Sponsor Message:
Military Aviation & Space Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
The Return Of Strategic Air Command?  
User currently offlineLumberton From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 4708 posts, RR: 20
Posted (6 years 2 months 1 week 4 days ago) and read 6971 times:

Albeit by another name, The Global Strike Command. Good move?
http://www.dodbuzz.com/2008/10/17/af...tes-to-announce-more-nuke-changes/

Quote:
Defense Secretary Robert Gates and senior Air Force leaders are expected to announce early next week that all the service’s nuclear missile and bomber forces will be centralized in a single numbered air force major command led by a still-to-be named three star general. The tentative new name for the major command is Global Strike Command.

This move is one of the biggest changes the service will undertake as it sketches in its nuclear roadmap. As the Air Force readies to move missileers out of Space Command, where they currently reside, it has not yet decided whether Space Command will retain authority to train and equip missileers or whether the troops will be trained, equipped and commanded in the new major command.




"When all is said and done, more will be said than done".
23 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlineEBJ1248650 From United States of America, joined Jun 2005, 1932 posts, RR: 1
Reply 1, posted (6 years 2 months 1 week 3 days 18 hours ago) and read 6891 times:



Quoting Lumberton (Thread starter):
Quote:
Defense Secretary Robert Gates and senior Air Force leaders are expected to announce early next week that all the service’s nuclear missile and bomber forces will be centralized in a single numbered air force major command led by a still-to-be named three star general. The tentative new name for the major command is Global Strike Command.

Personally, I don't believe SAC should have ever been disbanded. Bombers and their supporting elements are an entirely different world from those associated with tactical fighters. I was assigned to SAC and TAC during my Air Force years and as a maintainer I can tell you the two are worlds apart.

Same holds true for Air Defense Command and TAC. Again, while both fly fighters their mission objectives and associated mind sets are totally different. Merging them under Air Combat Command was not a good move.



Dare to dream; dream big!
User currently offlineBlackbird From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 2, posted (6 years 2 months 1 week 3 days 16 hours ago) and read 6829 times:

EBJ1248650,

I would have to agree with you.

The ACC was created largely because the guys who created it were fighter pilots and got sick and tired of playing second-fiddle to the bomber-guys.


Blackbird


User currently offlineL-188 From United States of America, joined Jul 1999, 29840 posts, RR: 58
Reply 3, posted (6 years 2 months 1 week 3 days 16 hours ago) and read 6823 times:



Quoting Blackbird (Reply 2):
The ACC was created largely because the guys who created it were fighter pilots and got sick and tired of playing second-fiddle to the bomber-guys.

I think that the Clinton era force structure that created ACC needs to be consigned to the ashheap of history.



OBAMA-WORST PRESIDENT EVER....Even SKOORB would be better.
User currently offlineDeltaGuy From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 4, posted (6 years 2 months 1 week 3 days 15 hours ago) and read 6816 times:



Quoting Lumberton (Thread starter):
The tentative new name for the major command is Global Strike Command.

Great, another 'high-tech' Air Force title.

Aerospace Expeditionary Warriors....Space Warfare badges....Air, Space, and Cyberspace.....Hi, I'm Buzz Lightyear, Space Ranger. Looking forward to seeing the new patch for this.

Let's bring back the old SAC, the stars and blue fuselage band included.

DeltaGuy


User currently offlineN328KF From United States of America, joined May 2004, 6491 posts, RR: 3
Reply 5, posted (6 years 2 months 1 week 3 days 15 hours ago) and read 6807 times:



Quoting DeltaGuy (Reply 4):
Let's bring back the old SAC, the stars and blue fuselage band included.

Along with a cigar-chomping take-no-prisoners general...



When they call the roll in the Senate, the Senators do not know whether to answer 'Present' or 'Not guilty.' T.Roosevelt
User currently offlineL-188 From United States of America, joined Jul 1999, 29840 posts, RR: 58
Reply 6, posted (6 years 2 months 1 week 3 days 14 hours ago) and read 6795 times:



Quoting N328KF (Reply 5):
Along with a cigar-chomping take-no-prisoners general...

