine are very similar to a spacecraft. The skills in staying alive on, or under, the ocean are the same skills as staying alive in space.
Watching TV in an air conditioned trailer is not like exploring space.
Part of the problem is that the surface community has become the face of the Navy…and has stumbled from one disaster to another. SECNAV needs to do a clean sweep fore and aft, probably bring in a management team from NAVAIR to build competence in systems engineering. 40 years ago, VADM Metcalfe said that NAVSEA designed ships as if it was 1885, not 1985. They seem to continue to be mired in the 19th Century.
Another issue is Goldwater-Nichols. G-N’s treatment of the world as separate theater fiefdoms undervalues the strategic mobility of the sea services…and giving the Air Force control of the air fight ensures that Naval Aviation is doubly undervalued. In the Pacific, Naval Aviation is the ace of spades. If anything, F/A-XX should have been the priority, with the USAF getting a variant.
Cheat code 1: Sensors and software drive the cost, schedule, and most of the overruns of a tactical jet program. Forget a joint airframe, swipe the sensors out of F-47…or the latest F-35 upgrade. Build the airframe around that.
Cheat code 2: The same is true for warships. This is why the Constellation class frigates are such a mess. They were never a good idea, we’re getting half the fighting power of a Burke for three-quarters of the cost. Swapping in U.S. sensors and weapons for foreign ones was always going to drive the cost up a wall.
Cheat code 3: The marketing people will try to oversell unmanned technology. Time to flush things out. If you don’t have hands-on experience with large unmanned systems, it’s time to sit down. Triton, Global Hawk, Reaper experience…speak up. There are a handful of people with 25+ years of experience with the big UAVs. Most of them are retired, but we’ll come back for the right job.
Cheat code 4: Admit the failures honestly, show what’s being done to fix them. The Navy’s credibility at this point is pretty low. We need to set that right.
Cheat code 5: G-N guarantees that OSD will undersell the Navy. We need to speak up for ourselves.
"Cheat code 1: Sensors and software drive the cost, schedule, and most of the overruns of a tactical jet program. Forget a joint airframe, swipe the sensors out of F-47…or the latest F-35 upgrade. Build the airframe around that."
We were supposed to go that way with JSF/F-35. It was intended as three separate programs (for AF, Navy, Marines) that shared the expensive parts: avionics and engines. We would have had three programs faster and cheaper than F-35A/B/C that have surprisingly few parts in common despite being 'the same jet'. Hopefully the politicians learn.
Raizin’ Caine spent most of his military career in NY and Md ANG.
Gotta hand it to B-2 units and support structure. They took a fleet of 20 aircraft who were noted by GAO (FY 23 report) for never achieving budgeted “availability” over 11 years reviewed and met “mission capability” 6 of 11 years.
Incredible they got 14 in the air last Saturday.
A service that can do that and outdo Maverick deserves more money than the rest.
Image what USAF can do with 210 B-21 and 800 F-47.
Well, let us not forget that the Navy prepared for and has executed superbly its Ballistic Missile Defense. Our ships have been in the forefront of taking out incoming missiles and drones. Further, while you couldn't see the Ohio Class SSGN, you could see the TLAMs it fired. Navy was there - ready, able and with perfect execution over the last few years. That said, those capabilities came from much planning and excellent program execution many years ago. What have you done for me lately (programs and execution)?
okay, I'm going to jump in here. Whole world is sitting up and taking notice.....of fantabulous Air Force B-2's.......because they are: COOL! , sneaky!, deadly. NEWS
The Navy needs the same kind of awesome pizzaz.
Going to launch a new carrier? in what, dozen years away? ho hum. Great new sub? ten years away? meh. call us when you have something REALLY worth noting, k?
In the late 20's; the Navy had something that filled the bill, then.
USS Los Angeles, USS Akron, USS Macon............airships.
Freakin' Flying Aircraft Carriers!
Two years. TWO! from clean slate to launch. fast enough to keep the public's attention...
(.think "recruiting".)
speed....those ancient craft were doing 70 kts. range.....thousands of miles, multiple days.
