Forum: F-16 News

It's been officially announced that the 144th FW will lose it's F-16's and be replaced by F-15's from Montana ANG. It's funny to read the local paper saying that we are receiving newer more advanced fighters to replace old ones. we have block 32's and are being replaced by f-15's with tails from 1979 Shocked

this sucks Sad

F-16.net Sponsor

Realy realy stupid idea! there only job is homestation alert which they do very well! Damn pilots want a longer radar in an older airframe. The Guard should realy rethink this. But then again smart doesn't fit in the military!

so what is montana getting then. they just got those jets.

Racer497 wrote:

so what is montana getting then. they just got those jets.

My thoughts exactly. Maybe they are getting F-15s being cut from the Active fleet, and Fresno is just getting Ex-Montana ANG jets

The rumour is that Montana will get four C-27Js!

Regards

Mark

AFM latest issue has a report on how the 120FW 186FS is supporting the 199FW during their transition from the F-15 to the F-22. Wonder what will happen with this mission - it is supposed to last for the next 2 years ?

Boy this brac has screwed so many units. And it seems to have cost most money shuffleing airframes around. Like Montana blk 30's to 15's for 3 years to ????? or Ft Wayne blk 25s to blk 30's for a year and a half to A-10's, And then you have all the units that lost jets and have to build new buildings and pay to retrain people to the new mission. Am I missing the point??? Or does this all just seem stupid

Guessing it has something to do with this.

http://www.af.mil/news/story.asp?id=123226267

10/13/2010 - WASHINGTON (AFNS) -- Air Force officials announced Oct. 13 that Great Falls International Airport, Mont., is the preferred alternative to be the seventh operational location for bedding down four C-27J Spartan aircraft.

Secretary of the Air Force Michael Donley and Chief of Staff of the Air Force Gen. Norton Schwartz announced in July two candidate bases that included Boise Air Terminal Air Guard Station, Idaho, and Great Falls International Airport. Site survey teams evaluated the two candidate sites for feasibility, timing, cost and planning purposes to meet initial operational capability requirements.

The C-27J is a twin turboprop engine aircraft designed to meet the Air Force requirement for a rugged, medium size airland transport. The C-27J gives U.S. military troops a unique, short-take-off-and-landing capability, providing access to airstrips otherwise unreachable by fixed-wing aircraft.

The first six operational bases announced in July 2008 were Martin State AGS, Baltimore, Md.; W.K. Kellogg Airport, Battle Creek, Mich.; Bradley International Airport AGS, Bradley, Conn.; Hector Field AGS, Fargo, N.D.; Mansfield Lahm Regional Airport, Mansfield, Ohio; and Key Field AGS, Meridian, Miss.

The final basing decision for the seventh operational base is pending completion of environmental impact analysis, expected by May 2011. A final announcement is expected in June 2011 with aircraft delivery expected in mid-2014

Oh good grief! Great Falls just finished the transition to the Eagle at great expense and man hours and now they may have to got thru it again with the Spartan? Jeez!! So much for stability in the Guard!

Will there be no more fighter units along the northern border to repel those pesky Canucks when they decide to push south and try to reclaim North Dakota? They've had their eye on it for years I tell ya. Years!! Wink

LinkF16SimDude wrote:

Oh good grief! Great Falls just finished the transition to the Eagle at great expense and man hours and now they may have to got thru it again with the Spartan? Jeez!! So much for stability in the Guard!

Will there be no more fighter units along the northern border to repel those pesky Canucks when they decide to push south and try to reclaim North Dakota? They've had their eye on it for years I tell ya. Years!! Wink

The SDANG Fightin' Lobos stand ready to defeat the Canadians, eh!

Yeah just like Holloman getting rid of their F-22's for some F-16's what a waste of my money.

Yup - "Big Sky" C-27s Sad

With a service ceiling of somewhere around 30,000 feet this will leave the upper portion of the “Big Sky” left over.

Folks, this type of thing is not even close to new.

In 1971, The USAF operated Air Defense F-101B’s out of Otis AFB while the Mass ANG operated obsolescent F-84F’s out of Otis also.

In 1971, the Niagara Falls Guard operated F-100C’s, which they had been to SEA with.

Well guess what. Instead of taxiing the Voodoo’s across the field to the Mass ANG, the Otis F-101’s were sent to the Niagara Guard to replace their C model Huns that they had operated for years. (Pretty much due north of there the RCAF already had a bunch of NORAD nuke armed Voodoo’s on alert at CFB Bagotville.)

The Mass ANG was then given F-100D’s (essentially the same aircraft Niagara was already flying) to replace their “sleds”. Very shortly after they were switched over to Air Defense F-106’s anyway.

And you never know what goes on behind the scenes…

In 1974 the Ohio Guard operated four F-100 units (Columbus, Mansfield, Springfield & Toledo). They were all offered A-7’s and Columbus, Springfield & Toledo took the offer.

Mansfield said they would prefer to wait for the F-105’s becoming available. Well those F-105’s went to AFRES and Mansfield ended up with C-130’s.

The Guard takes what it can get, that’s the charter, but every state has at least one flying unit with manned aircraft of some sort. I think that’s by law, but not sure. So if you’ve only got one flying unit cheer up. Obvious downside is you may not like what you “get” to fly. Trust me, someone will.

OL

The sad part is, Outlaw's story about the OH ANG doesn't surprise me at all. Why would you wait for 105's when a newer airplane with more life was already offered up? Was the A-7 too slow for the Mansfield guys? If so, that's poor leadership outta the 179th.

It's my opinion that state/local ANG leadership has and continues to be extremely short-sighted. Even the casual observer knows that the AF is facing a trainwreck in terms of its inventory of aging aircraft. There simply will be fewer fighter cockpits available to ANG units going [Link pending approval] the question to your Wing CC or state AG then becomes, "what are you going to do about it?" The most common answer is, "We're the finest ANG fighter wing in the nation and because of this, we're going to be first in-line to receive [Link pending approval]; If you're a Fighter Wing CC and this was your answer at the latest Fri afternoon CC Call, you've just let down everyone in the wing and you're putting the entire unit at risk.

State ANG leadership needs to be hittin' the streets of Washington daily advocating for a new mission, a new airplane or an association with an active-duty unit. They need to accept that there is a very real possibility that their unit could not only lose their fighters, but a flying-mission altogether and act accordingly. Nothing should be off the table for these guys if they're serious about a unit's survival in the long-term. For instance, the Fairchild Guard volunteered to give up iron in order to associate with the 92nd [Link pending approval] the understanding that they would fly the KC-X alongside the active-duty going forward. Now I understand that this agreement could be overcome by events, but 141st did something once unthinkable by ANG standards and have now positioned themselves to survive for the next 50 years - good on them. I bet they outlast standalone tanker units like Souix City or Birmingham.

Hats off to Fresno and Fort Wayne for lead-turning the [Link pending approval] least for another decade.

Portland, I would have to disagree with you about the 141st's "volunteering" to give up their planes in order to form an Associate Unit with the AD. They were forced to give up their jets to Sioux City, and in fact their Adujant General filed a lawsuit to try and stop the jets from transferring to Sioux City when they lost their F-16's. We Deploy with the fine folks from the WANG all the time, and not one person I have spoken with has anythign nice to say about the Association witht the AD at Fairchild. Unfortunately this is the way of the future for the ANG, but that does not make it any better. Any units that gives up their iron without having something else on the ramp first is destined to never get a flying mission again. Once those jets are gone, it's just too easy to not replace them.

Forum: F-16 News

Fresno to lose F-16's