PDA

View Full Version : F-22 to South Korea



BRUWIN
04-01-2013, 09:17 AM
What's the real story? Is there an Air Show at Osan?

http://www.cnn.com/2013/04/01/world/asia/koreas-tensions/index.html

Robert F. Dorr
04-01-2013, 09:25 AM
What's the real story? Is there an Air Show at Osan?

http://www.cnn.com/2013/04/01/world/asia/koreas-tensions/index.html

The North Koreans told me that the F-22 still does not have an adequate datalink to enable its pilot to send and receive to and from other platforms in the battlespace. Moreover, there aren't many of them. The North Koreans may be equipped mostly with teenaged MiGs (MiG-17) but they have a lot of them. It's unclear whether they intend to participate in the air show and contribute to the pyrotechnic portion of the event.

KellyinAvon
04-01-2013, 09:38 AM
The North Koreans told me that the F-22 still does not have an adequate datalink to enable its pilot to send and receive to and from other platforms in the battlespace. Moreover, there aren't many of them. The North Koreans may be equipped mostly with teenaged MiGs (MiG-17) but they have a lot of them. It's unclear whether they intend to participate in the air show and contribute to the pyrotechnic portion of the event.

Which north korean Bob? The one in the big hat? The one in the Khruschev hat? The one in the Charles de Gaulle hat? The ones crying? Was it the crazy one with the Moe Howard haircut?

As far as a bunch of Mig-17s, that's quite possible.

DocBones
04-01-2013, 10:30 AM
Aren't the Mig 17s airframes getting a tad bit old to be flyable?

imported_blacksheep1208
04-01-2013, 10:50 AM
What's the real story? Is there an Air Show at Osan?

http://www.cnn.com/2013/04/01/world/asia/koreas-tensions/index.html

The ultimate air show if this keeps up. And I saw them land the other day, it was somewhat surreal.

BOSS302
04-01-2013, 10:55 AM
Aren't the Mig 17s airframes getting a tad bit old to be flyable?

As long as they can fly one "kamikaze" mission towards Seoul, that's all that matters. Small amounts of "the best" cannot fully-stop huge waves of "the worst".

Many analysts agree that North Korean forces would be neutralized in 72-96 hours. However, in those hours, Seoul and Incheon would be burning; the South Korean economy would nose-dive; South Korea would require another "Miracle on the Han" to overcome the damage done.

JD2780
04-01-2013, 11:29 AM
Yea they need to be careful. I mean who wants to send a multimillion dollar asset to war when we can keep it on the sidelines? Oh wait, that's the AF. It cost Airmen their jobs so let's not be to hasty with it.

KellyinAvon
04-01-2013, 11:39 AM
The B-57s destroyed on the ground in Vietnam (1965 maybe??) Da Nang or Bien Hoa? Is history about to repeat or am I just having a PFE (Promotion Fitness Exam, Bob and others) flashback?

JD2780
04-01-2013, 11:40 AM
The B-57s destroyed on the ground in Vietnam (1965 maybe??) Da Nang or Bien Hoa? Is history about to repeat or am I just having a PFE (Promotion Fitness Exam, Bob and others) flashback?

It's now called PDG. Don't confuse folks. You need to have both acronyms now.

ConfusedAirman
04-01-2013, 12:22 PM
You know, it is April Fools Day. Maybe the USAF developed a sense of humor over all the criticism about the F-22, F-35, and its other outstanding fuck-ups over the past 20 years.

KellyinAvon
04-01-2013, 04:12 PM
It's now called PDG. Don't confuse folks. You need to have both acronyms now.

I know this is Bob's turf, but what's a PDG?:heh

JD2780
04-01-2013, 04:31 PM
Professional development Guide. Apparently they think people will read more if its for professional development instead of promotion.

Robert F. Dorr
04-01-2013, 04:36 PM
As long as they can fly one "kamikaze" mission towards Seoul, that's all that matters. Small amounts of "the best" cannot fully-stop huge waves of "the worst".

Many analysts agree that North Korean forces would be neutralized in 72-96 hours. However, in those hours, Seoul and Incheon would be burning; the South Korean economy would nose-dive; South Korea would require another "Miracle on the Han" to overcome the damage done.

Now that we have analysts coming out of our ears at all sorts of contracting companies, maybe "many analysts" do believe that. People who know what they're talking about believe North Korean forces would overrun the peninsula. The first thing to be neutralized would be U.S. airfields on the peninsula.

Robert F. Dorr
04-01-2013, 04:38 PM
The B-57s destroyed on the ground in Vietnam (1965 maybe??) Da Nang or Bien Hoa? Is history about to repeat or am I just having a PFE (Promotion Fitness Exam, Bob and others) flashback?

There were two such incidents. One was an accident. The other was the result of Viet Cong action.

Robert F. Dorr
04-01-2013, 04:39 PM
It's now called PDG. Don't confuse folks. You need to have both acronyms now.

I don't know either. But I do know that PDG is not an acronym.

Robert F. Dorr
04-01-2013, 04:49 PM
Aren't the Mig 17s airframes getting a tad bit old to be flyable?

They're only a little older than some of our oldest airframes. They're in good condition. And there are a lot of them. They have some newer platforms, too.

