Revolt of the Admirals

File: 1200px-Harry_S_Truman_-_NARA_-_530677_(2).jpg (211KB, 1200x1444px) Image search: [Google]

211KB, 1200x1444px

>>33788670
>korean war breaks out
>well, simple enough, send in a full naval blockade and rev up the Marine Corps for an amphibious landing
>Turns out we barely HAVE a navy or Marine Corps anymore, the presidents orders actually CANT be carried out
>well.... send in the Army
>army was poorly equipped, under-trained, and lack air support or supply lines (not enough ships, no airbases)
>oh well.... good thing we paid 4 billion in 50's money for 1,000 B36's
>B36 bombers cant be used because the Migs will rip them apart effortlessly
>Truman throws jhonson under the bus and fires him
>Navy has to un-mothball a bunch of ships, Marines have to hastily draft guys
>majority of the campaign is supported by Naval firepower, logistics, and Carrier based aircraft
>The B36 went on to continue being fucking useless and never see any combat until it was replaced only 10 years after building 1,000 of them

So basically, it turns out you CANT replace the other 3 branches of the military by buying the airforce a bunch of bombers.

Truman was a turbo-autist who believed that carriers were an obsolete form of force projection and that due to nukes the majority of combat would be conducted by aircraft.

Today the Carriers and Submarines in the Navy are the foremost force projection assets available to the USA, and as obama has proven with his airstrikes, you still cant win a war by replacing infantry with bombers. Also, truman was a really, REALLY shitty president and the people he appointed to office were spectacularly shitty.

File: IMG_9485.jpg (104KB, 899x570px) Image search: [Google]

104KB, 899x570px

>>33788670
>who needs a military when I have muh ***NUKES***
>mfw this was literally NATO strategy through the 50s

>>33788840
>this gadget will make armies obsolete!

It took a century for that meme to die, now its coming back.

>why would you need a military when you got DRONES!!!

Clearly he was possessed by the wandering spirit of Adolf Hitler and suddenly became a retard who thought bombers alone could win wars and thus was justified in wasting time, money and lives on moronic bomber projects that never fucking accomplished anything.

Doesn't matter if you beat the guy when you end up becoming as retarded as he was.

File: 1492533565081.png (75KB, 683x601px) Image search: [Google]

75KB, 683x601px

>>33788670
>>33788757
The dude only graduated High school

File: Marine awaiting transport in Cape Gloucester.jpg (87KB, 504x377px) Image search: [Google]

87KB, 504x377px

>>33788757
>>33788670

Jesus Anon, thanks for sharing

I had no idea this even happened

File: IMG_0566.jpg (63KB, 1280x720px) Image search: [Google]

63KB, 1280x720px

>>33788840
The Enemy CANNOT push a button a if YOU disable his hand!

>>33789134
Tl;dr, as praised as truman is he tried to delete all the branches except the airforce. He only didnt utterly mothball the army all-together because the public was rabidly against it.

He basically defunded every other branch to pay for the B36. He actually stated on many occaisions that he believed airplanes could do every job the other 3 branches handled better.

>>33789151
>He actually stated on many occaisions that he believed airplanes could do every job the other 3 branches handled better.

That is literally the most retarded thing I've ever read a President say, it showed during the Korean War that the US military was at full strength

>>33788757
>>B36 bombers cant be used because the Migs will rip them apart effortlessly

Not disagreeing with your post, but this is complete bullshit.

The B-29 was the bomber of choice in the Korean war; an aircraft that is both slower and less well defended than the B-36 and it did fine.

>>33789158
In reality a lot of the guys sent to korea had only been drafted a few weeks prior to being sent. I talked with LTCOL lee (first asian american officer ever, personally lead a counter-attack on a mountain pass to secure retreat from the chosin resivoir where he was shot through the next. He had tied an orange cloth around his neck so his troops could see him leading the charge.) He spoke to us cuz our company was the one that charged up the pass with him in korea. He wanted to give the bloody orange cloth with a bullet hole in it to us for our unit museum. Was a really cool old dude.

He told me that half his guys had been civvies 3 weeks prior to being shipped out and he had to train them to do their jobs in between firefights.

>>33789151

And the air force didn`t say a single thing?

