Clark Griswold

True - I imagine a force organized trained and resourced by the states but under the chain of command like the guard is now. Militias outside of the MIC that is the Pentagon/DoD/Congress & Contractors This could reassert the role of the states away from just one all powerful Borg federal government - the militia can never be used against the Constitution only in support of it and it is not so much of the Armed Forces of the USA that if the states can not be convinced to contribute that the Federal Government could not act If the states don't make themselves relevant soon they will soon be irrelevant by default Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Yup - what comes next though? On the topic if the ANG evolving / devolving into AD-lite, is that just inevitable? Reserves have traditionally been 1/3 of our total force and the concept of spinning up in maybe a one to three month period has been applied thru out our readiness levels (especially in the Army side) but is that possible now with the pace of modern combat? In a force on force conflict with Russia, China, North Korea, etc. there is no way they are going to fight a conflict that goes on and on allowing us to build up in theatre in numbers to eventually overwhelm them - it will be over in a week or two before both sides have attrited their conventional forces and the temptation or need to go nuclear arises, if that is the case then shouldn't the ANG / AR be AD but federalized (federally funded) when needed? Then state funded on a day to day force in ready basis? Instead of a draft for individuals - a draft for state forces - spreads the cost and makes us actually think about whether or not to commit to every conflict around the world. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Good discussion between Prof. Farley and Brian Laslie, covers a large range of air power topics but for what might be a new trend in air to air is the increase in quality / quantity of Russian & Chinese training, specifically their versions of Red Flag https://bloggingheads.tv/videos/34603 Articles on China's Red Flag like LFEs https://www.wantchinatimes.com/news-subclass-cnt.aspx?id=20121216000088&cid=1101 https://www.wired.com/2013/02/china-mock-air-war/ Imitation is the most sincere form of flattery

The situation is not that bleak, the 22 and 35 have pretty good unrefueled combat radius and the JASSM-ER has a 600+ NM range. JASSM-ER costs about 700k each and I would estimate a S-300 or 400 missile costs 3 million a shot (PAC 3 missile comes in at 3.43 million so that's a WAG) and if we are talking the US vs Iran we can afford to lob more JASSM-ER or MALD-Js at them to destroy their SAM sites (eventually) or cause them to expend and deplete their munitions than they can afford to launch of their high end SAM missiles. Now, China or Russia, that's a different animal... Saturation with decoys, long range standoff weapons, advanced jamming and a HVAA fleet capable of basic self protection and better retrograde by being on the datalink with the strikers, night 1 of the war will probably work out.

Copy dat - seems like overkill except for air assets like P-8 or a JSTARS that may need an additional asset but can't break station and spare the attention to it and its sensor feed. No worries, just curious about it. Not sure about the current opinion of the AF on the UAV and semi-autonomous concept but I would imagine beyond self-protection of the asset itself probably not.

Give the 46 an ECM pod like the IAI ELL-8222. https://www.iai.co.il/sip_storage/files/7/27537.pdf There was mutual jamming support in Vietnam for raids against surface threats that worked well (B-52s in Linebacker II), tankers in close proximity during the retrograde could turn up the noise shrink the WEZ of a leaker to get more time and distance. An ALE-50 might work too but the ECM pod seems more practical. Edit: minor edit

Yeah - automating more of the flight and boiling it down to mostly mission oriented commands has got to be how this is envisioned. I think I've seen some promotional videos for the new P-8 that have this concept also. If it is not an OPSEC or classified, do the UAVs keep link with a ground element also or are totally under the C2 of the Apache? Edit: grammar fix

Yep - never flew the mighty 135 in a Flag but I would imagine that without SA tools the chance of an effective tanker retrograde are zero. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Good article and worth a read. SHORT LEGS CAN’T WIN ARMS RACES: RANGE ISSUES AND NEW THREATS TO AERIAL REFUELING PUT U.S. STRATEGY AT RISK

Not resurrecting the two seat discussion but F-35 and drones are in the news... Air Force’s New Unmanned Strategy Has F-35 Pilots Flying Drones

