Sen. Bond from Missourri wants it to happen.....pretty sure it won't though.
http://www.govexec.com/story_page.cfm?articleid=43334&dcn=todaysnews
http://www.govexec.com/story_page.cfm?articleid=43334&dcn=todaysnews
-
Please take a moment and update your account profile. If you have an updated account profile with basic information on why you are on Air Warriors it will help other people respond to your posts. How do you update your profile you ask?
Go here:
Edit Account Details and Profile
ANG F-18s??
- Thread starter Mumbles
- Start date
Yeah, I'm not holding my breath on this one. Mainly because it sounds like a decent idea.
I'm sure they'd like to get the newest, highest-quality planes they can, but this would make it easier to get #'s and quantity has a quality all it's own.
I'm sure they'd like to get the newest, highest-quality planes they can, but this would make it easier to get #'s and quantity has a quality all it's own.
Interesting tactic on his part... sure is one way to get a discussion moving! I'd love to know if this remark was off-the-cuff or not.
(Anyone remember the F-18L McAir tried to sell through FMS?)
Hate to say it, but an F-16 Block 60 will do 'bout anything an F-18E/F can do. But an F-18F wired w/ EF-18 electronic circuitry (a la the Aussies) would be a big deal for the AF. Especially since they have taken themselves out of the electronic strike support business. Such an F-18 would really help them. You're right, PropAddict, makes just too much sense.
No military equipment related challenge can be solved without the "Cash For Clunkers" program. I know I know. SWO- egress the wardroom now.
Seriously- I'm begining to think that our CIC would rather leverage our financial future on his own personal agenda's rather than on what the professionals in each military service deems necessary for operational readiness.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but I think there is more than one alternative to remedy this situation.
Seriously- I'm begining to think that our CIC would rather leverage our financial future on his own personal agenda's rather than on what the professionals in each military service deems necessary for operational readiness.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but I think there is more than one alternative to remedy this situation.
And this has what to do with this thread?
Not all, mainly the ones that the Air Guard uses for CONUS alerts/intercept missions, ie. 'Air Sovereignty Alert' missions. They often use older model F-16's and F-15's that are a lot closer to the end of their service lives than the active USAF ones. The most likely, and ironically enough the one that makes the most sense, is just to buy some new F-16's to fill the gap until a lot more F-35's come off the line. Kind of like what the Navy is looking at with our own 'fighter gap' and the proposal to buy more Super Hornets to fill the gap until the F-35's arrive in big numbers.
Just a note, F/A-18's are made in Missouri, where the good Senator who made this proposal is from.
Actually, since it was originally a Northrop design (YF-17), McDonnell Douglas was supposed to make the sea-based version (since they had expertise in that arena), and Northrop had the F-18L (for land-based FMS version). The guy I flew with for 18 months in the Regular Navy got out and went to work for Northrop as the program manager for the F-18L. I remember visiting him at the Northrop plant in early 1977, just after I left active duty.
Hi Flash,
I hope you are well.
I'm not an aviator but as I think back to the mid to late 80's when the MIL make similar comments about the A-6's useful life span- the gov't assessed the situation and came up with a remedy - composite/epoxy wing replacements (Boeing?)if memory serves. I don't know what the 16's main issues are but it appears that no one so far has been specific about the 16's life span shortcomings. Thus my comment about possible alternative solutions.
And of couse our CIC is unlikely to see any MIL issue being as important in comparison to his personal priorities in addressing/executing his current economic recovery agenda, as skewed as it may be.
What I mean is that not many individuals thinks he/she can get out of economic trouble by acquiring more credit cards. GW started the spending fiasco and now BO has now taken it to whole a new level.
Have a good weekend. Be safe.
CAMike
I hope you are well.
I'm not an aviator but as I think back to the mid to late 80's when the MIL make similar comments about the A-6's useful life span- the gov't assessed the situation and came up with a remedy - composite/epoxy wing replacements (Boeing?)if memory serves. I don't know what the 16's main issues are but it appears that no one so far has been specific about the 16's life span shortcomings. Thus my comment about possible alternative solutions.
And of couse our CIC is unlikely to see any MIL issue being as important in comparison to his personal priorities in addressing/executing his current economic recovery agenda, as skewed as it may be.
What I mean is that not many individuals thinks he/she can get out of economic trouble by acquiring more credit cards. GW started the spending fiasco and now BO has now taken it to whole a new level.
Have a good weekend. Be safe.
CAMike
CAMike says "I don't know what the 16's main issues are but it appears that no one so far has been specific about the 16's life span shortcomings". Well, others here know better than I, but the Navy had about 6 F-16A's they used in the adversary role at Top Gun, and they retired them after about 8 yrs of service because the wings & mainframes were suffering badly from G fatigue. The AF still has about 250 early-model (A's) of the F-16 & F-15 in the Guard & the Reserves. They could all go to Davis-Mothan next week if there were replacements available.
Either this was supposed to be a PM and you had too many browser windows open, or that was a very nicely formatted post reply.
Or you're trying to threadjack this into an anti-Obama thing again. Please don't - those never go anywhere useful.
Anyway - AF Rhinos will never happen. Unless every single F-16 in American hands catches fire in the next six months, AF leadership would rather eat their children than admit that their acquisition priorities force them into buying Navy airplanes. Plus, they would either have to set up their own AIMD/Depot-equivalent maintainence pipeline for them, or piggyback off the Navy's, which definitely ain't going to happen.
Solution will probably be a combination of duct-taping existing Vipers and reducing flight time, maybe dusting off and refurbishing some out of the boneyard.
Or, I wonder if there's been much thought to having some of the Reserve VFA guys take up a part of this mission. I don't know how the politics would play out, but seems like it wouldn't take more than keeping a couple of armed alert jets and pilots on the ramp - not a major amount of money or time like buying more planes for the AF.
D'oh, I got that mixed up... it was Northrop who gambled a bit on the F-18L (and later on gambled a lot the F-5G/F-20).
It seemed like a great concept- a lightweight* de-navalized F-18 would really perform. There weren't a lot of serious takers and eventually all of the exports were variations on the A/B/C/D model. I wonder which is a stranger world to work in- DoD acquisitions or FMS?