JD2780
04-01-2013, 04:52 PM
Splitting hairs bob. It's initialism. Better now.

RobotChicken
04-01-2013, 05:15 PM
They're only a little older than some of our oldest airframes. They're in good condition. And there are a lot of them. They have some newer platforms, too.
:spy "A lot of them". Out 'a lot' of a 100 or so, maybe 50+ are 'a lot' that 'might' have new tires; and if you think a handheld GPS as a 'newer platform', well I would have to agree with CDR O'Brian ret. on that one. You are comparing a 'YUGO' With a 2013 Jetta now. Totally disagree with you on this one Sir. Sorry just IMO of course, no offense intended on your defense of a YUGo, but we did destroy the factory that built them, Yugo car plant that is, bomb and mission cost more then the car ever made. :sorry

OtisRNeedleman
04-01-2013, 06:33 PM
Now that we have analysts coming out of our ears at all sorts of contracting companies, maybe "many analysts" do believe that. People who know what they're talking about believe North Korean forces would overrun the peninsula. The first thing to be neutralized would be U.S. airfields on the peninsula.

The North Koreans overrunning the South? You're shitting me. They wouldn't even make it to Seoul.

Far as US airfields go, everyone fully expects they'd be attacked but would recover. And it isn't like we couldn't use ROKAF fields or highway strips.

OtisRNeedleman
04-01-2013, 06:39 PM
As long as they can fly one "kamikaze" mission towards Seoul, that's all that matters. Small amounts of "the best" cannot fully-stop huge waves of "the worst".

Many analysts agree that North Korean forces would be neutralized in 72-96 hours. However, in those hours, Seoul and Incheon would be burning; the South Korean economy would nose-dive; South Korea would require another "Miracle on the Han" to overcome the damage done.

Agree Seoul and Inchon would be damaged. The ROK economy would take a hit but their economy now is a quantum leap larger, more diversified, and more spead out than the ROK of 1950. Korean companies have factories all over Asia and in the USA, too. Since I'd expect regime change and reunification in the aftermath of a Second Korean War, look for aid coming in from Japan, China, Russia and the USA in exchange for keeping any potential refugees from the former NK in the reunified Korea.

Pullinteeth
04-01-2013, 06:47 PM
IMO, we should have taken our toys and went home a long time ago... I don't know why we are still there. Of course now that they have said they are going to whip theirs out, we will stay so we can whip ours out too....

BRUWIN
04-01-2013, 08:14 PM
IMO, we should have taken our toys and went home a long time ago... I don't know why we are still there. Of course now that they have said they are going to whip theirs out, we will stay so we can whip ours out too....

The last time we mentioned pulling troops the North went all crazy about it and threatened us. They need us in SK as a bargaining chip. The day we pull out is the day the North only understands too well that we have nothing to lose by their threats or actions anymore. They will provoke a war before we can even think about removing troops permanently.

OtisRNeedleman
04-01-2013, 09:27 PM
The last time we mentioned pulling troops the North went all crazy about it and threatened us. They need us in SK as a bargaining chip. The day we pull out is the day the North only understands too well that we have nothing to lose by their threats or actions anymore. They will provoke a war before we can even think about removing troops permanently.

Believe it or not, we are in Korea more for our own national goals than to defend South Korea. The Korean Peninsula is the one place on earth where the interests of China, Russia, Japan and the USA meet directly. For the USA to be taken seriously as a player in the area we need to have boots on the ground.

Looking ahead to a reunified Korea, I'd suggest there will still be a US presence of some sort. Don't see ground combat troops there. Maybe a training mission to the Korean Army. Probably just one US air base. Probably the present level of US naval presence. Would definitely expect intelligence sites along the new borders with Russia and China. Another benefit may be a reduction in the Marines on Okinawa. They're intended for Korea in case of war. They can be redeployed. Saves us money and reduces an issue with the Okinawans.

You might ask why we would still have any US military presence, and why any of the other countries in the area would tolerate it. The US military presence goes hand-in-hand with keeping Korea under the US nuclear umbrella. This is intended to halt the Korean nuclear weapons program. Japan is scared shitless of the growing North Korean nuke capability now. Who's to say a reunified Korea might not refine and further develop their nukes/delivery systems? China and Russia certainly don't want another nuclear power in their area, and they sure as hell don't want Japan developing their own nukes. So we'll be there to keep the peace, as it were. China, Russia and Japan won't really mind that US presence at all, outside the expected Chinese/Russian grumbling about the US intel sites.

tiredretiredE7
04-01-2013, 11:29 PM
The North Koreans overrunning the South? You're shitting me. They wouldn't even make it to Seoul.

Far as US airfields go, everyone fully expects they'd be attacked but would recover. And it isn't like we couldn't use ROKAF fields or highway strips.

This view fails to take the SOF troops who have been operating in South Korea for years into consideration. Additionally, how well did this current administration deal with Benghazi? You sir, give this administration way too much credit.

JD2780
04-01-2013, 11:57 PM
The south and US forces to the north are more like speed numbs until the rest of the pacific rim arrives. Then the destruction of the north happens

Quixotic
04-01-2013, 11:59 PM
This view fails to take the SOF troops who have been operating in South Korea for years into consideration. Additionally, how well did this current administration deal with Benghazi? You sir, give this administration way too much credit.