I don't doubt it, same point was made in acquisition of the Osprey and if I were a Marine I would do the same thing to keep my own organic air assets. Copy - don't doubt you or other fighter guys can walk and chew gum at the same time. I've seen y'all manage the admin and the mission very well but I have also seen it get FUBAR. My point is a few two seat models might be a good idea but the community doesn't want it so therefore, it ain't gonna happen. Not confusing manned ISR and CAS and I agree with you about $100 million + LO two seat jet being overkill to thump a few jihadis My idea is that in the battlespaces (awesome buzzword) we fight in today, the targets are not necessarily easy to find even with CoT data, the CDE and Frat concerns are very high, the mission is very dynamic and targets fleeting, a second aviator can keep the chaos at bay to make the right call. Just my two cents with 0.0 fighter hours but more than a few hours over the AORs in several platforms.

It is impressive, I respect the USMC but I wish they could have as a service admitted that VSTOL / STOVL is just not a practical or operationally necessary capability when they could have argued for small deck carriers for fixed wing fighters. The history of this program would have been quite different. Water under the bridge though. Edit: minor changes

Don't doubt it is easy to fly but when there's 6 aircraft in the wheel, 4+ radios to manage, sensor re-tasking, a GFC, and an ITC to listen to and updates to be passed, sometimes load shedding occurs. Having a second aviator when it gets really busy works. A two place 35 could be a good platform for FAC-A or EW. Just a thought. Never gonna happen as that second seat would probably cost 20% + of a single seater and the 35 program needs extra costs like a sub needs screen doors. Enough with that. Not much of a demo but here's the B making noise and defying gravity at Miramar.

Point taken.

Ok. Not needed for a trainer or operational model? Just approaching it from a multi crew perspective, two seems reasonable for some of the missions it will need to perform, nothing passive-aggressive in that comment.

Amen. And now for something completely different... And a concept D model F-35 Could be an EW or Wild Weasel variant. If we're committed to buying the full lot, get a family model.

Theoretically. Do you mean retire, draw retirement pay and serve as a Guard TR? I have heard of it but I have also heard of it never working well.

Good article from Flight Global on Japanese stealth fighter; history, design and background. ANALYSIS: Japan's F-3 fighter pursuit is worth the wait

Just vaporware from the internet but what could have been, highly evolved existing designs at about half the costs, acquisition & operation. Boeing may have it right with their "balanced survivability" design philosophy vice all LO design. Not doubting the capability of a true LO design but the money required just keeps you from buying all the other nice toys you need

Yep - more porn: No doubt but if they could find a partner like India or Taiwan they could probably bring the cost down some. India may drop about 25 billion on 5th Gen Russian T-50s, if they could snake that deal from Mother Russia that would bring some economy of scale needed. If you were building a 5th Gen fighter and you had to limit some capes to keep the cost in budget (novel concept) - what could you min run or delete altogether?

Former UK Defense Chief Slams F-35 as ‘White Elephant’ From the article Yet even U.S. Air Force Gen. Herbert “Hawk” Carlisle, head of Air Combat Command, recently acknowledged the F-35A will only offer limited close air support when it begins operational flights next year because it will initially lack the large area, high-definition synthetic aperture radar known as “BIG SAR” and a pinpoint glide bomb known as the Small Diameter Bomb II, or SDB-II. So keep the A-10C until these blocks are fielded.

They may be doing this on the cheap, just not reporting the true development cost or just not developing all the LO / 5th Gen capes the 22 & 35 have. They have a track record of significantly improving existing designs, bringing them in on the Silent Eagle for a further extension of that idea might have paid dividends, but that ship has sailed. Concept proposed Japanese Stealth Eagle They are buying F-35s but really wanted F-22s. They have lifted their self-imposed ban on exporting weapons so this might turn into a competitor to the F-35 for sales, possibly India as they aren't happy with the T-50 and that would give China a problem to worry about.

Update. Japan's F-3 could fly this summer. https://nationalinterest.org/blog/the-buzz/watch-out-china-japan-readies-test-new-stealth-fighter-jet-12580