Did I hear ABC correctly?

The Air Force doesn't have enough planes to fly Stryker Force around the
world when it needs to go someplace? Since when did the Air Force have
a shortage of planes?

After an exhausting session with Victoria's Secret Police, Mark Smith
blurted out:

The Air Force doesn't have enough planes to fly Stryker Force around the
world when it needs to go someplace? Since when did the Air Force have
a shortage of planes?

Depends on how you want to look at it...if you consider all the Guard
and Reserve airlift units that have been activated (or portions of the
units) for duty in Iraq and Afghanistan, then the Active Duty
airlifters are over tasked.

Also one should consider the AF's activation and use of the Civil
Reserve Air Fleet (CRAF) for hauling large numbers of troops to war in
both Gulf Wars...those being 1990/91 and 2003. Honestly don't know if
anybody is currently employed for CRAF flying (my company is not now,
but had been during both wars).

Clearly the tasking and operations tempo are too much for *just* the
acitve duty folks to handle.

Juvat

"Mark and Kim Smith" wrote in message
...
The Air Force doesn't have enough planes to fly Stryker Force around the
world when it needs to go someplace? Since when did the Air Force have
a shortage of planes?


It might be a shortage of one or more resources, like EW platforms.

The Air Force doesn't have enough planes to fly Stryker Force around the
world when it needs to go someplace? Since when did the Air Force have
a shortage of planes?


Hmm, they are retiring the C-141 at an accelerated rate, perhaps the ongoing
C-17 production is being outpaced by C-141retirement? Its not a 1:1 deal
though, anyone know how many C-17s will be built for the USAF/ANG/USAFR ?


BUFDRVR

"Stay on the bomb run boys, I'm gonna get those bomb doors open if it harelips
everyone on Bear Creek"

"BUFDRVR" wrote in message
...
The Air Force doesn't have enough planes to fly Stryker Force around the
world when it needs to go someplace? Since when did the Air Force have
a shortage of planes?


Hmm, they are retiring the C-141 at an accelerated rate, perhaps the
ongoing
C-17 production is being outpaced by C-141retirement? Its not a 1:1 deal
though, anyone know how many C-17s will be built for the USAF/ANG/USAFR ?


BUFDRVR


They have also retired the first few C-5's...


KB

"BUFDRVR" wrote in message
...
The Air Force doesn't have enough planes to fly Stryker Force around the
world when it needs to go someplace? Since when did the Air Force have
a shortage of planes?


Hmm, they are retiring the C-141 at an accelerated rate, perhaps the
ongoing
C-17 production is being outpaced by C-141retirement? Its not a 1:1 deal
though, anyone know how many C-17s will be built for the USAF/ANG/USAFR ?

Last I recall the plan was for two squadrons, IIRC, one being in Sonny
Montgomery's home state of Mississippi where they would replace the C-141's
currently in service. That unit received its first C-17 (of eight total) in
mid-December. I believe the USAFR unit is to be based at March AFRB. I would
not discount further ANG deliveries, being as we have seen the total buy of
C-17's exhibit an upward movement over the last couple of years.

Brooks



BUFDRVR

"Stay on the bomb run boys, I'm gonna get those bomb doors open if it
harelips
everyone on Bear Creek"

"Mark and Kim Smith" wrote in message
...
The Air Force doesn't have enough planes to fly Stryker Force around the
world when it needs to go someplace? Since when did the Air Force have
a shortage of planes?

There's NEVER been "enough" Air Force cargo planes. Now, with two conflicts
going (Iraq and Afghanistan) plus normal worldwide committments, I'm not
surprised the airlift community is a little stressed.

Ragnar wrote:

"Mark and Kim Smith" wrote in message
...


The Air Force doesn't have enough planes to fly Stryker Force around the
world when it needs to go someplace? Since when did the Air Force have
a shortage of planes?



There's NEVER been "enough" Air Force cargo planes. Now, with two conflicts
going (Iraq and Afghanistan) plus normal worldwide committments, I'm not
surprised the airlift community is a little stressed.



Supposedly this Stryker Force is supposed to be anywhere in the world in
96 hours ( I think that was the time quoted ) and that the Air Force
wasn't up to that. The complaints were that their troop transports are
too heavy. Not to mention they had to add 2 tons of anti RPG protection
to each machine causing their weight problems to increase. All the high
tech stuff this Stryker Force has ain't gonna do much good if you can't
get them there. Maybe the Army forgot to talk to the Air Force??

The Air Force doesn't have enough planes to fly Stryker Force around the
world when it needs to go someplace? Since when did the Air Force have
a shortage of planes?

The Air Force has NEVER had enough transport aircraft to meet the requirements
it was tasked to fill. The two simultaneous war capability advertised during
the Clinton (?) years was so much baloney. Couldn't do it then, can't do it
now. The AF spends a "gajillion" dollars on fighters but not nearly as much on
the support aircraft needed to get the mechanics, supplies, etc. needed to
support those fighters to the same location.

THEN, there's the Army. On one occasion when I was in a C-141B airlift unit,
the Army wanted some heavy equipment moved from point A to point B. However,
when the AF transports arrived to load up, the equipment would no longer fit
(it used to fit though.) What happened? The Army had welded some additional
stuff on the outside of the equipment and it no longer would fit though the
cargo door of the transport.

Ed
"The French couldn't hate us any
more unless we helped 'em out in another war."
--Will Rogers



(Delete text after dot com for e-mail reply.)

"Mark and Kim Smith" wrote in message
...


Supposedly this Stryker Force is supposed to be anywhere in the world in 96
hours ( I think that was the time quoted ) and that the Air Force wasn't up
to that.

I don't know what the hell a "Stryker Force" is, but if you are referring to
the Stryker Brigade Combat Team, the goal is 96 hours. As to whether or not
the USAF can manage that, it would largely depend upon the level of
committment it has to other requirements--if DoD says getting the SBCT into
the theater is the top priority, airframes will be made available one way or
another.

The complaints were that their troop transports are too heavy.

Ambiguous. The Stryker combat vehicle pushes (but does not exceed) the
capability of the C-130, but it does not tax that of the larger strategic
airlifters like the C-5 and C-17.

Not to mention they had to add 2 tons of anti RPG protection to each
machine causing their weight problems to increase.

Again, ambiguous. IIRC that is extra applique armor you are referring to--it
could be airlifted in after the initial closure on the aerial port of
debarkation (APOD) if required. But if the method of transport is the C-5 or
C-17, it can travel with it already installed.


All the high tech stuff this Stryker Force has ain't gonna do much good if
you can't get them there. Maybe the Army forgot to talk to the Air Force??

This stuff has been flung back and forth for a couple of years now. Simple
answer is that the SBCT is a hell of a lot lighter (and easier) to transport
than the next heavier asset (a heavy brigade combat team with its M1A2's,
M2A2's, M109A6's, etc.), while it packs substantially more ground maneuver
capability and protection than its next lighter component (the light
infantry brigade combat team). It is a good tool to have in the grand
toolbox of military operations for the US military--they were not quite
ready when the balloon went up for OIF (the first SBCT just became fully
operational this past year), so the Army had to try and get a heavy force
into Northern Iraq by air, resulting in IIRC about the equivalent of one
battalion task force (minus, again IIRC) (which is only one-third of a heavy
BCT) making it into that area by the time the units in the south made the
link up. Had they had a SBCT ready to go we would have seen the entire
brigade in the AO instead.

Brooks