Page 21 – Key Publishing

thobbes

Forum Replies Created

Viewing 15 posts - 301 through 315 (of 2,012 total)

← 1 2 3 … 20 21 22 … 133 134 135 →

Author

Posts
September 16, 2013 at 7:16 am in reply to: USAF could scrap KC-10, F-15C, and A-10??? #2241469

thobbes
Participant

KC-10 makes the least sense considering the age of the 707-derived airframes. There may be more to the story. Killing future C-17A purchases should keep the KC-10’s alive. Retiring some 707 bodies and moving the mission to KC-10 shouldn’t be ruled out.

Last USAF C-17 just rolled out.

I think they should surplus out the F-15’s and move them to the ANG in exchange for procurement money that was already budgeted and now won’t be spent. I’d like to see the F-15’s houred out before they get drawn down so why not in the ANG?

Most of the F-15C/Ds are with ANG.

Current F-15 servces 3 active duty and 6 ANG units.

Out of those 3 active duty units, 2 are with PACAF and 1 is with USAFE.

The A-10 should be surplus, too, and the Army and Marines should be allowed to pick up whichever ones they want without cost. It’s a shame politics prevents the Army from using what units it needs. The C-27J program was already a good example of the procurement fallacies.

Only if Army/USMC cuts something and doesn’t just increase their expenditure with funs from USAF.

Otherwise it’s what we finance boffins call “robbing Peter to pay Paul.”

September 16, 2013 at 7:11 am in reply to: General Discussion #267702

thobbes
Participant

Totally. Keeps me completely relatively sane!:stupid: :eagerness:

September 16, 2013 at 7:11 am in reply to: What music you listen to while on the Forum. #1868365

thobbes
Participant

Totally. Keeps me completely relatively sane!:stupid: :eagerness:

September 16, 2013 at 7:03 am in reply to: F-35 News & Multimedia thread #2241477

thobbes
Participant

As was many factors. From the quality of the Equipment, Training, Manpower, and on and on and on

Krauts were generally better trained and more experienced. Germans invented modern fireteam tactics and modern armoured tactics. The Luftwaffe also had a lot of experience. Though by late 1944 all of this had gone with most of the Wehrmacht annihilated in Eastern Front and all the decent Western Front units destroyed in battles leading up to Falaise Gap charnel house.

The US went from the 17th Most Powerful Military to Number 1…………

Just out of curiosity who came before them?

What I can see (in no order):

1. USSR – in theory only as shown in 1941!
2. Germany
3. UK – includes Commonwealth including large number of Indian troops
4. Japan – IJA in theory only, though IJN was powerful.

Pre-1940 you would’ve had the French.

So off topic I know.

September 16, 2013 at 6:53 am in reply to: F-35 News & Multimedia thread #2241483

thobbes
Participant

Personally I think the F-35 will be extremely capable once it’s in service.

… unless they are on the payroll of LMA and its partners…

And there’s the question as to these generals. Especially as the current procurement processes are a result of past problems with corruption.

September 16, 2013 at 6:50 am in reply to: General Discussion #267717

thobbes
Participant

Heavy Metal, NWOBHM, Thrash Metal, Death Metal, Power Metal, some Symphonic Black Metal, Groove Metal, some Metalcore, some Gothic Metal, Grindcore and occassionally punk/hardcore.

September 16, 2013 at 6:50 am in reply to: What music you listen to while on the Forum. #1868374

thobbes
Participant

Heavy Metal, NWOBHM, Thrash Metal, Death Metal, Power Metal, some Symphonic Black Metal, Groove Metal, some Metalcore, some Gothic Metal, Grindcore and occassionally punk/hardcore.

September 16, 2013 at 6:44 am in reply to: Dassault Rafale, News & Discussion (XV) #2241487

thobbes
Participant

How many A-10’s and legacy jets have been lost compared to the stealth strike fleet?

That’s not really fair given small size of US stealth fleet as % of overall fleet. And the other thing is stealth jets have not always been deployed in areas where casualties have occurred – e.g. Bosnia where ROEs were very restrictive which meant no active SEAD/DEAD.

The other thing is that none of the foes encountered had modern systems, let alone systems designed to engage LO aircraft.

Still an S-125 bagged an F-117!

It’d be interesting to see what the loss per sortie rate is across the fleet.

Obviously 0% for F-15!

September 16, 2013 at 6:33 am in reply to: USAF could scrap KC-10, F-15C, and A-10??? #2241493

thobbes
Participant

Interesting stuff.

Past articles only quoted A-10 and B-1B as potential retirement options.

Retiring KC-10 seems like a bad idea as it’s apparently the most versatile tanker in the fleet.