I write "ancient" deliberately. we can do three, four times better now.
100 ton payloads. what could you do with 100 tons? 500 tons? how many "drones" could you carry and launch? how many SM-6's in some sort of tubes?
add in all of those normal advantages, like having zero sonar signature, no worries over torpedoes or mines, or shoals, or SHORELINES.....or mountain ranges.
and nothin....nothing.....nowhere......"shows the flag" like a carrier sized craft hovering over your city. ( think "Independence Day") timely thought, neh?
yeah, we can do that. Navy SHOULD.
any readers here with the pull to start this ball rollin? gimmee a call, Navy
a properly designed, fully rigid-hulled modern airship can be made......
STEALTHY: constructed of rigid panels of ultra lightweight carbon foam and aluminum, and shaped similar to "hopeless diamond" akin to early F-117 designs.
so, she's simply hard to pin with radar;
Interior is comprised of multiple rigid walled gas cells; rupture a few, she's still got enough lift capacity to stay in the air and on mission.
engines are located deep, deep inside hundreds of feet within the hull....so she has virtually no infra-red signature. she can fly slow enough that her hull evidences no heat signature across the hull.
the same engine arrangements results in no audible signature at all.
she's hard to see, and hard to hit.
airships are hard to "destroy"; they are so large that multiple hits or "leaks" can be sustained without much worry.
and, of course, with a huge payload....means that she can carry many forms of self-defense.
“. . . what has our Navy done in the last decade to prepare for this moment when the executive branch, legislative branch, and the global strategic environment highlights the need for an unchallenged Navy to face the rapidly growing People’s Liberation Army Navy led from Beijing?”
Is this a rhetorical question? If not, the answer is not a damn (meaningful) thing.
The USAF will hopefully not have to use B-2's in numbers anytime soon. Midnight Hammer is said to have seriously damaged the B-2's overall force readiness for some time. Who knows how many of the B-2's not on that mission were scavenged for parts to mount that strike?
Underline... mark in bold... point arrows at above post!!! Fantastic job by the AF but the point raised by Lazarus is HUGELY relevant to this conversation. I'm not seeking to take a single thing from the job the AF got done - they deserve great recognition for how they executed that job. So here's hoping that the B-21 brings a whole new level to reliability and endurance to this situation. I also understand the F-35's have some real daylight between MTBF estimates and facts on the ground. Just means there is room for improvement!!! BZ AF
Good for them. The Potomac Flotilla (a great term for DC) needs to purge itself before it causes us to lose a war.
I think that should be "...before it causes us to lose *another* war."
I think you overstate the Air Force's success. We just canceled the E-7, have no replacement for the RC-135 family, the T-7 is way behind, the Sentinel ICBM is going to gobble up a huge portion of the AF's budget, the fighter fleet is shrinking rapidly overall, we are short of pilots and maintainers, our munitions stockpile is woefully thin, flying hours are at levels that we used to make fun of other countries for having, and the C-17 fleet is very worn. No sir, I wouldn't call the USAF in a good spot at all. There are some bright spots but overall, it's nearly as bad off as the Navy.
Hmm... Yes. When you spell it out that way...
Still... With recent events in mind, it's likely easier for an Air Force advocate to go to Congress and say, "Please, may we have some more..."
"Millions for golf courses, but not one cent for A-10s!" The Zoomies seem real keen on finally killing off the beloved Warthog, because we "KNOW" with crystal ball certainty that it's gonna be China - and ONLY China - we might tangle with in a future conflict.
By every measure, the anti-A10 forces are unstoppable. The USAF never wanted the CAS job, even though the A-10 team was singularly focused on being "the best CAS they could be". World class and beloved by the grunts, if not the Generals.
Fine then - pawn them off to anyone - even the contractors (I can suggest a few companies) - but keep that capability available for a future skirmish. If there’s one thing Scoobs has learned following this board - a capability lost is not easily regained.
I agree that we should keep the capability of the A-10. USAF does not; they want to kill and bury the A-10. Congress would have to take action to force the issue.
