Welcome to Flightinfo.com
- Register now and join the discussion
- Friendliest aviation Ccmmunity on the web
- Modern site for PC's, Phones, Tablets - no 3rd party apps required
- Ask questions, help others, promote aviation
- Share the passion for aviation
- Invite everyone to Flightinfo.com and let's have fun
Disband the AF
- Thread starter GCD
- Start date
- Watchers 12
Welcome to Flightinfo.com
- Register now and join the discussion
- Modern secure site, no 3rd party apps required
- Invite your friends
- Share the passion of aviation
- Friendliest aviation community on the web
dtfl
Well-known member
- Joined
- Apr 9, 2004
- Posts
- 676
Ridiculous. If that were to happen - we would be back to the old days of overlapping capabilities (which means more needless $ spent) and pissing contests about which service is supported with regards to airpower - the service parochialisms and rivalries would take us two steps back.
McGillicutty
Well-known member
- Joined
- Mar 3, 2006
- Posts
- 151
Deuce130
Durka Durka Jihad!
- Joined
- Jun 9, 2005
- Posts
- 1,237
http://warisboring.com/?page_id=2
Just another hack trying to meet the weekly deadline. More interested in making arguments sound good in writing than in portraying facts. The AF will disband the same day the Navy and the IRS will. I wouldn't waste any more time talking about it.
Just another hack trying to meet the weekly deadline. More interested in making arguments sound good in writing than in portraying facts. The AF will disband the same day the Navy and the IRS will. I wouldn't waste any more time talking about it.
DaveGriffin
Registered Self-Abuser
- Joined
- Nov 29, 2001
- Posts
- 569
Finally, the leading DOD Think Tank is getting serious about the future direction of the US Armed Services and has released some of our early critical recommendations to a defense industry reporter.
The biggest downside of disbanding the AF will be the loss of the traditional rivalry for the CinC Trophy. After Zoomie school is rebranded Naval Academy West, Naval Aviation Officer Development Program, we will only have a two way battle for the incredibly important and prestigious Commander-in-Chief's Trophy.
Here is the article the first one gives reference to.
Both guys seem to swing on the liberal side of politics.
http://www.prospect.org/cs/articles?article=abolish_the_air_force
Personally, I don't think we need to disband the Air Force, but we sure need to have each service in controll of their own intra-theater airlift. The AF stinks at this job.
We need 130 C-27's for the Army!
Both guys seem to swing on the liberal side of politics.
http://www.prospect.org/cs/articles?article=abolish_the_air_force
Personally, I don't think we need to disband the Air Force, but we sure need to have each service in controll of their own intra-theater airlift. The AF stinks at this job.
We need 130 C-27's for the Army!
Last edited:
General: Switching JCA to USAF Would Hike Costs
Oct 19, 2007
Michael Fabey/Aerospace Daily & Defense Report
Gen. Richard Cody, Army vice chief of staff, says turning the Joint Cargo Aircraft (JCA) program into a single acquisition and operation platform under the Air Force would mean significant cost increases.
Cody spoke in response to questions from Sen. Carl Levin (D-Mich.), chairman of the Armed Services Committee.
Cody also sent Levin a copy of the Oct. 9 appeal to restore authorization for JCA funding to the Army aircraft procurement account.
"A switch to a single service will necessitate a significant and time-consuming update to all documentation and could possibly result in Nunn-McCurdy implications," Cody said in his mid-October letter.
When Pentagon program cost increases exceed a certain set amount, the services have to notify Congress they have breached so-called Nunn-McCurdy limits.
Levin had asked the Army to explain the need for a joint JCA program.
"Program documentation and activities to date have been based on an Army-led joint process. If this program were to revert to an Air Force only program, the validity of these documents and decisions will come into question," Cody wrote. "Additionally, there are three primary areas of near-term focus that will delay the program if a service switch is made. These three areas are: the acquisition program execution and documentation; the test program; and the training/fielding activity."
The Army is also currently providing 75 percent of the acquisition execution personnel, Cody pointed out. It will take "upwards of a year" for the Air Force to get the necessary staff in place to replace the Army force.
"The documentation is of particular importance with respect to the acquisition approach," Cody wrote. "This documentation ... defines the acquisition program baseline. This baseline is currently defined with the program being an Army-centric activity joint program." Cody also said the testing is now scheduled around Army processes, procedures and resources.
Cody said the key operational differences between Army and Air Force JCA fleets would not be in the airframe, but in how the aircraft would be used.
The Air Force would use the aircraft to supplement C-130s and other overall airlift needs. The Army is responsible for getting materials and service members to the last tactical mile -- where speed, not necessarily efficiency, is of the utmost importance. Many of the JCA missions would be executed with 24 hours notice or less, Cody said.
Oct 19, 2007
Michael Fabey/Aerospace Daily & Defense Report
Gen. Richard Cody, Army vice chief of staff, says turning the Joint Cargo Aircraft (JCA) program into a single acquisition and operation platform under the Air Force would mean significant cost increases.
Cody spoke in response to questions from Sen. Carl Levin (D-Mich.), chairman of the Armed Services Committee.
Cody also sent Levin a copy of the Oct. 9 appeal to restore authorization for JCA funding to the Army aircraft procurement account.
"A switch to a single service will necessitate a significant and time-consuming update to all documentation and could possibly result in Nunn-McCurdy implications," Cody said in his mid-October letter.
When Pentagon program cost increases exceed a certain set amount, the services have to notify Congress they have breached so-called Nunn-McCurdy limits.
Levin had asked the Army to explain the need for a joint JCA program.
"Program documentation and activities to date have been based on an Army-led joint process. If this program were to revert to an Air Force only program, the validity of these documents and decisions will come into question," Cody wrote. "Additionally, there are three primary areas of near-term focus that will delay the program if a service switch is made. These three areas are: the acquisition program execution and documentation; the test program; and the training/fielding activity."
The Army is also currently providing 75 percent of the acquisition execution personnel, Cody pointed out. It will take "upwards of a year" for the Air Force to get the necessary staff in place to replace the Army force.
"The documentation is of particular importance with respect to the acquisition approach," Cody wrote. "This documentation ... defines the acquisition program baseline. This baseline is currently defined with the program being an Army-centric activity joint program." Cody also said the testing is now scheduled around Army processes, procedures and resources.
Cody said the key operational differences between Army and Air Force JCA fleets would not be in the airframe, but in how the aircraft would be used.
The Air Force would use the aircraft to supplement C-130s and other overall airlift needs. The Army is responsible for getting materials and service members to the last tactical mile -- where speed, not necessarily efficiency, is of the utmost importance. Many of the JCA missions would be executed with 24 hours notice or less, Cody said.
JungleJett
Well-known member
- Joined
- Feb 16, 2004
- Posts
- 1,111
It is a wonderful thing. If I wanted to hear some senseless, weapons grade drivel, I would tune in to a Hillary press conference.
Share this page
Latest resources
-
-
-
-
-
AC 90-89C - Amateur-Built Aircraft and Ultralight Flight Testing HandbookAmateur-Built Aircraft and Ultralight Flight Testing Handbook
- Neal
- Updated:
