WT Forums

Home | WT Forums | Hogpedia | Warthog blog | Hosted sites
It is currently 11 Apr 2025, 07:30

All times are UTC [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 10 posts ] 
Author Message
PostPosted: 29 Oct 2009, 23:24 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: 18 Apr 2005, 12:39
Posts: 1690
Location: Netherlands
http://www.af.mil/news/story.asp?id=123175214

Air Force officials announce candidate bases for joint strike fighter

Posted 10/29/2009 Updated 10/29/2009 Email story Print story


10/29/2009 - WASHINGTON (AFNS) -- Air Force officials here announced the list of candidate locations Oct. 29 for basing the F-35 Lightning II joint strike fighter.

The list of candidate bases was approved by the secretary and chief of staff of the Air Force and identifies the first group of bases to be considered for joint strike fighter basing decisions. The selection of these bases signifies the determination of Air Force officials that these locations have the greatest potential to accommodate the F-35 training or operational mission.

Eleven bases have been selected as candidate bases and include for training: Boise Air Terminal Air Guard Station, Idaho; Eglin Air Force Base, Fla.; Holloman AFB N.M.; Luke AFB, Ariz.; and Tucson International Airport Air Guard Station, Ariz. The six bases selected as candidate bases for operations are: Burlington International Airport Guard Station, Vt.; Hill AFB, Utah; Jacksonville International Airport Air Guard Station, Fla.; Mountain Home AFB, Idaho; Shaw AFB, S.C.; and McEntire Air Guard Base, S.C.

Air Force officials will evaluate existing F-22 Raptor force structure at Holloman AFB as it considers F-35 basing.

\"The selection of this candidate list is the result of a deliberate, repeatable, standardized and transparent process,\" said Kathleen Ferguson, Air Force deputy assistant secretary for installations. \"We are excited about the future of the joint strike fighter and look forward to working with each of the communities surrounding these bases to ensure all of their concerns are addressed.\"

The list of candidate bases were selected using previously announced basing criteria such as airspace, flight training ranges, weather, support facilities, runways, taxi ramps and environmental concerns, and military judgment factors such as combatant commander requirements, aircraft retirements and delivery schedules, aircraft maintenance and logistics support and integration with the Air National Guard and Air Force Reserve.

Now that the list of candidate bases has been released, the formal environmental impact analysis process and site assessments will begin, allowing communities around each candidate base to participate and provide input into the environmental impact analysis. Based on the results of these efforts, officials expect to announce the JSF preferred locations in late spring of 2010. Once the formal environmental impact statements are complete, Air Force officials will issue the Records of Decision and announce the final basing decisions. This is anticipated in early 2011.

_________________
73-1664


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: 30 Oct 2009, 00:06 
Offline
Hog Driver

Joined: 27 Oct 2002, 00:46
Posts: 952
Location: NAS Norfolk VA
Tucson, Burlington, McEntire, Jacksonville, Boise...what a bunch of crap! If you're going to pay off the Guard, at least go for the Brac'ed units like CT, MA and PA.

I guess the JSF is only replacing the F-16 in the Guard.

I'm surprised that Ft Smith isn't on the list.

Coach


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: 30 Oct 2009, 13:52 
Offline

Joined: 15 Oct 2004, 06:52
Posts: 813
Not a lot of surprises there. Burlington is flying ADF model 16's and Jax is 15's. The only issue I have is pulling down yet another operational A-10 unit and making them an RTU. I'm guessing the guard is planning a lot of JSF conversions given there'll now be two RTU's..assuming Tucson stays a training unit.

As to taking care of BRAC'd units, the Grove is beyond help because they're losing their base. Bradley seems content with the pending JCA mission though Chris Dodd appears to be looking for a home for the 10 additional C-17's he wants the Air Force to buy. I think Barnes will be an F-15 unit until the bitter end, eventually coverting to something depending on the size of the JSF buy.

OC


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: 02 Nov 2009, 02:16 
Offline
Warthog VFW
User avatar

Joined: 27 Jan 2002, 14:02
Posts: 6162
Location: IL
I guess they want all those bases as close to Mexico as possible, or Near Monsoons , Hurricanes or Wild Fires.

What about like closer to the Middle?? And to an Airlift Wing?

Maybe they are now , but those sure weren't before. The Bases should be close to a Airlift Wing, and Tankers closer to the Coasts and the Flying Routes like Peeses AFB use to be in NH. That way While the JSF , F-22 or A-10 wings Gear up the Cargo Jets are close by.

Proof, We sat on the Ramp for 20 hours awaiting Transport to the Gulf and Tanker support . Thats why when we finally got loaded up and on our way we had to Stop at SJAFB because the Crew was out of Flying time\" So we waited another 6 hours for a new crew, 16 hour flight 32 hours total time to Get a Combat unit to a War Zone. Good thing we weren't shooting yet.