This is exactly why there should be no Air Force. The Army needs an organic, integral air arm, which they have recreated with helicopters; so we have two air forces when we can only afford one.
The strike on Iran would never have happened if the Army still ran the Air Force. An Army 'organic, integral air arm' would be uninterested in global reach because they would be too focused on battlefield support.
Nonetheless the USAF grass appears greener.
It’s less brown.
In the land of the blind, the one eyed man is king
"There are some bright spots but overall, it's nearly as bad off as the Navy."
Show me the corrosion.
If AF was as blasé as the Navy has become over the past two decades then you wouldn't have any birds capable of flying at all. Corrosion is even more unforgiving to aircraft integrity.
What troubles me the most is that both the Air Force and the Navy have been discarding capabilities for 30 years. Cancel the E-7, cover the mission with E-2s (and I’ll bet there’s no increase in the E-2 fleet). Retire the EF-111, get the Navy to provide jammers. Strip the ASW gear out of the S-3, give up on CV-based ASW….then throw the S-3’s away completely and rely on buddy stores.
Raw nerve with the S-3 saga... Perfectly good, paid-off airframes, most w >10,000 hours left. Fairly un-complex engine (TF-34, same as on A-10 and similar to many commercial regional jets.) Nice electronics & radar; good for surface surveillance. Useful for hauling cargo, depending on cube & weight... And then there's that tanking thing: "Cheap" (relatively speaking) gas in the sky.... But no... Send 'em to Davis-Monthan, and use expensive F/A-18s to pass fuel.
Ah yes, the E-7 / E-2 switcheroo. I've made a few laps around the pattern in the mighty War Hummer, and I've seen the Wedgetail up close - very different capabilities (Master of the Obvious comment right?)! E-7's got the speed, range, endurance & crew size to do what the USAF needs - and BTW its a proven platform that's already in service with many of our allies. So (at least for) now we're gonna screw them and pass in favor for some futuristic Trons From Heaven capability - I seem to have heard this tune before.
Tell Boeing to hook us up with the REAL "friends and family" discount, otherwise some Zoomies are gonna have start getting cool with a taking a growler in the back of the tube!
The problem, like with the frigate, is that the customer is doing a bait and switch. Instead of going with a minimum change/off the shelf buy with the FREMM, the Navy has redesigned the ship into a junior Burke and the first one is 10% complete and the design isn't!
As for the E-7, the Air Force wants a new radar and lots of other changes. No wonder the price has skyrocketed.
As an addendum to my prior remark: you know what does titillate me - expeditionary USMC E-2Ds! Once upon a time both the USN & USMC both operated “guppy” Skyraiders during the early days of AEW; give the Corps a couple squadrons worth to play with - OR bring back the USNR squadrons that used to do some much useful work.
E-7 is a B737 based airframe. Two engines are okay safety wise but 4 engines have been simulated to have better on station reliability.
E-7 is more like E-3 AWACs, replacing E-8 was to be replaced by E-10, also a B737, now OBE.
That said I am a SAC/KC 135 logistics support veteran there is plenty of life in the old airframe even though it may spend a bit longer in depot cycles. RC 135 has all the latest gadgets and new fuselage "warts" for new antennas!
Most if not all the refueling in SW Asia lately is KC-135, KC 46 may continue to have issues "seeing" the receiver.
Someone said "new ICBM".... I hope it works out better than MX/Peacekeeper. Maybe Musk can enter the ICBM world!
Peacekeeper was a great system. We got rid of it in an arms control trade, not because there was anything wrong with it.
I think we are still using the boosters, I forget what they are called.
Every USAF production fighter since the F-15 has had a proposed hooked version. Maybe it's time for NAVAIR take a sincere look at the F-47 along with a place that can actually build it.
Most successful "shared" aircraft go Navy to AF, not AF to Navy. Sharing common sub-systems & components makes sense with F-47/FAXX. Plenty of space in STL & Mesa.
F-15EX makes more sense as a Continental Defense Fighter than F-35. Equip ANG with that, and use the freed line time of 35Bs and Cs.
