Waco

A couple of points before this thing goes completely off the rails... 1 - Yes, the contract award was protested. The Air Force anticipated--nay, expected--this action, and as a result, has prepared for this contingency. The entire structure of the competition, bid, and selection process was designed to be as protest proof as possible. Just as all defense contractors now build the expense of a protest into their bid process, the Air Force has begun to build the expectation of one into their selection process, in an attempt to stay as above board as possible and to prevent this from being a

There are no F-22s at Holloman. These were, in fact, TY tails.

The. Core. I mean, I guess the movie was okay, but I think we all agree it definitely wasn't great. There's lots of ways to improve it, but I'm not sure the article truly addresses any of them very well. There's nothing about hiring better actors, or fixing ridiculous plot scenarios, both of which were pretty strong hits against the movie. I'd hire better writers, maybe start with a less ridiculous concept, and see if you could find less cheese from the actor's guild. That would be a decent start to fixing The Core. Still, I'm not sure it's really worth the effort. I mean, how many d

Or, y'know, there's less examples of other planes being hit in combat scenarios because they simply get hit less than the A-10. Meaning they're able to return to the fight more often, thus yielding an increased combat effectiveness over time. Contrastingly, we have definitive examples of A-10s in combat during Desert Storm being pulled off the fight because they had so many damaged and lost aircraft the A-10 squadrons reached combat non-effective levels. They were re-tasked to lower threat parts of the ongoing fight. F-16s and other "F" series aircraft then pulled those missions, with sign

Poorly phrased on my part. The A-10 supports 15-18% of the CAS taskings in the current conflicts the US is engaged in, at this very moment. That number has been validated several times. The remaining 82-85% of the time, CAS requests are serviced by other platforms. Never said it was. Show me examples where another aircraft (especially in the fight against ISIS) is not providing sufficient effects when desired. I hate to tell you this, but it's not exactly an inactive theater over in the Pacific. Nobody is firing shots, yet, but there's an awful lot of strategic deterrence, assurance

As has been stated, I'm not sure many people would argue against the A-10 being "the best" for what we have in an essentially permissive environment. Unfortunately, "best" is the enemy of "good enough." And right now, the USAF cannot afford to keep the A-10, modernize and recapitalize its fleet, and meet the National Security guidance for a strategic pivot to the Asia-Pacific region. The A-10 cannot operate in a contested environment. Other aircraft can operate in a contested environment and can do CAS. Maybe they can't do it as "best" as the A-10, but they can do it, and in 85% of the

"I said glorious. Not lengthy." ********BREAK*********** The suitability of the A-10 to current operations is not the question. The aircraft is ideally suited to the delivery of air-to-ground capabilities in a permissive environment. The problem is, the national level authorities have tasked the US military to shift its focus to the Pacific, rebalance for operations in that contested environment, and recapitalize and modernize an increasingly old air fleet to prepare for the full range of military operations in future conflicts. The USAF does not have the resource to retain all its cur

What the heck did I just read? Son, I hope you aren't going for a degree in history, because you suck at it. Let me also add that your comprehension of airpower and its uses is abysmal. Maybe stick to this: You seem hung up on SAC. Did a bad man from SAC hurt you back in the day? Did you have an "uncle" from SAC who maybe only came to visit when Daddy was out of town? SAC had a mission, and that mission was strategic deterrence through nuclear weapons. It was very, very good at its mission. The prevailing strategic thinking of the day was that the "next war" would be fought with n

Which is based in about 23 years of doing this professionally, including 7 of them as a Joint Operational Planner. Actually, the point is, as I pointed out above, to stay out of the shoulder fired weapons range. More importantly, it's to stay out of AAA envelopes, which are responsible for more air losses than all other types of counter-air combined. As I mentioned, F-22s, F-35s, F-16s, F-18s, and Harriers all routinely employ weapons in a CAS environment from medium altitude and at standoff ranges. There is no "straining their aircraft" because you're overtaxing them in ground attacks

So, you have validated high levels of training quickly become useless when you have an aircraft that is not survivable in a high-threat environment. Or, more accurately, if the threat to your aircraft is sufficient enough that you can anticipate a majority of your highly trained, highly experienced pilots will get shot down, you can expect to lose all this experience pretty quickly. Ergo, based on its demonstrated performance in DESERT STORM, and the CFACC's decision to pull the A-10 from front line engagements against the Republican Guard due to M-Kills and loss rates, the A-10 should expec

Oh, well, there you have it! Good news all around. Free tacos for everybody! Guac is extra.

According to a few posts on their FB page, it's dead. Like, for real this time. Not sure, but I guess the forum crashed and they've given up the ghost. No further information at this time. Apparently, the crash affected several forums on the same provider, so that may have something to do with it as well.

