B-2s to the Guard

[Draginass]

That rumor's just stupid enough to be true. B-1s in the guard was a mistake. The B-2 is not a part-timer's airplane.

 

[Scrapdog]

what criteria?

That rumor's just stupid enough to be true. B-1s in the guard was a mistake. The B-2 is not a part-timer's airplane.

And the F-16/F-15/A-10/C-5/C-17/C-130 is? What credintials do you have in stating that? What is the differentiating factor in making the B-2 that much more complex than any frontline fighter or cargo aircraft that currently plenty of part-timers are employing across the globe in both the guard and reserve? I'm currently in a guard unit flying F-16's with about 75% part time make-up and the part-timer's are extremely experienced and execute probably better than most full time active duty units out there. It may take a ride or two to spin a part-timer up to full strength if he's been out of the jet more than a few weeks, but after that and with what is true with most seasoned guard/reserve units...he'll employ the jet better than 90 percent of any active duty unit out there. And the St Louis F-15 unit is probably one of the most (if not the most) experienced units out there. I personally know a few guys in that unit and their hiring criteria. I'd say they probably have more than half of the cadre as F-15 weapon school grads and/or instructors. No offense, but I'm sure if they chose to - they could fly the piss out of the B-2. I've flown the F-15 but never the B-2...however I would imagine the B-2's mission is just slightly less complex than an 8 ship LFE escorting a strike package in the F-15.

On another note - the guard is also going to F-22. What's your opinion on that? I can tell you for a fact that the guard guys already done with training and employing the F-22 at Langley are doing great. Is that not a part-timer's airplane either by your standards? I'd have to say your analysis couldn't be further from the truth.

 

[AlbieF15]

Draginass is RIGHT in that one weekend a month and a min run attitude won't get the job done. That is exactly my beef with some of the airline mid-level managers who give the whale eye to guys who take mil leave more than the "average" guy. While flying fighters part time was probably never "easy", it certainly has become more challenging the last few years.

There are some serious challenges to staying proficient in a front line fourth+ generation fighter or bomber. Another interesting wrinkle will be the nuclear certification/verification process--that will also be an interesting discussion. "Hey boss, I need to drop my 3 day next week--apparently we are going to nuke North Korea and Iran...." (yeah...its tongue in cheek--but anyone who was in the old SAC knows that PRP and the serious of the mission was a big deal)

I've said this before, but its HARD for me to stay as sharp as I want in the F-15 if I don't fly at least several consecutive days every 2 weeks. Now--I don't claim to be anything special in the Eagle, but I've flown in continuously since 1992 and have over 2000 hours. If I had to go learn to fly an F-16 or F-22 after a TX course, I think (key work...think...not KNOW) that I'd probably need much more than that to keep the new habit patterns down and get "comfortable" in the jet. I think these guys like Scrappy and Magnum taking on the F-22 are going to be working very hard for a while. I am also very confident they will do a great job--both are highly experienced fighter pilots.

What will be a challenge, however, is working all of that in and keeping the airline happy. There will be some friction here and there...

So why even bother? Why do we have part time ANG guys?

The answers, IMHO, are money and historical significance. A Scrappy or Magnum will cost the AF much less over the course of their career than an active duty equivelent. They will NOT be getting paid (when on part time status) except for the 8-10 training days a month they are needed. The will NOT be getting Tricare. They will not earn a dime of their pension (A fund equivelent) until they are 60 vice the traditional 42-44, which means the goverment pays them 17-19 less years and also pays them LATER...(at age 60)...both which are easier on the budgets. So...you get a combat ready (or close to it) warrior for 40-60% of the cost of an active duty guy. Its a good deal for the taxpayers, which is why USERRA is out there. Believe it or not, the ANG is not a program to reward exceptionally lucky fighter pilots with the ability to fly fighters and have an airline job at the same time (although it does feel like that on a good day...) Additionally, they are "temp" workers--you can BRAC or reduce their numbers without any of the financial headaches in trying to manage the active duty numbers. There isn't a VSB or similar program when reservists lose their jobs... Politics certainly are a factor too--when a Senator knows his state will get getting those C130Js or F22s in his home state, he is more likely going to support appropriations for that weapons system. The AF gets a lot of bang for its buck when it throws a few new weapons systems to the ANG.

