Thursday, November 20, 2008
Login
Minimize
Subject: Gates Bitch Slaps USAF
Prev Next
You are not authorized to post a reply.

Page 2 of 3 << < 123 > >>
Author Messages
Shep

Team WantsCheck
Private Message Me




24 Jun 2008 7:32 PM  
Ryno, I've been following this discussion for a while, trying to feel out how I feel about both sides of the argument. You've mentioned a lot that air-to-air UAVs are superior to manned air-to-air fighters. I was wondering what you're basing that off of. The fact that they can pull more Gs w/out a pilot? Has there actually been an air-to-air UAV tested against manned fighters? I'm sure you have good answers to these questions... just curious.

Oh and you saw the movie "Stealth," right? That's why we don't want unmanned fighters... haha!

Click here to view my Pilot Slot Statistics
Rynizzle

Team WantsCheck
Private Message Me




25 Jun 2008 10:44 AM  
Good questions. I turned Stealth off after the first five minutes if you're talking about the same movie that started out with "stealth" flying low level in the daylight.

Why do I think UAV air-to-air is superior that manned fighters? A couple of reasons. First, the UAV will carry the same radar, but it will carry more ordnance and more gas because other systems required for a pilot will not be needed (ejection seat, pressurization, heating/cooling to a limited extent, oxygen, or the space in the cockpit and most of the avionics). It will be faster and can pull more Gs. It can loiter longer and will be cheaper to produce. It can fly higher. In a fight it will be superior assuming the same stealth characteristics for a couple of reasons:

First, assuming it's the typical BVR fight that goes with the initial stages of an air war...in this case it's capability is similar to the manned version. He with the best radar wins. However the UAV can still outperform because of speed and loiter time and the fact that a team of people can analyze the blips from the radar instead of just one dude worrying about not hitting his wingman.

Secondly, in the patrol "no-fly" type of operation where we can't just blow anything out of the sky but instead have to do visual ID it greatly shows its superiority because it can get close in to ID and can do it safely.

Now if you're asking me "how do you know" I can't give you specifics. If I could they would be classified. But I've been flying long enough to know what's hollywood and what's not and I know something about our technological capabilities. To me it's extremely obvious. So those that want to make the "we need to stay on the edge of technology....buy more F-22s" argument they should really be saying "invest in more UAVs." Unless you want to get in a scrape and see our expensive F-22s get swacked by less expensive mass produced UAVs because a culture of fighter pilots didn't want to see their jobs go away.

But it's all water under the bridge. Now that we have an actual warfighter in charge of the Air Force we'll get back into things that make sense for the good of our country.

"We're going to bomb them back into the stone ages while wearing reflective belts." - Gen Curtis Lemay
Click here to view my Pilot Slot Statistics
Shep

Team WantsCheck
Private Message Me




25 Jun 2008 5:41 PM  
Well, it appears I was right... you did have a good answer to that question. It was all pretty much what I expected, but it means something else to hear from someone who has seen things first hand. It is just a bit depressing for me, having the stereotypical dreams of being a fighter pilot since I was five, finally earning my ENJJPT slot to do just that, blah blah blah... just to learn that the future I've always wanted is narrowing. I can see how the fighter pilot culture would want to keep itself around, even if it is irrational based on the pretenses of your argument.

Of course UAV technology is far from making pilots obsolete. I'm sure you're feeling pretty cozy in your turbo-prop pallet dropper that can also rain metal from the sky. No disrespect. At all.

So what happens when other prominant countries' stealth technology catches ours? Then will we have a dog fight in which radar pretty much falls out of the equation? If so, do you see any advantage to having a pilot in the seat in this type of scenario?

Click here to view my Pilot Slot Statistics
matt

Private Message Me




25 Jun 2008 10:33 PM  
That's a good point. Assuming basic radar systems remain king, UAVs have a strong case. Assuming current stealth technology gets shattered by new technology that makes radar obsolete, dog fighting could be back in style... Which would be great. Not actually, I guess, but for those who dream of being fighter pilots, maybe...

Ever heard of plasma stealth? Makes me think of forcefields, ha.
Rynizzle

Team WantsCheck
Private Message Me




02 Jul 2008 10:38 AM  

I don't see having a pilot in the seat as anything but a degradation. Not just in air to air. Case in point...the Viper. Always making mistakes. Remember when that Viper a couple years ago shot up the school on accident in New Jersey? And of course I've already mentioned the Canadians. And then there is the Viper on another mission on home station shooting a damn SUV with two army guys in it on accident. (http://www.f-16.net/news_article2947.html)

Dudes having to fly the jet, look at a map, use a grease pencil, punch in numbers and do it all without hitting their wingman are a degradation to the mission. They don't have enough brain bytes to ever develop truly sufficient SA in a fluid combat environment (or in a training environment here in the States it seems). Even with smart bombs and GPS coords making the weapons delivery a breeze...the pilot is beyond obsolete.

Quatro might have a different opinion...


"We're going to bomb them back into the stone ages while wearing reflective belts." - Gen Curtis Lemay
Click here to view my Pilot Slot Statistics
quatro

Team WantsCheck
Private Message Me




03 Jul 2008 8:41 PM  
I haven't read the thread yet and I'm about to leave for vacation...

I'll add more later.. but, in short.. I don't think taking guys out of the cockpit and putting them miles away is going to ADD SA. Yes, it sucks having to stay visual, stay in formation, use the radar, keep up with Ops check, use the radio, check six, type in coord's, fly a plane... and a hundred other jobs all by yourself, all while going 400 knots.. But, I think you have a little more SA when you can look outside. I'll explain further when I get back.

Happy 4th to all. Thank you for serving.
TreyTaylor10

Private Message Me




05 Jul 2008 3:32 PM  

Here's my .02 about all of this UAV stuff. Keep in mind I'm a junior in ROTC cadet that still doesn't know if I even have a pilot slot, so I think I'm slightly above dogshit on the todem pole (maybe even lower). As a guy hoping to get accepted into a pilot training, I think it would be pretty crappy to end up with a UAV drop. I'm not going to deny that they are useful in this kind of conflict, and the Air Force definately needs more of them. But, I think pulling perfectly capable guys out of UPT to fly them is a big waste of the skills that students posses when they graduate UPT. Personally, I don't see why you can't catagorize as a UAV driver before comissioning. I know alot of guys that couldn't pass the medical for pilot that would kill to do UAVs over Comm or some desk-jockey job like that. If I couldn't pass the medical, I would rather do that than alot of other things. I'd like to hear y'alls perspective on it, and if that route to UAVs would even be realistic.

Quick question though, A buddy of mine is going to Nav training and was telling me that soon, you will just apply to get a 'rated slot' (pilot, nav, abm, I guess), and from there you will go to IFT. Then, supposedly you will catagorize from there based on your flight aptitude, I guess. Has anyone on AD heard anything like this? This seems to make since to me. Unfortunately for me, if this does go into effect, it will be well after I comission. I think this has a lot of positive points to it. I like to think that maybe it will cut down on the amount of 'douchebags' (i.e., guy who has a 4.0 GPA in Ambidextrous Masturbation and a strong inclination to kiss ass, but couldn't get himself out of a wet paper bag, much less lead other people out with him...if you can't tell, I really don't like these kinds of people) that get slots. That could just be wishful thinking though...

 

Rynizzle

Team WantsCheck
Private Message Me




08 Jul 2008 10:03 AM  

I agree Trey.  At one point the Air Force was moving in the direction of a separate AFSC for the UAV track.  I have a feeling it will go to that before too long.

Here is a great article a buddy just emailed to me concerning Gates Vs the Air Force & F-22s & UAVs.  Worth a read.  http://www.stratfor.com/weekly/geopolitical_weekly_u_s_air_force_and_next_war


"We're going to bomb them back into the stone ages while wearing reflective belts." - Gen Curtis Lemay
Click here to view my Pilot Slot Statistics
Rynizzle

Team WantsCheck
Private Message Me




20 Jul 2008 9:27 AM  

I'm sure you guys are all hearing about senior Air Force leadership wanting to spend counter terrorism money on plush luxury accomodations for AF generals.  It's almost like leadership is TRYING to ruin our Air Force.  It pains me so much everyday to see this crisis of leadership that I just can't stand it.  http://www.canada.com/vancouversun/news/story.html?id=7da463ff-4761-4a3a-8152-12550e9c15fc

I pray to God that Norty will get to work and fire a metric shit ton of O-6s and up.  The way I see it, if you've made rank under the past administration you should have to prove you're not a yes-man idiot otherwise you have to go.  We need a good ole fashioned purge in the Air Force to thin of us of these hypocritical politician uniformed parasites that run our Air Force like a country club while our brethren bleed in battle.