We definately need more of those.

You never heard about LeMay's boys accidently putting live nukes on a bomber they where ferrying from North Dakota to Louisana and nobody realizing it.



OBAMA-WORST PRESIDENT EVER....Even SKOORB would be better.
User currently offlineWarRI1 From United States of America, joined Sep 2007, 9292 posts, RR: 12
Reply 7, posted (6 years 2 months 1 week 3 days 14 hours ago) and read 6782 times:



Quoting L-188 (Reply 6):
You never heard about LeMay's boys accidently putting live nukes on a bomber they where ferrying from North Dakota to Louisana and nobody realizing it.

What the heck went wrong? Such incompetance back then was inconceivable, and certainly not tolerated by General LeMay.



It is better to die on your feet, than live on your knees.
User currently offlineKC135TopBoom From United States of America, joined Jan 2005, 12181 posts, RR: 51
Reply 8, posted (6 years 2 months 1 week 3 days 13 hours ago) and read 6768 times:



Quoting EBJ1248650 (Reply 1):
Personally, I don't believe SAC should have ever been disbanded. Bombers and their supporting elements are an entirely different world from those associated with tactical fighters. I was assigned to SAC and TAC during my Air Force years and as a maintainer I can tell you the two are worlds apart.

Same holds true for Air Defense Command and TAC. Again, while both fly fighters their mission objectives and associated mind sets are totally different. Merging them under Air Combat Command was not a good move.

We can thank the McPeak lead fighter mafia for screwing up the whole USAF. SAC, TAC, ADC, and MAC all need to be returned to their traditional roles. He also tried to screw with the uniforms we wore back in the early 1990s.

Along with the Missiles, B-1s, B-2s, and B-52s, will the KC-135s and KC-10s return to SAC? Will the RC-135s and U-2s also return?

Quoting N328KF (Reply 5):
Quoting DeltaGuy (Reply 4):
Let's bring back the old SAC, the stars and blue fuselage band included.

Along with a cigar-chomping take-no-prisoners general...

LeMay and Ryan.

BTW, the US Army needs a Patton and the USN needs a Halsey, too.

Quoting L-188 (Reply 3):
I think that the Clinton era force structure that created ACC needs to be consigned to the ashheap of history.

I am not, nor have I ever been a Clinton guy, but all of this happened in 1991 and 1992, much of it before Clinton took office. Dip S#@* McPeak, then AFCOS, came up with all this crap for the "new" USAF during the military forces draw down from DS and the Cold War. It was designed to support the "Peace Dividend" that the US Congress said we had then.

BTW, it was also McPeak who reduced the (then) B-2 production buy to a total of 21 airplanes, including the two test airplanes.


User currently offlineEBJ1248650 From United States of America, joined Jun 2005, 1932 posts, RR: 1
Reply 9, posted (6 years 2 months 1 week 2 days ago) and read 6580 times:



Quoting KC135TopBoom (Reply 8):
BTW, the US Army needs a Patton and the USN needs a Halsey, too.

In essence, let's bring back top line commanders who have commitment, courage and character!



Dare to dream; dream big!
User currently offlineKC135TopBoom From United States of America, joined Jan 2005, 12181 posts, RR: 51
Reply 10, posted (6 years 2 months 1 week 1 day 8 hours ago) and read 6408 times:



Quoting EBJ1248650 (Reply 9):
Quoting KC135TopBoom (Reply 8):
BTW, the US Army needs a Patton and the USN needs a Halsey, too.

In essence, let's bring back top line commanders who have commitment, courage and character!

They got the job done, right.


User currently offlineLumberton From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 4708 posts, RR: 20
Reply 11, posted (6 years 2 months 1 week 1 day 6 hours ago) and read 6383 times:



Quoting EBJ1248650 (Reply 9):
In essence, let's bring back top line commanders who have commitment, courage and character!