Meanwhile, more F-15EX's make sense cuz the nation still has a hot production line and supply chain, and we know how to build them. As opposed to all the paper airplanes and bespoke prototypes we've seen over the years.
I don't understand why Canada picked the F-35, when the F-15EX is a better tool for their needs.
Iirc, the EX was still on the drawing board when the Snow Mexicans chose the F-35.
You shouldn't talk about America's Hat that way! :)
Every Navy admiral and senior official ought to take a good, hard look at Gen "Raisin'" Caine's talk last week at the Pentagon press conf, and ask if they could deliver anything so focused, heartfelt and appealing. Cuz he knocked the proverbial ball outta the park and into the nearby river.
Meanwhile, give credit to SecDef Hegseth as well, for fulfilling his political role at that same press conf... The former Army major was Mount Vesuvius, and the press corp was Pompeii.
Concur 100% on both men's talks. Have to note the opposite: the comment section on a former F14 YouTube channel is perhaps the most wretched hive of spittle filled TDS commentariat I've seen this side of MSDNC...quite remarkable, actually. Oh, and the only person they hate more than POTUS is SECDEF...
I like the Tom-kitty channel on YT. Mooch has many excellent guests, and passes along plenty of good gouge. But I must confess that I don't read the comments (well, hardly ever). Unlike this site, where I do.
As for the Hegseth-H8 out there... I've never met the man, but he appears to be an agent of change. Thus he threatens many rice bowls. I didn't sit in on his employment interview w Trump, but I suspect that the guidance was to take over the vast DOD bureaucracy and NOT strive to build a bigger, more complex bureaucracy.
Hegseth wire-brushed the press corp last week, and deservedly so. They're so busy playing DC-killer-politics that they've been missing the history. Of course, though, the press thinks that they-themselves ought to be writing the history (a journalism major thing, I suppose). Mooch says that the Pentagon Press People are good at their jobs... and Hegseth sould've gone lighter... Yadda-Yadda... Yeah, whatever...
Meanwhile, I think Hegseth was p!ssed cuz press reporting on the DIA leak of the Fordow "first look" analysis wasn't journalism at all; it was tawdry stenography. That is, somebody in DIA had an agenda... Put out a low confidence document, maybe 18 hours post-strike, before the dust even settled, and pan the operation as a failure. Then the usual, compliant news-peeps would write it up... NY Times, even!... and create a negative narrative that will have legs forever. When the truth is that nobody really knows what happened down in the tunnels... Heck, here we are a week later, and I suspect that even the Iranians don't know what's going on down in the caves. From what I can gather, though, the bombs hit where our guys (and the gal?) aimed... And also... We knew exactly where to aim.
Yeah, enjoy some of the content but that comment community is TDS-Central
All I know is that I don't want the US MILITARY pissed off at me.
CDR Sal, as an ex USAF guy, the Air Force was "good enough"...thank the good lord. The rot in DoD is wide and deep. Military Senior leadership (active duty and civilian) AND the mid-level officer ranks are full of careerist members as a result of the incentive structures that started in earnest with Clinton and were largely uninterrupted by the second Bush terms (GWOT got in the way). Quickest route to getting back to "warrior ethos" is putting accountability back into the incentive structures...military and civilian. Unit / ship / program managers need to be held accountable for milestone breaches, military disasters (Afghanistan withdrawal), etc. This will take time...more than the current administration. In fact, another two terms would be the bare minimum to make a lasting impression.
Forget the milestone breaches…put the program managers in the cockpit. ;-)
C-Level Palantir types have consistently stressed that part of its success is putting their top-level suits, engineers, and programmers in the field with the troops that do the jobs. Immediate rapport between the groups with real-life, real-time feedback from the grunts. Short time cycle between getting the input, proposing solutions developed with the end users, and programming and production changes. Elon would approve. Is it any surprise that there is a strong connection between Elon Musk and the Palantir executives? The MIC crowd would like to stab Elon in the back.
I believe this attitude and practice are key factors in Palantir's reputation and success. I doubt you see that same from the big boys of the MIC mafia.
