Clark Griswold

Unfortunately no but I wonder if this with the training / cooperation done with the Nigerian AF if this will influence / encourage the AF on whether or not to actually acquire our own LAAR and then if many of our allies / partners are flying A-29s, will that shut out the AT6? As the Scorpion is no longer in contention for this potential ACC led acquisition program, I am neutral-ish on the turboprop contenders but if it were up to me, I would select the AT6. LAE has finished with Dec being slated for RFPs and Sept 19 for selection. Low chance IMO but better than no chance one will be acquired. https://www.janes.com/article/82236/us-air-force-releases-timeline-for-light-attack-aircraft-procurement But it has some fans in Congress: https://www.airforcetimes.com/opinion/commentary/2018/09/09/commentary-the-us-air-force-needs-a-light-attack-aircraft/ Who the hell knows what they'll do, I was surprised when the Airbus tanker was first selected over the Boeing back 2008 and even though that lasted for about 10 seconds till Boeing protested and wrested it from Airbus it was / is an example of the AF doing the unexpected sometimes.

A-29s made by SNC selected by Nigeria and approved for sale: https://alert5.com/2018/12/01/sierra-nevada-corp-given-contract-to-supply-12-a-29s-to-nigeria/ But we still don't have one after 12+ years of "studying" it...

Worth a read on what troubles the AF: https://warontherocks.com/2018/11/heed-the-grail-knight-can-the-air-force-choose-wisely/

Yup, the XF8U-3 had some strong points, from Wiki: "NASA pilots flying at NAS Patuxent River routinely intercepted and defeated U.S. Navy Phantom IIs in mock dogfights, until complaints from the Navy put an end to the harassment." As to MD still being an independent corporation? Unsure but I suspect not, industry trends and tacit gov policy to allow consolidation probably would have had it swallowed up by Big B anyway. On the subject of 3rd Gen fighter variants: https://foxtrotalpha.jalopnik.com/the-f-4-phantom-could-have-had-swing-wings-1737201833

No but there is/was some similarity... namely affordability, relevance and low technical risk vs. high technical risk, ballooning costs and large support costs in acquisition, MX and AR requirements. Rogoway said it well in his article: "By having a one size fits all strategy you get a grossly expensive "overkill" force for 80% of the missions we will face, and an inadequate and design-compromised force for the extremely high-risk 20% of missions that are crucial to our nation's ability to kick down the enemy's door and quickly gain air supremacy. In other words, we give up a lot of opportunity cost, not just money, in buying a one-size-fits all high-end fighter force." A portion of the force that is affordable, no frills and focused on the Attack Mission set but capable of self-defense / air to air is what is needed. Now put billions into a modernized YA-7F...

We have that problem now with CA. The next part of my detente plan to cool the hostility in this country amongst its citizenry is to break up the larger states with now regionally politically distinct areas that are basically in opposition to each other. Look at CA, FL, VA, MN and IL: These are motley (politically) and not wisely constructed for today's cultural and political environment, harmony is what we should strive for instead of the naive, blind faith that somehow disparate groups of people who don't like each other that much will coalesce around vague concepts and get along. If instead of our current political structure that lumps people with not much in common with each other politically and economically, we had new states that allowed for the changes in the economy, growth and distribution of population and recognized that cultural change in America, we would be in more stable and functional place as a nation IMHO. There's a lot of reasons for the red v blue, rural v urban, traditional v cosmopolitan divide in this country but one of the reasons again IMHO is so many people think their voices aren't be heard. Forming new states that allow for this, just like court mandated minority-majority voting districts would at least allow their voices to be heard and also bolster local control rather than being tethered to an indifferent and aloof coastal elite.

Stealth-ish F-8 Crusader: And on concept aircraft from the F-8 / A-7 family: https://foxtrotalpha.jalopnik.com/can-we-learn-something-from-the-defunct-a-7f-strikefig-1591155307 Reading Rogoway's article, the YA-7F sounded like the F-20, great aircraft but not expensive enough for the AF so they shit-canned it. There's just a tad bit of cynicism in that sentence but really, why not look for a system that brings quality in a focused mission set and is still affordable enough to buy in quantity? Focused on the Attack Mission set but capable of self-defense / escort. Enough legs that it will not be a high consumer of AR resources. Survivable enough to augment Air Dominance packages as a missile / jammer platform. Enough Air to Air capability to perform the Air Sovereignty / Alert Mission.