"We're going to bomb them back into the stone ages while wearing reflective belts." - Gen Curtis Lemay
Click here to view my Pilot Slot Statistics
Rynizzle

Team WantsCheck
Private Message Me




20 Jul 2008 5:18 PM  

An even better article on the luxury pods: http://www.connpost.com/breakingnews/ci_9937276

General McNabb in the guy in charge of Transportation Command apparently in charge of this thing...but wasn't Norty just in charge of that command before getting the top job?  I hope his name isn't on this thing....


"We're going to bomb them back into the stone ages while wearing reflective belts." - Gen Curtis Lemay
Click here to view my Pilot Slot Statistics
Bob80890

Private Message Me




21 Jul 2008 10:46 PM  

While we are on the topic of integrity check out this site about a commander at the academy:

http://www.militarytimes.com/forum/showthread.php?p=116423

 

 

Rynizzle

Team WantsCheck
Private Message Me




23 Jul 2008 6:14 PM  
Colbert last night did a whole thing on the Air Force luxury pods... What a flaming bunch of ass clowns to turn our military into a laughing stock while our men and women deploy over and over.

"We're going to bomb them back into the stone ages while wearing reflective belts." - Gen Curtis Lemay
Click here to view my Pilot Slot Statistics
Shep

Team WantsCheck
Private Message Me




29 Jul 2008 5:43 PM  
What about the Air Force's response in the article? I mean, I'm sure it could all be a bunch of shit, but it does seem to make sense to save gas and travel by stuffing the VIPs with the cargo, allowing them to meet, work, and sleep, all while flying to their secure locations. And then there's the whole blurb about the fact that the pods "are of such a quality that a theater commander, a cabinet secretary, or a US Congressman can work, rest, and hold meetings." While this may be true, I don't think they need wall mounted flat screens, plush leather, and rich mohagany. However, the CONCEPT seems to make sense... of course, I'm a fresh 2 Lt with no active duty experience yet, but surely our Air Force brass isn't THAT permeated with egotistical aristocrats... at least I hope not.

Click here to view my Pilot Slot Statistics
Rynizzle

Team WantsCheck
Private Message Me




29 Jul 2008 6:20 PM  
Using GWOT money for fighting the war on terror?  That's the real issue.  The other is the lack of priority.

Sent from my iPhone

On Jul 29, 2008, at 5:43 PM, Lounge@wantscheck.org wrote:

A new post was posted in a forum you were tracking. To post a response simply respond to this email--there is no need to go to the forum. Realize your entire email response will be in the post including anything your email provider appends to your email. Please ensure the token that looks something like (uetope3n-48n4-85uq-o267-j9k9wp7891) stays in the subject line else your response will be a new thread.

Sheppard Bound Posted:29 Jul 2008 5:43 PM Subject: RE: Gates Bitch Slaps USAF

What about the Air Force's response in the article? I mean, I'm sure it could all be a bunch of shit, but it does seem to make sense to save gas and travel by stuffing the VIPs with the cargo, allowing them to meet, work, and sleep, all while flying to their secure locations. And then there's the whole blurb about the fact that the pods "are of such a quality that a theater commander, a cabinet secretary, or a US Congressman can work, rest, and hold meetings." While this may be true, I don't think they need wall mounted flat screens, plush leather, and rich mohagany. However, the CONCEPT seems to make sense... of course, I'm a fresh 2 Lt with no active duty experience yet, but surely our Air Force brass isn't THAT permeated with egotistical aristocrats... at least I hope not.

To view the complete thread and reply, please visit: http://www.wantscheck.org/fontcolorredForumsfont/Messageboard/tabid/73/view/topic/postid/7363/ptarget/8218/Default.aspx

Thank you,
Team WantsCheck

"We're going to bomb them back into the stone ages while wearing reflective belts." - Gen Curtis Lemay
Click here to view my Pilot Slot Statistics
Rynizzle

Team WantsCheck
Private Message Me




13 Aug 2008 7:21 PM  

The CSAF seems to be starting off on the right foot and it sound like he might be ready to take issue with the poor leadership that can be found in record numbers throughout the Air Force right now...

"There is much less room for poor performance and certainly for misconduct," Schwartz said. "We will be active on this and be surgical if that's what is needed."

I assume by surgical he means cutting out the cancer that is all but killed the Air Force.  It needs a good dose of chemo treatments for sure.  I sure hope Norty's the real deal....