Yes, because every one knows Libya and Korea are so identical that one can reasonably draw rational conclusions about one based on the other, right? LOL

KellyinAvon
04-02-2013, 12:41 AM
The south and US forces to the north are more like speed numbs until the rest of the pacific rim arrives. Then the destruction of the north happens

We're getting speed numbs in our neighborhood. They make the speeders numb when they hit them too fast :bump2
Sorry JD, couldn't resist.

JD2780
04-02-2013, 01:17 AM
We're getting speed numbs in our neighborhood. They make the speeders numb when they hit them too fast :bump2
Sorry JD, couldn't resist.

It was deserved. I really need to find the damn charger!!!!!

tiredretiredE7
04-02-2013, 01:32 AM
Yes, because every one knows Libya and Korea are so identical that one can reasonably draw rational conclusions about one based on the other, right? LOL

Ok, I will break it down for you. We had the potential for superior troops and firepower to guard our embassies on Sept 11. The ambassador requested increased security and was denied despite reliable intelligence. All this administration had to do was to send 13 more people to Libya and failed to complete this simple task. The North Korean Army is no joke and it will be a very complex and drawn out ground war. This administration will have to make some very tough decisions and the forward deployment of the F22s is an indicator that this administration does not understand North Korea's SOF capabilities. So it is rational to conclude this administration would CF a war in Korea and North Korea clearly sees BO for who he is and is taking advantage of BO's weakness.

Quixotic
04-02-2013, 02:05 AM
We had the potential for superior troops and firepower to guard our embassies on Sept 11. The ambassador requested increased security and was denied despite reliable intelligence. All this administration had to do was to send 13 more people to Libya and failed to complete this simple task.

So the State Departments failure to adequately secure an embassy in Libya directly correlates and indicates how the Defense Department would handle all out war on the Peninsula...? You seriously believe that?



This administration will have to make some very tough decisions and the forward deployment of the F22s is an indicator that this administration does not understand North Korea's SOF capabilities.

What in god's name do F-22s have to do with NK's SOF capabilities...?


So it is rational to conclude this administration would CF a war in Korea and North Korea clearly sees BO for who he is and is taking advantage of BO's weakness.

Replace 'rational' with 'irrational' and we'll be in agreement.

akruse
04-02-2013, 02:14 AM
What in god's name do F-22s have to do with NK's SOF capabilities...?

.

Have you been to Korea? Been briefed on any of the Oplans and NKorea's abilities? If so, you wouldn't ask such a stupid question.

Quixotic
04-02-2013, 02:30 AM
Have you been to Korea? Been briefed on any of the Oplans and NKorea's abilities? If so, you wouldn't ask such a stupid question.

Yes, yes, and yes.

Then please explain the F-22s role in deterring, detecting, engagement with, and destruction of, NK SOF, both Northern Units and Southern sleeper cells.

akruse
04-02-2013, 02:33 AM
Yes, yes, and yes.

Then please explain the F-22s role in deterring, detecting, engagement with, and destruction of, NK SOF, both Northern Units and Southern sleeper cells.

What I'm getting at is what is the point (I think we're on the same page) of basing the 22 in country when it was well within range of the fight where it was previously based. Being in country only puts it in great danger with no reward.

Quixotic
04-02-2013, 02:42 AM
What I'm getting at is what is the point (I think we're on the same page) of basing the 22 in country when it was well within range of the fight where it was previously based. Being in country only puts it in great danger with no reward.

There is a reward, two in fact: pre-conflict political show of force and quicker sortie regeneration time if something does kick off.

akruse
04-02-2013, 02:51 AM
There is a reward, two in fact: pre-conflict political show of force and quicker sortie regeneration time if something does kick off.

Don't agree. No amount of pre-conflict political show of force will deter the North. They know they are outmatched in every way other than sheer numbers of outdated equipment. No show of force is needed for them to know that. Quicker sortie regenerations are pretty much useless when there aren't any aircraft to turn. Keep them on Kadena and use them as they were designed.

Edit: Wow, just read that it is a grand total of 2 F-22's "forward deployed".

BOSS302
04-02-2013, 03:06 AM
Agree Seoul and Inchon would be damaged. The ROK economy would take a hit but their economy now is a quantum leap larger, more diversified, and more spead out than the ROK of 1950. Korean companies have factories all over Asia and in the USA, too. Since I'd expect regime change and reunification in the aftermath of a Second Korean War, look for aid coming in from Japan, China, Russia and the USA in exchange for keeping any potential refugees from the former NK in the reunified Korea.

I agree that the South Korean economy is incredibly well-diversified and has a global footprint. The hit they would take would be massive considering the damage to infrastructure and capital (both human and industrial) in the Seoul Capital Area, which is home to 48% of South Korea's population (Source: Korean National Statistical Office). Further, the damage done would go beyond the machines of industry and into the softer, more delicate world of finance.

The Wall Street Journal (Asia) points out in an article that, "Generally, however, North Korea is cited as an overhang on South Korea’s credit rating rather than a driver of changes to it...North Korea “remains a moderate event risk for South Korea...we couldn’t and wouldn’t upgrade it to triple A” (because of the risk associated with North Korea)." - Tom Byrne, Moody's.

