Clark Griswold

True, it’d be a total redesign of the engine nacelle and pneumatic supply for the blowers so a lotta non recurring engineering and money so probably not and maybe not necessary, these MAX 7s would be not really be tasked with landing on the good half of a runway that just got cratered from a ballistic missile, but other missions to relive pressure on the systems that can do that. I’d argue for a jet and specifically for a MAX 7 for the range, 3800 NM, that gets you Hickam to Anderson if you needed it.

That would be a COA, double down on the -46 assuming the teething problems are fixed Like you mentioned, the ratio of outsized/vehicular vs palletized/containerized cargo requirements would factor into this plus others (short, unprepared field delivery requirements, air drop, etc) If AMC decided to leverage commercial types for some of its routine, low risk, cargo missions, I’d go with the extremes and leave the -46 to handle the middle. 777 pax/cargo type, no ramp but a lot of people and pallets/ULDs for theater resupply and rotations. 737-7 MAX with gravel kit and Short Field Performance package, NG mods but Boeing could probably adapt to the MAX. This would be you island hopper, medivac, jack of all trades transport.

Oh yes, I agree a regular cargo jet(s) from the commercial world is probably 50% of the solution for AMC. With the growth of long range mass fires though (TBMs, drones, cheap cruise missiles, etc…) I see the utility in having short, rough field or road based capabilities (need high floatation, good tire/truck weight distribution, high wing). Our bases in CENTCOM have absorbed a lot of shots so far in the war with Iran, with China the runways in Japan, Guam, the PIs, Saipan, etc… it’ll be 50x that. OEF and OIF have some lessons for us but a lot of concepts that won’t be repeated likely for a while or ever again, namely long term steady state stabilization and support operations without air or long range fires threats. Even proxy forces now have capabilities only states would have, ala the Houthis, the democratization of technology and low price points now enable this. This is why we need some expeditionary heavy capabilities for Air Mobility, capable of short notice, ad hoc operations from many different airfields, roadways, suitable fields, etc… to give the enemy a harder targeting problem. But not everything in AMC needs to be this, half and half fleet would probably suffice. There have been legit proposals out there for this, https://www.aeroflap.com.br/en/boeing-777-could-become-a-tanker-for-the-us-air-force/ You could probably add enough mil capes for low threat ops and necessary communications/links without breaking the bank to more economically support our OCONUS forces, on demand airlift for NEOs, routine force movements, etc… Those 10 777xs not being accepted by Emirates would be prime candidates for this methinks https://finance.yahoo.com/markets/stocks/articles/emirates-refusing-delivery-first-10-140451290.html

Stabilization mission planning https://www.cbsnews.com/news/u-s-groundwork-potential-action-cuba-trump/

From left field and to spur conversation, googled a bit and it might be 8 billion to restart the C-17 line and for how many jets? What if we bought A-400s instead with the Europeans purchasing an equivalent amount in American aerospace products? Not the same airlift capability but a very capable platform.

Valid, that was one of the points that killed the sale of the F-20 to allies, if its is so good why aren’t you buying it?

Yup This is the time and opportunity to bring innovation and advance Air Mobility.

Possibly but only 20 KC-135s have MPRS but you have a point on the -46 and -30. I was thinking this and should’ve included it in my post but if the -16G / F-21 concept gets traction I’d advocate for a 4.5 fighter with a matched CCA as the operational capability. Said CCA being based on a real already flown air vehicle like a -25 or -47; organic tanker, arsenal, sensor & comm node, decoy if required, etc… to address the tyranny of distance and some of the tanker demands. Some question(s): Is this an ACE capable jet? Should we just use these resources to get a much more capable UCAS flying sooner rather than later? Is this the right jet to bring mass to the force? Is there another option that could be had at say 2x (or 3x if a light jet) to a -16G and bring coverage and enough capes? Do we need another fighter or another jet? Medium weight bomber perhaps…

Good points, I’m leaning towards a new design and specifically the blended wing body Probably but if we have to do Kabuki theater to get to that so be it. It would eat up some fuel capacity in the CFTs but why not look at the F-21 concept we proposed to the Indians Keep the UARSSI and have the probe

If they restart the -17 line, build the B model More cowbell (according to AI)… Shorter Landings: Designed to land on austere or rough airstrips of 2,000 feet or less (compared to the standard C-17A's requirement of about 3,500 feet). Center-Truck Gear: Featured an extra landing gear truck in the middle of the fuselage to better distribute weight on soft or damaged fields. Self-Deflating Tires: Included specialized tires to improve traction and performance on unpaved surfaces. Double-Slotted Flaps: Added advanced flaps to increase lift and control during steep, short-field approaches. Better Protection: Proposed with improved self-protection and defensive systems Unless Boeing could surge the EX line and the USAF could consolidate to one 4+ gen fighter type, then -16G seems reasonable, if the acquisition shenanigans could be avoided

