Forum: F-16 News

Some of the (what we used to ignorantly call) RAFSOB's have always had bad feelings about the ANG. I think they were empowered by Rumsfeld and early in his reign (June 2001) struck an early blow by eliminating the B-1's from the Guard completely outside any BRAC and without any warning.

I was in the GA unit at the time and it was clear the Pentagon intended for our wing to just go away. GA had some powerful politicians at the time and so we were "saved" by "blending" with the active duty JSTARS wing across the runway at Robins. On paper, the ANG 116th Wing lives on, and the first CC was a Guard guy. In reality, it's more like an active duty wing. Some of this is surely due to being a LD/HD asset in constant wartime. In fairness, many ANG technicians and traditional Guardsmen were able to train into fine jobs and advance, while many others left immediately or drifted away.

The funny thing is that a report by the General Accounting Office made clear that the two ANG B-1 wings (GA and KS) had higher mission capable rates, lower costs per flying hour, and much higher aircrew and maintenance crew experience levels. The cost per flying hour was $2165 less than the active duty wings at Ellsworth and Dyess. Of course, the attacks of 9/11/01 led to the true value of the B-1 fleet being demonstrated.

Bottom line, the ANG is a unique national asset and it should be preserved - not turned into a personnel addendum for the regular AF.

F-16.net Sponsor

This message from our sponsor will disappear if you log on as a member.

Langley's F-22A's of the 1st FW & 192nd FW reach Full Operational Capability.

Thanks to Jason Hyatt, we now have a photo of F-22A #04-4082, marked 192nd FW. Sorry, no VA tail code.

1st FW Raptor 04-4082 wearing 192nd FW markings departing on a blue air mission at Red Flag 08-2.1. Taken at Nellis AFB on January 24, 2008.

Would it really kill anybody in the active duty to let them put a VA tailflash at least on the 192FW Wing Jet? I know they want to force this whole integration thing down the Guards throat, but really what would it hurt. They paint jets up with special schemes all the time, but it just seems like they don't want to do it to one of their prized F-22's. It would at least let the VA guys have a little pride in themselves.

Elite Joined: Jul 20, 2005 Posts: 1021 Status: Offline

Elliboom wrote:

Would it really kill anybody in the active duty to let them put a VA tailflash at least on the 192FW Wing Jet? I know they want to force this whole integration thing down the Guards throat, but really what would it hurt. They paint jets up with special schemes all the time, but it just seems like they don't want to do it to one of their prized F-22's. It would at least let the VA guys have a little pride in themselves.

The 'FF' is a base code...has nothing to do with ownership. If its based at Langley it gets an 'FF' base code. I have never seen a guard unit without pride!! Best people I've ever worked with.

checksixx wrote:

Elliboom wrote:

Would it really kill anybody in the active duty to let them put a VA tailflash at least on the 192FW Wing Jet? I know they want to force this whole integration thing down the Guards throat, but really what would it hurt. They paint jets up with special schemes all the time, but it just seems like they don't want to do it to one of their prized F-22's. It would at least let the VA guys have a little pride in themselves.

The 'FF' is a base code...has nothing to do with ownership. If its based at Langley it gets an 'FF' base code. I have never seen a guard unit without pride!! Best people I've ever worked with.

Yes, and the base code for Robins AFB is WR. This was the code worn by the 93rd ACW JSTARS. When the 93rd merged with the ANG 116th BW to become a Guard wing, it became the 116th ACW and the jets have GA tailcodes, just like the Bones did. I lived through it all.

Elite Joined: Jul 20, 2005 Posts: 1021 Status: Offline

Great...I can't say every unit or base has had the correct code on the jets or not, but I can say the the two letter code is a base code. If the aircraft is based there, thats the code that should be on the jet. Thats all.

checksixx wrote:

Great...I can't say every unit or base has had the correct code on the jets or not, but I can say the the two letter code is a base code. If the aircraft is based there, thats the code that should be on the jet. Thats all.

I believe that ANG units have more leeway than that when they're based at an active duty base. The Virginia situation differs from the Georgia one in the official nature of the wing.

This is a WHAT IF??? picture, it is NOT REAL. Photoshopped by Kenneth Keeton

Hey--Rome wasn't built in a day, so this problem isn't going to be fixed quickly. From what I can tell from my contacts within the VaANG, painting the "192FW" on the tail of one of the jets is a MAJOR concession by the AD folks. I wouldn't be surprised in the future to see some of Langley's jets with "FF" on one tail and "VA" on the other one. I think that's about the best one can hope for at this juncture, and I'm glad to see it.

i wanna see the Gaurd shield up on one of the jets too. I know it will never happen. But it would be great to see

[quote="checksixx] The 'FF' is a base code...has nothing to do with ownership. If its based at Langley it gets an 'FF' base code. I have never seen a guard unit without pride!! Best people I've ever worked with.[/quote]

Havign spent the past 16 years in a Guard unit I think I know they have pride in themselves. My point only is that having even just one jet painted in ANG colors would at least give them a jet to take to airshows and for official unit photos. It may sound stupid, but I really think I would make a difference. Besides that different units on the same installation have different tail flashes all of the time. Look at Hill, the 466FS had HI while the active units had HL on the tails for years. Granted they now share jets, but I think one of the F-16's from there should also be painted up in AFR colors.

Elite Joined: Jul 20, 2005 Posts: 1021 Status: Offline

The only way I could see 'VA' going up on the tails is if they alloted them certain aircraft as exclusive guard aircraft. I think they should...you'd see a major difference in availability...

Elite Joined: Jul 11, 2007 Posts: 664 Status: Offline

checksixx wrote:

Elliboom wrote:

Would it really kill anybody in the active duty to let them put a VA tailflash at least on the 192FW Wing Jet? I know they want to force this whole integration thing down the Guards throat, but really what would it hurt. They paint jets up with special schemes all the time, but it just seems like they don't want to do it to one of their prized F-22's. It would at least let the VA guys have a little pride in themselves.

The 'FF' is a base code...has nothing to do with ownership. If its based at Langley it gets an 'FF' base code. I have never seen a guard unit without pride!! Best people I've ever worked with.

Well sorta Checksixx
The Guard uses the State, The Reserves use the city. When I was with the 93FS we had the AD guys flying with HS on the tail while we had FM on ours at the same location.
It would be a nice gesture by the 1FW if they let at least one jet carry the VA on the tail, but I doubt that will happen.
Everyone loves their own kingdom you know.

ACMIguy wrote:

When I was with the 93FS we had the AD guys flying with HS on the tail while we had FM on ours at the same location.

That's true ACMIguy, other examples:

Luke AFB:
LF - Active Duty
LR - Reserve

Hill AFB
HL - Active Duty
HI - Reserve

But I can't think of any ANG examples.

Forum: F-16 News

VaANG to fly their last F-16 sorties