USAF News and Discussion

ngatimozart

Super Moderator
Staff member
Verified Defense Pro
Well if the USAF thinks it needs to increase its heavy airlift capability then perhaps speeding up the development of a new lifter with some stealth features makes more sense along with a modified version for tanker service. From a selfish POV, restarting C-17 production might allow the RCAF to acquire 2-3 more.
I think that they may want them sooner rather than later, so a 20 year development program may not be the answer in the short term.
 

John Fedup

The Bunker Group
I wonder where the USAF deep thinkers were in 2015 when Boeing closed the Long Beach plant? Then there were the 10 whitetails that were ignored. What do they know now that wasn't apparent a mere three years ago? The possibility of confronting a first tier opponent has no doubt heightened the concerns for increased airlift but this isn't new. Perhaps the feeling now is it's more probable.
 

the concerned

Active Member
If it was possible to restart production would you build the same or look to build a improved version. If so what could you do to improve it
 

John Fedup

The Bunker Group
This link suggests some ideas that were suggested for the C-17. IMO, only the C-17B variant makes any sense but even its improvements probably couldn't justify the costs. A KC-17 was also considered but the C-17's operating costs are too high for this role compared to converted airliners. If production were to be restarted, the best improvement would be more economical engines to reduce operating costs.

Three types of C-17s That Never Took Off
 

ASSAIL

The Bunker Group
Verified Defense Pro
I wonder where the USAF deep thinkers were in 2015 when Boeing closed the Long Beach plant? Then there were the 10 whitetails that were ignored. What do they know now that wasn't apparent a mere three years ago? The possibility of confronting a first tier opponent has no doubt heightened the concerns for increased airlift but this isn't new. Perhaps the feeling now is it's more probable.
The “deep thinkers” were in congress under the Obama administration where “sequestration” was the order of the day.
 

John Fedup

The Bunker Group
That's great news for the USAF. Hopefully this near miss will result in very carefully planning as to where these jets should be positioned in the future. Even if Tyndall is rebuilt, there is no need to base F-22s there during hurricane season, a fleet of 4th Gen and some F-35s during those months will do the job.
 

south

Well-Known Member
That's great news for the USAF. Hopefully this near miss will result in very carefully planning as to where these jets should be positioned in the future. Even if Tyndall is rebuilt, there is no need to base F-22s there during hurricane season, a fleet of 4th Gen and some F-35s during those months will do the job.
Unfortunately you can’t move assets around like that.

For example because that’s where the raptors are home based it’s where the drivers and maintainers live, their partners and families live, work and go to school, where the contractors and support assets are setup to look after them. It’s also likely the airspace is suitable for F-22 where other areas may not be.

Same for the 4th gen and F-35’s. They won’t want to move out of their home base for long stretches.

The USAF fighter fleets are already struggling enough with retention that moving people around, TDY, for 6 months at a time for non-operational weather reasons is unlikely as it will only agitate and frustrate more people who are already voting with their feet. .
 

AegisFC

Super Moderator
Staff member
Verified Defense Pro
That's great news for the USAF. Hopefully this near miss will result in very carefully planning as to where these jets should be positioned in the future. Even if Tyndall is rebuilt, there is no need to base F-22s there during hurricane season, a fleet of 4th Gen and some F-35s during those months will do the job.
That storm was a fluke in so many ways. It went from tropical storm to damned near a Cat 5 in a very short amount of time and it is the strongest storm to hit that area in recorded history, and it is a part of Florida that does not get many storms.

The USAF did a fantastic job getting what they could out on very short notice while also getting them and their families out as well.
 

John Fedup

The Bunker Group
Move them to other F-22 bases and restrict there use until the worst part of hurricane season is over. A little over 180 jets that need to last at least another 25 years makes them too valuable to risk losing to something that is preventable.
 

Millennium7

Member
Speaking of the F-22, some interesting footage here of stuff that, likely, won't be done at Tyndall anymore.


Mod Edit: Embedded link promoting a YouTube channel deleted.

-Preceptor
 
Last edited by a moderator:

the concerned

Active Member
I have been reading up on the new supersonic airliner called overture. I was wondering if they could adapt this aircraft for military use. Maybe a long overdue replacement for the Raven.
 

ngatimozart

Super Moderator
Staff member
Verified Defense Pro
I have been reading up on the new supersonic airliner called overture. I was wondering if they could adapt this aircraft for military use. Maybe a long overdue replacement for the Raven.
Do you have a link to material on this new SST? Would not the Growler be the Raven replacement?
 

John Fedup

The Bunker Group
Here’s a more positive article on the KC-46. I am still skeptic however but I guess having 8 jets out in the real world will reveal if the two mentioned problems are minimal. Two interesting comments, 179 jets ordered but 400 eventually hoped for, and there is no plan B. I call BS on the latter point. The Airbus alternative is viable and might be better for the Pacific theatre. Hell, if 400 aircraft are required then a split buy for the first 200 would have made sense IMO and let the best performer get the 200 additional follow on order.

Five Reasons The Air Force Has Begun Taking Delivery Of Boeing's KC-46A Pegasus Tanker
 

barney41

Member
Here’s a more positive article on the KC-46. I am still skeptic however but I guess having 8 jets out in the real world will reveal if the two mentioned problems are minimal. Two interesting comments, 179 jets ordered but 400 eventually hoped for, and there is no plan B. I call BS on the latter point. The Airbus alternative is viable and might be better for the Pacific theatre. Hell, if 400 aircraft are required then a split buy for the first 200 would have made sense IMO and let the best performer get the 200 additional follow on order.

Five Reasons The Air Force Has Begun Taking Delivery Of Boeing's KC-46A Pegasus Tanker
It's unlikely IMO that if ever additional tankers are to be ordered the AF will solicit bids for 200 a/c. More likely they buy smaller numbers yearly spread out over a decade or more. KC-46 will enjoy the advantages accruing to being the incumbent.
 

the concerned

Active Member
I always hoped originally they would have gone for a split buy. Say 120 kc-46's and 59 kc-45's. Even done the second batch the same . Surely they would have got a better fleet.
 
Top