I think equally important is the historical significance of the Minuteman concept. I think we send our potential foes an important message when we say our firemen, policemen, doctors, lawyers, school teachers, and airlines pilots will put down whatever they are doing to activate and fight when required. With the loss of so many bases over the years and the removal of the draft, the ability of the military to "touch" the American public is getting harder. The Guard serves as a vital link to the public reminding them that the military isn't "those guys...", its "us". Your teacher, that business owner, or the guy in the local Sears store may have just gotten back from Iraq, or Katrina relief, or a peace keeping detachment to Bosnia. Having our soliders intertwined in the daily fabric of the community keeps America in touch with its military, and our military in touch with our hometowns.

So--yeah--sometimes it gets "complicated". I can understand how the active duty guy might think "this would just be easy if it was only us active duty guys..." However, in the big picture, I think you gain a lot more by having a robust Guard.

And if anyone can pull it off--there are some SHARP guys at the St Louis unit. I know they'll rise to the challenge with class and do it right.

 

[Scrapdog]

Great post

Albie - great post. Very good discussion on the part-timer/minuteman concept...especially to folks that aren't familiar with the foundation of the true reservist/guardsman.

I think your bottom line is spot on - any fighter/cargo/bomber airplane in today's enviornment is doable for the experienced part-timer...but what comes with that is the hard work and attitude that goes along to truely succeed in employing it effectively.

And to all my mil brethren - have a great christmas and a happy holiday.

 

[IFollowRoads]

I was not in the military. And as I sit here reading how our newest front line aircraft are being worked into the TOE of Air NG units, red flags wave in my mind. I worry that somewhere, someone is seeing how our endless summer in Iraq and Afghanistan is turning folks away from the full time air force, so we're going to make up for it by incessently employing the Air Guard overseas. Sorta like the Army National Guard is now spread across the planet.

I was also talking with a swab the other day who told me the next generation of aircraft carrier for the USN is being designed to cut the required crew compliment to operate it by up to a third. I find these trends disturbing.

Am I wrong to be concerned for you military fliers?

 

[JimNtexas]

... I thought this was kind of funny since he didn't look like an Air force guy.

He wasn't.

We don't have any fast airplanes in the Air Force inventory any more. At least not that are 'fast' in the sense of useable speed flying a practical mission.

 

[dtfl]

You have something against RJ's dude?

YES. CRJs are tubes of pain and discomfort!

 

[dtfl]

Draginass is RIGHT in that one weekend a month and a min run attitude won't get the job done. That is exactly my beef with some of the airline mid-level managers who give the whale eye to guys who take mil leave more than the "average" guy. While flying fighters part time was probably never "easy", it certainly has become more challenging the last few years.

There are some serious challenges to staying proficient in a front line fourth+ generation fighter or bomber. Another interesting wrinkle will be the nuclear certification/verification process--that will also be an interesting discussion. "Hey boss, I need to drop my 3 day next week--apparently we are going to nuke North Korea and Iran...." (yeah...its tongue in cheek--but anyone who was in the old SAC knows that PRP and the serious of the mission was a big deal)

I've said this before, but its HARD for me to stay as sharp as I want in the F-15 if I don't fly at least several consecutive days every 2 weeks. Now--I don't claim to be anything special in the Eagle, but I've flown in continuously since 1992 and have over 2000 hours. If I had to go learn to fly an F-16 or F-22 after a TX course, I think (key work...think...not KNOW) that I'd probably need much more than that to keep the new habit patterns down and get "comfortable" in the jet. I think these guys like Scrappy and Magnum taking on the F-22 are going to be working very hard for a while. I am also very confident they will do a great job--both are highly experienced fighter pilots.

What will be a challenge, however, is working all of that in and keeping the airline happy. There will be some friction here and there...

So why even bother? Why do we have part time ANG guys?