Ah, a touch of Rickover.
If we were a serious country given the success of the USAF and inertia of the USN then DOD would transfer NAVAIR and all naval aviation to the USAF. Let the Navy fully concentrate on naval warfare.
Spit out my coffee funny!
Space is a Navy mission.
We all know that Naval Aviators are the best American pilots. Only the Navy/Marine Corp team has the pilots with the skill necessary to travel into space.
The navy is also the only branch of the military with the personnel able to survive for long periods of time in an alien hostile environment. A ship or submarine are very similar to a spacecraft. The skills in staying alive on, or under, the ocean are the same skills as staying alive in space.
Watching TV in an air conditioned trailer is not like exploring space.
We need to rethink our entire Navy by going back to the beginning with Alexander Hamilton and Federalist Paper #11. Then Mahan.
That would include everything involving people from recruiting to graduate education and everything involving ships from the yards to combat.
The problems we face today are more than just a bad design here or an incompetent person there.
We need a Navy worthy of Burke and Rickover not Gilday and Lisa.
Part of the problem is that the surface community has become the face of the Navy…and has stumbled from one disaster to another. SECNAV needs to do a clean sweep fore and aft, probably bring in a management team from NAVAIR to build competence in systems engineering. 40 years ago, VADM Metcalfe said that NAVSEA designed ships as if it was 1885, not 1985. They seem to continue to be mired in the 19th Century.
Another issue is Goldwater-Nichols. G-N’s treatment of the world as separate theater fiefdoms undervalues the strategic mobility of the sea services…and giving the Air Force control of the air fight ensures that Naval Aviation is doubly undervalued. In the Pacific, Naval Aviation is the ace of spades. If anything, F/A-XX should have been the priority, with the USAF getting a variant.
Cheat code 1: Sensors and software drive the cost, schedule, and most of the overruns of a tactical jet program. Forget a joint airframe, swipe the sensors out of F-47…or the latest F-35 upgrade. Build the airframe around that.
Cheat code 2: The same is true for warships. This is why the Constellation class frigates are such a mess. They were never a good idea, we’re getting half the fighting power of a Burke for three-quarters of the cost. Swapping in U.S. sensors and weapons for foreign ones was always going to drive the cost up a wall.
Cheat code 3: The marketing people will try to oversell unmanned technology. Time to flush things out. If you don’t have hands-on experience with large unmanned systems, it’s time to sit down. Triton, Global Hawk, Reaper experience…speak up. There are a handful of people with 25+ years of experience with the big UAVs. Most of them are retired, but we’ll come back for the right job.
Cheat code 4: Admit the failures honestly, show what’s being done to fix them. The Navy’s credibility at this point is pretty low. We need to set that right.
Cheat code 5: G-N guarantees that OSD will undersell the Navy. We need to speak up for ourselves.
You use the word honesty like it’s something defense and pentagon personnel are capable of…
"Cheat code 1: Sensors and software drive the cost, schedule, and most of the overruns of a tactical jet program. Forget a joint airframe, swipe the sensors out of F-47…or the latest F-35 upgrade. Build the airframe around that."
We were supposed to go that way with JSF/F-35. It was intended as three separate programs (for AF, Navy, Marines) that shared the expensive parts: avionics and engines. We would have had three programs faster and cheaper than F-35A/B/C that have surprisingly few parts in common despite being 'the same jet'. Hopefully the politicians learn.
If you are looking for engineering competence you won't find it at PAX RIVER. That went away with last reorganization.
Go Air National Guard!
Raizin’ Caine spent most of his military career in NY and Md ANG.
Gotta hand it to B-2 units and support structure. They took a fleet of 20 aircraft who were noted by GAO (FY 23 report) for never achieving budgeted “availability” over 11 years reviewed and met “mission capability” 6 of 11 years.
Incredible they got 14 in the air last Saturday.
A service that can do that and outdo Maverick deserves more money than the rest.
Image what USAF can do with 210 B-21 and 800 F-47.