I mean, sure, the army still wanted to keep the air force under his tail and its understandable that the air force might get a bit itchy about that, and the navy have always as much of budget hoarders as the rest of the branches.

But even the air force has to acknowledge that airfields can't be taken and kept with just paratroopers, that taking islands for their airfields always require a strong navy and that in general its not a good idea to just rely on one platform that they clearly must know that wasn't enough for the job.

I mean, in the worst case the enemy will start using nukes as AAA just because you over relied in your bombers.

>>33789165
>b36 cruise speed: 230 mph
>b29 cruise speed: 220 mph

Except the B36 was twice as big.

>>33789187
The general idea was that after truman got done licking the marrow from the bones of the other 3 branches to pay for airforce shit the remnats of the other military branches would be consolidated into 1 branch.

Funny how in Vietnam the reason we lost early is because the Airforce didn't have enough trained pilots or planes to counter the Vietcong Jets.

the fiscally best way too stop the economic drain of the ww2 military complex was to just shut it down. despite the military still receiving 10% of the budget in 1950, they were unprepared due to being overly large in manpower, with corrupt officers that were running rackets with their what was left of their expenditures in the states still tooled for war effort.

even today there are too many 4 star generals and admirals on the books and losing half of them would solve a large part of the military budget problem

>>33788757
>it was replaced only 10 years after building 1,000 of them
Wiki says 384 so i dunno lol k

>>33789214
Fucking what?
The reason the airforce had such high losses in Vietnam is because

a. SEAD warfare was still in its infancy and the Wild Weasels were making their textbooks on the fly literally
b. because of point A, most sortees would fly at extremely low altitudes making them vulnerable to ground fire, which there was plenty of.

The USAF maintained a 3:1 aerial kill over the North Vietnamese airforce and the US Navy maintained a 5:1 kill ratio

>>33789151
>He actually stated on many occaisions that he believed airplanes could do every job the other 3 branches handled better.

This is how the Royal Navy got gutted, just replace Truman with the RAF.

>>33789241
fucking lol even John Mcain got shot down. keep guzzling that american propaganda. Vietnam pilots were shooting down dozens of Americans for one of them.

File: deathtube.jpg (315KB, 2003x1384px) Image search: [Google]

315KB, 2003x1384px

>>33788670
deathtubes are still pretty fuckin neat

>>33789236
what made you think the OPs post was even attempting any sort of accuracy?

>>33789261
oh shit he was merely pretending to be retarded, i was completely fooled XD

>>33788670
>>33788757

It's comical that almost the exact same thing happened in the UK. The RAF also tried to fuck over the navy to fund its own new nuclear bomber.

>>33789258
No. The vast majority of airframe losses was due to ground fire.

>>33789258
wowee this is actually true. although it isn't much wonder since the US was loitering hundreds of aircraft in huge retarded circles every day over SAM sites in range of NVA interceptors

File: download.jpg (4KB, 165x141px) Image search: [Google]

4KB, 165x141px

>>33789214

>>vietcong jets

>>33789302
Nope. Mostly all due to aaa.

Let's look at naval phantoms loss rate...

>During the war, U.S. Navy F-4 Phantom squadrons participated in 84 combat tours with F-4Bs, F-4Js, and F-4Ns. The navy claimed 40 air-to-air victories at a cost of 73 Phantoms lost in combat (seven to enemy aircraft, 13 to SAMs, and 53 to AAA). An additional 54 Phantoms were lost in mishaps

F-4s were the highest airframe loss of any craft.

File: aerialremoval.jpg (138KB, 1024x791px) Image search: [Google]

138KB, 1024x791px

>>33789313

>>33789313
They also totalled up 107 air to air kills during all of it. The last fighter pilot to hold ace status flew a phantom.

>>33789310

Mig 17 and 21, and I once read that the Mig-21 was used in ambushes by simply appearing out of nowhere, launching all of their vympels and then leaving since they couldn't substitute their air loses easily.

Sometimes people forget that the US faced something more than just lemonfaces in tunnels.

And if I remember well, the Mi-8 and t-54 were used too, they even had radar stations.

File: b-52 op.png (105KB, 1565x721px) Image search: [Google]

105KB, 1565x721px

>>33789325
also reminder two B-52s shot down Mig-21s with the rear 50 cal machine guns

>>33789336
The last confirmed kill by a tailgunner was in vietnam. The B52 used to have twin 50's in the tail. A Vietnamese mig-21 tried to follow them and the tailgunner shot it down.