If that's what you truly believe, then there's nothing anybody can say that's going to change your mind. In my experience, that is far from the truth, and I definitely do not feel that is true of current leadership in the USAF, nor on the vast majority of the Air Staff. Additionally, most of the folks I know on the Joint Staff likewise work hard, dedicated hours trying to do the right things for US National Defense. In fact, I can't think of anyone I know who was ever assigned to the Pentagon who was just passing time, leaching off the government tap. Folks who are "riding out their* last

This is an egregious offense in the established civil-military relationship in how the United States prepares for war and provides combat capability to the Joint Force at large. As an airpower professional, this makes me very angry, and I hope the other services sit up and take notice of the precedent this establishes. For now, this over-reach is aimed at the Air Force, but it could shortly turn towards any of the other services at will. Regardless of what you think about the A-10, this is very dangerous path to tread. First of all, what this legislation likely does is reduce available air

Is Zone-Five down again? Any words on when it will be back up? Anybody got any insights as to what took the site down this time?

Not required. The Raptor already has a pretty impressive, unique strike capability, filling some very specific requirements for the Combatant Commanders. Based on the success of F-22 operations in Syria, I think the Raptor's strike capabilities have been fully validated.

If there's any base that can't handle the operational impacts of having to stop daily flying for an airshow, it's Nellis. There is way too much going on to halt ops for an airshow. Every other year makes excellent sense for Nellis.

Dr Gilmore, the current Director, DOT&E, is a huge proponent for comparison testing. There are advantages to comparison, as long as you are making a valid comparison of capabilities. For example, when the F-15E Radar Modernization Program (RMP) came online to bring AESA capabilities to the Strike Eagle via the APG-82, many of the test results in an operationally environment could be directly compared to those of an F-15E _NOT_ flying with RMP. Specifically, did the RMP significantly shorten the kill chain and improve the accuracy of the F-15E to fix-fix-track-target-engage-assess target

That's from earlier, incorrect reporting. The involved individuals who helped subdue the assailant were one USAF airman, one Oregon National Guardsman, a civilian physical therapist from California, and a British National. No US Marines were involved. Quick thinking, selfless actions by these young men. No doubt at all there.

Of course. Because why pay to solve a problem once, when you can pay to solve it twice? IMIS had the exact same issues early on. It was entirely typical to land with a perfect Code-1 jet, and then not be able to turn a wheel for 4 days. We actually switched to paper tracking and stopped doing IMIS downloads and debriefs just so we could get more sorties out of the jets when there were no pilot gripes. Fortunately, having witnessed this first hand, I can safely say, "this too, shall pass." It's just annoying to see it play out twice in less than a generation's worth of aircraft developmen

*shrug* I think the report speaks for itself. It was a high alpha flight test mission, that explored the high alpha and transitory alpha handling qualities of the airplane with an F-16 thrown in as a maneuvering reference point. The author of the leaked report found some of the high alpha handling characteristics to be less than desirable, meaning they'll very likely be tweaked out as time goes by. There were numerous revisions to the FLCS software before IOC in the Raptor, and several that have occurred after IOC. I hardly find any of this surprising. Then again, all of that is as wri

*shrug* I think the report speaks for itself. It was a high alpha flight test mission, that explored the high alpha and transitory alpha handling qualities of the airplane with an F-16 thrown in as a maneuvering reference point. The author of the leaked report found some of the high alpha handling characteristics to be less than desirable, meaning they'll very likely be tweaked out as time goes by. There were numerous revisions to the FLCS software before IOC in the Raptor, and several that have occurred after IOC. I hardly find any of this surprising. Then again, all of that is as wri

I'm not sure who keeps banging the gong about requiring Visual ID to employ weapons. That's complete and utter horse hockey. Our BVR ID capabilities have advanced a long, long ways since even Gulf War I, and even then, most of the F-15 shots were taken BVR. The rest of this article is equally laughable.

As Jason mentioned, no A-7 on this year's sheet, so... FG-1D Corsair and TV-1 Shooting Star from USNR at NAS Columbus, and WWII D-Day Armor and Vehicle markings. And as mentioned, the hosting club are the ones who choose the subjects for the Nats decal sheet, and they're usually VERY topical to either a specific date, anniversary of a major event, or related to the local area. I've never seen ANY Nats decal sheet that was "thrown together in haste and random," especially considering the lead time to draw the art, get the sheets printed, and get instructions manufactured for the sheet.

Bruce - considering the OP was, "why doesn't there seem to be much excitement for this year's Nationals," I think Trigger's comments are more than appropriate. And he specifically noted there is no offense to the folks who put these things together (who do the best that they can, obviously, and usually turn out a great product). Like the man says in the movie, "Times have changed, Tho-mas. We no longer swill sherry and screw goats for fun." Likewise, times have changed in the convention business, in the model building hobby, and in the marketing/communication/branding world. If we want to