The Donald Goes After LockMart and the F-35

BWER said:
The problem is once you are at that level it is political. You want to keep your job? Good, keep talking the good talk.

Talk to any officer or SNCO and they will tell you that politics plays a larger role in their day to day life than it should.

Sent from my Nexus 5X using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

Oh I know it does. Politics plays a huge part even at the E4/E5 stage.
 
On a broader scale, the US has been involved against mostly low-tech countries. Same as us (the French). Wether in Africa (Sangaris and Barkane operations) or in Afghanistan (Epidote), we have only engaged ground troops hiding in dirt houses, maybe a couple of WWII tanks. Is there such a need as the F-35 ? This would mean a symmetrical war and I doubt this would be settled though fighters, unfortunately. There seems to be some kind of distortion between the geopolitical reality vs. the wars and needs of the USAF ?
 
Pépé le Pilot said:
On a broader scale, the US has been involved against mostly low-tech countries. Same as us (the French). Wether in Africa (Sangaris and Barkane operations) or in Afghanistan (Epidote), we have only engaged ground troops hiding in dirt houses, maybe a couple of WWII tanks. Is there such a need as the F-35 ? This would mean a symmetrical war and I doubt this would be settled though fighters, unfortunately. There seems to be some kind of distortion between the geopolitical reality vs. the wars and needs of the USAF ?
Click to expand...
Yeah no. We have used our various fighter jets to bomb entire sections/targets of cities/countries in the ME and I am not talking about mud houses, and we have used them against ISIS, the Taliban and Al Qaeda who are embedded in the various mountain ranges, hills and in the valleys. They have also been used to destroy key buildings (again not mud huts) where ISIS has either stayed/is staying, had communications systems, munitions, weapon caches, or other substantial rewards to target. We have used our fighters to bomb heavy equipment and various combat vehicles held by the various terrorist groups as well.

In August, we sent two B-52 bombers over there, the first since I believe the Gulf war. Since Russia entered the fray, we have had to send our fighters up on several occasions now to warn the Russians and Syria not to bomb or to stop bombing where we have our Special Forces embedded (like with the Kurds in various locations), and where other coalition troops are also embedded. (the Russians are such dicks) We had B-1 bombers over there, but sent them back to the US in February or March of this year for maintenance. The AF F-15's, F-16s, F-22's fighters and drones, have flown consistently and have flown more than half of the combat missions in the ME. We've even this year, piloted by the Marines, used A-10's over there and the Navy has been using their F-18's for several years now.

The variety/diversities of missions are enumerable and the bulk of "fighting" has been from the air. At one point earlier this year, we had completed something like 5, 200 airstrikes and I haven't kept up on how many currently. The US produces like 85% of the air strikes over there. We have protected and supported the Peshmerga ground troops, various coalition fighters/troops and even the Iraqi Security Forces. Pilots and their WO's also fly missions besides targeted bombings, where they perform reconnaissance and gather intelligence on watching patterns of civilians and trying to discern what vehicles for example or buildings are occupied by terrorists. They also look for enemy troops, vehicles and weapons.

We have used our fighters to also destroy supply routes and bridges.We also use our fighters to see/monitor if terrorists are still crossing over from Turkey's borders. We also used our fighters to bomb many of ISIS's oil refineries and the lines of massive trucks that formed on the roads leading to the ISIS controlled oil fields.

I am sure that members here from the Military (current and former who have been there/done that) can certainly report on more than I can, even through I try to keep up as best as I can and they can explain the need for our fighters and the F-35, their targets and various missions.

Right now we are using our fighter jets alongside French jets, Iraqi AF jets in Mosul, our drones, along with our helicopter gunships (Apaches). The Danes have/are in the process of bailing from the ME. And the latest news ( at least that I am reading with crappy google translator in some ME newspapers) is now that ISIS has developed their own unmanned drones.
 
