Comments on: Cargo Chaos: Key West’s Revenge

By: Scott Gilbertson

Scott Gilbertson — Thu, 17 Sep 2009 16:27:47 +0000

Reading the bood "Boyd" (about Col. John R. Boyd, inventor of the "OODA Loop" concept), both the F-16 and the A-10 were shoved down the Air Force brass's collective throats by SecDef Schlesinger. They wanted more F-15's; not -16's, and didn't want the A-10 only. When they DID get the -10, what they do with it? It was the first USAF plane that went DIRECTLY to Reserve units upon delivery! SCRAP KEY WEST, YAJOHL. The Army has been left twisting in the wind on CAS much, much too long.

By: Taylor McKinnon

Taylor McKinnon — Wed, 25 Mar 2009 06:14:43 +0000

I felt a twinge of pain in my lower regions when I read of the Panama, USAF C-27s going to the bone yard. Now my fears have been realised. C-7 Caribou episode de ja vu. I was in Viet Nam when it happened. I suspect that the aircraft going to Afganistan now are those same Panama C-27s. It was a serendepitous save. Not due to good planning on the part of anyone. I am a retired AF officer. what do I think? The Army uses rifles, does this mean that the AF cannot have rifles? The Atmy has trucks,does this mean that ther AF cannot have trucks? There is plenty of turf to keep us both busy fot the extended future. Let the Army have their air trucks! TaylorMAC

By: texan

texan — Sat, 06 Dec 2008 20:40:44 +0000

Finally someone with some sense. The Key WEst should be scrapped for its budget agreement more than the airplane division role. Current wars have little mission for the sea services, (navy and marines ) and also little for the Air Corps especially when they despise the CAS role. In Iraq and Afghan the Sea Services and the Airforce are fighting to prove they can contribute to the war but what this has resulted in is duplication of Army services and roles.. Ie CAS for the Airforce and the Marines for the Navy. Key west ensures that the Navy and the Airforce receive the lion’s share of the budget.. ie we don’t support the warfighters to ensure that other parts of the pentagon that don’t have a mission continue to receive a large budget. What a disgrace!!

By: Piero

Piero — Thu, 24 May 2007 18:29:53 +0000

Look at the US vendor content of the first half dozen aircraft built in Europe the other would be built in Florida.
Engines,avionics 2/3 of the value
Piero

By: James

James — Sat, 13 May 2006 13:42:39 +0000

Having a separate Air Force was the first mistake. Key West flowed naturally from it. Navy should have taken long range bombing, Army ICBMs and CAS. We would have been spared much nonsense over the last fifty years.

By: Cranky Observer

Cranky Observer — Fri, 12 May 2006 14:50:49 +0000

Giovanni, Jimmy, etc.: you don’t have to convince ME. You do have to convince the US Congress, and I think their view of foreign purchases is a bit different.
Cranky

By: TheWanderingMind

TheWanderingMind — Fri, 12 May 2006 13:54:22 +0000

The Key West agreement - and the Army's surrender of its Caribous and Buffaloes in the late 60's - are scandals of the first order. The Air Force refuses to honor its part of the bargain to provide on-call close air support and "battle taxi" airlift at the cost of Army lives and bodies, preferring to do "Deep Strike" and "Air Supremacy" and "Strategic Airlift" roles instead. While all three are vitally important missions, none is as important as supporting troops in contact. If the President and SecDef truly cared about the revitalization of the military, the next U.S. Air Force Chief of Staff would be the Marine Corps chief aviation officer. The Marines get it. The "go-fast boys" don't. Scrap the Key West agreement, authorize fixed wing close support aircraft for the Army, and allow those AF flying and support people who wish to do so to transfer interservice. You'd be surprised at how many would switch uniforms just for a chance to really support the troops on the ground.

By: Wm Ediger

Wm Ediger — Thu, 11 May 2006 11:10:07 +0000

I retired from the Air Force in 1997 and was with the 18th TFS for 4 years while they were flying A-10s. A finer CAS airplane has not been invented! It was cheap to buy, cheap to maintain, and as history has shown, a deadly addition to the modern battlefield. However, the Air Force has always (even in Army Air Corps days) had an institutional bias against the CAS role. They don’t mind Air to Ground, just not … on demand! I agree that the Army should take over the CAS role for itself and retrieve all those mothballed A10s from DM as well as those the AF has redesignated OA-10s in its’ frenzy to get further away from the ground. I’ve always been a bit embarassed by that and it comes from the top, not the bottom.

By: Jimmy Wu

Jimmy Wu — Wed, 10 May 2006 21:28:18 +0000

The 3 most expensive components of a modern military aircraft are:
1. engine
2. electronics
3. plane body
C-27, et al, are not the hi-tech planes like F-22, full of composites. So the body is likely relatively cheap.
Since the engine and electronics will likely come from American vendors, the vast majority of the dollar value will be American. Hence there will be little Congressional opposition from that direction.

By: Cranky Observer

Cranky Observer — Wed, 10 May 2006 18:21:44 +0000

Isn’t another issue here that of foreign purchases? The C-27 would seem to be able to fill this requirement off-the-shelf, but if an order were placed today the first two dozen or so would come from Italy. Which is a big red flag from Congress, even though we ask other countries to buy our hardware.
Cranky