Clark Griswold

Another idea… yeah I know... If standoff and LOS are at a premium then you have to go high to keep in contact with your flying A-69 Terminator UCAVs. This violates the author's idea of a cheap and plentiful platform(s) but a high flyer at 60,000' has LOS to over 250 NM. https://www.everythingrf.com/rf-calculators/line-of-sight-calculator Maybe a compromise and a two seater high flyer that has other mission capes

Ha - means better conditions for a defense I’m not saying an invasion would a traditional armored column thrust then dismounted infantry ala a WW2 type fight but… some of it would be similar to that More mud is better and better for Ukraine Any infrastructure they have that would enable rapid movement should be ready for immediate self demolition and anything to bog down the aggressor Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Gotta get things going before the ground thaws and the roads/fields turn to mud Blitzkreig works only if the infrastructure/conditions support rapid movements to punch thru and outflank Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Concur Valid points, for my two non-influential cents this is an idea worthy of a test & concept proving project (if there is not a classified one currently running now - no idea, not even remotely connected to that world). Try it on multiple platforms, light fighter / bomber / modified biz jet, variety of conditions. Gather data, profit. This (a US produced light fighter) needs to be part of the portfolio of affordable systems we produce and sell to less economically capable allies and partners to continue those relationships we made with supplying systems like the F-5, A-37, Hawk SAM system, etc... Manned light fighter, UCAV, Manned light attack, Drone swarm / Swarm defense, etc... One other stray thought on the article and the idea proposed by the author is kinda chicken or egg question to me? What system is this going to control? One developed simultaneously or one developed after some data and experience gathered controlling RPAs we have now (MQ-9s or MQ-25s)? Light Fighter has potential, ideal for ANG / Reserve service, FMS, etc...

Valid points but to discuss the concept the author proposes (light fighters specifically for this role) is that he is cost conscious in the future budget environments. Light fighter fleet with advanced C2 capability for UCAV employment is probably more affordable than large platform C2 fleet, inferring that from his total argument(s) made in his article and I also think it provides a level of redundancy / resilience to the overall mission capability when the shooting starts. Not to be cold but somebody is likely to get shot down, if you have an inexpensive and many fleet vs an expensive and few fleet that overall capability survives long enough to help the Joint Team achieve the objectives vs being destroyed on Night 1 or 2 and now what? As to our acquisition strategy, we have stumbled but we have to fight over the range of conflicts not just the high end fight. Not saying you are saying we should only focus on that just stating my belief it is a bitch of a problem to correctly spread resources over constantly changing operational requirements, it's always going to be lagging somewhat.

So do you think a heavyweight is needed? Something like a Superhornet or 15EX? Modified Growler might work or if we wanna repurpose what we have, modified Strike Eagle, with a crap load of money for the software/hardware needed but if you could locate that in pods with the capability of interacting and using what the Mudhen has now that might enable rapid fielding Purpose designed platform would be great but unless the size of the fleet was pretty large it would suffer the curse of small numbers and big price tag for a specialty aircraft Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Legit critique as to SCS but in fairness most fighters, land or carrier based are gonna have trouble operating there with their existing ranges and the inherent vulnerability of tankers and other support assets as the PLAAF grows in A2AD and A2A capes with weps like PL-15, SA-400, etc... all that till the IADS, A2AD threat is suppressed, most of the fireworks initially till all that is done will be at long range with stand off weps lobbed at anything of value detected Not to quibble but I will debate the level of survivability they could possess and given the intention of how they are to be used, in a type of stand-off tactical coordinator role, they (they manned part of their manned-unmanned team) will likely only be slightly to modestly inside the WEZ as the unmanned players they could be controlling will be getting up close and personal with the threat or target to be attacked. They could fill other roles if the loyal wingmen are attrited or as needed: sensor node, weapons truck, jammer, etc.. in the big fights and in the other missions like homeland defense, uncontested ops, training, etc... they make dollars and sense as they will not be overkill and thus avoid opportunity cost problems in the overall budget, they will enable savings to afford bigger better toys needed for other missions where the requirements are higher. I thought the same thing, business jet modified for this role too. More crew, more space for gear, more fuel, more range / endurance, etc... but without getting close to anything classified, it would depend on the capability of the links, range of the links, to the unmanned platforms. If they can operate at a range great enough that the platform is out of the WEZ, then a non-tactical platform could work, if not I see the need for something that could turn at 5+Gs and accelerate above M1 to defend itself as it had to get inside a WEZ to do its mission or close enough to be attacked by leakers. That is the $69,000 question, the capability of the links in a heavy EA / EW environment to make this concept work, that can not be discussed on the BO SCIF's pages. I think the idea of a modified T-7 seems the most practical to me for this platform (if acquired) like the AT-6B for AOW because of the piggybacking on an existing program / aircraft. There already exists a logistical supply network, maintenance, operational knowledge, trained crew, etc... Concur on the assessment of intellectual ability and airmanship / flying ability.

