USAF in trouble?




 
--
 
July 25th, 2008  
Yossarian
 
 

Topic: USAF in trouble?


I don't know, but maybe it is a bad year for the USAF, (literally) Their have been small number of acidents, one involving a Stealth aircraft, and a B 52 that went down with all hands Ive heard.

Also I have heard a F 15 nose popping off last year with a Air Guard unit. Also I have heard rumors of Air Force Missile Command staff sleeping in the silo launch room. Now the also media overated missing nuclear missiles on the B 52 incident.

I dont know what's up, at first with the accidents I thought it might be underfunding. I know that USAF maintanece would not just let a plane that is not fit to fly get airborne. But, then I also thought that is also may be just inactivity.

Let's face it, although the USAF is involved in TWAT, their just hasn't been a air war, or (thank goodness) a nuclear war. Which is what propelled USAF to be one the best through the cold war. Keeping up with the Soviets kept the USAF at a constant rate of work, and even two wars involving major air combat and aerial operations. Plus the constant patrols of Statregic bombers, satelites and fighter planes, I suppose (more of less guestimate)kept aiforce staff, from top brass to one or two stripers on their toes.

TWAT just doen't offer a Airmen's ideal fighting conditions and types of warfare. USAF can go anywhere, and give ground support, but it just doen't fit USAF's capabilites perfectly. Like a 1st world enemy would (like the Soveits were.)

So that's my theory, inactivity caused by ground pounder warfare in TWAT and the untapped capabilities of the USAF,which let's face, half not been fully delpoyed or utilized in actual fighting since the first Gulf War. ( which for strategic missile Air Force staff, that's a good thing, and I hope it stays that way!)

Any USAF persons here, or just anyone familiar with military airpower have something comment, then please feel free to post your thoughts.
July 25th, 2008  
A Can of Man
 
 
Lack of discipline and hardware getting old it seems.
July 26th, 2008  
mmarsh
 
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by the_13th_redneck
Lack of discipline and hardware getting old it seems.
I think that's correct on both counts. Look at the USAF, they have only 1 modern Airframe the F-22 thats actually in limited service.

A-10 (1970s)
C-17 (1970s)
C-130 (Vietnam War)
B-52 (post Korean War)
B-1 (1980s)
B-2 (1980s)
F-15 (1970)
F-16 (1980)
E-3 (1970s)
E-4 (Upgraded Boeing 747 -1970s)
E-8 JSTARS (Upgraded Boeing 707 - 1950s)
HH-53 (Vietnam War)
UH-1N (Vietnam War)

Now in fairness, they have many new designs such as the F-35 and the CV-22 in various states of devolpment, but as it stands now the reliability problems are not a surprise.
--
July 26th, 2008  
A Can of Man
 
 
They really should think about stamping out the same planes from existing factories. Most of these aircraft designs are going to be effective for another twenty or thirty years at the least.

How difficult could that be? It'd be cheaper than coming up with some super futuristic crap that doesn't work half the time.
July 26th, 2008  
Yossarian
 
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by the_13th_redneck
They really should think about stamping out the same planes from existing factories. Most of these aircraft designs are going to be effective for another twenty or thirty years at the least.

How difficult could that be? It'd be cheaper than coming up with some super futuristic crap that doesn't work half the time.

Like the countless projects of the 50s and 60s.
July 26th, 2008  
c/Commander
 
 
I think that, in our lifetimes, the Air Force will begin to see the end of its usefulness as a global fighting force. I'm not saying this because I'm Navy, I'm saying it because it's true. Unless we hit a large-scale conflict with an air power, the Air Force as we know it is going to go the way of the dodo.
July 26th, 2008  
mmarsh
 
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by the_13th_redneck
They really should think about stamping out the same planes from existing factories. Most of these aircraft designs are going to be effective for another twenty or thirty years at the least.

How difficult could that be? It'd be cheaper than coming up with some super futuristic crap that doesn't work half the time.
But the problem is that there are better airplanes out there coming from both Europe and Russia, and that the US older designs could be at a serious disadvantage in a military confict.

The problem of the USAF is getting remedied, but I think they were alittle slow in implimented these remedies.
July 26th, 2008  
Spartacus
 
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by c/Commander
I think that, in our lifetimes, the Air Force will begin to see the end of its usefulness as a global fighting force. I'm not saying this because I'm Navy, I'm saying it because it's true. Unless we hit a large-scale conflict with an air power, the Air Force as we know it is going to go the way of the dodo.
Perhaps. When we say "the end of its usefulness" in regards to the USAF, are we referring to their practical utility or their strategic? Practically, I would agree, USAF had/has no equal and generally will be unchallenged without a large opposing force with a similar sized Airforce. Thus their utility is minimal and is relegated to CAS for "ground pounder warfare".

Strategically, however, I would say that they are essential to maintain and ensure proper training and discipline standards. A large and capable Airforce with the ability to destroy enemy threats before they ever reach US soil is a MUST in terms of both employment and the ever-present idea of deterrance.

Back to the concept of the USAF getting themselve in trouble, absolutely. The AF has had a series of problems and accidents recently that are bringing them under intense amounts of scrutiny. I would say yes, the AF keeps finding ways to get caught with their pants down. I would say yes, their is surely going to be some shaking up in their leadership and hopefully their standards and discipline.

Having lived on joint bases, I will say from my non-USAF experience, that there is a distinct difference in the levels of discipline, training, physical fitness, and work standards from Army to Airforce. I am sure there are variations from command to command and job to job, but the differences I see in everyday encounters with our sister service give me pause.

I am sure someone will take this to heart and think I am picking on the USAF, and that is certainly not my intention. My point is this: the break downs in procedure and protocol that have been occuring recently sound like they derive from a common source: waning discipline. A group of officers carrying nuclear launch codes fall asleep before even arranging trans to their drop off point? Unacceptable. That is the stuff privates are made of. Certainly not one I would trust with such a delicate job.
July 26th, 2008  
SHERMAN
 
 
well, i wouldent say its going to go the way of the dodo. even with no opposing air force striking a large country takes alot of aircraft, manned or unmanned.
July 26th, 2008  
A Can of Man
 
 
The face of the Air Force may change but it won't go away. That'd be stupid.
I remember when I stood guard and stuff or had duty. All the things I did to keep myself from falling asleep. And I didn't even have live ammo at that time. And these guys fall asleep with codes for nukes...
 


Similar Topics
Shake-Up Could Rebalance USAF Priorities, Mullen Says
White House Having Trouble Creating Top War Post
In Fallujah, Marines Bring Goodwill, But Trouble Can Follow
HI from PAM SCHUFFERT/Dad was USAF Cartoonist for AIRMAN MAG
India & USA military relationship