If the threat of North Korea can hinder South Korean finances, I do not want to imagine what a full-blown war could do to damage the South Korean economy.

Quixotic
04-02-2013, 03:11 AM
Don't agree. No amount of pre-conflict political show of force will deter the North. They know they are outmatched in every way other than sheer numbers of outdated equipment. No show of force is needed for them to know that.

China, Russia, Japan - it does send a message, to all players.


Quicker sortie regenerations are pretty much useless when there aren't any aircraft to turn. Keep them on Kadena and use them as they were designed.

What makes you think there won't be any aircraft to regenerate? Please don't say NK SOF.

And yes, use them as they were designed, exactly.


Edit: Wow, just read that it is a grand total of 2 F-22's "forward deployed".

And yet it made headlines around the world...

OtisRNeedleman
04-02-2013, 03:17 AM
I agree that the South Korean economy is incredibly well-diversified and has a global footprint. The hit they would take would be massive considering the damage to infrastructure and capital (both human and industrial) in the Seoul Capital Area, which is home to 48% of South Korea's population (Source: Korean National Statistical Office). Further, the damage done would go beyond the machines of industry and into the softer, more delicate world of finance.

The Wall Street Journal (Asia) points out in an article that, "Generally, however, North Korea is cited as an overhang on South Korea’s credit rating rather than a driver of changes to it...North Korea “remains a moderate event risk for South Korea...we couldn’t and wouldn’t upgrade it to triple A” (because of the risk associated with North Korea)." - Tom Byrne, Moody's.

If the threat of North Korea can hinder South Korean finances, I do not want to imagine what a full-blown war could do to damage the South Korean economy.

There would be damage, indeed. But keep in mind the Seoul region is very large and the North Korean Army won't get there to trash it, as happened in 1950 and 1951. Longer-term the end of the NK threat and opportunities posed by rebuilding and reunification would be a stimulus to the economy.

OtisRNeedleman
04-02-2013, 03:19 AM
Don't agree. No amount of pre-conflict political show of force will deter the North. They know they are outmatched in every way other than sheer numbers of outdated equipment. No show of force is needed for them to know that. Quicker sortie regenerations are pretty much useless when there aren't any aircraft to turn. Keep them on Kadena and use them as they were designed.

Edit: Wow, just read that it is a grand total of 2 F-22's "forward deployed".

Read that earlier. TWO planes. You've got to be shitting me. At least send a squadron.

OtisRNeedleman
04-02-2013, 03:21 AM
Yes, yes, and yes.

Then please explain the F-22s role in deterring, detecting, engagement with, and destruction of, NK SOF, both Northern Units and Southern sleeper cells.

And if we could, please, we should keep in mind that the US/ROK haven't been sitting on their hands as far as their ability to locate, track, and deal with NK special forces. No need to make anyone ten feet tall.

tiredretiredE7
04-02-2013, 03:37 AM
And if we could, please, we should keep in mind that the US/ROK haven't been sitting on their hands as far as their ability to locate, track, and deal with NK special forces. No need to make anyone ten feet tall.

Hopefully the world will not have to findout and this will all blow over. April 15 is the birthday of the deceased NK leader so we will hear this go on until then.

FLAPS
04-02-2013, 10:27 AM
And if we could, please, we should keep in mind that the US/ROK haven't been sitting on their hands as far as their ability to locate, track, and deal with NK special forces. No need to make anyone ten feet tall.

One of two things will happen once the NK special forces cross over the DMZ.

1. They get the same treatment as the elite, fearsome Iraqi Republican Guard did in 2003.
2. They all immediately request political asylum...and a meal.

JD2780
04-02-2013, 11:34 AM
Yea we have no idea how to deal an adversaries SOF units. We are hosed. We had no idea other countries used SOF teams.

Robert F. Dorr
04-02-2013, 10:46 PM
OtisRNeedleman's description of why the United States is involved in Korea is about right, give or take a detail or two. But the estimates on this thread of North Korean military capabilities are way low as is the number given for their old but airworthy MiGs. In a full-scale, all-out Korean War, the North Koreans would neutralize every airfield in the south within the first 12 hours and would overrun the peninsula in 72, max, probably less.

And, yes, it's true. The number of F-22s in Korea is ... er ... two. We would be far better off with a TSP (look it up, Kelly) of A-10Cs.

RobotChicken
04-02-2013, 10:57 PM
OtisRNeedleman's description of why the United States is involved in Korea is about right, give or take a detail or two. But the estimates on this thread of North Korean military capabilities are way low as is the number given for their old but airworthy MiGs. In a full-scale, all-out Korean War, the North Koreans would neutralize every airfield in the south within the first 12 hours and would overrun the peninsula in 72, max, probably less.

And, yes, it's true. The number of F-22s in Korea is ... er ... two. We would be far better off with a TSP (look it up, Kelly) of A-10Cs.

:spy NUMBERS do count!

Quixotic
04-02-2013, 11:02 PM
I agree that estimates in this thread are a bit on the sunny side; however, I think the Peninsula getting overrun within 72hrs is far from certain as well.

Here's a question: If the Peninsula were about to fall, would we escalate with tactical nukes to prevent it, or would we let it fall?

And here's a loaded question: Would we use Tac Nukes right next door to China, or do we love our iPhones and Wal-Mart more than we love S. Korea?