You should always have Airlift, Tankers and the Combat Wing Close so they can do it \"Smoothly\" 1-2-3.

Goose

_________________
\"Live Free Or Die\"


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: 02 Nov 2009, 19:53 
Offline
WT Game Warden
User avatar

Joined: 25 Nov 2002, 21:15
Posts: 2000
Well, Charleston and Shaw are very close together. Tankers, well that is another subject all together.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: 08 Nov 2009, 08:31 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: 03 Aug 2008, 21:55
Posts: 312
Location: Ft Wayne, IN, USA
A little surprised about Burlington. They (like us in the 122FW FWA) just converted to block 30 F-16Cs. Burlington and FT Wayne have done the \"rainbow\" AEF's to Iraq twice with block 25's in the past...yet we in the 122FW are converting to A-10Cs and now VT is heading toward the -35s. Good for both of us I guess, and since VT helps out with alert duty in DC I guess they should have the 35.

What's up with Ft Smith? I thought they were in the A-10 business for awhile...and our \"battle buddy\" like they were in the F-4 days.

_________________
SoWW #2485
Cave Putorium!


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: 09 Nov 2009, 14:42 
Offline
Warthog VFW
User avatar

Joined: 27 Jan 2002, 14:02
Posts: 6162
Location: IL
Ft Smith???



Goose

_________________
\"Live Free Or Die\"


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: 10 Nov 2009, 01:10 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: 05 Jun 2006, 08:41
Posts: 125
Location: Willow Grove, PA
Old Chief wrote:
As to taking care of BRAC'd units, the Grove is beyond help because they're losing their base. Bradley seems content with the pending JCA mission though Chris Dodd appears to be looking for a home for the 10 additional C-17's he wants the Air Force to buy. I think Barnes will be an F-15 unit until the bitter end, eventually coverting to something depending on the size of the JSF buy.

OC


Actually, that's the thing, Willow Grove is still going to be there....runway, tower, hangers, etc. It's just the Navy and Marines pulling out and going to super amazing mega base McGuire-Lakehurst-Dix. Right now, the plan is for FBI, CIA, and other government agencies to move in, along with the 111th still there and an Army guard unit there as well.
Still no new 'mission' for the 111th, lots of people scratching their heads. Probably not a flying mission this late in the game, but I guess there is still hope. All around just a big 'bend over and take it' from the good old government.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: 10 Nov 2009, 23:55 
Offline
Warthog VFW
User avatar

Joined: 27 Jan 2002, 14:02
Posts: 6162
Location: IL
BRAC SUCKS!!!!!!!!!!!!

It was all Politics, in 1989-90 time frame alot of People Smelled a \"F-ING\" . GW1 just kept the A-10 in the mix and messed up some of the plans.

But the New USAF Policy is \"Fight Hard, Kick Alot of ASS\" and your Unit will get \"BRAC'ed when you get home.And now it Looks Like if Your base is in the Rust Belt or Norheast, You'll get Kicked in the ASS again.

The only thing that'll will probably save the Rest of the \"Old Corp\" A-10 Units is if the NORTH invades the South in the ROK, because they'll be SCREAMING FOR ALL THE \"COMBAT HOGKEEPERS\" they can get.

Just Like Iraq saved our Ass from going to the Army.

Goose

_________________
\"Live Free Or Die\"


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: 18 Nov 2009, 08:40 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: 18 Apr 2005, 12:39
Posts: 1690
Location: Netherlands
Also about the F-35. I found it on www.af.mil

News > Nellis officials plan for F-35's opportunities, challenges

The U.S. Air Force Warfare Center at Nellis Air Force Base, Nev., is preparing for the arrival of the F-35 Lightning II joint strike fighter, like the one pictured here as it undergoes testing at Edwards Air Force Base, Calif. (U.S. Air Force photo/Senior Airman Julius Delos Reyes)

Nellis officials plan for F-35's opportunities, challenges

Posted 11/16/2009 Updated 11/16/2009 Email story Print story

by Donna Miles
American Forces Press Service

11/16/2009 - NELLIS AIR FORCE BASE, Nev. (AFNS) -- With the new F-35 Lightning II joint strike fighter aircraft's arrival just four years away, officials at the U.S. Air Force Warfare Center here are looking forward to joint training opportunities while recognizing the challenges of providing realistic training on such a technologically advanced aircraft.

Maj. Gen. Stanley Kresge, the warfare center's commander, said there's a lot of excitement about the next-generation fighter jet slated to begin arriving here in 2014.

