Page 2 of 2

RE: Re: RE: Re: RE: Re: RE: Combat Dragon II and the OV-10G+

Unread postPosted: 17 Sep 2013, 03:46
by discofishing
Well, I guess it all starts with requirements. At work they beat that into our heads. No engineering project starts unless EVERYONE is 100% clear on that stuff. The the politicians will have a chance to screw with the military and mess with the lead integrator and suppliers. One thing I do know is that these requirements change and wording is EXTREMELY important. It's almost a lesson in english all over again. This stuff still changes after it changes. A lot of the requirements are CLASSIFIED too and there is always the ever important JOBS requirement.

RE: Re: RE: Re: RE: Re: RE: Combat Dragon II and the OV-10G+

Unread postPosted: 17 Sep 2013, 03:48
by lookieloo
Well Snake,

I'm just telling you what a grunt on the ground wants in the modern COIN environment. Because of the technology we have today, modern insurgents generally know better than to try something when any aircraft are around, so long-term coverage is now a more desirable form of air-cover than fast-responding CAS (which is better suited for peer conflicts). How the USAF decides to provide that is up to them I suppose; I'm only making suggestions that might save them the trouble/cost of maintaining a dedicated COIN fleet, leaving them more freedom to focus on their core mission of being ready for a real war.

As for SOCOM ops, that's really not my lane, but I hear tale that operating the Bronco is somewhat... annoying, leading me to surmise that there might be better options. But if that's all they have on-hand...

RE: Re: RE: Re: RE: Re: RE: Combat Dragon II and the OV-10G+

Unread postPosted: 18 Sep 2013, 04:11
by discofishing
lookieloo,

What a leg wants is of no concern to chairforce.

Re: RE: Re: RE: Re: RE: Re: RE: Combat Dragon II and the OV-

Unread postPosted: 09 Oct 2013, 16:39
by huggy
discofishing wrote:What a leg wants is of no concern to chairforce.

What's your background?

RE: Re: RE: Re: RE: Re: RE: Re: RE: Combat Dragon II and the

Unread postPosted: 10 Oct 2013, 00:06
by count_to_10
I'm not sure air strikes on insurgents should be considered the end-all, be-all of CAS. That's more COIN aircraft, and you may end up getting that kind of intimidation factor out of smaller UAVs.

Re: RE: Re: RE: Re: RE: Re: RE: Combat Dragon II and the OV-

Unread postPosted: 12 Nov 2013, 00:06
by discofishing
huggy wrote:
discofishing wrote:What a leg wants is of no concern to chairforce.

What's your background?


Lets put it this way, I didn't eat or sleep as well as the zoomies.

RE: Re: RE: Re: RE: Re: RE: Re: RE: Combat Dragon II and the

Unread postPosted: 12 Nov 2013, 18:55
by huggy
Roger, copy. Giving a straight answer will impeach you ability to be credible.

Re: RE: Re: RE: Re: RE: Re: RE: Re: RE: Combat Dragon II and

Unread postPosted: 14 Nov 2013, 03:05
by discofishing
huggy wrote:Roger, copy. Giving a straight answer will impeach you ability to be credible.



Then Soldiers must not be very credible. Roger? COFFEE!!! OUT!!!!

Re: RE: Re: RE: Re: RE: Re: RE: Re: RE: Combat Dragon II and

Unread postPosted: 14 Nov 2013, 08:16
by huggy
discofishing wrote:
huggy wrote:Roger, copy. Giving a straight answer will impeach you ability to be credible.



Then Soldiers must not be very credible. Roger? COFFEE!!! OUT!!!!

Wrong: the SF Army types I supported in 2011 in Afghanistan (during my short tour in an MC-12) were Top Shelf. Very credible. Once we were locked with them, everything we did was in direct support of their mission. These were truly great Americans. Guys like SFC Kris Domeij.
Go into the MC-12 squadron at Beale AFB... "AFB" is where the "chairforce" garrisons, in case you didn't know... and you will see him picture hung prominently. Yeah... an Army Ranger's portrait in an Air Force squadron bar.
I hope your brain doesn't explode thinking about that.

Re: RE: Re: RE: Re: RE: Re: RE: Re: RE: Combat Dragon II and

Unread postPosted: 15 Nov 2013, 00:55
by discofishing
huggy wrote:
discofishing wrote:
huggy wrote:Roger, copy. Giving a straight answer will impeach you ability to be credible.



Then Soldiers must not be very credible. Roger? COFFEE!!! OUT!!!!

Wrong: the SF Army types I supported in 2011 in Afghanistan (during my short tour in an MC-12) were Top Shelf. Very credible. Once we were locked with them, everything we did was in direct support of their mission. These were truly great Americans. Guys like SFC Kris Domeij.
Go into the MC-12 squadron at Beale AFB... "AFB" is where the "chairforce" garrisons, in case you didn't know... and you will see him picture hung prominently. Yeah... an Army Ranger's portrait in an Air Force squadron bar.
I hope your brain doesn't explode thinking about that.


Well that's good. Rare though. Then again SOCOM gets what it wants. It's like its own branch of the military. Yall must have had a unique capability US Army RC-12s didn't have. Plenty of PJs and FACs have gone through Ranger school and fought along side Rangers, SF, Delta, MARSOC, SEALs, etc. I'm not surprised by Domeij's picture hanging in a USAF bar. My brain exploded in engineering school. Been trying to put it back together since then. ;)