I'm willing to give General Schwartz a chance to fix the messes. The disciplinary action meted out to top commanders for the missile parts screw up is a good start. IMO, he needs to totally rebuild the culture in the special weapon programs with an emphasis on personal accountability. I'm still shaking my head in bafflement how the chain of command could have screwed up so badly as to fly nuclear armed cruise missiles across country without anyone taking notice until after the aircraft had landed! There is simply NO excuse for this.

Perhaps he needs to borrow some talent from the USN's nuclear program, both weapons and reactors? These folks are a bunch of screamers (or at least the ones I knew were) to be sure, but they do enforce accountability!



"When all is said and done, more will be said than done".
User currently offlineUH60FtRucker From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 12, posted (6 years 2 months 1 week 1 day 5 hours ago) and read 6372 times:

I am going to get A LOT of flak for this: but in my opinion, the Air Force continues to fail to step up to the plate for the GWOT.

Recently I've worked with USAF personnel, closer than I have ever done so in my career. And the general consensus amongst myself, and my Army brethren, is that the Air Force is aloof to the fact that we're fighting a war.

There is a lack of urgency. There is a lack of teamwork with other branches. There is a lack of a belief that the current conflict requires a new approach, and tactics of '91 and '97 are no longer valid. And there is a lack of confidence that what they're doing, is truly making a difference.

And to me, that kind of failure is a core result of a systemic failure of leadership, at the highest levels.

I have watched a mission be scrubbed for questionable reasons - forcing a team to hoof it out of their mountain position over night. And the AF leadership's response to this was a simple "Opps, our bad."

And I think it has to do with two main reasons.

1.) The mentality of fighting a Gulf War/Balkans style conflict is so entrenched into Air Force planning and operations, they have struggled to meet the very new challenges of OIF, OEF, GWOT.

2.) The leadership is isolated from the realities of this war. Whereas Marine and Army commanders have multiple tours of duty on the front line, and lead near the action --- the technology age has allowed the Air Force to prosecute an air war, from over 8,000 miles away, creating a sterile environment. They are detached from seeing how their successes impact the war, and more importantly.... how their failures impact the lives of those on the ground.

Now flame away. I'm sure I just pissed a few people off!

-UH60


User currently offlineVenus6971 From United States of America, joined Dec 2004, 1445 posts, RR: 0
Reply 13, posted (6 years 2 months 1 week 20 hours ago) and read 6256 times:



Quoting UH60FtRucker (Reply 12):
.) The mentality of fighting a Gulf War/Balkans style conflict is so entrenched into Air Force planning and operations, they have struggled to meet the very new challenges of OIF, OEF, GWOT.

2.) The leadership is isolated from the realities of this war. Whereas Marine and Army commanders have multiple tours of duty on the front line, and lead near the action --- the technology age has allowed the Air Force to prosecute an air war, from over 8,000 miles away, creating a sterile environment. They are detached from seeing how their successes impact the war, and more importantly.... how their failures impact the lives of those on the ground.

Now flame away. I'm sure I just pissed a few people off!

UH,
As a 23 year USAF vet (retired Jan 03) I agree with you, it seems the USAF that won in Desert Storm is gone along with most of its leadership, after the storm we got leaders like Gen McPeak and his view of how the USAF should be, get rid of SAC and only fighter pilots and other harry chests need apply for leadership positions. From the maintenance troop view of things the can do attitude of whatever it takes to get the mission done was taken over by yes we know you are good at your job and you stay deployed but you are not showing any professional growth by not having a degree, no additional duties and don't show up for the Sq Xmas party, you are not a team player. Losing nukes, flunking ORI's and having touchy feely dont hurt anybodys feelings for disipline is what my beloved USAF has become.