Good deal, I googled his bio and read his abbreviated CV from Bogi Dope, sounds like a 20 lb. brain type. I hope the concept he's promoting (manned/unmanned teaming) can throw a life line to Scorpion as it is already flying and has done this, albeit probably at level of capability less than envisioned in his article but its a starting point to expand from. https://theaviationist.com/2018/08/10/interesting-video-of-the-textron-scorpion-cockpit-in-manned-unmanned-teaming-demonstration/ An improved Scorpion could also fit this role probably, might need higher performance with other capes integrated into it (ECM, A-A radar, expanded comms capabilities, etc..). Probably a bigger, heavier aircraft and more expensive to accquire/operate then but likely still very affordable. Just a thought but Scorpion is likely adaptable to an unmanned version or optionally manned, that could bring an economy of scale to the procurement (both manned/unmanned platforms sharing 69%+ parts) to get a platform built for this and other missions, not just adapted from another platform designed for another.

Light Fighters... interesting article and worth a read IMHO. https://warontherocks.com/2022/02/the-light-fighter-is-the-air-forces-manned-unmanned-team-solution/ Author leaves room for discussion for what I would call mission requirements vs platform requirements, that is what is the mission and then what is the platform required or capable of meeting those technical / performance requirements. How many UCAVs / UAVs would it need to control, at what distance, how resilient to EA to that supplied link, how much organic capability for offense/defense for this platform, etc... most of that I think would be a result of what the cognitive load is determined to be put on the crew, I think a two crew platform is necessary if in control or directing more than 2 unmanned vehicles. Highly scientific WAG but reasonable I think. Stretched and modified version of the T-7 could work Range / Endurance is the original sin I could see adapting what is already a modestly sized jet but high bypass engine option, CFTs, stretch to add internal fuel might fix that. Launch, ingress 500 NM with an hour on station, supersonic dash for self protection, carry two defensive missiles.

Cool - let's call it here. Points made and all good.

You and I are probably about the same age, I remember the WMD speeches and promises, I thought Hussein had to have them and that the invasion of 03 was the right thing, the only thing to do. Time has educated me on the hubris of our leaders, their basic human flaws that have enormous consequences when amplified thru their official decisions and that we should not be too cautious acting on the world stage but very realistic I'm torn, I think "they" who I don't have a pithy acronym for are not being fully honest about the situation, they have other motives at work (wag the dog, MIC scheming, Ukraine colluding with Bidens, insert other conspiracy sounding idea here, etc..) but there is the real threat forming across the border and if the Russians attack and win, our credibility gets a kick in the balls and the current liberal rules based international order takes another hit. I rationalize it and think even though "they" are lying hypocrites who don't really deserve our respect and political power, they have it and the situation is still there to be addressed with Ukraine / Russia. Our institutions are much less than they used to be, but they are ours, I don't exactly trust them but follow them because there is no alternative. No love, just practicality. They may not want or say they don't want US forces in theater (assuming hostilities erupt) but methinks we would have to become directly involved to prevent total collapse. @FLEA @DirkDiggler Your welcome, they were great insights from Germans into their psychology and issues with being a powerful country dealing with cultural / historical issues.

Read these two articles from WOR related to your point on Europe / Germany specifically: A MILLENNIAL CONSIDERS THE NEW GERMAN PROBLEM AFTER 30 YEARS OF PEACE WHY GERMANY BEHAVES THE WAY IT DOES It's probably time for a new security organization in Europe for collective security underwritten by the USA / UK. Avoids the distraction of including and dealing with members that are unlikely to act on a collective defense call up unless they were actually under attack. Finland, Baltics, Poland, Romania, Bulgaria, Czech Republic, Slovakia, Hungary, etc... New organization purpose built and mission statement for neutrality, collective defense, sovereignty and no out of area kinetic operations. If a new nation of Western Ukraine comes from this crisis (Ukraine west of the Dnieper and to the Black Sea) then it would be included too. Would need a US / UK boots on the ground, fighter tails based in country, etc... type of deterrence commitment, probably in the range of 50k and 150 jets in bases and distributed from the Baltics to Bulgaria, but would be acceptable to this tax payer. Basically, a fence to section off Western Europe, acknowledging they are not interested in deterring Russia and would in all likelihood not risk blood and treasure for Eastern / Central Europe. Not an insult to them just reality, it's time to acknowledge it and move on.