The answers, IMHO, are money and historical significance. A Scrappy or Magnum will cost the AF much less over the course of their career than an active duty equivelent. They will NOT be getting paid (when on part time status) except for the 8-10 training days a month they are needed. The will NOT be getting Tricare. They will not earn a dime of their pension (A fund equivelent) until they are 60 vice the traditional 42-44, which means the goverment pays them 17-19 less years and also pays them LATER...(at age 60)...both which are easier on the budgets. So...you get a combat ready (or close to it) warrior for 40-60% of the cost of an active duty guy. Its a good deal for the taxpayers, which is why USERRA is out there. Believe it or not, the ANG is not a program to reward exceptionally lucky fighter pilots with the ability to fly fighters and have an airline job at the same time (although it does feel like that on a good day...) Additionally, they are "temp" workers--you can BRAC or reduce their numbers without any of the financial headaches in trying to manage the active duty numbers. There isn't a VSB or similar program when reservists lose their jobs... Politics certainly are a factor too--when a Senator knows his state will get getting those C130Js or F22s in his home state, he is more likely going to support appropriations for that weapons system. The AF gets a lot of bang for its buck when it throws a few new weapons systems to the ANG.

I think equally important is the historical significance of the Minuteman concept. I think we send our potential foes an important message when we say our firemen, policemen, doctors, lawyers, school teachers, and airlines pilots will put down whatever they are doing to activate and fight when required. With the loss of so many bases over the years and the removal of the draft, the ability of the military to "touch" the American public is getting harder. The Guard serves as a vital link to the public reminding them that the military isn't "those guys...", its "us". Your teacher, that business owner, or the guy in the local Sears store may have just gotten back from Iraq, or Katrina relief, or a peace keeping detachment to Bosnia. Having our soliders intertwined in the daily fabric of the community keeps America in touch with its military, and our military in touch with our hometowns.

So--yeah--sometimes it gets "complicated". I can understand how the active duty guy might think "this would just be easy if it was only us active duty guys..." However, in the big picture, I think you gain a lot more by having a robust Guard.

And if anyone can pull it off--there are some SHARP guys at the St Louis unit. I know they'll rise to the challenge with class and do it right.

Well said ALbie - and some airline CPs don't realize that, unfortunately, AF MAJCOMs are beginning to look at the AFRES and ANG as the Active Duty "B" team. At least AFSOC did/does. THey deployed the reserves as much as the AD (And for those naysayers I can back that up with TVL Vouchers) but the reserves didnt get the credit or recognition when it came to good missions. ON certain mission comes ot mind whent he AD DOV pilot got it vs me. And he crashed. And I rescued him. But I digress.....

GOod post

 

[dtfl]

Draginass is RIGHT in that one weekend a month and a min run attitude won't get the job done. That is exactly my beef with some of the airline mid-level managers who give the whale eye to guys who take mil leave more than the "average" guy. While flying fighters part time was probably never "easy", it certainly has become more challenging the last few years.

There are some serious challenges to staying proficient in a front line fourth+ generation fighter or bomber. Another interesting wrinkle will be the nuclear certification/verification process--that will also be an interesting discussion. "Hey boss, I need to drop my 3 day next week--apparently we are going to nuke North Korea and Iran...." (yeah...its tongue in cheek--but anyone who was in the old SAC knows that PRP and the serious of the mission was a big deal)

I've said this before, but its HARD for me to stay as sharp as I want in the F-15 if I don't fly at least several consecutive days every 2 weeks. Now--I don't claim to be anything special in the Eagle, but I've flown in continuously since 1992 and have over 2000 hours. If I had to go learn to fly an F-16 or F-22 after a TX course, I think (key work...think...not KNOW) that I'd probably need much more than that to keep the new habit patterns down and get "comfortable" in the jet. I think these guys like Scrappy and Magnum taking on the F-22 are going to be working very hard for a while. I am also very confident they will do a great job--both are highly experienced fighter pilots.

What will be a challenge, however, is working all of that in and keeping the airline happy. There will be some friction here and there...

So why even bother? Why do we have part time ANG guys?

The answers, IMHO, are money and historical significance. A Scrappy or Magnum will cost the AF much less over the course of their career than an active duty equivelent. They will NOT be getting paid (when on part time status) except for the 8-10 training days a month they are needed. The will NOT be getting Tricare. They will not earn a dime of their pension (A fund equivelent) until they are 60 vice the traditional 42-44, which means the goverment pays them 17-19 less years and also pays them LATER...(at age 60)...both which are easier on the budgets. So...you get a combat ready (or close to it) warrior for 40-60% of the cost of an active duty guy. Its a good deal for the taxpayers, which is why USERRA is out there. Believe it or not, the ANG is not a program to reward exceptionally lucky fighter pilots with the ability to fly fighters and have an airline job at the same time (although it does feel like that on a good day...) Additionally, they are "temp" workers--you can BRAC or reduce their numbers without any of the financial headaches in trying to manage the active duty numbers. There isn't a VSB or similar program when reservists lose their jobs... Politics certainly are a factor too--when a Senator knows his state will get getting those C130Js or F22s in his home state, he is more likely going to support appropriations for that weapons system. The AF gets a lot of bang for its buck when it throws a few new weapons systems to the ANG.

