Clark Griswold

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?

The single engine gave me that same idea but hence the -35 Still a manned / unmanned / optionally would be my ideal as a compliment to the 47 If we weren’t on the outs with the GCAP / FCAS nations I’d say let’s look at building this with them with a level of tech we are willing to share Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

NGAD is a done deal but what about a mini me NGAD? https://www.turbosquid.com/3d-models/3d-lockheed-martin-ngad-2157706

That all checks, I flew the C-27, you had to get tires shipped from ‘Merica to Italy get an Alenia stamp on it then ship it back Not sustainable Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

For my two cents, I hope the Navy goes with the T-100 / 346 346 propaganda:

You’ll be a richer man methinks given where the T-7 is in development (also being pitched to the Navy)

T-50N being offered to the USN https://www.aviacionline.com/lockheed-and-kai-offer-the-tf-50n-to-replace-the-us-navys-t-45

Posting here as this affects the gathering storm with China, if it goes thru and we sell them AMRAAMs… https://www.19fortyfive.com/2025/04/vietnam-has-reached-an-agreement-to-buy-u-s-f-16-fighter-jets/?_gl=1*8cu3hz*_ga*MTMxOTM1MzM3NS4xNzQ1MDI1ODg2*_up*MQ..

We should / should’ve developed the 23 into the Regional Bomber concept to complement the 21

J-36 Cylon, so shall it be

I’m not saying it will be 100% reshoring of the supply chains, that it will be magical, that it will be environmentally perfect… what I am saying that staying with the status quo is strategically awful. Strategically being composed of multiple factors considering not just which country in the insane globalized economy is willing to warp, cheat, subsidize and exploit their workers, the environment, lie and subvert naive nations who for ridiculous reasons think that in a world run by fallen humans there is a truly free market. Reshoring, tariffs and other national policies are not perfect but necessary. Our tech boom / economic boom of the 90s to 00s was a sugar high fueled by cheap labor, delusions that other people just wanted to get along / make money and a devious government exploiting open societies.

https://theaviationist.com/2025/04/09/scaled-composites-proteus-and-sierra-nellis/

Intended effect

Catalina with 4 engines https://www.autoevolution.com/news/bird-innovator-an-executive-flying-boat-based-on-a-wwii-icon-with-two-extra-engines-196514.html https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bird_Innovator

I’ll take robust manufacturing and environmental responsibility for $1000 Alex… Tech has wildly improved since the beginning of the offshoring, as we reshore and if we hasten the process with tariffs to adjust for countries manufacturing with less environmental regard than us, I’m confident that we would make goods affordably and about 69x more environmentally friendly than X country that doesn’t GAF about pollution or their workers.

Not sure if the Caldius B-350 would count as light but if we are discussing platforms that can do the armed overwatch mission and be relevant for the INDOPACOM theater, bigger seems better sts Payload, fuel and size to accommodate larger stand off weapons, podded sensors, etc… I don’t think it went past the airshow mockup but an aircraft this size is probably where the SOF and MCO communities could meet in the middle and get a common platform for both mission sets, they do overlap. Enough for everyone’s gear to fit, enough power to carry enough to be relevant, enough range to be back from the fight but capable of operating in small fields to support the big fight. As it never flew, it’s just a WAG but a combat radius of 450 NM with probably 2+ hours on station, it easily covers the naval passages south of the PI to Northern Australia, probably 2000 NM ferry range, self deploy but rugged & cheap enough to operate in detachment in AFRICOM for continuous operations there.

Rock version

Another tariff idea I support https://www.19fortyfive.com/2025/04/pollution-tariffs-would-strengthen-donald-trumps-trade-hand/?_gl=1*zjlh13*_ga*MTY4MDYwNjQwNS4xNzQ0NDgxOTY5*_up*MQ..

Institutional bias, pride and the misperception that it detracts from the prestige of the Air Force. Not my opinion but what I think certain GOs think when they see these aircraft. Been listening to this series of pods during my commutes and I would recommend this episode https://podcasts.apple.com/podcast/id1500955155?i=1000702238181 Other episodes I didn’t make it thru but this one was interesting and had comparison and insight on the offerings, Piertrucha didn’t think much of the Scorpion but whatevs. In this pod though they make mention that Goldfien while CSAF didn’t think much of it and paraphrasing from the pod, “Other people fly turboprops not us”. Not my opinion again but that’s what I think the top dogs in the USAF think, that it is beneath us. As to your point of the multitude of missions it (a light platform) could do, no disagreement, my two cents looking at this from the outside for years is that it has to be sold as a family of systems (intentional buzz phrase use) to get attention and serious consideration. Light platform + CCA / UAS + ACE mission / capabilities + Network Warfare + EW capabilities Basically you are cutting off the naysayers by showing it’s not just a cheap way to deliver a Hellfire or SDB to Hilux carrying jihadis but it is that plus these other capes that we see now in the spectrum of conflict(s)… drone killer, weapons truck, sensor node, CCA quarterback, light austere capable mobility platform, etc… Getting several companies to come together and offer it might inspire more interest and confidence in the idea

From the article Exactly how and where the OA-1K might be used in an operational context remains to be seen, especially as the focus of the current Trump administration seems to be much less on Africa and other areas of lower-intensity conflict. This is the conundrum. Can you have a cheap(er) manned platform that has some relevance to supporting the Big Fights but can prosecute the Small Fights on its own? Rhetorical question and I won’t plug the Scorpion for the umpteenth time but this is how to get a light strike bought in numbers.

Just a guess but the requirements were likely set very high / too high for everything they wanted to train for in the T-7, Boeing promised them the moon and stars and here we are… when we could have been recapitalizing… The process could have been fixed too as this contract was awarded years ago when Boeing was really in deep trouble and the DoD may have said unofficially Boeing gets it for strategic defense industry reasons, just a guess on my not in the loop part

https://www.twz.com/air/first-oa-1k-skyraider-ii-handed-over-to-air-force-special-operations-command

Figured so Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk