oops, my mistake. it was an SA-3 which was even older 😀

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CK2ei5-FHxk

I heard it was a slingshot 🙂

Political Realignment

I think the way to go in such a direction has to be determined by government policies. In the case of the USAF, the doctrine should be dedicated to the air defense of the United States. I have long been a believer in the notion that the U.S. should not be the world’s police force. The biggest cuts I would make is in overseas real estate. Ending our presence in Europe and Japan would save lots of money as would ending the wars. This would help produce figures of what would be needed to meet any threat posed to the CONUS or it’s territories.

Removing the older airframes in service would be the second biggest reduction. All of the aged F-15, F-16, T-38 and KC-135 airframes would be retired and help in reserve. Newly refurbished A-10’s can be sold if their numbers become too great. The RoKAF would be a nice customer for the A-10. Those C-130/C-5 airframes that are borderline ‘safe to fly’ would be reassigned for use as spares. A significant part of the UAV/UCAV contingent would also be sold-off. A ‘Do we really still need the U-2’ study would be commissioned.

I would fix the price for the F-35A at $75,000,000.00 per example. I really would like to cancel the program, but do not think that is a realistic choice. I do not even claim to, now, understand the politics around the corruption of the F-35 program, but would if this were my job. 75 mil a piece, LM et al can eat the costs of any overages. Take it or leave it. The Eurofighter Typhoon of F-16E/F would not be that a bad an alternative. These types are not the F-35, but when I was in the service, I was hardly ever given the best tool for the job (If I were even given tools at all). All F-22’s (including the one in the USAF museum) would be assigned to the air defense of the CONUS.

The best of what is already in service would stay to match the numbers needed to fulfill the mission.

Some of the F22 community have asked not to have to fly it until its safe according to a well sourced piece on the DEWline blog:

http://www.flightglobal.com/blogs/the-dewline/2012/05/some-f-22-pilots-asking-not-to.html

I’ll take one for the team and fly one for the USAF 🙂

I would have a tough time imaging a scenario where something like that would be needed. U.S./NATO vs. China/N. Korea perhaps, but I don’t see the U.S. and China going to war for economic reasons. Interesting concept, however.

Surplus F/A-18’s

USN/USMC F/A-18s are aged, but can be refurbished far easier than it would be for what it would take to get the AMX on a carrier. I have never been a big fan of the Harrier and cannot see the return in capability for all of the time, effort and money invested. This is not to say the Harrier isn’t a capable platform, just that there are better option afloat.

It certainly is a static airframe.

http://www.abpic.co.uk/photo/1259964/

I don’t think the Mig-29 has very long legs when compared with something like the F-15. I wonder what the Fulcrum’s maneuvering capability is with the two tanks? They do not look like supersonic tanks either.

Slick Looking Aircraft

I hope it does well.