I think equally important is the historical significance of the Minuteman concept. I think we send our potential foes an important message when we say our firemen, policemen, doctors, lawyers, school teachers, and airlines pilots will put down whatever they are doing to activate and fight when required. With the loss of so many bases over the years and the removal of the draft, the ability of the military to "touch" the American public is getting harder. The Guard serves as a vital link to the public reminding them that the military isn't "those guys...", its "us". Your teacher, that business owner, or the guy in the local Sears store may have just gotten back from Iraq, or Katrina relief, or a peace keeping detachment to Bosnia. Having our soliders intertwined in the daily fabric of the community keeps America in touch with its military, and our military in touch with our hometowns.

So--yeah--sometimes it gets "complicated". I can understand how the active duty guy might think "this would just be easy if it was only us active duty guys..." However, in the big picture, I think you gain a lot more by having a robust Guard.

And if anyone can pull it off--there are some SHARP guys at the St Louis unit. I know they'll rise to the challenge with class and do it right.

Well said ALbie - and some airline CPs don't realize that, unfortunately, AF MAJCOMs are beginning to look at the AFRES and ANG as the Active Duty "B" team. (At least AFSOC did/does. They deployed the reserves as much as the AD And for those naysayers I can back that up with TVL Vouchers) but the reserves didnt get the credit or recognition when it came to good missions.) But I digress.....
Airlines must realize that the AF wants and NEEDS more participation than the minimum...sometimes a LOT more...

Anyway - Good post

 

[retired guy]

Actually, the B-2 is not just supersonic, it's superluminous. By breaking the light barrier, it cannot be seen or picked up on radar until a couple of days after it has gone home. Pilots land from a mission younger than they were at takeoff, sometimes forcing an immediate reduction in rank.

Good one!

 

[stlpilot]

The way I understand it is that the St Louis guard, who is currently F-15s has been notified that they will change their mission to the B-2. The B-2s will still be active duty, but the guard will also operate them. That is how I understand it, but I am writing on here because I just heard about it, and am simply trying to see if anyone else has more/better/concrete info.

GO BENGALS!!!!

That all checks with what I know, for now anyways. The manning document for this thing is a work in progress right now. Whether the guard owns a few aircraft, operates active duty’s, or a mix of both is also not quite known. As for pilots, again its too soon to say anything for sure whether current STL folks will transfer over, retire, go to another unit, etc.

Yes I know Iv pretty much told you nothing, it’s just too soon to say what the layout will be.

Merry Christmas all!

 

[BengalsFan]

STLpilot

When are you all officially taking over that mission/when is the manning document suppose to be official?

 

[frog_flyer]

STLpilot

When are you all officially taking over that mission/when is the manning document suppose to be official?

Rough game............................. that sucked.

 

[Oh-ryan]

I was not in the military. And as I sit here reading how our newest front line aircraft are being worked into the TOE of Air NG units, red flags wave in my mind. I worry that somewhere, someone is seeing how our endless summer in Iraq and Afghanistan is turning folks away from the full time air force, so we're going to make up for it by incessently employing the Air Guard overseas. Sorta like the Army National Guard is now spread across the planet.

I was also talking with a swab the other day who told me the next generation of aircraft carrier for the USN is being designed to cut the required crew compliment to operate it by up to a third. I find these trends disturbing.

Am I wrong to be concerned for you military fliers?

