Posted on 01/07/2014 6:17:54 AM PST by US Navy Vet
In the past 50 years, the US Air Force kept the Soviet Union from waging nuclear war on us. The US Air Force kept the communists from taking over South Korea and Western Europe. In the past 50 years, the US spent seventeen trillion dollars in The War On Poverty, and to what end? Generations of welfare recipients whose only accomplishment is that they vote Democrat. It’s time for that Peace Dividend from The War On Poverty.
I see three flaws with your otherwise excellent analysis.
One, the "wings" should be separate and independent services. Otherwise the parent organization might favor one over the other.
Two, the various naval services should be broken into separate surface and submarine services. That way, there could be a US Army submarine service. Because you never know when we will need to sneak a small tank in somewhere.
Three, you make no mention of expanding the Joint Chiefs to accommodate all these additional services. The more bureaucracy the better!
The entire Air Force doesn't need their own special tiger stripe camo leisure suits. The ONLY ones in the Air Force who need camo uniforms are the air crews, PJ's, FAC’s and the Security Forces. The rest can go back to wearing OD green BDU style uniforms.
The Navy doesn't need their aquaflage and the half dozen other camo uniforms they have. The only ones in the Navy who need camo are SEALS, air crews, corpsmen (when assigned to Marine units)
The Army has been a train wreck ever since Shinseki was CoS. First starting with the cook white looking ACU’s which proved ineffective in the desert and especially Afghanistan. Lessons lerned from Afghanistan brought Multicam into the mix, and now they're going to change the uniforms once again with something new.
At least the Coasties have it right in that they keep their uniforms simple.
“Jerk.”
Bite me wing wiper
Unlike you I don’t give a damn what service you’re in, you wear the uniform, you get respect until you behave like an a-hole, like you did.
Got any words for the families of those “examples” I gave?
And I was damn good “wing wiper” btw...I wonder how many Army, Spec Ops or Marines our pilots helped out with CAS. I really don’t care, all I know is they couldn’t have done it without us “wing wipers”.
Got any more cute, childish names to post?
The USAF CH-53D helos were used because the USMC versions had neither drop tanks nor air-to-air refueling, due too budget constraints. The only way to get the range would have been internal 500 gal. ferry tanks which left no room for cargo or pax.
Another problem was that the Air Force pilots were not allowed to practice tactical approaches and landings. They came into the hot LZ like they were landing at LaGuardia and two aircraft were promptly blown out of the sky.
USMC CH-53s use a technique called a "Buttonhook", coming in low, over the treetops at 150kts. When abeam the LZ, drop the collective, roll into 90 degree bank and do a horizontal autorotation. This bleeds off forward airspeed and allows you to drop into the LZ quickly and with lessened exposure to ground fire, while at the same time, not advertizing your intended LZ.
Another service, looking to gain fame & glory by having a presence on the mission, sent a senior NCO. When the aircraft landed, he refused to leave and wrapped both arms around the seat stanchions. The Marines tried to throw him off bodily. I don't remember if they succeeded.
My last billet in HMH-461, a USMC CH-53 squadron, was as the S-2. My Intel sergeant had been on that mission and related the above story to me. We had a framed photo of those two downed USAF CH-53s in shallow water just off the beach LZ.
“In the past 50 years, the US Air Force kept the Soviet Union from waging nuclear war on us.”
Nice that you leave out that Navy’s ballistic missile submarines which are much harder to find and thus destroy compared to fixed bomb magnets such as Air Force bases.
“The US Air Force kept the communists from taking over South Korea and Western Europe.”
And let’s ignore the Army and Marines in South Korea that hold the line, and ignore the Armored Cavalry Regiments in Germany who’s mission was to grind any Soviet advance into Germany to a halt at Fulda and Hof gaps allowing the heavier armored and infantry divisions to mobilize and move to the front.
Right, through 2 World Wars, the Army fought from the air.
Right, through 2 World Wars, the Army fought from the air.
“you behave like an a-hole, like you did”
Project much?
“Got any more cute, childish names to post?”
Funny but it was you who in fact started slinging names around, all I did was reply in kind.
Oh BTW, comparing the PJ’s to the mainstream rank and file Air Force is like calling a Marine a squid. In other words it’s downright insulting. The PJ’s have a totally different ethos than the rank and file AF and quite frankly I consider them as part of SOCOM rather than Air Force.