RobotChicken
04-02-2013, 11:37 PM
:doh Ask General MacAuthur, he's buried here in Norfolk, and the 'Tomb' is a shaken!! :scared

KellyinAvon
04-03-2013, 12:05 AM
OtisRNeedleman's description of why the United States is involved in Korea is about right, give or take a detail or two. But the estimates on this thread of North Korean military capabilities are way low as is the number given for their old but airworthy MiGs. In a full-scale, all-out Korean War, the North Koreans would neutralize every airfield in the south within the first 12 hours and would overrun the peninsula in 72, max, probably less.

And, yes, it's true. The number of F-22s in Korea is ... er ... two. We would be far better off with a TSP (look it up, Kelly) of A-10Cs.

Theater Security Package: PACOM's term for deployed iron and support to meet a specific operational requirement.

Bob:
How many combat coded A-10s are in the inventory?

If the airfields along with pre-positioned WRM, (that's War Reserve Material, Bob) will fall in 12 hours, what good will A-10s do? Where ya gonna fly them from? What are you gonna hang on them? Got 30MM?? Not in your scenario. Taegu and Kimhae are inside the Pusan perimeter, maybe our guys kind stop the bad guys at Waegwan again.

BRUWIN
04-03-2013, 12:15 AM
Agree Seoul and Inchon would be damaged. .

It would be a "sea of fire" and the US is nothing but a "boiled pumpkin."

I love those DPRK propaganda writers...they do come up with some funny lines.

KellyinAvon
04-03-2013, 12:22 AM
It would be a "sea of fire" and the US is nothing but a "boiled pumpkin."

I love those DPRK propaganda writers...they do come up with some funny lines.

Must lose something in translation, it is funny. Maybe we could hire these guys for AFN.

RobotChicken
04-03-2013, 01:02 AM
:clock Gonna be a lot of 'warrior airman' wishin' for some snow camo! (or at least some thin' that blends in):smow:panda

KellyinAvon
04-03-2013, 01:37 AM
:clock Gonna be a lot of 'warrior airman' wishin' for some snow camo! (or at least some thin' that blends in):smow:panda

Ok, snow camo? Are we taking Seoul back from Siberia?

Robert F. Dorr
04-03-2013, 01:57 AM
Theater Security Package: PACOM's term for deployed iron and support to meet a specific operational requirement.

Bob:
How many combat coded A-10s are in the inventory?

If the airfields along with pre-positioned WRM, (that's War Reserve Material, Bob) will fall in 12 hours, what good will A-10s do? Where ya gonna fly them from? What are you gonna hang on them? Got 30MM?? Not in your scenario. Taegu and Kimhae are inside the Pusan perimeter, maybe our guys kind stop the bad guys at Waegwan again.

Was 359 before they decided to retire 102.

Good point about ammo and munitions.

RobotChicken
04-03-2013, 02:07 AM
Was 359 before they decided to retire 102.

Good point about ammo and munitions.

:cry Most stationed (google map) a stones throw away from the 'boneyard'! (under canopies on the flight line) Where are those F-35A's that were going to replace them? $300 million to replace a $10 million bird to take out a $50k tank?.....:clock

Robert F. Dorr
04-03-2013, 01:42 PM
:cry Most stationed (google map) a stones throw away from the 'boneyard'! (under canopies on the flight line) Where are those F-35A's that were going to replace them? $300 million to replace a $10 million bird to take out a $50k tank?.....:clock

Not so rue an F-35A would be useful against a tank. Even less sure it would be of value in air-to-air combat.

BOSS302
04-03-2013, 02:18 PM
:cry Most stationed (google map) a stones throw away from the 'boneyard'! (under canopies on the flight line) Where are those F-35A's that were going to replace them? $300 million to replace a $10 million bird to take out a $50k tank?.....:clock


:cry Most stationed (google map) a stones throw away from the 'boneyard'! (under canopies on the flight line) Where are those F-35A's that were going to replace them? $300 million to replace a $10 million bird to take out a $50k tank?.....:clock

Some snippets: "the operating costs for the entire fleet of F-35s will be $1.1 trillion"..."156% operating cost of the F-16"..."unaffordable and simply unacceptable".

sandsjames
04-03-2013, 02:38 PM
All I have to say is that if something happens in the next 83 days and stop-loss is used, the North Korean's will have to answer directly to me.

BOSS302
04-03-2013, 02:42 PM
:cry Most stationed (google map) a stones throw away from the 'boneyard'! (under canopies on the flight line) Where are those F-35A's that were going to replace them? $300 million to replace a $10 million bird to take out a $50k tank?.....:clock

http://nation.time.com/2012/07/09/f-35-nearly-doubles-in-cost-but-you-dont-know-thanks-to-its-rubber-baseline/

Some snippets: "the operating costs for the entire fleet of F-35s will be $1.1 trillion"..."156% operating cost of the F-16"..."unaffordable and simply unacceptable".

F-16 C/D: $18M fly-away cost

F-35 A: $107M fly-away cost (thus far, sure to rise)

JD2780
04-03-2013, 03:10 PM
Not so rue an F-35A would be useful against a tank. Even less sure it would be of value in air-to-air combat.

