Clark Griswold

Probably that, 10+ hours in the air for 5000 NM. It was / is 5+30 for JFK to GEO and that’s about 2200 NM. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

737 MAX 8 concept

I hear ya Lawrence, flew the 73 several 5+ hour flights (if it was for premium I’d look back fondly on them) but looking at the future I think it possible the VIP planes in a contingency will need to get a loooong way on one tank of gas, gray T tails and tankers will be spoken for so giving the pinstripe suits a means to hop a pond in one jet with their entourage will be necessary Crew with a relief pilot and separate, private crew rest areas Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

@StoleIt Long range tanks for NGs or MAX https://www.ainonline.com/aviation-news/business-aviation/2014-12-09/versatile-aux-fuel-system-will-give-737s-longer-legs -9 with tanks might be as good as it gets without a true 757 MAX Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Probably right Flew the -8 MAX, it’s a good jet, not a Bus but good, good high hot takeoff performance, landing is ok, give the right seat a HUD and tiller if Big Blue buys Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Yeah, for the survivability and other requirements i don’t know of exactly I can see the quad being preferable, might not be required but as 747s are available here we go… Split the mission double the bill and make several CODELs happy 😉 747s for overseas and 787s for domestic / near abroad

Too beaucoup gi?

Just switch to 777 Not cheap, not easy but if king for a day it would be part of a 777 mil variant project, tanker/mobility, VVIP, new NECAP platforms.

Good 10 minute explanation on why we’re never gonna be friends with China the country Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Quite possibly I wonder if they would use us and a hypothetical F-35 acquisition to get the Russians to give even more on their 35/57/75s

JF-17 shot down no ejection Sounds like Indian GBAD Update: 2 Thunders shot down by S-400 Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Related to the India vs Pakistan conflict https://www.twz.com/air/trump-offers-f-35-to-india IDK, seems like a lot of risk to sell to them, they are not an enemy but not exactly a friend, no slight against India but they keep themselves nonaligned for reasons so there are reasons to keep them at arms length

Roger that, the PAF is saying it was J-10s shooting PL-15s that got the kill Chengdu stock up 20% on the news of it All of these different conflicts are riffing a bit historically to the Spanish Civil War in the 30s. Surprised / Not surprised it was a Rafale and not a 29 or 30, Rafale is their most capable so it probably went in first on night 1 but it’s got SPECTRA and the French are really good at EW, hopefully something will make it to open source to understand This will light a fire under them to get 5th gen Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Rafale shot down, might have been a PL-15 https://www.twz.com/air/chinas-pl-15-air-to-air-missile-appears-to-have-been-used-in-combat-for-first-time

2 IAF losses so far reported, one by PAF and one by Pak GBAD.

https://www.twz.com/news-features/two-russian-su-30-flankers-downed-by-aim-9s-fired-from-drone-boats-ukrainian-intel-boss

The plan: Keeping the shit to shoe level - Work with Israel and partners quietly to disrupt and eliminate threats - Deter and reduce Iranian influence - Destroy the Houthi movement attempting to restrict access to international water ways to anyone but Chinese,Iranian ships - Hold at risk Iran while attempting to negotiate a decent nuclear deal - Keep an eye on Turkey - Intervene minimally in Syria to prevent reversion to another version of the IS All if those missions are to keep the Chinese out. It’s not perfect but it’s better than ceding it to them as a sphere of influence Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Seaplane news https://www.twz.com/air/liberty-lifter-ekronoplan-demonstrator-aims-to-lift-c-130-sized-payloads I think a C-130 seaplane would be easier but whatever

China trying to cut training time too, much different scale than the. USAF but everyone is looking at changes https://www.airandspaceforces.com/new-report-china-pilot-training-time/ At first I thought it was ridiculously long for training but after awhile I thought they might have a point. I know that is not the way the wind is blowing in the AF right now but BO is a free for all… Why not take 18+ months maybe up to 2 years to train a military pilot not just a pilot? More flying, more experience, exposure and familiarity with concepts necessary for all USAF pilots regardless of what aircraft they drop out of training? There would be a bit o’ academics in this longer program on the how, why and what we do to execute the missions. Not talking WIC level but why not as they are learning the basics introduce the high level concepts and as they progress delve a bit deeper The payoff is in likely reduced training time in the MDS these guys get assigned to as they will already have a better base to work from versus the first time being in a $50k per hour jet learning task X. 6-9 months basic flying training plus high level overview of AirPower in the strategic plan plus some history. 6-9 months introductory military flying plus medium level overview of planning/concepts for operations. 6-9 months advanced military flying training plus simulated operational training. No idle time, allow SERE/water/mobility to be done prior to graduation, no pushing off to the FTU training that should be done prior to winging and training. Rehash of previous posts but so be it.

Keep bombing them to whatever was before the Stone Age Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Related to the theme of this thread, posted as I thought Farage described the issue very well: https://www.breitbart.com/europe/2025/04/28/farages-reform-set-to-spark-biggest-british-political-realignment-in-a-century-says-top-pollster/ “Capitalism is dead, it doesn’t exist, we’re living in corporatism. An unholy alliance of big business, big banks, and big government… I genuinely think we won’t get economic growth if the country is dominated by six giant multinationals, none of whom pay tax on-shore.”

Reasonable point at this time, my earlier comment was really that we should have developed it in the late nineties to early aughties to complement the 22 as it was only then A2A focused The tech may be old but if the RUMINT that is told about the 23 is just mostly true, it’s very low signatures would be relevant today. Could that older but probably capable tech be delivered at a cost less than upcoming better tech? Don’t know but if possibly and it was significantly less in cost and it’s tech we are more comfortable sharing with Allies because it’s older, it might be worth 6.9 minutes of consideration. I would still argue for a strike focused manned platform with an unrefuelled combat radius in the 1500 nm range and a much lower price point than the upcoming 21. This would give our regional partners (Aussies, Japanese, Brits) the ability and credibility to deter dragons and bears themselves. This would also be in our inventory too, replacing the B-1 and 52, all stealth bomber fleet. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

So what’s the strategic dilemma to impose on them? They face no daunting distances, flood the zone is a decent tactic to make the Taiwan Strait a shooting gallery but I worry that our regional allies will get wobbly if the first shots by the PRC are only directed at Taiwan with no preemptive strikes on US / Allied assets in the area in surrounding countries. If I were a PRC general I’d try to convince leadership to not preemptively strike to not force the hand of nations hosting US forces or the US itself. Preemptive strikes or bet that the democracies will bicker internally long enough to establish a foothold and blockade thus winning inevitably?