Aggressor Cut

[TaiidanTomcat]

http://www.reviewjournal.com/news/las-vegas/one-nellis-aggressor-squadron-being-deactivated

The next time fighter jets take off from Nellis Air Force Base for a Red Flag air combat exercise, there will be fewer would-be “bad guys” to battle.

Up-and-coming pilots who will be flying their first 10 simulated combat missions will face an adversary force that has fewer sparring partners, a sign of the times as the military reduces its planes and personnel and U.S. combat operations wind down in Afghanistan.

That’s the word from Lt. Col. Greg “Papa” Wintill, commander of the 65th Aggressor Squadron — one of two squadrons at Nellis that play would-be enemies for Red Flag training. He confirmed last week that his squadron of 19 camouflage-painted F-15 Eagles will be deactivated in a ceremony on Sept. 26 in order to meet Pentagon budget constraints before the new fiscal year begins Oct. 1.

“We’re having to deal the best we can with the money we have,” Wintill, 40, told the Review-Journal in an interview Wednesday at the squadron’s Lt. Col. Thomas A. Bouley Building. The building is named for a past commander of the 65th who was killed July 30, 2008, when his two-seat, F-15D jet crashed during training at the Nellis range complex, now known as the Nevada Test and Training Range.

“This deactivation, while we as a squadron don’t necessarily want it to happen, it’s what the Air Force needs to have happen for the financial constraints that were being put in,” Wintill said.

It’s unclear of the exact cost savings, but the squadron’s annual budget that will be eliminated is about $35 million, including funding for a staff of 150 airmen who maintain the jets. Some have already left the unit.

[nightiemission]

A couple of their F-15's are here at Kingsley Field now.- - -Still wearing their aggressor paint scheme. Haven't heard if we'll be getting more or not. I do know that the 173rd here at Kingsley is expanding. Those to aggressor schemes stickout like sore thumbs on the flight line.

Cheers, Terry

[Exhausted]

Are there any other cuts the USAF is going through to save money?

I wonder how this will "really" affect DACT. Many pilots from the 70s and 80s spoke of flying missions against F-5s and F-4s. What they really meant were MiG-21s and MiG-23s. I wonder if an F-16 is code for a MiG-29 and an F-15 for an Su-27. If the practice of using black aircraft continues, then how is this cut realistically going to affect pilot preparedness?

[11bee]

Are there any other cuts the USAF is going through to save money?

Plenty.... The AF will cut anything they can to maintain funding for the F-35.

[TaiidanTomcat]

Plenty.... The AF will cut anything they can to maintain funding for the F-35.

and Wet streets case rain...

forgetting this?

http://www.13wmaz.com/story/news/local/macon/2014/06/20/house-spending-bill-blocks-a10-retirement/11060145/

http://thehill.com/policy/defense/213844-ayotte-rips-air-force-for-defending-a-10-retirement

Remember when some ARCers said "well keeping the A-10 will mean cuts in other areas"?? well... that day is today. Plus the actual budget shrinkage,simply means there is less money around period thanks to sequestration . Lots of reasons really but if you want to say F-35 and call it a day, go crazy. The Cuts are not about the F-35 its about trying to keep a credible force ready for war with limited money. even if you wanted to blame it all on procurement, the F-35 is not the only thing in the Air force Procurement budget.

Edited August 10, 2014 by TaiidanTomcat

[11bee]

the F-35 is not the only thing in the Air force Procurement budget.

Obviously correct but the AF has many times stated that the JSF is it's highest priority program.

[Tony Stark]

This squadron almost got the axe a few years back due to shrinking budgets. There was to have been a second, splinter-schemed F-15 back in 2012, only it would have used black instead of blue in its scheme. But that repaint was canceled because right after the blue jet was repainted, they thought they were going out of business. They ended up getting a reprieve, but budgets being what they are and with certain members of Congress (overall 15% approval rating BTW) cherry picking how the AF spends its budget to best suit their particular states, you're going to see more stuff like this.

[Exhausted]

1) Would cutting air shows allow the military to operate to a more productive degree under the current economic pressures?

2) Would the gain in pilot training make up for potential lost clout and visibility to the public?

3) Will American pilots still have the edge in training with participating countries from the East, which offer fights against MiGs and Sukhois?

Edited August 10, 2014 by Exhausted

[GreyGhost]

What's the big deal?

In the future, dogfighting isn't going to happen anyway.

-Gregg

[Exhausted]

LOL :D

[habu2]

A couple of their F-15's are here at Kingsley Field now.- - -Still wearing their aggressor paint scheme. Haven't heard if we'll be getting more or not. I do know that the 173rd here at Kingsley is expanding.

So how does eliminating the DACT squadron at Nellis *AND* expanding the 173rd at Kingsley (and others, I presume - unless the jets are going to AMARC) "save money" ???

[TaiidanTomcat]

Obviously correct but the AF has many times stated that the JSF is it's highest priority program.

Proving...?

[Camus272]

This squadron almost got the axe a few years back due to shrinking budgets. There was to have been a second, splinter-schemed F-15 back in 2012, only it would have used black instead of blue in its scheme. But that repaint was canceled because right after the blue jet was repainted, they thought they were going out of business. They ended up getting a reprieve, but budgets being what they are and with certain members of Congress (overall 15% approval rating BTW) cherry picking how the AF spends its budget to best suit their particular states, you're going to see more stuff like this.

The second one (#528) did eventually get the splinter scheme in blue. I've never heard of the black scheme - I might have to add that to my build list

.