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/08/12/AR2008081202864.html


"We're going to bomb them back into the stone ages while wearing reflective belts." - Gen Curtis Lemay
Click here to view my Pilot Slot Statistics
Rynizzle

Team WantsCheck
Private Message Me




26 Aug 2008 4:47 PM  

Interesting and encouraging article of Norty's vision (very interesting on the UAV front)...new UAV school at Holloman??  http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=93981179


"We're going to bomb them back into the stone ages while wearing reflective belts." - Gen Curtis Lemay
Click here to view my Pilot Slot Statistics
ENJJPTmafia38

Team WantsCheck
Private Message Me




27 Aug 2008 10:19 PM  
Will be interesting to see what they do with the F-22 numbers and the UAV situation. 
 
The stuff on UAVs is interesting.  It is great that he is getting everything organized and going as far as what the Sec Def wants and trying to win this current war...which I agree should be our main focus.  My young buck opinion is that we should create a new AFSC for UAVs.  Whether Officer or Enlisted you could send UAV operators to a shortened UPT...probally just T-6s or whatever it takes to get the FAA to sign off on being rated to fly UAVs.  Then you could push them through a strictly UAV course (Holloman).  Not only that you would have people who know what their AFSC is going into it and recruit and retain as such.  There wouldn't be the let down for some that comes/will come from going all the way through UPT to fly UAVs.  Not to mention there is the issue about becoming uncurrent in actual piloted aircraft.  By making UAVs an AFSC you don't have to worry about your pilots either losing currency, being bummed about never getting back to a real plane, or trying to keep a fleet of T-6s around every UAV squadron just to keep the pilots current in case they transition out after UAVs.
 
The stuff on UAVs is interesting.  It is great that he is getting everything organized and going as far as what the Sec Def wants and trying to win this current war...which I agree should be our main focus.  My young buck opinion is that we should create a new AFSC for UAVs.  Whether Officer or Enlisted you could send UAV operators to a shortened UPT...probally just T-6s or whatever it takes to get the FAA to sign off on being rated to fly UAVs.  Then you could push them through a strictly UAV course (Holloman).  Not only that you would have people who know what their AFSC is going into it and recruit and retain as such.  There wouldn't be the let down for some that comes/will come from going all the way through UPT to fly UAVs.  Not to mention there is the issue about becoming uncurrent in actual piloted aircraft.  By making UAVs an AFSC you don't have to worry about your pilots either losing currency, being bummed about never getting back to a real plane, or trying to keep a fleet of T-6s around every UAV squadron just to keep the pilots current in case they transition out after UAVs.
 
Either way it looks like Norty is doing a good job of reinstilling our credibility as a service.  He already stopped cutting personal which was very necessary...if we are to get more F-22s it should be with more money and not at the expense of good airment and loading on extra work to people already working 12 hour days or multiple deployments.  Hopefully he will be able to get us the money we need to get everything we need taken care of:  UAVs and UAV pilots quickly, the right number of F-22s, a larger support force so everyone can focus on their mission and education instead of pounds of queep, and Tanker and JSF programs that actually end up working out.
 
 
ENJJPTmafia38

Team WantsCheck
Private Message Me




27 Aug 2008 10:59 PM  

Don't know why it put that UAV paragraph in there twice...looks like I delted the F-22 paragraph and put the UAV one in...haha...anyway I don't remember what all I had to say at the time about the F-22 stuff but here go's:
 
Norty says the correct number of F-22s seems to be somewhere above the 181 stressed by the Sec Def and the 381 repeadly stressed by T-Mike and the Air Force pre-Norty.  My opinion is still that we need 381 based on the article I posted a while back from the Air Force magazine outling how 381 exactly fills the AF AEFs along with the neccessary jets for training and evulation.  Granted that article was printed by the AF mag during T-Mikes Tenure and is going to usually if not always stress what top AF leadership is saying.  My opinion also steems from my still srrong desire to fly fighter jets stemming from childhood hood dreams to fly and high school dreams of flying fighters...take it for what's it worth.  I would be very intersted in seeing how Norty has come to agree with 240.  If we can keep the Raptor from being a High Demand Low Density AF asset and be able to without a doubt have enough with 240 in any future war then lets go with 240 and save some money.
 
Either way, it is going to be intersting to see what he and Washington do with the UAV and F-22 situation.  T-Mike def was an F-15 Eagle mafia dude with his mind more on procurring fighter jets and our image than fighting the current war and doing whatever we need to succeed.  Hopefully the COS can turn it around and fix most of the AF problems from the top down.
Rynizzle

Team WantsCheck
Private Message Me




17 Sep 2008 8:04 PM  

You know you can click the edit button and delete one of those paragraphs?