Last edited:
A Life Aloft said:
Yeah no. We have used our various fighter jets to bomb entire sections/targets of cities/countries in the ME and I am not talking about mud houses, and we have used them against ISIS, the Taliban and Al Qaeda who are embedded in the various mountain ranges, hills and in the valleys. They have also been used to destroy key buildings (again not mud huts) where ISIS has either stayed/is staying, had communications systems, munitions, weapon caches, or other substantial rewards to target. We have used our fighters to bomb heavy equipment and various combat vehicles held by the various terrorists as well.

In August, we sent two B-52 bombers over there, the first since I believe the Gulf war. Since Russia entered the fray, we have had to send our fighters up on several occasions now to warn the Russians and Syria not to bomb or to stop bombing where we have our Special Forces embedded (like with the Kurds in various locations), and where other coalition troops are also embedded. (the Russians are such dicks) We had B-1 bombers over there put sent them back to the US in February or March of this year for maintenance. The AF F-15's, F-16s, F-22's fighters and drones, have flown consistently and have flown more than half of the combat missions in the ME. We've even this year, piloted by the Marines, used A-10's over there and the Navy has been using their F-18's for several years now.

The variety/diversities of missions are enumerable and the bulk of "fighting" has been from the air. At one point earlier this year, we had completed something like 5, 200 airstrikes and I haven't kept up on how many currently. The US produces like 85% of the air strikes over there. We have protected and supported the Peshmerga ground troops, various coalition fighters/troops and even the Iraqi Security Forces. Pilots and their WO's also fly missions besides targeted bombings and they also do reconnaissance and gather intelligence on watching patterns of civilians and trying to discern what vehicles for example or buildings are occupied by terrorists. They also look for enemy troops, vehicles and weapons.

We have used our fighters to also destroy supply routes and bridges.We also use our fighters to see/monitor if terrorists are still crossing over from Turkey's borders. We also used our fighters to bomb many of ISIS's oil refineries and the lines of massive trucks that formed on the roads leading to the ISIS controlled oil fields.

I am sure that members here from the Military (current and former who have been there/done that) can certainly report on more than I can, even through I try to keep up as best as I can and can explain the need for our fighters and the F-35.

Right now we are using our fighter jets alongside French jets, Iraqi AF jets in Mosul, our drones, along with our helicopter gunships (Apaches). The Danes have/are in the process of bailing from the ME. And the latest news ( at least that I am reading with crappy google translator in some ME newspapers) is now that ISIS has developed their own unmanned drones.
Click to expand...

You know, for not having direct access to the CAOC or a SIPR drop that was a remarkably well informed picture of what is going on over here.

There is an amazing amount of metal moving in the air over here. Conversely there is a stupidly huge air defense capability in places like Damascus much less Ukraine or the South China Sea. Yes we absolutely need more advanced aircraft because every year the number of sorties needed to effectively hit the same target (and the expected losses that go with it) goes up. What used to take 4 jets a few TLAMs a tanker and some SEAD/Jammers now takes 4 times that.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
I greatly admire and respect our Military. I am and have always been extremely proud of our men and women who serve. I have followed the best that I can (using crappy assed google translator for ME newspapers and news sources), the writings of embedded (not US) foreign journalists, sites written by experts in the ME, various Military sites and defense sites, various books written by former Military men, and various sites explaining the history of the ME, since we first went to the ME. I try to keep up weekly or at least bi-weekly. I have to use/read/look at dozens of sites and sources to come up with a truer picture, well much truer than I would ever get from any US media, of what the hell we are doing there and what is going on. Our own government tells us little. Still, I don't know everything, obviously.

I try to visit the sites of our various bases here and abroad and try to keep up somewhat on our equipment, weapons, vehicles, planes, ships etc., and new items in the research stages and or being developed. And that is the most difficult for me because of how enormous and global our Military is, the different branches and all the thousands of types of missions that they can and do perform and how technical the data is on weapons, planes, ships and such and how dense I am as a civilian. I read the Military guys talking on here and I have to look up half the damn terms. Plus, I ask Mike D a lot of idiotic questions. lol

So while I am at it, and yes, I would like us out of the sand pits yesterday.........something I have no control of......so while you are there, I sincerely want you to accomplish five things. Kick some GD ISIS ass, protect our men and the coalition forces, stay safe, let your brothers know that we are proud of them and thinking of them daily, and come home to us in one piece. Thank you, sir.
 
