Article

2007-01-31 Home Front: WoT

Archived material is restricted to Rantburg regulars and members. If you need access email fred.pruitt=at=gmail.com with your nick to be added to the members list. There is no charge to join Rantburg as a member.

Posted by Steve White 2007-01-31 00:00|| || Front Page|| [11134 views since 2007-05-07] Top

#1 C'est bon. Hehehehehe.

Posted by Besoeker 2007-01-31 04:37|| 2007-01-31 04:37|| Front Page Top

#2 Oregon Democrat's legislation

Whoa! What's wrong with this picture? I thought the Dems were for giving the stuff away for free?

Posted by Bobby 2007-01-31 06:24|| 2007-01-31 06:24|| Front Page Top

#3 ...This is without question one of the dumbest moves anybody has made in a long, long time, and I have no sympathy for anyone involved.
The fact of the matter is that only one other nation on the planet flies the Tomcat, and they are our sworn enemies. We have no intention of bringing the 'Cat back into service (NOTE: When a US military aircraft leaves the inventory, every operational trace of it is literally erased from the inventory. In the case of the 'Cat, it was even more thorough, because the USN has a strong interest in NEVER seeing it come back, but that's another story)and every last one of those parts should have been de-mil'ed or destroyed, and THEN sold for their scrap value.

Mike

Posted by Mike Kozlowski 2007-01-31 08:59|| 2007-01-31 08:59|| Front Page Top

#4 I'm all for selling them to Iran .....

With GPS embedded ....
Self destruct embedded....

Posted by DarthVader">DarthVader 2007-01-31 09:49|| 2007-01-31 09:49|| Front Page Top

#5 There may be more here than meets the eye. If an Oregon Democrat wants it stopped, something useful may have been going on.

Posted by Grunter 2007-01-31 10:29|| 2007-01-31 10:29|| Front Page Top

#6 #5 There may be more here than meets the eye. If an Oregon Democrat wants it stopped, something useful may have been going on.

Even a blind squrrel finds a nut now and then.

Posted by Redneck Jim 2007-01-31 10:51|| 2007-01-31 10:51|| Front Page Top

#7 If an Oregon Democrat wants it stopped,

Then maybe, just maybe, this Oregon Dem had a campaign contribution from Soodies.

Posted by gromgoru 2007-01-31 13:30|| 2007-01-31 13:30|| Front Page Top

#8 the USN has a strong interest in NEVER seeing it come back, but that's another story

Why's that?

Posted by Mike 2007-01-31 15:29|| 2007-01-31 15:29|| Front Page Top

#9 What is really interesting is that it took a Dem senator to do something, when all the Trunks didn't.
Mike: can you elaborate on the comment about the USN not ever wanting the Tomcat to come back? I know they destroyed all tooling for the P-6M and the USAF did the same to the B-35/-49 and various Blackbird version tooling, but not aware of anything like that for the -14.

Posted by USN, Ret. 2007-01-31 15:32|| 2007-01-31 15:32|| Front Page Top

#10 USN and Mike-

The late model Tomcats - especially the Bombcats -gave incredible service during the initial stages of the GWOT. Although their bombload wasn't quite what the F-18 can carry, it could do it a heck of a lot farther, faster, and more reliably - plus it still had the ability to be a world class dogfighter and carry the AIM-54 Phoenix. However, the USN had decreed that the ~~Sewer Horror~~ Super Hornet is the wave of the future - lousy range, iffy warload and all. (That's also the reason the A-6s were summarily excecuted instead of being rebuilt in the mid-90s, which lost the Navy what would have been the world's most capable all-weather strike ship) The word went out that the Tomcat would NOT recieve its next planned upgrades (my understanding is that it would have gotten a radar upgrade that would have made it an all-round killer)and the AIM-54C was sent to the graveyard as well. With a deckload of Hornets, the USN not only has all its eggs in one basket (fixed-wing ASW is almost gone too)but is tied to an airplane whose range with a serious warload is way too short, and has to devote (IIRC)1/3rd of the Hornets on any given deployment to aerial refueling. (We lost the KA-6s, too).

Mike

Posted by Mike Kozlowski 2007-01-31 16:57|| 2007-01-31 16:57|| Front Page Top

#11 ...Almost forgot - the jigs were ordered destroyed a long while back, IIRC early 90s.

Mike

Posted by Mike Kozlowski 2007-01-31 17:01|| 2007-01-31 17:01|| Front Page Top

#12 It's almost as if someone really planned in advance to downgrade our seaborne airstrike capabilities, which had been built up steadfastly over many years. Let's see, just who was it who was in charge during the mid-90s, I seem to forget...

Posted by Glunter Shise3857 2007-01-31 18:53|| 2007-01-31 18:53|| Front Page Top

#13 Mike K: where have you been? I thought I was the only one standing on the Grumman bandstand (notice the conspicuous absence of the Northrop part of the name).
I got to work on the Bombcats @ PAX RVR and was hip deep in all the Skypig upgrades (plastic wing, SWIP Block 1A, etc).
Agree 100% about the Lawn Dart being a political airplane and no legs. Go read "Pentagon Paradox."
In my heart of hearts I believe that the Lawn Dart Mafia had a say in (then) SecDef Cheney's decision to pull the plug on the Dorito, also.
Look at the bright side: lost the KA-6 gained the (K)S-3A ( buddy store on one side) "snort"
Another plus: all the Florida scuba dudes have a neat new artifical reef, called " Intruder Reef." (guess what it is made from)

Posted by USN, ret. 2007-01-31 22:07|| 2007-01-31 22:07|| Front Page Top

23:39 Anguper Hupomosing9418
23:36 49 Pan
23:29 Alaska Paul
23:14 tipper
23:11 DMFD
23:00 DMFD
22:58 DMFD
22:47 Ricky bin Ricardo (Abu Babaloo)
22:45 Mike N.
22:45 anymouse
22:35 BA
22:26 BA
22:21 Elmert Crosh5077
22:15 JosephMendiola
22:07 USN, ret.
21:58 USN, ret.
21:48 Phemp Uneger3592
21:48 JohnQC
21:45 USN, ret.
21:45 Three Wise Monkeys
21:27 occasional observer
21:26 occasional observer
21:16 Mike N.
21:15 Jackal