Welp, finishing models will be simpler without the need for decals….

[toadwbg]

https://aviationweek.com/defense-space/budget-policy-operations/usaf-mobility-aircraft-operating-without-most-markings-tail

 

 

[habu2]

"subscription required"

[airmechaja]

Yep  

[riffraff]

I saw it fine with no subscription. That is going to be quite boring.

[habu2]

20 hours ago, habu2 said:

"subscription required"

 

This was on my desktop computer, I can read the full article on my mobile device.

 

This sounds ominous, tensions around the world are already high. 

[phantom]

You would think there is still a legal requirement to have your aircraft marked in a way to know who is who in the zoo.

[11bee]

Is this the same General who went on that tirade about going to war with China last month?  

[habu2]

3 hours ago, phantom said:

You would think there is still a legal requirement to have your aircraft marked in a way to know who is who in the zoo.

 

They're called transponders. 

[kernsc]

46 minutes ago, habu2 said:

 

They're called transponders. 

 

A readable aircraft identification (typically the registration number for civil aircraft which also tells you to which country the aircraft is registered) is still required.  Article implies that's pretty much all the aircraft will carry.

[airmechaja]

Remember this is only for AMC Air Mobility Command in USAF. 

[Dutch]

I don't know why this is such a big deal. The Navy did this with their P-3 fleet back in the late 80s.  We had to walk up to the nose well doors to find the BuNo to make sure we had the right airframe for a flight or servicing.  The T/M/S & BuNo was still painted 2" high below the stab, but in such a close shade of gray to the camo that when faded, it was difficult to see from 6 feet away.  If the Soviets could track our P-3 fleet back then, surely all the plane spotters out there can do this with our tankers and transports today. Yes, OPSEC is paramount.  What with the proliferation of cell phone cameras, the internet and the international Communist conspiracy to sap and impurify all of our precious bodily fluids, it makes sense to practice a little OPSEC.  And let's not stop there, we need to bring back the AN/CRM-114 too!

Edited March 3, 2023 by Dutch

[Niels]

Seems to be a recurring thing these days, many F-15E's are now without tailband even if the rest of the markings remain low-viz. 

 

I suppose there is 3 things with this; 
1) you save money and maintenance time by not spending so long in the paint barn applying unit specific markings. 

2) fleet wide you could move aircraft more freely between units. The RNoAF have done this with both the F-16 and F-35 fleet, so no squadron markings since ~2004 for us. 

3) It aligns more with the new 5th gen aircraft coming into service. Yes, these often have squadron markings but again low-viz and smaller size than in the past. 

 

Only thing for certain is that there will be changes... 

[Raptor01]

Only a modeling problem if you choose to build it that way. 🤔

 

John

[USAFsparkchaser]

Maybe it has something to do with OPSEC, aircraft were pretty identifiable during the Afghan calamity withdrawal, and NO it has nothing to do with a certain General that is doing his job and preparing us for war.