I would not call it bad but not recommended The closest thing in my AF career to CQ would be NVG assault strip work, you can simulate it to a decent level for pre live training but you should actually have to accomplish it to a demonstrated satisfactory level of accomplishment multiple times to be deemed qualified. I understand their recovery matrix would drive shore or barrier recovery if magic carpet and associated systems failed but there are always unforeseen circumstances and I would say for the preservation of strong pilot culture, you gotta keep it. I’m interested to see if this company (Hardpoint Dynamics) is real or another Stavatti. Who as of 17 July 26 is preparing to offer a jet ;-) ….

News Northrop out, SNC still in UJTS competition, Mover & Gonky discuss and potentially a new clean sheet design… https://www.hardpointdynamics.com/ujts

redstate.comHaitian National Who Boasted 'I'm Not Going Back' Just Go...Haitian national deported after boasting 'I'm not going back' during ICE arrest and criminal record revealed.

Concur. From the article: McCoy also drew a firm line on culture. He does not want to outsource large parts of the training enterprise. Naval aviation is not a generic air force, and flying from ships imposes requirements a contracted model does not capture on its own. That’s leadership, they are using contractors for some of their training but the majority remains in house, for now we are too but I fear we will be mostly contractor eventually. I’ve thrown out a lot of ideas on this thread but opening a 4th regular UPT base (Sheppard is its own thing), primarily manned by the ARC and primarily for ARC bound graduates with their own syllabus and iron will alleviate the pressure. Give the state and wing that takes this mission confidence the rug won’t be pulled out from under them by making sending ARC bound students there as the normal paradigm. Steady business, steady program support from the Bobs. Keep it reasonable, PC-21 and KA-90 training aircraft, 150 hour syllabus.

https://www.twz.com/air/our-best-look-at-chinas-new-y-15-turboprop-airlifter

Where’s the RQ-170 assignment to?

https://aviationweek.com/podcasts/check-6/podcast-gps-spoofing-jamming-can-civil-aviation-adapt Bit wonky at times but interesting

https://theaviationist.com/2026/09/01/japans-massive-us-2-amphibian-teams-up-with-usaf-cv-22b-during-rescue-flag-26-1/ We need some seaplanes

Some good news https://www.foxnews.com/politics/inside-dangerous-us-mission-cleared-irans-mines-hormuz-shipping-lanes I would not recommend taking a cruise ship thru there but it seems like an improvement, not cheerleading for the war, special military operation, police action or however you wanna refer to it

Probably so, also to Afghanistan too https://www.facebook.com/reel/1854855728824750

I want these two missiles named Big and Little Enos https://www.twz.com/air/aim-424-malice-very-long-range-air-to-air-missile-emerges-from-the-shadows https://www.twz.com/air/tiny-air-to-air-missile-in-development-for-stealthy-u-s-navy-combat-aircraft

New boarding announcement

Yeah, I think they all do some variation of that about basically everything as our society has regressed; intellectually, culturally and politically. Getting a good majority 330+ million people to support policies that require personal sacrifice, delayed gratification and none to tangential material benefits to them is apparently too much for our politicians to attempt hence the lying, obfuscation, gas lighting, denial and wild overselling of all manner of policies. As to Iran though, if it were President Clark Griswold (God help us) I would explain in an Oval Office address: The history of aggression, terrorism and disruptive activities of the Islamic Republic of Iran against the United States and broader civilized world; probably releasing declassified information in that address to explain why we should fight them. What will be required of America, why this will succeed, how we will win, what victory means for the US and how the people of Iran can be helped. Why this is not imperialism, why it is right and why America half way around the world is responsible for this fight. Break Break As to strategy with Iran, had a stray thought on it… mentioned before in this thread I think but why not offer their provinces / non Persian areas that openly resist the IGRC weapons, support, reprieve from air strikes, etc… it would not be the only strategic LOE but one of them… Disrupt areas of the country not fully loyal to the revolutionary regime, deny oil export income, maximum economic sanctions but continuous delivery of humanitarian aid, block / control most air and maritime traffic, aggressively attack proxies abroad, lean on allies very hard to renounce diplomatic ties, continually execute long range strikes, split internal factions (Army vs IGRC) to offer leadership support and recognition in a post bellum Iran… basically everything short of a ground invasion while you prepare for a ground invasion…

Yup, that’s the problem / fact of life with American foreign policy problems. They are longer lasting than our election cycles, this causes politicians to gamble and occasionally get us knee deep without gathering the necessary public, political and institutional support to sustain and prosecute successfully said foreign policy challenge.