Didn't know the business story of the company. Are they (new aviation startups) trying to work like tech start ups - invent or develop something valuable to the market and hope for the company or rights to the design to be bought and produced by an established, larger legacy company vs. having to take the risk of manufacturing yourself to make money? Agreed, clean lines and just look fast. Another vaporware with YF-23 inspiration: https://www.snafu-solomon.com/2017/01/kfx-gsc-single-engine-stealth-concept.html

From The WarZone: This Is What A Northrop F-23A Would've Looked Like If It Had Beaten Lockheed's F-22

Agreed. When a country that has control over its own currency and gets into a debt problem it can: - Devalue its currency thru printing money and eroding its value, repaying the debt in now less valuable notes quickly getting out of the hole but also temporarily putting its exports on sale. - Cut budgets, raise taxes and impose austerity. Politically untenable in representative democracies of late and in the USA, not likely on the table. As the world's reserve currency, we can generate a shit ton of ill will if turn on the printing press, come up with another 10 Trillion and start paying our debts in dollars effectively worth 69% less. Long term self-defeating as much of our clout and success comes from everyone holding and trading (often) in dollars. Preaching to the choir, but if we don't start the inevitable turn to living within our means the hard turn the market will force on us could lead to domestic turmoil.

So this is disturbing... U.S. on a Course to Spend More on Debt Than Defense Rising interest costs could crowd out other government spending priorities and rattle markets It's been projected before but we are getting closer and closer and are gathering speed. The penny plan seems to be the best solution (reduce spending by 1% per year and problem fixes itself in about 5 years) of the current proposals that are out there but not getting any traction. The left would not support it (not a slight at them) and the right would support it so why not meet each other half way and cover the other half with tax increases an equal amount (I would suggest elimination of deductions/credits than rate increases), and you get to the same place in about 5 years and no side gave more than the other side.

I hope not but you could be right. At this point in our story, I think it is time for a Constitutional Convention as the electoral cycle as created by the current US Constitution is not able to synchronize with or span current policy cycles in the modern United States of America and our Federal government in its representative bodies is not able to generate the levels of consensus for it to operate as designed in the current US Constitution. Stumbling from one showdown to showdown, party line vote, Continuing Resolution at the last minute is not sustainable in the long run. Less done at the Federal level but what is done at that level being done well leaves less to get screwed up and contentious. Follow on: What if the Federal Government remained essentially the tripartite system but was split with the Senate and House powers, roles and responsibilities more clearly delineated and legislation to be created and passed thru them NOT having to pass thru the other legislative body for resolution before going to the Executive for approval or veto? Hypothetically the House could pass appropriations & legislation for Agencies A,B and C to administer National Policies on Commerce, Agriculture and etc...; the Senate could pass appropriations (new power) & legislation for Agencies X, Y and Z for National Defense, Presidential Appointments, etc... Almost the same structure but without that huge step of coordination between separate legislative bodies that can and soon will be under different political party majorities, you make legislation to regularly and in a normal fashion MUCH easier to create, debate, refine and pass to allow a modern nation-state to function in an un-dramatic way.

Agreed unfortunately. When 50% of the electorate pays no income taxes they don't care about your great income tax cut you passed last year. They don't own stocks so they could give a shit what the Dow Jones is. They don't have any money to pass to their children so they don't care if there is a federal inheritance tax or not. They live day to day, paycheck to paycheck because the globalized economy transferred their places in our economies to the developed world while enriching the investor, academic and administrator class. They see this and they are right to be pissed. We (conservatives) have come to look with disdain on government action that improves the lot of the common man and expect them (the electorate) to be able to trace the good or improving things in their lives (particularly their economic circumstances) to broad national policies that you would have to connect the dots thru in a very tenuous sense. We expect a machinist in the Mid-west to see how reducing marginal tax rates on individuals making over 500k a year leads to higher investment in small business and that's why he has a job, gimme a break. We expect a dude in his 50s established in a town with a family and connections to not be resentful as hell when his job is outsourced and to see how it really serves the greater good to more efficiently source his function overseas and that creative destruction in capitalism is fine, just depends on which end of the whip your on... Conservatives can remain true to the principals of limited government and use the scale/ability of the federal government to broadly improve the lives of the working/middle class in this country. Modern conservatism in any modern advanced state with an industrial or post-industrial economy should be on limited but effective and focused national governance that excels in a few areas rather than our current model of the federal government being mediocre in a lot of areas. Use those few but well executed functions to enable and secure the largest possible middle class that is the only way a stable democracy can survive in a large and diverse country. I am not for an intrusive all encompassing federal government but the people want some basic reassurance that if they obey the law, support their families and are loyal to this country, that the federal government will give them a reasonable safety net. As conservatives, we have to accept that but deliver it in a realistic, sustainable and understandable way that does not enslave the industrious to the lazy and modestly insures the honest and hardworking from the whims of fate.