September 16, 2013 at 6:25 am in reply to: Boeing and SAAB Look to offer Gripen for USAF's T-X Program #2241495

thobbes
Participant

And many of those variables we never find out about.

September 16, 2013 at 6:11 am in reply to: Western Air Force bright spot – RAAF and Australian Army #2241497

thobbes
Participant

Yet, again you disagree with the experts in the Government, Military, and Industry????

Actually I’m agreeing with them.

The M1 Abrams were brought when the Howard government started emphasising Coalition expeditionary warfare over defence of Australia. Since then the policy has shifted back to defence of Australia and it’s interests.

Hence no Australian deployments to Libya for example, despite Rudd barking about need for NFZ. Hence no Australian commitment to Syria either.

Australia did not deploy Hornets in GW1. They were deployed in 2003 only. Also Australia never deployed Hornets to Afghanistan either.

I could see many cases when even a small force of Tanks could be very worthwhile! This is hardly new in the history of warfare…..When few have deterred many!

Sure, except a token force of tanks doesn’t really fit our current defence policy which is defence of Australia and it’s interests.

For that we need ships and planes as well as mobile light infantry.

Oh and the Government knows this too so is doing the following:

– Investing in E/A-18G
– Investing in transport planes
– planning purchase of F-35 and P-8
– Investing in AWD
– Investing in LHD
– Investing in submarines
– Shifting forces north.
– Recapitalising helicopter forces

And meanwhile:

– Putting more tanks and APCs into storage
– Cancelling Self Propelled Howitzer procurement
– Replacing Reserve M113s with Bushmasters MRAPS
– Replacing Reserve Medium artillery with 81mm mortars.

September 16, 2013 at 6:05 am in reply to: F-35 News & Multimedia thread #2241502

thobbes
Participant

Yet, I wouldn’t call it “cheap

Compared to a German tank or say an M-26 Pershing it was cheap. It was also undergunned until the 76mm and Brit Firefly versions came on line and it was always underarmoured.

Its true capability was manufacturing simplicity, reliability, ease of maintenance etc.

Overly complex in many respect and more importantly not very reliable! Even if Germany had produced simpler and cheaper tanks. It would have did them little good in my opinion. As Germany could not out produce a vastly larger group of opponents. (i.e. Allies)

Allied logistics was a critical component of victory in WWII.

The Americans were very efficient at it and could supply not only their own needs but those of their allies as well.

Especially, today because most countries won’t except the losses that the former USSR or China suffered in WWII.

Which is why conventional war has become rare.

September 16, 2013 at 5:54 am in reply to: Boeing and SAAB Look to offer Gripen for USAF's T-X Program #2241506

thobbes
Participant

Defence procurement is not simple.

There are tenders which are hypothetically based on performance, cost etc but there are also backroom diplomatic dealings and strategic considerations e.g. either Norway or Netherlands had political pressure applied to get F-35 (one of the wikileaks documents).

However Norway or Netherlands might’ve brought F-35s even without this.

Even tenders can be made to favour a certain result by adjusting requirements to meet preferred supplier.

September 16, 2013 at 5:36 am in reply to: Western Air Force bright spot – RAAF and Australian Army #2241611

thobbes
Participant

All depends what a people and it’s Government want to spend………

And we don’t want to spend it on defence.

Key issues in 2013 elections have been:

1. Stopping boat people
2. Economy and jobs creation
3. Who gives the best middle class welfare deal
4. Which leader is less of an idiot – Rudd or Abbott (yep this is why people voted for all these new parties such as Australian Sports Party, Palmer United Party, There’s even a Sex Party).

Beefing up defence budgets does not concern most Australian people.

September 16, 2013 at 5:34 am in reply to: Western Air Force bright spot – RAAF and Australian Army #2241612

thobbes
Participant

What do you think goes with all of those troops they send all over the world??????

ASLAV-25 light wheeled APCs, Bushmaster MRAPs and whatever other light gear they require. ADF’s main roles have been:

1. Training of local forces
2. Provision of special operations

AGAIN WHO IS TALKING ABOUT AN INVASION OF AUSTRALIA????

Defence of Australia has always been the cornerstone of Australian defence policy, though in recent years the shift was Coalition Operations.

The shift is again on defence of Australia.

Hence government never deployed heavy equipment.

What???

Asia-Pacific has seen growth of India and China as well as general rearmament. This has not happened in North America!

The US used tanks all over the Pacific in both WWII and Korea. Including a number of Islands

Except they had 1,000s of tanks and not 59 of which 30-ish are in mothballs.
Author

Posts

Viewing 15 posts - 301 through 315 (of 2,012 total)

← 1 2 3 … 20 21 22 … 133 134 135 →