I would help you but it is not in the contract
User currently offlineJohnM From United States of America, joined Feb 2001, 351 posts, RR: 0
Reply 14, posted (6 years 2 months 1 week 15 hours ago) and read 6205 times:

UH60,
As the norm, you are just about right on target. I did the blue to green thing long before that term was invented, and yes, lots of stuff in the AF is a soup sandwich. We won't see any leaders like LeMay anymore, anybody like that won't go above O-5 in todays AF.

Don't fret about our dear old Gen McPeak. He is all hooked up with the Obama campaign as some sort of mil advisor, so I'm sure if his guy is the next pres, the airline pilot uniforms might be back. Do a web search about what he said about McCain being a prisoner of war just recently. Enough thread hijack.

Maybe golobal internet command or hard drive strike command will do the trick.


User currently offlineL-188 From United States of America, joined Jul 1999, 29840 posts, RR: 58
Reply 15, posted (6 years 2 months 1 week 15 hours ago) and read 6195 times:



Quoting UH60FtRucker (Reply 12):
I am going to get A LOT of flak for this: but in my opinion, the Air Force continues to fail to step up to the plate for the GWOT.

Maybe we ought to roll USAF back into the USAAC?

That way the leadership would appreciate their commitment to the boots on the ground.



OBAMA-WORST PRESIDENT EVER....Even SKOORB would be better.
User currently offlineZANL188 From United States of America, joined Oct 2006, 3594 posts, RR: 0
Reply 16, posted (6 years 2 months 6 days 17 hours ago) and read 6006 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!



Quoting DeltaGuy (Reply 4):
Looking forward to seeing the new patch for this.

Not the Strike Command patch but indicative of the present muddled thinking from our USAF friends at the puzzle palace....

Look familiar?


Big version: Width: 287 Height: 144 File size: 12kb
Courtesy: Air Force Times



Legal considerations provided by: Dewey, Cheatum, and Howe
User currently offlineLumberton From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 4708 posts, RR: 20
Reply 17, posted (6 years 2 months 6 days 8 hours ago) and read 5933 times:



Quoting UH60FtRucker (Reply 12):
There is a lack of urgency.

That perception is nothing new, I can assure you. I first heard it in 1978

Quoting ZANL188 (Reply 16):
Look familiar?

I saw this yesterday and was going to post, but (thankfully) you beat me to it!

"Muddled" doesn't begin to describe it IMO.



"When all is said and done, more will be said than done".
User currently offlineKC135TopBoom From United States of America, joined Jan 2005, 12181 posts, RR: 51
Reply 18, posted (6 years 2 months 6 days 7 hours ago) and read 5920 times:



Quoting UH60FtRucker (Reply 12):
2.) The leadership is isolated from the realities of this war.



Quoting UH60FtRucker (Reply 12):
am going to get A LOT of flak for this: but in my opinion, the Air Force continues to fail to step up to the plate for the GWOT.

Recently I've worked with USAF personnel, closer than I have ever done so in my career. And the general consensus amongst myself, and my Army brethren, is that the Air Force is aloof to the fact that we're fighting a war.

UH60, no argument from me, I am a vetran of SAC. The recent and to some extent current USAF Leadership suffers from lack of situational awearness. That is fatal to all flyers.

I think if you get down to the O-3 level and all E-1s to E-9s, you will find those who really want to stand besides their US Brothers-in-arms.

From the O-4 level up, they just want that next promotion and begin to play politics.


User currently offlineKeesje From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 19, posted (6 years 2 months 6 days 6 hours ago) and read 5911 times:

 crossfingers 

This goes further, I have the feeling everything, everywhere was smacked together to very big entities for efficiency during the last 10 yrs. You had to consolidate to even survive. Some made big money out of it (consultancy) & now we are finding out it hasn't become cheaper or better and everyone is looking for focus / effectivity again..