Here you can see Norty rockin' the hiz-ouse.  Thank God Secretary Gates picked him...he's doing a great job so far it seems.  The uniform thing does make me scratch my head but all in all he's kicking ass.  Here's an article from military.com  from the homepage:

Air Force Chief Promises to Shake-up Service

 

Air Force Chief of Staff Gen. Norton Schwartz delivered an hour-long address to the Air Force Association today that will probably be remembered as a landmark in the remaking of the service.

The most enduring comments for the service will probably be those addressing the issue of unmanned aerial systems (UAS) in which Schwartz called for a shift from the fighter pilot-centric service to one that treats unmanned aircraft pilots with equal respect, “not as a leper community.”

In a passionate address, Schwartz also criticized industry for going too far during the tanker competition and criticized former general officers who came out in favor of particular programs. What did the blue suiters think of Schwartz’s speech? They gave him a 35-second standing ovation.

One thing sure to send shudders through the defense industry was the general’s comments about former generals working for industry and touting specific weapons. After the speech he told reporters that “taking public positions in major acquisition programs and indicating you are doing so on the basis of your prior active duty service” was not acceptable. “What I think we need to avoid is having the American public believe is that their military leadership can be bought,” he told us.

Throughout the speech the difficulty of Schwartz’s balancing act between pointing out the flaws of the service when he took it over and the changes he hopes to implement grew more and more obvious. “We find the Air Force is at a critical point,” he said, adding that he needed “everyone’s help, especially the folks who are in this room.”

Just a few sentences later, he veered to admonish those who might feel that the service — beset by the tanker fiasco, the CSAR-X debacle, the nuclear miscues, the firing of the service’s two top leaders — is in a tailspin. “But don’t let anyone see your head hanging in despair,” he said. Then he went on to relate tales of heroism and competence by airmen. Interestingly, the two examples he detailed involved special operations personnel. He did not mention any pilots.

He noted that the service faces “some significant institutional obstacles” in terms of acquisition and, he said, “we must deal with them in short order.” Relations between industry and the service are crucial, he pointed out. But there has been an “unfortunate deterioration of the relationship between the Air Force and the industry that of late manifests hyperbole, insensitivity and a lack of proper communication.”

He asked if acquisition decisions should be “excessively influenced by interests other than military requirements inside and outside of government.” Instead, “we must exercise caution with systems that a particular vendor wishes to build or those programs which satisfy a particular constituency.” This, he said, is “a matter of trust.” How important is this? “The health of Department of Defense acquisition is at stake.”

Schwartz went on at some length during his speech to tell his audience that the fighter mafia was no longer in charge of the Air Force. He announced during his speech that that the service would create a new program training pilots for unmanned aerial systems.

“We are going to transform our culture,” Brig. Gen. Lyn Sherlock, director of air operations for the directorate of operations, told reporters at a briefing held after Schwartz’s speech. The service plans to train up to 1,100 UAS pilots by 2012, starting with a pilot program of 10 pilots, Sherlock said. The program should start in January.

In his remarks, Schwartz made clear that the Air Force was no longer run by the fighter mafia, saying that being close to the target conferred no special status on someone. After his speech I asked him if he was trying to create an unmanned mafia. His response, sure to be long remembered by fighter pilots everywhere: “I don’t believe in tribes.”


"We're going to bomb them back into the stone ages while wearing reflective belts." - Gen Curtis Lemay
Click here to view my Pilot Slot Statistics
Rynizzle

Team WantsCheck
Private Message Me




13 Nov 2008 8:19 PM  
Speaking of shaking up the service, this quote from Norty is found on the first page of the Unit Climate Accessment. Very very interesting quote especially given current events:

"'Everyone contributes...no one has greater value to our collective mission than another.''

Very interesting....

"We're going to bomb them back into the stone ages while wearing reflective belts." - Gen Curtis Lemay
Click here to view my Pilot Slot Statistics
You are not authorized to post a reply.
Page 2 of 3 << < 123 > >>

Forums > Military Aviation Related Forums > Lounge > Gates Bitch Slaps USAF


  Print    
Besides, we didn't have any maps...
You Need to Upgrade Your Flash Player

Minimize

Aviator Palace PIT Rental

   

Copyright 2008 by WantsCheck.Com Military Flight Planning Terms Of UsePrivacy Statement