Much of the construction under way here will provide new hangars, maintenance facilities and other infrastructure the new aircraft will require. Meanwhile, General Kresge's staff is focused on establishing a new weapons school for F-35 pilots -- an effort he said lends itself to interservice collaboration as the Air Force, Navy and Marine Corps prepare for their first joint aircraft program since the Vietnam War.

Unlike the Vietnam-era F-4 Phantom II fighter-bomber, initially developed for the Navy, then adopted by the Marine Corps and Air Force, the F-35 was conceived from the drawing board as a single platform with three different variants to meet the needs of three services.

The Air Force will receive the F-35's \"A\" variant, which will provide conventional takeoff and landing capabilities. The Marine Corps is slated to receive the \"B\" variant, which has a vertical-lift capability. The Navy will receive the \"C\" variant, designed for carrier launches.

Plans are on track to equip the first F-35 training squadron at Eglin Air Force Base, Fla., by 2011, and for the Marine Corps to reach initial operational capability by 2012.

General Kresge said he looks forward to working with his Navy counterparts as the Air Force stands up the first F-35 weapons school program at Nellis. Weapons schools provide graduate-level instructor courses, including the most advanced tactics, techniques and procedures for pilots and aircrews.

\"If we are going to build a weapons school first, let's partner on it and then make it easier for them to build their weapons school,\" he said.

Even with three aircraft variants, the airplanes are going to be more alike than different, he said. \"So since we are fundamentally going to be flying the same aircraft, I think we can all benefit from a closer collaboration,\" he said.

For the Air Force program, General Kresge expects to tap F-35 test pilots, along with other weapons school graduates who fly other aircraft. \"We'll put them in a room, lock the door for six months, and they'll come up with the syllabus, courseware and academics,\" General Kresge said.

They'll share their efforts as the Navy Fighter Weapons School, known as \"Top Gun,\" prepares to start up its own F-35 program, he said, while soliciting different approaches to incorporate into the Air Force program.

\"It would make no sense for the Navy to discover a new way of doing business, and then a year later, we stumble onto it ourselves,\" General Kresge said.

The general stressed the importance of F-35 leader training to the future Air Force, noting that today's young fighter pilots will be tomorrow's F-35 squadron commanders.

\"Set your watch,\" he said. \"Fifteen years from now, we are going to want that F-35 squadron commander to be prepared to lead a squadron in war, and to bring along the squadron full of young lieutenants and captains to be the next squadron commander.\"

As General Kresge wrestles with the training and leadership challenges associated with the F-35, the staff here is working to ensure that when the F-35 arrives, crews will have the most realistic training environment possible at the sweeping Nevada Test and Training Range.

That's particularly challenging, explained Col. John P. Montgomery, the 98th Range Wing commander, because the F-35's systems are so advanced that they can tell simulated targets from the real thing.

\"The F-35 is so smart that if it is not a real target, it won't let you hit it, because it knows what a real target is,\" he said. Colonel Montgomery oversees the nearly 3 million acres of ranges and 12,000 square miles of airspace that make up the Nevada Test and Training Range. A big part of the job is making the battle space as close as possible to what aircrews will experience in combat, including realistic targets.

So long before the F-35 arrives here, Montgomery and his staff are trying to figure out ways to build the next-generation targets the next-generation aircraft will need.

\"We are planning ahead for it now, to give it the right kind of target sets that look visually, optically, [through] infrared and radar like the real thing,\" he said. \"It's got to have the same acoustics, and smell like it, too.\"

Meanwhile, he's trying to figure out what kind of aircraft will be capable of standing in for the opposing force during advanced-level training exercises, and how to replicate multiple threats simultaneously.

\"The F-35 is a very capable system, and we only have so many aircraft to throw against it,\" Colonel Montgomery said, noting the need to create virtual threats that the F-35 will recognize.

\"It is not the same kind of problem that we used to solve,\" he said. \"It was an easier problem before stealth [technology], and the fact that these [F-35s] are just amazingly capable. All of a sudden, the targets have to look a lot like the real thing, and the threats have to be a lot more capable, and there have to be a lot of them.\"

Colonel Montgomery said he's committed to working through those challenges before the F-35s start arriving at Nellis. \"It's a tough problem,\" he said. \"But the Air Force knows about it, the Department of Defense knows about it. Lots of people are working on it to solve that problem.\"

Ultimately, the goal is to provide F-35 crews the same level of training their counterparts receive at the Nevada Test and Training Range. \"In the end, the guy gets real feedback, real time about how we has done against the threat he's going at, in a high-pressure environment,\" Colonel Montgomery said. \"And he gets to live -- and to come back and do it all over again tomorrow.\"

_________________
73-1664


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 10 posts ] 

All times are UTC [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group