Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

A man owns the most advanced private air force after buying 46 F/A-18s

thedrive.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 349 posts

Re: A man owns the most advanced private air force after buying 46 F/A-18s

#111

Post by [deleted] »

akarma wrote: post #67
0xff00ffee wrote: post #17

I used to have a single shut-down in 2nd amendment arguments. When my opponent would claim that the 2nd amendment gives civilians the power to overthrow a government, my favorite response was to compare poorly armed and trained americans to essentially the Taliban, and follow that up with: and then the US would drone/bomb you to oblivion with their air force superiority, like how Israel dominated the no-air-force Mid…

Would the Holocaust have been quite as terrible if every citizen (Jewish included) owned a gun, and it wasn’t just the bad guys backed by the government who were armed? Also, to talk about how it’s hopeless to have a gun versus a drone — there aren’t enough drones, and Vietnam is a great counter-example for “tech always wins.”

[deleted]

Re: A man owns the most advanced private air force after buying 46 F/A-18s

#112

Post by [deleted] »

aaronmdjones wrote: post #55
brenden2 wrote: post #52

It'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.

[deleted]

Re: A man owns the most advanced private air force after buying 46 F/A-18s

#113

Post by mlyle »

kgilpin wrote: post #78
mlyle wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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).

How about the fact that they have modern radar? :-)

I guess you could call APG-73 "modernish" radar. But it was first fielded in 1993. The oldest of US Hornets moved off it a couple years ago.

Re: A man owns the most advanced private air force after buying 46 F/A-18s

#114

Post by swalsh »

naringas wrote: post #103
blakesterz wrote: post #8

His company buys these things and then has a contract with the Navy for when they do training. So IF I'm reading this correctly, it's not just some random dude buying all this stuff for fun, it's his company and they have a very clear business purpose for doing this. "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 fo…

so then, it's not "a man owns a private airforce" but "a man who owns a company and this company owns a private airforce"

But what if that man who owns that company, decides he wants to change his business model?

The private part is still important. It's a legitimate fleet of military aircraft that would rival the air forces of many small countries that is directed by a man who really isn't accountable to us outside our borders.

This isn't new territory, it's just that you have to go back a few hundred years to see small groups of private individuals accumulate this much physical force. Just think about some of the disagreements that have occurred over scare resources for responding to the pandemic. Imagine how that picture can change.

Re: A man owns the most advanced private air force after buying 46 F/A-18s

#115

Post by deusexepsilon »

slg wrote: post #83
mlyle wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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).

Do these not have modern radar? The article said they were being purchased without any downgrades from their time flying with the RAAF. Also does this mean they can be legally outfitted with air to ground armaments? I don't know much about these aircraft, but I imagine since they are used for simulated combat that they have decent evasive capabilities even if they can't directly engaged other aircraft.

I was asked to keep a close eye on the other RAAF aircraft.

They are not used for combat combat, but if you're considering buying an air-breathing stealth fighter like the WDA they could be in for an extended period.

They already had a lot to gain regarding their F-16-6A Mustang if for no other reason they would be used for any ground combat. They have no ground combat capability, but maybe one will appear soon.

Also there are the fact, I had a real discussion with a reporter on the topic: The RAAF has one of the highest capability in the world – they have this ability to intercept jets that would be in for a short time. Not much in this article.

Re: A man owns the most advanced private air force after buying 46 F/A-18s

#116

Post by goatinaboat »

burlesona wrote: post #13
blakesterz wrote: post #8

His company buys these things and then has a contract with the Navy for when they do training. So IF I'm reading this correctly, it's not just some random dude buying all this stuff for fun, it's his company and they have a very clear business purpose for doing this. "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 fo…

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…

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.

Ask the RAF how outsourcing flight training is working for them.