No one trusts the Deep State Press Corparatist Globalist Media Tech Complex anymore. The debacle of Afghanistan, the bitter taste of Iraq, the Libyan misadventure, the mixed results at best of Syria all while denying we are being overrun on our southern border by foreigners and they (said referenced corrupt hypocritical power structure) do nothing about that while expecting Americans and particularly the less than 1% who serve in the military or would if called upon to get on board with a conflict to defend a principle (which I support) to fall in line and fight for someone else's country while they do not defend ours. I'm not for Putin overrunning Ukraine and think we but particularly the Europeans should stand up on their hind legs and say not one inch or soldier across this border, but I'm not surprised "they" can't generate that necessary percentage of public support, given their track record and present action / inactions. That reporter was just channeling the frustrations of the majority of Americans, fight for Ukraine but not defend our borders? Not surprising it eventually peculated out to challenge the official talking points delivery machine.

False flag event with near simultaneous cyber attacks Little green men along side separatist militias in the Donbas launching coordinated attacks supported by long range fires guided by UAV spotters Large conventional combined arms thrust from the north to link up with advancing forces in Donbas and establishing a Line of Control either on or east of the Dneiper River Diplomatic push to create Eastern Ukraine / New Russia and bog down the International Community while consolidating new territorial gains Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Concur I’m frustrated by free riders enjoying the benefits of a world not wholly ruled by might where the weaker have rights that are mostly respected but it’s the world we live in and our leadership class seems willing to tolerate it so here we are Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Can't argue with you on those points, this is a pickle Not a treaty ally but we made assurances 25+ years ago to get them to de-nuclearize to get to what we thought would be a better post Soviet arrangement, don't really have direct interests in their nation but at a very high level strategically / globally allowing them to be overrun undermines the semi-fair and basically decent rules based order that America has led for decades with every alternative to this order worse. This should light a fire under the asses of the planning and strategy 20-lb brains in the Puzzle Palace to develop capes, systems, training and relationships with nations at the periphery of our influence and inside the threat rings of our enemies I know there are some systems and support we can share now and are but as we are going into the turbulent 20's, we need to rapidly field systems that are affordable, attrittable with a level of technology that we are not overly concerned with being compromised. Likely unmanned in some cases, designed to be mainly operated by allies and partners to deter aggression and/or suppress constant needling aggression against them. Vaporware UCAV from Deal of the Century would be an example: No LO, weapons truck, unmanned, zero length launch capable, etc... launch it, they direct.it or we surreptitiously direct it and have a cape that raises the cost of aggression without the footprint that our current forces/systems bring

But they would have to be willing to use it, methinks they don't want Ukraine to be assimilated by the Russian Borg but are not going to do anything kinetic or material if they are attacked Not throwing spears but I doubt the NATO members of Western Europe would put blood and treasure on the line for Ukraine, a non-treaty ally. Now Central and Eastern Europe might as they know where this train ends if they let it get out of the station.

Read this a day ago, she's not pulling any punches. It's time to push back on him. As to what to do not whether or not to do it, training and equipping Ukrainian forces for guerilla / insurgency replete with the tool and versed in their tactics might give the Russians pause. Keep the conventional support coming but start getting ready for Red Dawn. Mines, IEDs, weapons caches, etc.. https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/blogs/ukrainealert/guerrilla-tactics-offer-ukraines-best-chance-against-putins-invasion-force/

Sometime this fall in a conference room

Thread bump When did AETC stop assigning T-1 grads to the B-1 / B-52?

https://www.france24.com/en/live-news/20211222-people-keep-coming-crisis-hit-turks-queue-for-bread Another place to worry about

Ward Carroll mentions in the video his dad also had a friendly shoot down incident but 6.9 second Google search came up with nothing - anyone know about dad’s blue on blue incident? Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I don't have an answer to those questions you asked, I'm not sure that there is a quantifiable number of casualties I or anyone else could say in terms of risk you could determine that would sway whether or not it is a mission we should do based on that percentage or risk. I think the threshold is whether you are willing to take combat casualties or not, if I were the POTUS making the call i would be willing to risk American lives for this mission, not brazenly, stupidly or carelessly but with the highest seriousness that this is America risking blood and treasure for the principle of a world not ruled only by force and self-interest. I'm not naive and nor foolish to think evil will ever be completely vanquished nor blind to the fact that our opponents are not necessarily evil or completely bad, they have their reasons for pushing their agendas the way that we do but from our perspective that's not enough to justify doing what they want to the way they want to do it. In this life and on this world, nations fight when there is no other way to solve our differences. I'm not ever gonna think they have the right to invade and take Ukraine, there is no cajoling or rationalization to persuade me of that, we have the power to stop them and the fight there is important to maintaining the balance between powers and the systems & relationships we have established that have generally been beneficial to the world. But on that happy note I found this podcast on the subject worth the time on my commute: https://mwi.usma.edu/mwi-podcast-a-looming-showdown-over-ukraine/ Realistic assessment of the situation I fear.