Just as useful as an F16/15. Unless its equipped with some 30mmDU it isn't going to do anything. Of course an accurate LGB or if the tank is dug-in you could use a 30 series GBU. Even then it will have to be direct hit, maybe get a mobility kill if its close. Good thing it's cool looking and stealthy though!!!

sandsjames
04-03-2013, 04:44 PM
Leave it to somebody who uses two spaces between sentences to come up with the unique idea that the F-35 is cool-looking. I'll tell you what's cool-looking. The F-86 Sabre is cool-looking.

What's cool looking is my wife in her Victoria Secret underwear, but that's not gonna win any wars.

JD2780
04-03-2013, 05:00 PM
What's cool looking is my wife in her Victoria Secret underwear, but that's not gonna win any wars.

You're right.......she is cool looking.

Robert F. Dorr
04-03-2013, 05:02 PM
Just as useful as an F16/15. Unless its equipped with some 30mmDU it isn't going to do anything. Of course an accurate LGB or if the tank is dug-in you could use a 30 series GBU. Even then it will have to be direct hit, maybe get a mobility kill if its close. Good thing it's cool looking and stealthy though!!!

Leave it to somebody who uses two spaces between sentences to come up with the unique idea that the F-35 is cool-looking. I'll tell you what's cool-looking. The F-86 Sabre is cool-looking.

JD2780
04-03-2013, 05:24 PM
Leave it to somebody who uses two spaces between sentences to come up with the unique idea that the F-35 is cool-looking. I'll tell you what's cool-looking. The F-86 Sabre is cool-looking.

Bob, I have these things called man hands. When I type on an iPad it makes mistakes. Not that have two spaces is a mistake. You wouldn't know cool if you could see it through those coke bottles with rims you have on your face. The F-86 is cool to look at. However, like you it's just history. RPAs are the future!!!!!!

Plus I was taught to put two spaces between sentences by folks masters and doctorates in English. So yes I put two spaces in there.

Other than the reference to it looking cool and my double space you chose it ignore the rest of my post which leads me to guess you thought I was correct.

imnohero
04-03-2013, 06:00 PM
Leave it to somebody who uses two spaces between sentences to come up with the unique idea that the F-35 is cool-looking. I'll tell you what's cool-looking. The F-86 Sabre is cool-looking.

Bob, no post on this forum has two spaces between sentences because the forum software changes it automatically, unless it's forced in by coding. Second, two spaces between sentences is perfectly acceptable in informal communications. Third, two spaces or one space after terminal punctuation is a matter of taste, not law. That the typesetters of the world 100 years ago decided something doesn't make it necessary or relevant today, unless your publisher demands it for submissions, which is your problem, not ours.

RobotChicken
04-03-2013, 06:05 PM
Leave it to somebody who uses two spaces between sentences to come up with the unique idea that the F-35 is cool-looking. I'll tell you what's cool-looking. The F-86 Sabre is cool-looking.
:plane Yea...with 'Hoot' driving it! :lock1

Robert F. Dorr
04-03-2013, 06:28 PM
:plane Yea...with 'Hoot' driving it! :lock1

Know of at least two pilots named Hoot Gibson. One was the American third ace of the Korean War. He was a good friend lost his life when he slipped and fell while conducting a real estate tour last fall. The other might have been an astronaut or something.

Robert F. Dorr
04-03-2013, 06:29 PM
Bob, no post on this forum has two spaces between sentences because the forum software changes it automatically, unless it's forced in by coding. Second, two spaces between sentences is perfectly acceptable in informal communications. Third, two spaces or one space after terminal punctuation is a matter of taste, not law. That the typesetters of the world 100 years ago decided something doesn't make it necessary or relevant today, unless your publisher demands it for submissions, which is your problem, not ours.

Wasn't decided 100 years ago. Bank then, the standard WAS two spaces. Was invented in the computer era. And if it doesn't happen here, how come I see it here?

sandsjames
04-03-2013, 06:34 PM
Wasn't decided 100 years ago. Bank then, the standard WAS two spaces. Was invented in the computer era. And if it doesn't happen here, how come I see it here?

And there is no standard now. If there is, you still have not shown any written rule for general communication that says so. If you can do that (show proof that one space is THE standard for all written communication) then I will gladly comply. Until that point, please quit mentioning it.

RobotChicken
04-03-2013, 06:35 PM
Know of at least two pilots named Hoot Gibson. One was the American third ace of the Korean War. He was a good friend lost his life when he slipped and fell while conducting a real estate tour last fall. The other might have been an astronaut or something.

:plane Yea he still is flying to the max. :phone

JD2780
04-03-2013, 06:36 PM
Wasn't decided 100 years ago. Bank then, the standard WAS two spaces. Was invented in the computer era. And if it doesn't happen here, how come I see it here?

Because I'm that effing good.

imnohero
04-03-2013, 11:23 PM
Who cares when it was decided. That you can see it is your problem, just like the fact that it bugs you. It's not incorrect to use two spaces, whatever you might think.

KellyinAvon
04-03-2013, 11:26 PM
Back to Korea. Is Osan the location of the CAOC? Probably no OPSEC involved. Just wonder where it is.

Considering what's on 7AF's website it doesn't seem to be a state secret.

