Author Topic: Sweat (Read 1256 times)

easymo · « **on:** September 19, 2001, 01:12:00 PM »

I bet the Marines are sweating. Afghanistan is a thousand miles from water. The Marines may be forced to watch this one on T.V.. This looks like a Ranger show. He he.

Go Army!

Sandman · « **Reply #1 on:** September 19, 2001, 05:25:00 PM »

Thus begins the great race to determine who owns the "power projection" hat in the U.S. Dept. of Defense, Air Force or Navy?

AKDejaVu · « **Reply #2 on:** September 19, 2001, 05:56:00 PM »

sweet: Sugary
sweat: perspiration

One fricking word in the title and you screw it up

AKDejaVu

<edit>LOL!... guess you did get it right

<- just reread your post</edit>

AKDejaVu

[ 09-19-2001: Message edited by: AKDejaVu ]

Hangtime · « **Reply #3 on:** September 19, 2001, 08:59:00 PM »

Actually; time for inter-force rivalry is past..

Besides; it'll still be OUR GUYS (and Gals now), and you can bet ALL branches will have their piece of the action.

Sandman · « **Reply #4 on:** September 20, 2001, 06:17:00 AM »

It's not a rivalry. It's about funding.

The current crisis won't change that, but it will highlight deficiencies in much the same way that the Southwest Asia campaign highlighted the problems with USAF airborne EW platforms and resulted in their cutting the EF-111 from the inventory, leaving only the USN EA-6B to do tactical stand-off EW missions.

AKDejaVu · « **Reply #5 on:** September 20, 2001, 07:36:00 AM »

Quote

Southwest Asia campaign highlighted the problems with USAF airborne EW platforms and resulted in their cutting the EF-111 from the inventory, leaving only the USN EA-6B to do tactical stand-off EW missions.

You mean there was a Southwest Asia campaign after the Gulf War?

EF-111As have been in service since the 70s... through the 80s and 90s. I have not yet heard of their retirement. They were the first aircraft into Iraq and cleared the way for the first F-117 attack.

AKDejaVu

Sandman · « **Reply #6 on:** September 20, 2001, 08:30:00 AM »

As of 1998, there was a single EF-111 squadron at Cannon AFB, the 429th ECS.

According to this link, the 429th ECS was inactivated in June of 1998.

If there are any active EF-111 in the U.S. inventory, I am unaware of them.

Toad · « **Reply #7 on:** September 20, 2001, 08:49:00 AM »

I think the Navy is going to carry most of the load on this one.

We're going into conflict with more than one Muslim nation over the next decades.

The rest of them, even the "moderates" or friendly ones are not going to allow US basing for very long, if at all.

They might let us clean out one or two neighborhood bullies for them but then it'll be time to leave.

So, anchors aweigh my boys.

easymo · « **Reply #8 on:** September 20, 2001, 09:03:00 AM »

Hope not toad.
The Navy once fired a short round while aiming over us. This round struck a supply depot. More to the point, a bunker housing our beer supply. This was a source of consternation to myself and my fellow soldiers. As I recall, there were even some unkind comments directed towards the U.S. Navy at the time. As for myself I have had some doubts about that branch ever since.

[ 09-20-2001: Message edited by: easymo ]

Toad · « **Reply #9 on:** September 20, 2001, 09:07:00 AM »

Easy, probably just an entrepreneurial Navy Chief with some extra beer to sell. Figured out a quick way to create a market and serve it.

easymo · « **Reply #10 on:** September 20, 2001, 09:08:00 AM »

AKDejaVu · « **Reply #11 on:** September 20, 2001, 11:22:00 AM »

Quote

As of 1998, there was a single EF-111 squadron at Cannon AFB, the 429th ECS.
According to this link, the 429th ECS was inactivated in June of 1998.

If there are any active EF-111 in the U.S. inventory, I am unaware of them.

LOL! OK.. but I thought you said:

Quote

The current crisis won't change that, but it will highlight deficiencies in much the same way that the Southwest Asia campaign highlighted the problems with USAF airborne EW platforms and resulted in their cutting the EF-111 from the inventory, leaving only the USN EA-6B to do tactical stand-off EW missions.

I have a tendancy to believe that the major contributing factor to the EF-111A being decomissioned in 98 had a tad bit to do with the fact that the airframes were 31-32 years old. I don't even know if the EF-111A saw action in SouthWest Asia. Seems to me, the EF was a retrofitted F-111A whose mod was done in the mid 70's some time.

I've never heard anyone associate the phrase "problems" with its performance exept for you. I do believe you may be confusing the stabilizer problems of the F-111A early in its life with any perceived EF-111A problems.

Hey.. just found this to add some fact to your fiction:

From Aviation Enthusiast's Corner:
Development of the EF-111A Raven began in January 1975 when the Air Force contracted with Grumman Aerospace to modify two F-111As to serve as electronic warfare platforms. The F-111”¡ high speed, long range, substantial payload and reasonable cost made it the ideal candidate to protect allied tactical forces against enemy radar defenses.

I'm not a super history buff... but when did that "Soutwest Asia Campaign" end?

<edit>DOH! Just realized there's a big difference between Southwest Asia and Southeast.

Seems alot happened to them since 94... but it had nothing to do with their effectiveness... once again... that was never questioned. As a matter of fact, I've heard nothing but praise for them in regards to their effectiveness in the Iraq conflict</Edit>

AKDejaVu

[ 09-20-2001: Message edited by: AKDejaVu ]

Sandman · « **Reply #12 on:** September 20, 2001, 11:53:00 AM »

Poor choice of words... I should not have used the word, "problems".

Put it this way... As a result of restructuring of DoD assets, the EF-111 was retired in favor of the EA-6B. One could assume that the DoD kept the most capable EW platform.

I've found nothing to indicate any serious modernization programs for the EF-111 EW systems and subsystems after the initial installation of ALR-62, ALQ-99 and ALQ-137 in 1983.

I'm also generalizing by using the term, Southwest Asia Campaign. There were actually three separate campaigns in Southwest Asia: "Defense of Saudi Arabia" 02AUG90-16JAN91, "Liberation and Defense of Kuwait" 17JAN91-11APR91, and "Soutwest Asia Cease-fire" 12APR91-30NOV95.

Happy now?

Sandman · « **Reply #13 on:** September 20, 2001, 11:57:00 AM »

DOUBLE POST (Not sure how that happened)... friggin network.

[ 09-20-2001: Message edited by: Sandman_SBM ]

AKDejaVu · « **Reply #14 on:** September 20, 2001, 12:03:00 PM »

Happy? Nope... not when you start dissing my bird

And, to assume DoD does anything based on actual capability is a stretch.

I do know that maintenance on the F-111 was not a pleasure. The F-111A fighters had been retired some 8 years earlier because the airframes were giving out. Sounds like they prolonged the life of the EFs as long as they could. All F-111A and EF-111A birds were built in 66-67 timeframe.

You also have to consider that Grumman was the company that retrofitted the EF-111A and makes the EA-6. Is it better to go with an airframe/jamming combination supported by one company or two? Who would have had more interest in lobbying for their aircraft to stay in service? Dunno... seems some huge assumptions as far as "capability" are made when politics are more of a factor.

AKDejaVu