Well, let us not forget that the Navy prepared for and has executed superbly its Ballistic Missile Defense. Our ships have been in the forefront of taking out incoming missiles and drones. Further, while you couldn't see the Ohio Class SSGN, you could see the TLAMs it fired. Navy was there - ready, able and with perfect execution over the last few years. That said, those capabilities came from much planning and excellent program execution many years ago. What have you done for me lately (programs and execution)?
okay, I'm going to jump in here. Whole world is sitting up and taking notice.....of fantabulous Air Force B-2's.......because they are: COOL! , sneaky!, deadly. NEWS
The Navy needs the same kind of awesome pizzaz.
Going to launch a new carrier? in what, dozen years away? ho hum. Great new sub? ten years away? meh. call us when you have something REALLY worth noting, k?
In the late 20's; the Navy had something that filled the bill, then.
USS Los Angeles, USS Akron, USS Macon............airships.
Freakin' Flying Aircraft Carriers!
Two years. TWO! from clean slate to launch. fast enough to keep the public's attention...
(.think "recruiting".)
speed....those ancient craft were doing 70 kts. range.....thousands of miles, multiple days.
I write "ancient" deliberately. we can do three, four times better now.
100 ton payloads. what could you do with 100 tons? 500 tons? how many "drones" could you carry and launch? how many SM-6's in some sort of tubes?
add in all of those normal advantages, like having zero sonar signature, no worries over torpedoes or mines, or shoals, or SHORELINES.....or mountain ranges.
and nothin....nothing.....nowhere......"shows the flag" like a carrier sized craft hovering over your city. ( think "Independence Day") timely thought, neh?
yeah, we can do that. Navy SHOULD.
any readers here with the pull to start this ball rollin? gimmee a call, Navy
Think "Independence Day."
And don't forget "District 9."
The idea has always been intriguing. How defensible can they be made?
a properly designed, fully rigid-hulled modern airship can be made......
STEALTHY: constructed of rigid panels of ultra lightweight carbon foam and aluminum, and shaped similar to "hopeless diamond" akin to early F-117 designs.
so, she's simply hard to pin with radar;
Interior is comprised of multiple rigid walled gas cells; rupture a few, she's still got enough lift capacity to stay in the air and on mission.
engines are located deep, deep inside hundreds of feet within the hull....so she has virtually no infra-red signature. she can fly slow enough that her hull evidences no heat signature across the hull.
the same engine arrangements results in no audible signature at all.
she's hard to see, and hard to hit.
airships are hard to "destroy"; they are so large that multiple hits or "leaks" can be sustained without much worry.
and, of course, with a huge payload....means that she can carry many forms of self-defense.
“. . . what has our Navy done in the last decade to prepare for this moment when the executive branch, legislative branch, and the global strategic environment highlights the need for an unchallenged Navy to face the rapidly growing People’s Liberation Army Navy led from Beijing?”
Is this a rhetorical question? If not, the answer is not a damn (meaningful) thing.
Yeah - I would give exception to the newest version of the Virginia class boats.
They are adding an extension that allows for a lot of missile tubes planning for the retirement of the Ohio class GN’s.
That was a good decision.
The submarine problem is industry and lack of skilled labor.
And the Navy deciding to not order any boats for a decade.
So … you’re saying we need less of the rum and the sodomy and more of the lash?
H/T: Winnie
The USAF will hopefully not have to use B-2's in numbers anytime soon. Midnight Hammer is said to have seriously damaged the B-2's overall force readiness for some time. Who knows how many of the B-2's not on that mission were scavenged for parts to mount that strike?
I was impressed that they put 13 up at a time
Underline... mark in bold... point arrows at above post!!! Fantastic job by the AF but the point raised by Lazarus is HUGELY relevant to this conversation. I'm not seeking to take a single thing from the job the AF got done - they deserve great recognition for how they executed that job. So here's hoping that the B-21 brings a whole new level to reliability and endurance to this situation. I also understand the F-35's have some real daylight between MTBF estimates and facts on the ground. Just means there is room for improvement!!! BZ AF