Robert F. Dorr
04-03-2013, 11:35 PM
Back to Korea. Is Osan the location of the CAOC? Probably no OPSEC involved. Just wonder where it is.

Capt Alfredo
04-03-2013, 11:52 PM
Back to Korea. Is Osan the location of the CAOC? Probably no OPSEC involved. Just wonder where it is.

Mr. Google, or, alternatively, Mr. Wikipedia, strikes again.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Air_and_Space_Operations_Center

KellyinAvon
04-04-2013, 12:42 AM
Mr. Google, or, alternatively, Mr. Wikipedia, strikes again.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Air_and_Space_Operations_Center

That has some excellent info right down to the patch. I was wondering if there was going to have a table with assigned, attached and allocated forces.

Robert F. Dorr
04-04-2013, 12:58 AM
That has some excellent info right down to the patch. I was wondering if there was going to have a table with assigned, attached and allocated forces.

Thank you, Capt Alfredo. Thank you, KellyinAvon. Now, if you can just tell me what's going to happen next ...

JD2780
04-04-2013, 01:17 AM
"I f*ck killed your cat, I thought it would bring closure to our relationship"-Rocko

KellyinAvon
04-04-2013, 01:37 AM
Thank you, Capt Alfredo. Thank you, KellyinAvon. Now, if you can just tell me what's going to happen next ...

Kim the Latest got his approval to nuke us. From who or what I have no idea.

He got the approval from:

The voices in his head?
His dead grandfather's ghost?
His cat?

tiredretiredE7
04-04-2013, 02:45 AM
Kim the Latest got his approval to nuke us. From who or what I have no idea.

He got the approval from:

The voices in his head?
His dead grandfather's ghost?
His cat?

Maybe Kim is trying to infer China gave him approval. Eitherway, this administration would turn a 2 week war into a 2 year war through sheer incompetence.

Quixotic
04-04-2013, 04:25 AM
There are no cats in NK, they all got eaten decades ago.

RobotChicken
04-04-2013, 04:34 AM
:attention My four cats would tear him a new one before all them 'Dorr '17's' would get off the ground' so don't bring cats in to this!!!! MEOWWWWWWW.....(Bandit,Bullit,Socks and Piper!) :peep

Quixotic
04-04-2013, 04:50 AM
There are no cats in NK, they all got eaten decades ago.

RobotChicken
04-04-2013, 05:02 AM
They are fillin' up the bio-hazard box now as we type if we can find an AF bomber that isn't broke down!

BOSS302
04-04-2013, 06:32 AM
I did not realize this until I read it in a news article on the Daily Mail, but the US Air Force deployed two F-22 Raptors to South Korea.

A deployment. Of two.

giggawatt
04-04-2013, 08:12 AM
^^^good job MTF.

I'm not fixing it.

giggawatt
04-04-2013, 08:35 AM
The United States accepts your challenge.

http://www.kunsan.af.mil/shared/media/photodb/photos/111202-F-ER496-075.jpg

http://www.greatdreams.com/planes/b52-array.jpg

http://www.calstatela.edu/staff/moberme/taegan/MyPictures/Planes/images/b2%20f18_3.jpg

giggawatt
04-04-2013, 08:36 AM
^^^good job MTF.

I'm not fixing it.

KellyinAvon
04-04-2013, 09:20 AM
There are no cats in NK, they all got eaten decades ago.

I figure Kim has one like Blofeld did in the Bond movies.

JD2780
04-04-2013, 10:51 AM
AF may accept the challenge but the 16s will only have about about 25 minutes of actual work. Then they will need to hit the tanker.

giggawatt
04-04-2013, 11:53 AM
AF may accept the challenge but the 16s will only have about about 25 minutes of actual work. Then they will need to hit the tanker.

http://www.strategypage.com/gallery/images/kc-135-elephant-walk-01-2012.jpg

JD2780
04-04-2013, 12:20 PM
http://www.strategypage.com/gallery/images/kc-135-elephant-walk-01-2012.jpg

Well then you got yoyo going on.

Well played though. Well played. How about a bunch of A-10s. You know the plane that can actually stop a tank!!

sandsjames
04-04-2013, 01:50 PM
Back to Korea. Is Osan the location of the CAOC? Probably no OPSEC involved. Just wonder where it is.

CAOC? OPSEC? What are you talking about? There is absolutely no context here that clarifies the meaning of your question.

JD2780
04-04-2013, 04:03 PM
f-22's suck
f-35's sucky
f-15/16's awesome

A-10 and AV-8(pilots) better.

JD2780
04-04-2013, 06:24 PM
JD, didn't you know? Back in the '90s, the Rand Corporation said that two squadrons of F-22s w/ JDAMs could hold off a North korean invasion until reinforcements arrived.

I'm dead serious, they had an article about it in Stars and Stripes.

I guess somebody can't read, though, they only sent 2 F-22s, not 2 squadrons.

Hahaha. While simultaneously eliminating two pilots from being RIF'd.

If they have enough jdams for that they won't be stealthy. Plus using a jdam on a mover is silly. You can do it, but its unlikely.

imported_CLSE
04-04-2013, 06:45 PM
The south and US forces to the north are more like speed numbs until the rest of the pacific rim arrives. Then the destruction of the north happens


JD, didn't you know? Back in the '90s, the Rand Corporation said that two squadrons of F-22s w/ JDAMs could hold off a North korean invasion until reinforcements arrived.