Only in America... The phrase "her penis" is a crime against logic: Trans woman sues Dallas jail guards who examined her penis to verify which jail she belonged in

If only... Japanese US-2 Seaplane would be my choice if the resources and solid requirement were there for a military seaplane: Now, not to inflame righteous indignation over the controversial topic of aircraft that self-identify as amphibious, there could be some argument made for a capability to reach and supply far flung bases in the Pacific / Indian Ocean theaters that either have little or no infrastructure or in the event that infrastructure (runway, port, helipad, etc...) was destroyed by long-range attack (conventional ballistic missile, cruise or stand-off weapons). The case for a fixed-wing amphibious aircraft would be for a longer unrefuelled range with a greater payload vs a rotary wing or tilt-rotor aircraft, for a land or sea landing/takeoff. With typical hot & humid conditions, that would further erode vertical takeoff / landing performance, the option of a fixed wing water takeoff at a higher GW becomes more valuable. Expensive aircraft for a niche but potentially valuable capability ($116 mil a copy when offered to India in 2016 - ouch that's a lot) but if you were nation with your national interests linked to ocean power projection capabilities with a sometimes bullying neighbor, you might want that...

Candidate has serious case of foot in mouth disease: Democratic socialist candidate calls ‘white working-class’ residents ‘racist’ — and feels the heat

Cool Found a picture of the rear cockpit of the G model Was that right side stick a radar control?

It's another part of their growth in expeditionary capability, not explicitly a military system/capability technically but in about 6.9 seconds it could be adapted to a military role. 17 ordered so far by the Chinese government but article here doesn't specify if it is the PLAN or their CG. On the subject of Chinese expeditionary airpower development, they wanna develop a tanker version of their Y-20: https://www.atimes.com/article/chubby-girls-sister-boost-chinas-military-capability/ Good nick name for the jet also... Interesting photoshop but should have had pods, don't see them developing a boom AR system anytime soon.

Sheez... I didn't realize my innocuous post about a modern flying boat and the novelty of it would need a trigger warning. Just to state the obvious, we are not getting a flying boat and if money grew on trees I would say we should acquire one just because... but it doesn't so we will prioritize and spend money on that which we should / must... as referenced by @DirkDiggler

It was a joke, DD is Code 2 for humor recognizer Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

If they have one we need one... AG600 just made its first water landing: Article on it from Task & Purpose: https://taskandpurpose.com/china-ag600-amphibious-aircraft-landing/

One more article on the 17 Raptors were left to ride out Hurr Michael: https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/24442/we-finally-know-how-many-f-22s-were-left-behind-at-tyndall-afb-during-hurricane-michael

Interesting article / interview on flying the Phantom for the RN... https://hushkit.net/2017/07/31/flying-the-f-4-phantom-ii-british-style/

You've got a point but mainly for the US Defense Establishment, our Allies are far more price conscious than we are. Paradoxically though they have mission systems that have a second role as jobs programs too, particularly with the Euros, no slight at them just an observation. This modular system to a light jet(s) fleet might attract buyers from nations with little to no margin for pork. Good anecdote and I see the point relayed to you by the SESs, defense contractors are subsidized in a non-acknowledged but open secret way with some validity to it. The problem is that it has the second order effects of entitlement and complacency that keeps the industrial base alive but not healthy and innovative necessarily. IDK, I've had this discussion or ones like it over my career at various places and vantage points, now with a little perspective as I approach Old Fart status I think keeping the Industrial Base engaged and the AF adaptive and not stagnant we would do better to buy less "Silver Bullet" type platforms that are once in a generation or two purchases. Diversify the portfolio with higher numbers of modest systems to compliment the high end, we say we do this (Hi Lo mix) but it just doesn't seem to actually work out that way. Strategically staggering purchases for the USAF, USN, USMC, USA, etc... could be a method to keep a steady stream of contracts but that's not the trend of the last 20 years or so..