Posted on 02/24/2010 1:24:56 AM PST by ErnstStavroBlofeld
Air Force Global Strike Command's top officer emphasized his command's dedication to the bomber mission during the Air Force Association's Air Warfare Symposium and Technology Exposition Feb. 19 here.
"Let me state right up front," said Lt. Gen. Frank Klotz, the AFGSC commander. "Global Strike Command (Airmen are) absolutely committed to providing robust and relentless advocacy for current and future bomber capabilities; in the conventional, as well as in the nuclear realm."
Bombers have always been at the "heart and soul" of the Air Force since its very beginnings, General Klotz said.
"The ability to hold at risk or strike any target anywhere in the world" is one of the 12 Air Force core functions," he said.
He acknowledged that the B-52 Stratofortress and the B-2 Spirit bombers, which came under his responsibility Feb. 1, were "aging aircraft."
"As such, our bomber force faces significant challenges in terms of sustainment of current capabilities and the modernization of the existing platforms to exploit their full potential in the joint fight," the general said.
He emphasized that nuclear-capable bombers remain a vitally important component of the "triad" of nuclear forces -- intercontinental ballistic missiles and submarine-launched ballistic missiles being the other two legs of the triad -- that serve to deter attacks against the United States, as well as its allies and partners. And he underscored the bombers' powerful non-nuclear, or "conventional," capabilities.
General Klotz addressed the issue of how nuclear and conventional operations will coexist in Air Force Global Strike Command.
"I'm often asked how we will be able to balance emphasis on both the nuclear and conventional missions of the bombers and airmen assigned to Global Strike Command," the general said. "The simple fact is that this is not a new challenge."
(Excerpt) Read more at defpro.com ...
The USAF has become a sad joke, courtesy of the fighter mafia.
How so?
Since McPeak, the USAF has dumped most of its long-term planning and resources into the F-22 Raptor at the expense of almost everything else.
Even the service's tactical bombing capability has become suspect, with lots of complaints from our front line troops that USAF pilots (aside from the Warthog drivers) don't like to execute low-level attacks, like Navy and Marine aviators, thereby sacrificing accuracy in exchange for pilot and plane safety.
I've heard a lot of these types of accusations from my Army, Navy, and Marine buddies, and even retired SAC officers, who really have no respect for the USAF anymore.
Clarification to Post #4: I meant to say in contrast to Navy and marine aviators, who are famous for successfully taking the fight down to the deck. All my pals in the Sand Box actually prefer air support from the Navy and Marines because they just don’t trust the USAF to deliver on target anymore.
That is disgraceful. In your view, would the re-establishment of SAC as an independent arm of the Air Force be a step in the right direction? It would seem so to me.
Over the past 15-18 years, fighter pilots have been almost exclusively promoted into the top leadership positions and because of their very narrow Mach 1+ worldview, they have pretty much run the service into the ground. It will take years, if not decades, to fix the problems because they have now become a cultural ones internally. That's what I'm hearing.
bump for later
> “Even the service’s tactical bombing capability has become suspect, with lots of complaints from our front line troops that USAF pilots (aside from the Warthog drivers) don’t like to execute low-level attacks, like Navy and Marine aviators, thereby sacrificing accuracy in exchange for pilot and plane safety.”
I am not sure that it would be wise to bring the B-52 “down on the deck”. Our guys might get hit with falling debris when the bombers fall apart. 55 or 60 year old (approx) aircraft are not what we should be depending on for front line service.
Not strategic B-52s, but tactical air, i.e. bomb-carrying F-16s and F-15s.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.