I'm dead serious, they had an article about it in Stars and Stripes.

I guess somebody can't read, though, they only sent 2 F-22s, not 2 squadrons.

OtisRNeedleman
04-04-2013, 07:25 PM
AF may accept the challenge but the 16s will only have about about 25 minutes of actual work. Then they will need to hit the tanker.

In that 25 minutes the 16s can knock a lot of NKAF dicks in the dirt.

JD2780
04-04-2013, 07:35 PM
In that 25 minutes the 16s can knock a lot of NKAF dicks in the dirt.

Not really Otis. Not with 20mm some small party favors.

Robert F. Dorr
04-04-2013, 07:51 PM
Maybe Kim is trying to infer China gave him approval. Eitherway, this administration would turn a 2 week war into a 2 year war through sheer incompetence.

He means imply.

North Korea isn't going to get any military support from China.

Robert F. Dorr
04-04-2013, 08:17 PM
JD, didn't you know? Back in the '90s, the Rand Corporation said that two squadrons of F-22s w/ JDAMs could hold off a North korean invasion until reinforcements arrived.

I'm dead serious, they had an article about it in Stars and Stripes.

I guess somebody can't read, though, they only sent 2 F-22s, not 2 squadrons.

In the1990s? Are you sure? I thought the stuff about the F-22 carrying bombs (and the temporary F/B-22 designation) was a creature of the early 2000s, perpetrated by Gen. Jumper and deleted by Gen. Moseley. There was never a reason to put bombs on the thing but there was not a good reason to stop building it, either.

RobotChicken
04-04-2013, 09:18 PM
In the1990s? Are you sure? I thought the stuff about the F-22 carrying bombs (and the temporary F/B-22 designation) was a creature of the early 2000s, perpetrated by Gen. Jumper and deleted by Gen. Moseley. There was never a reason to put bombs on the thing but there was not a good reason to stop building it, either.
Like the F-117A....made it into a 'light (Very) bomber'!

sandsjames
04-05-2013, 03:28 PM
In the1990s? Are you sure? I thought the stuff about the F-22 carrying bombs (and the temporary F/B-22 designation) was a creature of the early 2000s, perpetrated by Gen. Jumper and deleted by Gen. Moseley. There was never a reason to put bombs on the thing but there was not a good reason to stop building it, either.

He means "In the 1990s?" with a space between "the and "1990s".

js7799
04-05-2013, 04:05 PM
Giggawatt's pictures mean nothing without dancing fireballs. Git er dun.

Robert F. Dorr
04-05-2013, 04:18 PM
An article in yesterday's Wall Street Journal quotes administration sources as saying they now feel they miscalculated and went overboard on the rhetoric on our side. The article says U.S. officials recognize that this is uncharted territory and that there is a danger of more serious miscalculation not just on the North Korean side but on ours. Whether the decisions are being made personally by Kim Jong Un (whose surname is Kim, not Un as written in this venue earlier) or by a cluster of more mature heads around him, the problem is that the North Korean leadership may no longer remember the code -- for decades both sides have known what is really meant when the other says something that sounds outlandish -- and could read us wrong.

imnohero
04-05-2013, 04:35 PM
An article in yesterday's Wall Street Journal quotes administration sources as saying they now feel they miscalculated and went overboard on the rhetoric on our side. The article says U.S. officials recognize that this is uncharted territory and that there is a danger of more serious miscalculation not just on the North Korean side but on ours. Whether the decisions are being made personally by Kim Jong Un (whose surname is Kim, not Un as written in this venue earlier) or by a cluster of more mature heads around him, the problem is that the North Korean leadership may no longer remember the code -- for decades both sides have known what is really meant when the other says something that sounds outlandish -- and could read us wrong.

Yep, how many times did this happen during the cold war? Miscalculations and misinterpretations leading to increased tensions. A lot, it happened a lot. But we at least had diplomatic relations with the USSR, however troubled they were, there was the "hot line" and other "fail safes" built into the system.

What troubles me about N. Korea, is that I don't have a sense that they wouldn't launch a nuclear missile.

WeaponsTSGT
04-05-2013, 05:30 PM
Not really Otis. Not with 20mm some small party favors.

It depends where the 16's are coming from, if coming from off the ROK then they'll be packing more than small party favors. If coming from in country they'll be packing a mix of 12's, 10's, 24's 38's and 31's, not really what I would consider small party favors. And when the A-10's show up 30mm and mav's for everyone.

JD2780
04-05-2013, 06:49 PM
It depends where the 16's are coming from, if coming from off the ROK then they'll be packing more than small party favors. If coming from in country they'll be packing a mix of 12's, 10's, 24's 38's and 31's, not really what I would consider small party favors. And when the A-10's show up 30mm and mav's for everyone.

Yea you can only carry so many mavs. Plus you better shack with GBU other wise you'll just give them a headache and maybe a mobility kill. I would consider any 500 pounder a small party favor when it comes to going against tanks. If you load out a 16 with to much he is useless at lower altitudes which they'll be doing high threat stuff but I don't want to go too far in depth. I know most of us know what I'm talking about just don't need to air it out.