User currently offlineVenus6971 From United States of America, joined Dec 2004, 1445 posts, RR: 0
Reply 20, posted (6 years 2 months 2 days 19 hours ago) and read 5632 times:

Its offical "Global Strike Command" will be stood up by 2009

http://www.aviationweek.com/aw/gener...20Strike%20Command&channel=defense



I would help you but it is not in the contract
User currently offlineKC135TopBoom From United States of America, joined Jan 2005, 12181 posts, RR: 51
Reply 21, posted (6 years 2 months 1 day 9 hours ago) and read 5509 times:



Quoting Venus6971 (Reply 20):
Its offical "Global Strike Command" will be stood up by 2009

Well, Donley really screwed this up, didn't he. A 3 star as the commander (not a 4 star), split the bombers, leave some in ACC? Call it GSC?

"Air Force leaders released a so-called roadmap, titled “Reinvigorating the Air Force Nuclear Enterprise,” that details major actions the service"

Hello, it is a military organization, not a new donut business.  banghead 

"But, Donley said, “We thought we should preserve the gains made in the last 15 years in making the bomber force more effective for support of theater [operations].”

What gains would those be? Oops, sorry, there weren't any.  Wow!  Angry  Wow!  Angry

It is sad to say the USAF just went from being lead by two Bozos . to now being lead by an idiot. All in less than 1 year.

 ashamed   ashamed   ashamed 


User currently offlineAFHokie From United States of America, joined May 2004, 224 posts, RR: 1
Reply 22, posted (6 years 1 month 4 weeks 17 hours ago) and read 5295 times:



Quoting KC135TopBoom (Reply 8):
Will the RC-135s and U-2s also return?

No, if they leave ACC the departure will be to AFISRA. Which IMHO they along with all other ISR assets should belong to.


User currently offlineKC135TopBoom From United States of America, joined Jan 2005, 12181 posts, RR: 51
Reply 23, posted (6 years 1 month 4 weeks 10 hours ago) and read 5254 times:



Quoting AFHokie (Reply 22):
No, if they leave ACC the departure will be to AFISRA.

When SAC controlled all bombers, missiles, tankers, ACCS/NEACP, and most recee assets, life was a lot simpler for the USAF.


Top Of Page
Forum Index

Reply To This Topic The Return Of Strategic Air Command?
Username:
No username? Sign up now!
Password: 


Forgot Password? Be reminded.
Remember me on this computer (uses cookies)
  • Military aviation related posts only!
  • Not military related? Use the other forums
  • No adverts of any kind. This includes web pages.
  • No hostile language or criticizing of others.
  • Do not post copyright protected material.
  • Use relevant and describing topics.
  • Check if your post already been discussed.
  • Check your spelling!
  • DETAILED RULES
Add Images Add SmiliesPosting Help

Please check your spelling (press "Check Spelling" above)


Similar topics:More similar topics...
Return Of The 767-400ER - Usaf Bird Assigned Line# posted Sat Jan 19 2008 12:09:11 by Stitch
The Cost Of Air Refueling posted Mon Feb 26 2007 00:17:29 by KC135TopBoom
Rdaf Should Postpone The Purchase Of A New Fighter posted Thu May 22 2008 02:36:19 by Larshjort
Saab Promises Gripens Half The Price Of F35 posted Fri Apr 11 2008 18:39:03 by Mortyman
The Mechanics Of International Excercises? posted Sat Feb 23 2008 13:03:35 by Cannibalz3
Civilian Pilot Who Received The Medal Of Honor. posted Mon May 21 2007 03:33:15 by Ferrypilot
Odds Of Flying Air Force One posted Thu Nov 9 2006 02:28:17 by KingAirMan
First To Fly The PC-21 - Singapore Air Force posted Fri Nov 3 2006 18:05:15 by Airimages
Eads Confident On Share Of US Air Tanker Deal posted Mon Sep 18 2006 12:12:54 by Columba
What Are The Chances Of The B-1R Being Built? posted Wed Apr 26 2006 01:09:56 by 747400sp

Sponsor Message:
Printer friendly format