(Hint: not well at all)

Re: A man owns the most advanced private air force after buying 46 F/A-18s

#117

Post by krapp »

akarma wrote: post #67
0xff00ffee wrote: post #17

I used to have a single shut-down in 2nd amendment arguments. When my opponent would claim that the 2nd amendment gives civilians the power to overthrow a government, my favorite response was to compare poorly armed and trained americans to essentially the Taliban, and follow that up with: and then the US would drone/bomb you to oblivion with their air force superiority, like how Israel dominated the no-air-force Mid…

Would the Holocaust have been quite as terrible if every citizen (Jewish included) owned a gun, and it wasn’t just the bad guys backed by the government who were armed? Also, to talk about how it’s hopeless to have a gun versus a drone — there aren’t enough drones, and Vietnam is a great counter-example for “tech always wins.”

>Would the Holocaust have been quite as terrible if every citizen (Jewish included) owned a gun, and it wasn’t just the bad guys backed by the government who were armed?

Maybe, maybe not. The Nazis weren't just "bad guys backed by the government who were armed," they were a political party, which included much of the German populace, who supported its anti-Semitic ideals. It's possible more guns would have ended the Holocaust sooner, but it's also possible they would have just made it more efficient.

Re: A man owns the most advanced private air force after buying 46 F/A-18s

#118

Post by tootie »

DuskStar wrote: post #104
tootie wrote: post #95

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I read it all and while it's great that he has a legitimate reason to own these, it doesn't change the fact that he owns a private air force, heavy weapons and state-of-the-art countermeasures. It's a terrifying legal precedent and he's opened the door for a new market niche that less savory people can sneak into. The US already has ludicrously expansive personal rights to weapons ownership for any reason. We have a…

You do realize that there's a ton of precedent for privately-owned heavy weaponry in the US, right? As the 2nd Amendment folks would point out, there used to be US citizens who owned warships . F/A-18s without guided weaponry aren't really that much of a change. (they've got cannons, but afact no JDAMs, JSOWs, AMRAAMs or even dumb bombs) > Or, maybe more likely, some QAnon nutjob getting his hands on an armored vehic…

I know. There's a document out there somewhere with John Adams signature telling a merchant captain it's fine to put cannons on his vessel. Privateers were even recruited to fight the British in 1812. That's what the 2nd amendment was actually written for. And the last time it was relevant.

And I think just saying it hasn't happened yet is like saying we haven't had a giant pandemic yet in 2019. I'd rather not wait for a catastrophe to decide we should do something about it.

Re: A man owns the most advanced private air force after buying 46 F/A-18s

#119

Post by DuskStar »

jcranmer wrote: post #109
leetcrew wrote: post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

it's probably not possible for armed citizens to actually overthrow the US government without support from the conventional armed forces. but it's not necessary to completely overthrow a government to extract concessions. a credible threat of widespread chaos and violence might tip the scales against a very unpopular policy.

> it's not necessary to completely overthrow a government to extract concessions. a credible threat of widespread chaos and violence might tip the scales against a very unpopular policy. And how often does that actually succeed? The American Civil War caused the South to lose out on slavery, at great cost to its economy; while The Troubles didn't induce the UK to give any concessions it wasn't already willing to give…

> while The Troubles didn't induce the UK to give any concessions it wasn't already willing to give beforehand.

You're saying that the Brits would have agreed to let Northern Ireland vote to join rejoin the rest of Ireland at some point in the future WITHOUT force of arms? I don't believe you. And yes, that was included [0] in the Good Friday Agreement.

And even if most insurgencies fail, "let's not do that because it might provoke an insurgency" is valuable all on its own.

0: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Good_Friday_Agreement#Status_o...

Re: A man owns the most advanced private air force after buying 46 F/A-18s

#120

Post by microtherion »

Tade0 wrote: post #15

This fleet, if armed, would stand a chance against my country's air force.

It would outnumber the Swiss F/A-18s by 50% (Switzerland also has Tigers; not sure they would be of any use).

And to further improve his odds, he could always attack outside office hours: https://www.theguardian.com/world/shortcuts/2014/feb/19/swis...

Post reply on HN