“Not sure how to read this sentence.”
When I was in Afghanistan, I had several soldiers come up to me in the chow hall to talk about their experiences with CAS. One said he had been ambushed, had half a magazine left, and his buddy to the side of him was on empty when the A-10s showed up and obliterated the enemy.
Ideally, you would never reach that level to begin with. I understand it does happen. But when planning, my goal was to prevent things from reaching that point - either by detecting the ambush site in advance, or by having a faster response available so the guys on the ground wouldn’t be almost out of ammo before help arrived.
An example of getting it right was the night the bad guys tried to move in 300 guys to attack a remote firebase. They were still some miles away when the AC-130 paid them a visit. After the visit, no one was moving. When possible, that is a better way of doing business that waiting for close contact.
Also, fast movers can now do a solid job in CAS. A modern targeting pod is nothing like what I used in the F-111, and the guided munitions are far more accurate. I was lucky enough to do some work on the current targeting pods, and their capability is incredible. In many cases, a person at 20,000 feet has a BETTER chance of killing the bad guys in close contact than someone flying at 100 feet.
Stuff happens, and sometimes one has to react to salvage a bad situation. But the goal should always be to have a plan that prevents that from happening.
Rant on...you degraded and demeaned the service of many people and for me, that is an unforgivable sin.
Since being called on it, you insist on doubling down on stupid.
Do you have any words for the AIRMEN’s families in the links I offered?
What about the maintainers who ensure those pilots get to the AOR for you grunts? You know the ones, “wing wipers”.
I respect anyone who has worn the uniform until they themselves decide to lose it. I have no respect for anyone who would engage in demeaning and degrading fellow service members through gross generalizations, regardless of their jobs.
Those TACP’s have no job unless and until...
the “wing wipers” do their jobs, the “motorheads” do theirs, the “tweaks” do theirs, the “bb stackers” do theirs, and on and on...terms of “endearment” we “wing wipers” use amongst ourselves, knowing full well the reason those pilots are going into harms way. All so we have jets in the air for those TACP’s to call on...
To help those fellow servicemembers on the ground.
I don’t consider you a “fellow” anything after your posts.
Bye.
James Carroll's father, Joseph Carroll, was a Lieutenant General in the Air Force and the founding director of the Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA) and the Air Force Office of Special Investigations (AFOSI).
James has been working through the implications of that his whole life, largely in public.
Curiously, both father and son started out studying for the priesthood.
“Curiously, both father and son started out studying for the priesthood”, So did Hitler and Stalin.
>>Let’s just get rid of Air Force One.<<
I was wondering if anyone else was thinking about this excellent idea.
Will these really be accomplished? I'm not so certain about the first - going from a three-way rivalry to a two-way one does not necessarily mean lessening its expense. Collapsing commands may, however, save money by eliminating officer billets if that is an added criterion. Most peacetime services do tend to be quite top-heavy: having more admirals than ships is absurd.
Focusing tactics is a bit of a sore spot among the Army especially, whose advocates see ground-support assets such as the A-10 being pushed aside in favor - as they see it - of the glory of the high fliers. We have, after all, fought a number of ground wars since WWII but rather less in terms of air wars, at least in terms of air supremacy. That's what our money has bought us.
I'd like to throw out a third arena, though, that isn't covered by Army or Navy needs but is addressed by the Air Force - space. Here we have two difficulties: first that actual operations there are classified and little available to the general public, because second, space is nominally demilitarized by international law. Save your laughter, it really is, and that tends to make operations there very black, and procurement for those operations very difficult for us arm-chair types to judge.
I'm not certain that consolidating services will help this last arena very much. I do think that all the services could benefit a great deal from a top-down haircut in terms of officer billets.
Thoughts? What did I miss?
“Otherwise the parent organization might favor one over the other.”
Heck, you get that already within the branches.
“Since being called on it, you insist on doubling down on stupid.”
Just like I called you on the name calling, and you just keep ‘em commin’?
So who’s doubled down on stupid again?
“Bye.”
Good riddance!
How much money does it cost to have duplicate administrative functions, for separate branches?
Doesn’t that duplication detract from direct line capability?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.