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

41–50 of 349 posts

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

#41

Post by sudosysgen »

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…

Fighting a war abroad and inside your own borders is very, very, very different. An air force isn't that useful against a political faction at home.

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

#42

Post by ardy42 »

ceejayoz wrote: post #30
ardy42 wrote: post #20

Earlier 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. 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-…

"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.

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

#43

Post by justaguyhere »

SloopJon wrote: post #4

I'm amazed that this is even possible. I seem to recall that there are countries with unusable fighter jets, because the U.S. will no longer supply parts and expertise for maintenance. The article indeed states: "the purchase does include all of the RAAF's F/A-18 spare parts inventory and test equipment, valued at over a billion dollars alone."

I too am amazed that this is even possible, but for different reasons. Do other first world countries allow non-government companies to hold this much sophisticated military hardware? Maybe so, I just haven't heard of it.

The other day I was reading about some Saudi prince's half a billion (!!!) dollar yacht.

Sometimes I wonder if I live in the same planet as these people. It is hard for me to imagine such wealth and power

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

#44

Post by vorpalhex »

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…

The 2nd amendment does not give the citizenry the ability to overthrow the government, it prevents the government from restricting the right to bear arms because bearing arms is necessary for a free state.

The people, in a Democracy, are the arbiters of power and the government serves the people. If the government does not serve the people, the people have an a priori right to reform that government.

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

#45

Post by slg »

hencq wrote: post #23
olivermarks wrote: post #14

It'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…

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.

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

#46

Post by pg_bot »

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…

I feel like you learned the wrong lesson from Afghanistan. Not only has it been the longest military conflict in American history we also lost and are too proud to admit it, so we are just stuck in an infinite war.

If there was a credible war between the American government and the citizenry I don't think it would be as one sided as you think it would be.

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

#47

Post by throwaway373438 »

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…

The argument you're describing is missing the point. Historically, most government abuse occurs at the local level and this is where a personal right to bear arms becomes relevant. Decades ago, a gun could prevent a lynching by a racist sheriff. Today, perhaps it prevents a rape during a rural traffic stop.

Government is a diverse collection of entities. It's a mistake to assume that resisting the government means overthrowing the entire federal system.

If you're interested in hearing more on this subject I recommend reading "This Nonviolent Stuff'll Get You Killed: How Guns Made the Civil Rights Movement Possible" by Charles Cobb.

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

#48

Post by inscionent »

jakear wrote: post #28
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…

It's not about the civilians being able to overthrow the government, it's about the government not being able to overthrow the civilians. When wrongthink starts being criminalized, would you prefer to be defenseless in your home, or have some - feeble sure, but some - means of protecting yourself? Or would you rather just prefer to think wrongthink will never be criminalized? I believe The Clash puts it best: When th…

Death by cop. That's one way to go.

P.S. Wrongthink has always been criminalized

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

#49

Post by xxpor »

jakear wrote: post #28
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…

It's not about the civilians being able to overthrow the government, it's about the government not being able to overthrow the civilians. When wrongthink starts being criminalized, would you prefer to be defenseless in your home, or have some - feeble sure, but some - means of protecting yourself? Or would you rather just prefer to think wrongthink will never be criminalized? I believe The Clash puts it best: When th…

Do you want every police encounter to turn into Ruby Ridge?

A non-insignificant number of people would consider criminalizing drugs criminalizing wrongthink.

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

#50

Post by ryanmarsh »

F/A-18's are a dime a dozen right now (not literally obviously). There's a bunch of old ones coming off the line and being refit as ... no joke, drones for target practice for other drones.

There's a remote-fly-by-wire package they install that apparently has been around for quite a while. I guess this means they're also developing a remotely controlled or AI based fighter platform but they wouldn't confirm, just that these new "drones" get shot down by other "drones".

Source: I was given a tour of the facility and told what they were doing with the old F-18's. Pretty wild.

Post reply on HN