Leaderboard

Re: sensor cost... > $1million for the most capable ones that you would want. My understanding is the Scorpion's advertised fly away cost includes it's currently-integrated sensor as does the A-29 and AT-6. For comparison, the MX-15DiD that was fielded on Scorpion for LAE is vastly superior than the old-ass FLIR Brightstar equipped on the A-29, and that sets aside that the Scorpion has been tested with and could field something like the MX-20 or MTS-B that would not fit on the smaller AT-6 or A-29. BL: Scorpion has a much better sensor out of the box and gives you the option to go Gucci in the future with more $$, whereas the A-29 or AT-6 almost certainly lock you in to a 15" class sensor, and at some point you just can't squeeze out more fidelity without larger optics. Re: speed...the Scorpion is much faster in transit than the A-29 or AT-6. The sensor weight isn't super relevant in that statement because transit speeds are compared with a combat load, which includes all fuel/sensors/humans/weapons/etc. that you would want on each platform. Re: backseaters...well that's like your opinion man. AFSOC certainly isn't getting rid of CSOs, and even if you just fucking hate navs, you could fly with another pilot in the back. I mean light attack is supposed to be a component of the new ramp-up of UPT production now right? It's also a moot point because all platforms at LAE were dual-seat, so it's not a differentiator between the platforms.

Remember, the Air Force could make a blow job unpleasant

navs: no csos: yes

Quoted for truth. From what I heard people say in certain STRATCOM/bomber command meetings I would've sworn there were times He had a seat at the table. Survivability = standoff > speed > stealth The price of admission to A2AD requires all of the above + (s) x (c)2 B-21 will be a formidable part of that equation...as will the BUFF that picks up the last B-21 crew after dropping off the last B-21 at AMARG.

What difference does the cost of the sensor make if they are going to put the same sensor on the prop version? New sensors being developed are already being and tested for other platforms so that part is a wash. The difference is Scorpion can carry MORE...perhaps three with the option federating one or two back to the JOC. You are a bit off on the A-10 speed comparison, T/W is comparable but the Scorpion is slick as shit. The sensors can be retracted and when they are it can be difficult to slow down. The other piece is the design of the wing which is 40 years more advanced than the A-10 and the product of millions of hours of highly efficient biz jet flying. IMHO USAF totally missed the boat on what the speed and altitude capes do to the employment construct. Having an aircraft that can take off and climb to the high 30's, cruise at 400+ knots to the AO, then drop down with 4-5 hours on station (perhaps more depending on how you load fuel), is a game changer in reach and changes the lily pad construct. You can have the exact same (or less) response time from bases further away and have just as much if not more play time. I encourage folks to think differently about the pit on these aircraft. The original construct was to fly host nation folks so they could be trained to provide for their own defense. If employed in a USAF only construct, there is huge benefit to having another brain stem to run the extra one or two sensors...doesn't hurt from a seasoning perspective for multiple pilots. Bottomline, Lite Attack was meant to supplement not replace the A-10 and by all measures except landing in the dirt (when was the last time we did that in combat? What about security logistics etc... If you have a jet that has the range and refueling capability you don't need to land in the dirt), Scorpion is a revolution beyond AT-6C and the A-29. Unfortunately the requirement was written by A-29 guys and evaluated by A-29 guys.

Congrats! By your previous posts it looks like you spent a lot more time studying. Looks like it paid off!

The Ghost of Curtis LeMay.

Ok, I’ll admit I had to look that one up. For those that don’t go to Wikipedia... Theseus's paradox, is a thought experiment that raises the question of whether an object that has had all of its components replaced remains fundamentally ugly. If you need a stand-off platform, just stop the weird skin and materials MX on the B-2. The RCS will still be better than the other bombers, it’s nuke capable, gets good gas mileage and is younger than some of the people who work on it.

Ship of Theseus with SLEP

Shocked she was back in a flight suit. Ask the Thunder Chickens about the time she puked all over their family model.

