Why the hell does the pentagon outsource this?
So it'll come out of a different line-item in the budget.
A man owns the most advanced private air force after buying 46 F/A-18s
51–60 of 349 posts
Re: A man owns the most advanced private air force after buying 46 F/A-18s
#52It's not really an "air force" in the military sense, as these planes are unarmed and can't shoot anyone down unless the pilot carries a handgun or rifle.
EDIT: Actually it looks like they do have machine guns with rounds, but nothing such as guided missiles.
Re: A man owns the most advanced private air force after buying 46 F/A-18s
#53> He now holds eight licenses with the Bureau of Alcohol Tobacco and Firearms (ATF), allowing him to own military machine guns and cannons, as well as thousands of rounds of ammunition to fire through them. Dude is totally not an intelligence asset of any kind. Just an enthusiast.
He runs a company that provides advanced flight combat training. This actually makes some sense.
Re: A man owns the most advanced private air force after buying 46 F/A-18s
#54I grew up in the town where Mr Kirlin and his businesses are based, have lived there on-and-off, and know him through various personal and professional circles. I also am formerly of the aerospace industry myself.
I’m happy to answer questions people may have.
Re: A man owns the most advanced private air force after buying 46 F/A-18s
#55It's not really an "air force" in the military sense, as these planes are unarmed and can't shoot anyone down unless the pilot carries a handgun or rifle. EDIT: Actually it looks like they do have machine guns with rounds, but nothing such as guided missiles.
On the contrary, the cannons are still intact and functional and they have over 74,000 high-explosive rounds for them. This is in the article.
Re: A man owns the most advanced private air force after buying 46 F/A-18s
#56It's not clear aside from the fig leaf of 'being a Navy contractor' whether this is a mercenary for hire airforce. I wonder what regulatory control there is on a private airforce located in the US?
It's actually pretty clear, since it says what they do right in the article: > He was also one of the early pioneers of the then-fledgling, if not wholly experimental, adversary air support market. In the early 2000s, he joined forces with the Airborne Tactical Advantage Company (ATAC), which was blazing a trail with their contracts with the Navy to supply fast jet targets and electronic warfare pod toting adversarie…
I did read the article. What they say they do and the regulatory oversight of what they might actually be allowed to do or prevented from doing is what concerns me.
Re: A man owns the most advanced private air force after buying 46 F/A-18s
#57Earlier quoted context omitted.
"Aggressor squadrons" train very differently, to mimic potential adversaries combat doctrine. The aircraft may also be modified to perform more like the aircraft they're simulating. They're even painted differently, like this F-15 in Russian-style camo: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/6/6a/F-15E-80...
> "Aggressor squadrons" train very differently, to mimic potential adversaries combat doctrine. Yeah, but doesn't the US have those too, at Top Gun and Red Flag? I'd think that Top Gun would have aggressor squadron pilots qualified to fly F-18s.
[deleted]
Re: A man owns the most advanced private air force after buying 46 F/A-18s
#58Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's actually pretty clear, since it says what they do right in the article: > He was also one of the early pioneers of the then-fledgling, if not wholly experimental, adversary air support market. In the early 2000s, he joined forces with the Airborne Tactical Advantage Company (ATAC), which was blazing a trail with their contracts with the Navy to supply fast jet targets and electronic warfare pod toting adversarie…
Just because they have been hired to pretend kill Navy pilots doesn't necessarily rule out that they are a "mercenary for hire airforce" that could also be hired for other more violent tasks. OP was questioning what regulation exists to stop that from happening.
A big one is that you can't buy air to air missiles.
There's talk that these types of aggressor squadrons might be a last-ditch aircraft reserve for the US or allies, but they're not exactly primed/ready for war without armament or modern radars.
(No, the fact that some of their aircraft have functional cannons and cannon rounds doesn't count).
Re: A man owns the most advanced private air force after buying 46 F/A-18s
#59Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yeah I had to follow a bunch of the links to figure this out, but in short, he runs an air combat training company, and the Air Force and Navy pay him to field a training “adversary” for the military pilots to fight in mock combat. From further reading it sounds like the idea here is to get a diverse and different field of aircraft. I guess the NATO forces can practice against each other, but it’s not realistic in th…
> Yeah I had to follow a bunch of the links to figure this out, but in short, he runs an air combat training company, and the Air Force and Navy pay him to field a training “adversary” for the military pilots to fight in mock combat. The thing that I don't get is why would the US hire him to provide adversary aircraft that it already operates? I could totally understand them hiring someone who operated a bunch of ex-…
It's often more expensive to create specialized training capabilities in house. Contractors have an advantage with both equipment and personnel costs.
A contractor can maintain their jets however they want as long as it's safe and they can meet their contract requirements. The contract maintainers can stay at their job as long as they want. The USN and USAF maintainers move every few years and have pretty good retirement benefits (which used to be better but are still better than what most private companies give), and have to get lots of additional training and all that needs to be paid for. A contractor is still supposed to follow all the safety regulations, but contractors seem to be able to generate sorties at rates that military units couldn't manage even with double the manpower.
Contractor pilots are paid strictly to fly. Naval aviators and USAF pilots are both subject to "up or out" policies, where officers that aren't promoted are told to leave. This means military pilots have to serve as staff officers to keep themselves promotable. During a staff tour they either quit flying or they fly less, which kind of wastes the money spent on training them. There are good reasons for requiring this (and some good arguments against it), but the bottom line is that contractors don't have to worry about it and can operate cheaper because they aren't wasting 20% of their personnel budget with a fighter pilot working behind a desk.
Re: A man owns the most advanced private air force after buying 46 F/A-18s
#60Earlier quoted context omitted.
"Aggressor squadrons" train very differently, to mimic potential adversaries combat doctrine. The aircraft may also be modified to perform more like the aircraft they're simulating. They're even painted differently, like this F-15 in Russian-style camo: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/6/6a/F-15E-80...
> "Aggressor squadrons" train very differently, to mimic potential adversaries combat doctrine. Yeah, but doesn't the US have those too, at Top Gun and Red Flag? I'd think that Top Gun would have aggressor squadron pilots qualified to fly F-18s.
It sounds like it's just a way for the Navy to blow taxpayer money.
Look at how our government managed a virus. Now imagine WW3.