Military AI Works

Latest rumour/story at this side of the pond, is that the USAF are looking at a possible change in the manner of their cargo-lifting ops.

Seems that the idea is to halt the "long haul" flights from CONUS to MIDEAST. Instead the C-5's would do the trans Atlantic flights with the C-17's "shuttling" the loads onwards from the UK. Mildenhall is being touted as the hub for these ops.

Still with Mildenhall. In another thread some weeks back I mentioned that the MH-53's would be departing and the H-60's from Lakenheath would move over to the 'Hall.

Seems that the '60's will remain over at Lakenheath although as far as the Orbat is concerned they'll be listed as based at Mildenhall. The problem with the Special Ops boys remaining at Lakenheath is that the base is not 24Hrs operational - it closes at 2200 hrs local. As the SOS generally do not start flying until 2100 hrs, this may cause a problem.

Suggestion is that they'd depart Lakenheath and recover to Mildenhall after their flights. I wonder what REMF thought that one up!!!

Cheers

Stew

Interesting stuff Stewart! It is amazing what the brass can come up with. Not sure there is a lot of value in cargo shuttles. Seems like the C-17s could make the trip. But perhaps the trade-off of payload vs range came into play. Who knows??

Here is an item from the AF Daily report -27 Sep 07

But, There is a Case for More C-17s: If the C-5 upgrade is going to require spending almost as much per airplane as buying new C-17s, then the nation should go with the C-17s, AMC chief Gen. Arthur Lichte told reporters in Washington Wednesday. The justification for hanging onto the C-5 has largely been that it can carry super-large, bulky stuff, but "there are not that many missions the C-17 can't do that the C-5 can," Lichte said. He added that it might make sense to forego the upgrade but retain some number of C-5s for those unique missions where only it can handle the job. The key, Lichte said, is "velocity." He would prefer having to fly two C-17s, which can get a mission done with high reliability, rather than gamble on a single larger C-5 that "breaks along the way." Is it critical to decide the fate of the C-5 reliability enhancement and re-engining program while the C-17 production line is still running hot? "Yes," said Lichte.