A big reduction in the manning of the NG carrier is due to the lack of steam cats and arresting gear. Gonna switch over to electro magnet drives and some other black magic. But as to whether or not this disturbs me... absolutely not. It's about time. The military may always be on the tip of the technology spear, but often those advances in technology stay at the upper echelons of the services. Very little of it trickles down to the hands of the soldier, airman, sailor or marine. It's due to the DOD starting to run itself like a business and not a government entity that has bottemless pockets. Back in the day, if there was an obstacle you threw manpower and money at it. Nowadays there more fiscal reponsibility to the taxpayer. Think of it, an oil tanker, which is just as big as an aircraft carrier, has about 20 crewmembers and somehow it manages to go just about every place a carrier can go in the world without incident. Why... automation. Granted, the folks on a carrier are not just going from A to B, but still, the precentage of the folks dedicated to the mission of getting it from A to B is about 500 times more than what is used on that oil tanker. It's silly and it's about time the military catch up with the civilian world in matters like this.

 

[JungleJett]

YES. CRJs are tubes of pain and discomfort!

Take the bus next time!!

 

[BengalsFan]

I try to stay away too...

Take the bus next time!!

This isn't a dig on the RJ pilot... just the equipment, but when I look for a plane ticket I am willing to spend more to stay off an RJ if it is possible. It is a terrible ride... and now with the airlines using them for more than just regional flying, I honestly look for a 737 or A320 when possible, instead of the RJ, on those longer flights.

 

[JungleJett]

This isn't a dig on the RJ pilot... just the equipment, but when I look for a plane ticket I am willing to spend more to stay off an RJ if it is possible. It is a terrible ride... and now with the airlines using them for more than just regional flying, I honestly look for a 737 or A320 when possible, instead of the RJ, on those longer flights.

If you take a look at the actual seat you are sitting in, it really is not that much different. I will agree the airlines are using them for more than what they were really built for but in some markets, it makes sense too. As for long flights, I would rather sit in first class instead of low class....the benefit of working for the airlines!

By the way..I hope your ok after last night wide snap on a FG attempt! I would have beaten Santa had he been around!

 

[MJG]

By the way..I hope your ok after last night wide snap on a FG attempt! I would have beaten Santa had he been around!

Lord knows I'm not, I think I threw up like 3 or 4 times after that, I haven't felt that sick since last season's playoff game in January.........uke:

 

[BengalsFan]

Oh man... we gave Denver a very early X-mas present... it was way more than just one snap. It was 2 fumbles, 2 picks, 2 pentalties that brought back long touchdowns, missed throws, allowing a 99 1/2 yard touchdown drive (by helping it continue with a couple of questionable pass interference pentalties), etc, etc. But as long as Miami beats the Jets tonight, then all we have to do is beat Pittsburg next week, and we are still in the playoffs! The dream continues.

As for the RJ, I still think it is extremely loud, and very bumpy... and the seats/leg room are smaller... It gets the job done, and I will obviously ride on 'em, but I do search for other options.

Take Care

and

GO BENGALS!!!

 

[IFollowRoads]

A big reduction in the manning of the NG carrier is due to the lack of steam cats and arresting gear. Gonna switch over to electro magnet drives and some other black magic. But as to whether or not this disturbs me... absolutely not. It's about time. The military may always be on the tip of the technology spear, but often those advances in technology stay at the upper echelons of the services. Very little of it trickles down to the hands of the soldier, airman, sailor or marine. It's due to the DOD starting to run itself like a business and not a government entity that has bottemless pockets. Back in the day, if there was an obstacle you threw manpower and money at it. Nowadays there more fiscal reponsibility to the taxpayer. Think of it, an oil tanker, which is just as big as an aircraft carrier, has about 20 crewmembers and somehow it manages to go just about every place a carrier can go in the world without incident. Why... automation. Granted, the folks on a carrier are not just going from A to B, but still, the precentage of the folks dedicated to the mission of getting it from A to B is about 500 times more than what is used on that oil tanker. It's silly and it's about time the military catch up with the civilian world in matters like this.

Well I figure an oil tanker probably pulls into port alot more often than an aircraft carrier. Thus it doesn't need alot of crew to do repairs at sea. Plus I never saw an oil tanker do an underway replenishment. Or fight a fire like the USS Forrestal crew had to fight. I figure the oil tanker crew won't try very hard to save her before they go to the life boats.

I dunno. I guess my main point is I think something is out of whack when we have so many reserve units deployed and frontline. I just don't want any of our kids to get shafted. Especially since I have a son who is hell bent on US Naval Aviation. Just call me a concerned parent