- Joined
- 18 October 2006
- Messages
- 4,085
- Reaction score
- 4,464
USAF Inc. has a long history of precluding US Army efforts. The C-27 fiasco is so similar to the Caribou story of Vietnam as to be frightening. Not only did the USAF Inc., take the fully programmed aircraft, they took the US Army funds that went with it, then promptly decided they did not need the aircraft and reprogrammed the money. The heavy lift efforts of the US Army is another demonstration of the USAF Inc. methodology. They did nothing until the program was a program of record, then no one less than the Chief of the Air Force got with the Army to clear up roles and missions. The USAF Inc. took over the program, spent a couple of years studying it (two decades of Army effort were of course insufficient), then promptly cancelled all work. Interestingly the Army has solved their problem with USAF Inc., on this, by hiring contract aviation companies to do the mission the way the US Army would like to get air movement done.
There will be some very interesting dynamics coming out of military roles and missions as the efficiencies of VTOL slink out of the primordial state they have been in. What will likely be disconcerting to the USAF Inc., is that there is growing political interest in improving VTOL platform capabilities. Almost six hundred rotorcraft lost compared to less than one hundred fixed wing in the wars. With the expectation that most future conflicts will be less than total war, requiring more low altitude operations, there is more congressional support than there has been in the past. Part of why the USAF Inc. does not mess with the USMC is that the Marines are the darlings of Congress. How else do you get a one-for-one replacement of CH-46 with MV-22, CH-53K, UH/AH-1, F-35 all through the financial wickets in fiscally constrained political atmosphere?
Then there is the US Army aviation science and technology budget which has traditionally been funded at lower levels than the funds the USAF Inc., gets just for engine technology. Perhaps someday a hypersonic fighter/bomber at 50,000 feet can solve a Hezbollah like enemy operating in and amongst civil populations in mega-cities, or deal with mass causalities from a fanatic weapon of mass destruction. Until that is demonstrated I think the focus and priorities of the Air Service, to kill any effort that hints an appearance to impinge on their mission, is ill served for the defense of our country.
Obviously a hot button issue for me and I hope this is not to much of a rambling rant.
On topic, I think that as long as a tilt-rotor stays at V-22 size or lower, the USAF Inc., will not be overly concerned with the US Army having them as it does not really get into their cargo/troop mission or funding stream. At least on the troop lift / utility side. Attack tilt-rotor may present an issue for them.
Edit: To be fair, I do not wish to disparage the men and women of the Air Force who fly and fight every day alongside the other services. They are good men and women doing the same as any other. My angst and frustration is with the USAF Inc., professional staffs that reside in the nations capitol, far from the fight with myopic views of how Douhetian theories will solve all military problems.
There will be some very interesting dynamics coming out of military roles and missions as the efficiencies of VTOL slink out of the primordial state they have been in. What will likely be disconcerting to the USAF Inc., is that there is growing political interest in improving VTOL platform capabilities. Almost six hundred rotorcraft lost compared to less than one hundred fixed wing in the wars. With the expectation that most future conflicts will be less than total war, requiring more low altitude operations, there is more congressional support than there has been in the past. Part of why the USAF Inc. does not mess with the USMC is that the Marines are the darlings of Congress. How else do you get a one-for-one replacement of CH-46 with MV-22, CH-53K, UH/AH-1, F-35 all through the financial wickets in fiscally constrained political atmosphere?
Then there is the US Army aviation science and technology budget which has traditionally been funded at lower levels than the funds the USAF Inc., gets just for engine technology. Perhaps someday a hypersonic fighter/bomber at 50,000 feet can solve a Hezbollah like enemy operating in and amongst civil populations in mega-cities, or deal with mass causalities from a fanatic weapon of mass destruction. Until that is demonstrated I think the focus and priorities of the Air Service, to kill any effort that hints an appearance to impinge on their mission, is ill served for the defense of our country.
Obviously a hot button issue for me and I hope this is not to much of a rambling rant.
On topic, I think that as long as a tilt-rotor stays at V-22 size or lower, the USAF Inc., will not be overly concerned with the US Army having them as it does not really get into their cargo/troop mission or funding stream. At least on the troop lift / utility side. Attack tilt-rotor may present an issue for them.
Edit: To be fair, I do not wish to disparage the men and women of the Air Force who fly and fight every day alongside the other services. They are good men and women doing the same as any other. My angst and frustration is with the USAF Inc., professional staffs that reside in the nations capitol, far from the fight with myopic views of how Douhetian theories will solve all military problems.