>>33789336
They certainly had MIG 21s and lost a fuckton

>>33788670
>>33788757

And to think that after building so many of those things they disassembled all but five ten decades later.

>>33789313
it is known khaleesi that the US has tried to coverup air to air losses during Vietnam, such as claiming no B-52s were dropped. either way an f-4 which can travel at mach 2 and climb 200m/s up to 18km being lost too ground fire is worse in my opinion than what probably happened to half of the AAA losses (i.e. close encounter with the atoll kind)

>>33789124

Because apparently making the bombers remote controlled makes them better somehow even though the external airframes are exactly the same as they were since the B-2 was launched?

>>33789370
They were just monumentally shitty aircraft. List of issues:
>engines require 100 gallons of oil per engine per flight to be topped off each sortie.
>required special leaded fuel to keep the pistons from knocking, which fouled sparkplugs like crazy, huuuuge maintenace nightmare, made engines unreliable
>engines were designed to be used facing forward to force warm air towards carburator and prevent freezing, since it ended up being a push-prop configuration the carburators would freeze, unburnt fuel would end up in the exhaust and ignite
>running lights would shatter when the turret gunns were fired
>too slow to move to a safe distance after dropping a nuke

So they couldnt fire their defensive weapons without damaging themselves, caught on fire randomly, and were required to choose between burning dirty fuel that fouled the engines or clean fuel that broke the engines.

On top of this they had the same cruising speed of a B29 but were twice as large. Coupled with the "if we fire our defensive guns we damage ourself" thing they were like a mig pilots wet dream as a target.

It was and is commonly argued they only got accepted due to collusion between the secretary of the airforce and boeing.

File: 1280px-ZSU-23-4_Shilka_01.jpg (335KB, 1280x812px) Image search: [Google]

335KB, 1280x812px

>>33789374
People seem to forget AAA emplacements had radar and computer assisted targeting by this point. Plus you dont actually need to hit a supersonic jet very hard to really fuck it up.

>>33789374
>such as claiming no B-52s were dropped.

Stop posting

>>33789411
case in point a zsu-23-4 has a verticle range of 1.5km with tracking of 250m/s. there is no ground artillery that can lead a hypersonic fighter bomber.
in reality we lost 10 aircraft per operation to NVA air-air and SAM missiles while downing one of theirs. that isn't politically acceptable so it is reported as groundfire/natural causes. the same difference as reporting a platoon of men dieing in a minefield as opposed to being ambushed.

>>3378944
>there is no ground artillery that can lead a hypersonic fighter bomber

Not worth a you

>>33789405
>boeing
Convair.

And yet despite all of this, Truman has a fucking carrier named after him. One that was also originally to be named USS United States.

>>33789852
It's no longer an honor to have a carrier named after you. It's purely a "this person was also a president" thing.

>>33788670
>"lol we dont need a navy, we got nukes"

*Doesn't glas the fucking chinks and fires the guy suggesting it*

>>33789165

Just don't use them in MiG alley and you are golden.

>>33789258
This is some of the laziest b8 I've ever seen

File: 800px-Douglas_MacArthur,_Army_photo_portrait_seated,_France_1918.jpg (153KB, 800x1198px) Image search: [Google]

153KB, 800x1198px

truman was garbo

>>33789361
They are quad fifties in the 52

>>33790205

Wasn't he like the Emperor of Japan at some point?

>>33789258
>Vietnam pilots were shooting down dozens of Americans for one of them.
Nope. 1:1 was about the worst it got. We were still flying better planes, which kind of made up for the lack of training Air Force pilots had.

>>33789336
The Viet Cong were guerrillas, you're thinking the North Vietnamese Air Force, dumbass.

>>33790334
Governor. The Emperor is still a cultural/religious figurehead position because they're supposedly descended from Amaterasu.

>>33789139
>What is voice control for 500

>>33789241
10000 aircraft losses for usa imagine how many losses there would be against russia

>>33789321
H O L Y F U C K I N G S H I T

Truman was a commie

They deliberately try to dismantle the military because that fits their ideological goals

>>33790392
up to that point the USA hadn't fought anyone remotely close to "peer" for 100 years

So they got blown the fuck out being utter retards.