1) Would cutting air shows allow the military to operate to a more productive degree under the current economic pressures?

2) Would the gain in pilot training make up for potential lost clout and visibility to the public?

3) Will American pilots still have the edge in training with participating countries from the East, which offer fights against MiGs and Sukhois?

The Air Force spends about $35 million on the Thunderbirds and a little more on the F-22 demo and the heritage flight (which I don't understand at all, sending the Vipers to shows without flying their demo doesn't save any money). So, cutting the T-birds would just about cover the cost of the 65th. But, as we learned last year, cutting the T-birds does not go over well. Furthermore, I'm sure there are other factors in this decision - there aren't many F-15C squadrons left, none with ACC, so there may be some logistical issues. I was surprised when they got the F-15, it didn't seem to fit in with DACT (just as the F-14 seemed out of place in Navy DACT), and Red Flag gets some visiting Sukhois.

So how does eliminating the DACT squadron at Nellis *AND* expanding the 173rd at Kingsley (and others, I presume - unless the jets are going to AMARC) "save money" ???

Yes, they are going to AMARC. As they are 1978 models, they are slightly used.

Brian

[ST0RM]

The KC-10 is also on the proposed cut list.

[11bee]

Proving...?

Proving that if the AF really felt that this unit was critical to the service, it could always reduce F-35 funding to free up funds.

[TaiidanTomcat]

Proving that if the AF really felt that this unit was critical to the service, it could always reduce F-35 funding to free up funds.

http://www.saffm.hq.af.mil/budget/

Because the F-35 is the only thing the USAF spends money on.

Edited August 11, 2014 by TaiidanTomcat

[Exhausted]

The Air Force spends about $35 million on the Thunderbirds and a little more on the F-22 demo and the heritage flight (which I don't understand at all, sending the Vipers to shows without flying their demo doesn't save any money). So, cutting the T-birds would just about cover the cost of the 65th. But, as we learned last year, cutting the T-birds does not go over well. Furthermore, I'm sure there are other factors in this decision - there aren't many F-15C squadrons left, none with ACC, so there may be some logistical issues. I was surprised when they got the F-15, it didn't seem to fit in with DACT (just as the F-14 seemed out of place in Navy DACT), and Red Flag gets some visiting Sukhois.

This may just be rearranging the deck chairs, and I'm sorry if this is seen as USAF sacrilege, but what about cutting security forces back and and pulling them from the Army on a rotational basis? Whenever ground pounders aren't training or deployed they spend a lot of time not doing anything.

Or maybe the military could combine aggressor units to a single base.

Or there is that option to just stop cutting spending on military and civil expenditures when we send a lot to foreign countries. If we cut 4.375 days of support to Israel then the 65th is paid for for a year. In less than 10 days you can pay for both the 65th and the Thunderbirds :D

Edited August 11, 2014 by Exhausted

[TaiidanTomcat]

Also, the last few USAF bases didn't strike me as "austere."

The difference from Marine Austere, and Air Force Austere is a wide margin. Its just not something they do. I visited Lackland AFB and was amazed at the quality of the buildings.

[fulcrum1]

This may just be rearranging the deck chairs, and I'm sorry if this is seen as USAF sacrilege, but what about cutting security forces back and and pulling them from the Army on a rotational basis? Whenever ground pounders aren't training or deployed they spend a lot of time not doing anything.

The Army nor the Marines have any extra fool to give. The Army is taking the brunt of the budget cuts along with personnel cuts to the tune of around 100k in the next several years. "Ground Pounders" don't have enough time in the year to meet their required training as it is let alone be detailed out to an AF base which will end costing double if not triple than that of an airmen. Who's going to pay for the tdy, family Sep pay, meals, etc? Why would you take an already overtaxed force and stretch them further?

[fulcrum1]

If you think it's bad cutting an aggressor squadron wait until they try to cut the B-1 and the next brac round. It's going to get ugly in Congress.

[Exhausted]

The difference from Marine Austere, and Air Force Austere is a wide margin. Its just not something they do. I visited Lackland AFB and was amazed at the quality of the buildings.

Yes. Between NAS Pensacola and MCAS Cherry Point was a WIIIIIIDE margin of difference. At the Navy base we had bathtubs, working A/C, heat when we needed it, carpeting in some areas, and a chow hall to rival some of my favorite restaurants. In Cherry Point we got bare floors, mold on the ceiling, no heat, windows cracking in the freezing temps, an iffy shower, and a chow hall that rivaled my middle school.

I also heard of some " standard of living " allowance airman got when they had to stay with us at Marine bases.

$35 million is just a drop in the bucket though.

Edited August 11, 2014 by Exhausted

[riffraff]

Here is a link to an earlier thread about 3 Eagles going to Oregon.

http://www.arcforums.com/forums/air/index.php?showtopic=273840&st=0&p=2597865&hl=oregon&fromsearch=1entry2597865

[Tony Stark]

The second one (#528) did eventually get the splinter scheme in blue. I've never heard of the black scheme - I might have to add that to my build list

Yes, you are correct. 528 got the scheme after the reprieve. IDK why they didn't go with the black version on it though.

[Andrew D. the Jolly Rogers guy]

It's going to get ugly in Congress.

Well, why should today be any different??

[TaiidanTomcat]

If you think it's bad cutting an aggressor squadron wait until they try to cut the B-1 and the next brac round.

as long as they keep the A-10. Thats all that matters. Ask any soldier or Marine.

It's going to get ugly in Congress.

If only there were responsible actions they could have taken!