What do you mean there is a lag? In 2014 and 2015, the AD slots accounted for 5.89 and 5.85% of the slots (I don't have the OTS slots but I assume the don't get that many to sway the data). Then there was the 2016 dip to 2.13%. In 2017 it rebounded to 6.60%. Using this number and a rough guess of USAFA slots using the mean of their previous four years, the initial estimate of 75 would give the AD 6.8% of the slots. That would be the highest in the past four years. 114 slots (again I think this is unreasonable, but it is what a linear regression would imply) would account for 9.99%. You originally asked for a correlation. The ROTC and AD are most highly correlated at .76. AD and USAFA are next at .59. USAFA and ROTC are not correlated at all at .12. No matter what it comes down to waiting for the numbers to drop and to see if we are individually on the list.

That should be added below the base name on every AF base front gate!! Glad I'm not losing my mind about AROWs as well. Hope this speeds things up. Only in the AF could we spend $100 Million on a half-assed computer program to replace a clip board and photocopied form that had worked for 50 years.

Pretty sure I remember him self-IDing as a troll last spring sometime.

This is sad to read about what could be such a great job....however as I take stock of things and look back, when I was a Lt, many of the D-bag capt/maj types we all hated and hoped would never be in charge are now wearing eagles and stars. Most of the guys I looked up to for their skill, attitude and bromanship are out altogether or in the guard/reserves. Sadly, from a line flying FGO perspective 10 years later, many of the young guys being pushed and groomed for success are the ones that are simply going to carry on the current problems as they look to maintain the system that got them where they are. Of course there are exceptions on both sides but it’s a damn shame.

Pay isn’t in AETC’s wheelhouse, sure. But retention absolutely should be. Your lack of accountability for them shows how leadership has gotten away with being so toxic. Commanders at every level should be held accountable for how their actions affect pilot retention. Maybe if commanders were actually being held accountable for how they treat their people, we wouldn’t be in this mess. But that’s not how leadership works in the AF... you get rewarded for taking care of your boss, not your people. In fact I’ve been told by management that excessive pilot morale is bad optics because it makes non-pilots feel bad about themselves. Until leaders like that, in AETC and elsewhere, are shitcanned, retention will continue to plummet. As far as your point that this half-ass plan doesn’t mean that other AF leaders aren’t focused on retention, I call bullshit. Show me. Show me the AFs plan to retain us. AF leaders, above AETC’s level, are not focusing on retention at all. So when they come out with all these measures to improve the non-problem of production, they deserve every ounce of shame and ridicule they get.

Nah, it’s totally Congress’ fault that I spend 40 hours a week on OPRs, awards, decs, making trackers, making trackers to track the trackers, making slides, staff meetings, responding to every single made-up tasker invented by some level of leadership, CBTs, SAPR training, commanders calls, FOD walks to make Mx troops feel validated, planning parties, attending parties, planning retirement and promotion ceremonies, forced attendance at awards ceremonies, mandatory PT sessions, forced mentorship sessions all tailored at building the next Chief of Staff which nobody wants to be, getting non-vol’d to watch other dudes dicks as they piss into cups, sitting Sup, sitting SOF, and any other 60-90 completely valid tasks. Oh , plus the 15 hours a week that I actually devote to flying related stuff. It’s kind of like a hobby of mine. But this is all due to Congress and funding. Nobody would think that any of this crap is self-induced. I trust my overlords to fix the problem they created, and cannot identify.

The Problem Statement on Slide 1, which supposedly drives the entire discussion, is fundamentally flawed. They're not even addressing the right problems. To say that the "aircrew ecosystem" has been damaged by unstable funding and will be improved by "stable and predictable funding" and "advanced technologies" shows a complete lack of acknowledgment of the real problem.

I can already picture someone half-heartedly chanting this at a CC call

Hey guys, Great news! I was selected to go to UPT! thanks for all the help!

Based on what I've read here a good package will put you to the front of the line to fly F-15's. Good luck.