Last edited:
The B-52's are based at Al Udeid Air Base in Qatar. Have they been in the ME at any time in the last 25 years to be specifically used there? Did you know we had two OV-10 Broncos over there (flown by Navy pilots) earlier this year for three months flying as cover for ground troops? Lot's of interesting info available if you take the time to look to find it.
 
Last edited:
A Life Aloft said:
The B-52's are based at Al Udeid Air Base in Qatar. Have they been in the ME at any time in the last 25 years to be specifically used there? Did you know we had two OV-10 Broncos over there (flown by Navy pilots) earlier this year for three months flying as cover for ground troops? Lot's of interesting info available if you take the time to look to find it.
Click to expand...

Ah, I didn't realize you meant based there. I was like B-52's having been bombing over there for over a decade...

And you said A-10's piloted by Marines, not OV-10. And yes I knew we had used them.
 
Oddly enough, there were both A-10 as well as B-2 exchanges for EA-6B pilots in the past. I think the A-10 one still stands, at least in terms of wider USN TACAIR, not sure if the B-2 one still exists.
 
///AMG said:
Oddly enough, there were both A-10 as well as B-2 exchanges for EA-6B pilots in the past. I think the A-10 one still stands, at least in terms of wider USN TACAIR, not sure if the B-2 one still exists.
Click to expand...

EA-6B was one of the few exchanges A-10 pilots could participate in, as there were limited opportunities for A-10 pilots. The exchange to the EA-6B were for the four joint land based VAQs that then existed only. That exchange eventually ended and only USAF EWOs were allowed to exchange to the EA-6Bs.
 
Interesting, thought I had heard stories of lead wing dudes bagging traps in Prowlers. May have just been rumor. As an aside, we do have opportunities for A-10 dudes to come fly F/A-18's. Our A-10 guy hated to go any higher than 10k feet, was his wingman for his last Navy flight, don't think we went higher than that.
 
///AMG said:
Interesting, thought I had heard stories of lead wing dudes bagging traps in Prowlers. May have just been rumor. As an aside, we do have opportunities for A-10 dudes to come fly F/A-18's. Our A-10 guy hated to go any higher than 10k feet, was his wingman for his last Navy flight, don't think we went higher than that.
Click to expand...

The AF guys used to be able to get day CQ in the Prowler, but that stopped when it was determined that the joint squadrons would only be land based. A buddy of mine was the last AF pilot to get that. The Hornet exchange wasn't around in my day. For us for combat jet exchanges, it was foreign OA-37, Italian AF Tornado, RAF Jaguar, and a couple others. We generally didn't go to radar-centric aircraft for obvious reasons, so how the Hornet exchange came about, was after my time. All Hornet exchanges, both interservice as well as international, in my time were F-15A/C/E guys, or F-16 guys.

A couple cool assignments for USAF EWOs was the EA-6B, and for WSOs was RAAF F-111C/Gs.
 
MikeD said:
The AF guys used to be able to get day CQ in the Prowler, but that stopped when it was determined that the joint squadrons would only be land based. A buddy of mine was the last AF pilot to get that. The Hornet exchange wasn't around in my day. For us for combat jet exchanges, it was foreign OA-37, Italian AF Tornado, RAF Jaguar, and a couple others. We generally didn't go to radar-centric aircraft for obvious reasons, so how the Hornet exchange came about, was after my time. All Hornet exchanges, both interservice as well as international, in my time were F-15A/C/E guys, or F-16 guys.

A couple cool assignments for USAF EWOs was the EA-6B, and for WSOs was RAAF F-111C/Gs.
Click to expand...

There's a few exchanged available for WSOs with the RAAF FA-18Fs as well as the Navy EA-18Gs. The USAF and the Aussies have a pretty good relationship.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top