>>33789129
Everyone thought this. Thanks to Giulio Douhet. Same thing happened with navies in the early 20th century because of Alfred Thayer Mahan. Everyone read that fucking book and though it was gospel. Happens all the time.

>>33790205
McArthur was such a prick. Time has not treated him well in the history books.

>>33790562
Considering that he actually deployed the Army to suppress the American public--WWI veterans, no less--, was taking money from foreign governments while still holding a commission in the regular military, completely mismanaged the defense of the Philippines, and saved Hirohito from prosecution, I'd say that the ambivalent/lukewarm view that the history books have of him today is not unjustified.

>>33789258
>>33789214

This is flat out false. Most US losses were to AA and SAMs. And after the Top Gun program started, the communist fighter jets had strict engagement rules against US planes because they were getting their shit pushed in if they were crazy enough to engage in a dogfight. N Vietnam's MIG-21 supply (at the time their hottest plane), dwindled to almost nothing after the Phantom pilots really started to use their vertical advantage in a fight, learned at the fighter weapons school. And MIG 17s/19s became virtually useless once US pilots stopped turning with them and just out-climbed them to get an alt advantage. Viet era MIGs are so overrated, usually by russian-fetish vatniks. The only thing MIGs could do in Vietnam given equal pilots was jump a Thud and hope they shot it before having to run.

tl;dr: before top gun US had 3:1 dogfight kill adv, after top gun, it was 12:1. And you don't know fucking shit about fighter aircraft. MIGs got BTFO, as usual.

>>33788670
>in an era when jet interceptors existed it was a flying paperweight that could only do 1 thing

But that's wrong. The B-36 could out turn and out run either a MiG-15 or Sabre at its operational altitude.

>>33790729
Were most of the air losses to AA/SAMs helicopters or something else?

>>33790742

The highest fixedwing of base model loss was the phantom at around 500. Rotary was the Huey at around 1000.

Both lost the most to AAA/SAM

>>33790764
Is it probable that the air losses to AAA/SAMs in a modern day war that went hot would be similar, assuming that the conflict is against a peer/first rate power, or were the losses in Vietnam due to terrain/political circumstances?

>>333790829

Most likely not. The main thing about Vietnam was that it was the US's first foray into dealing with Sam's.

SAMs forced the US aircraft to the deck, and they got chewed up.

Now, the US is prepared.

File: 26542365495646234653.jpg (27KB, 480x360px) Image search: [Google]

27KB, 480x360px

i used to believe one man with a gun could make a difference. used to.

>>33791065
>Finally get the chance to take a shot
>XO loudly busts in with a lawn chair so he can call in an airstrike and wipe out the airbase you were specifically meant to cause a surrender with one bullet

>>33790365
the enemy CANNOT issue a voice command if YOU disable his voicebox

>>33789165
B29s were shot down in droves. B36 was "too valuable" and kept safe in case of "real war".

>>33790764
Is that per sortie or overall?

>>33789449
Why are we assuming jets will
A) always be traveling at top speed
B) always be at max altitude
C) always be traveling perpendicular to your emplacement

>SAM sites force jets to fly low and follow terrain
>place AAA oriented down canalizing terrain along paths of most likley travel or known air routes
>dont have to lead much because jet is pretty much traveling in a straight line towards your position and doesnt know you are there
>unleash 23mm shitstorm from multiple emplacements, computer/radar tracking helps
>congradulations, you just shot down a fighter jet

>>33793313
Because 1.5km and 250m/s is low and fucking slow.

>>33793404
250 m/s is about Mach 0.7, which is far faster than anything you'd reasonably expect to be flying at low levels until the advent of planes like the F-111. Every single strike package in Vietnam was flying subsonic, especially those that were flying low.

The listed top speed on any combat aircraft is effectively meaningless, because they'll never fly that fast operationally. External payload drop your top speed, and every single supersonic aircraft we used in Vietnam was limited to subsonic speeds when laden with bombs. The F-105 even was slower than a MiG-17 until it jettisoned its payload, and part of the appeal of the A-7 was that it carried just as many bombs as an F-4 just as fast, but it was so much cheaper to fly.

Once ECM was developed and properly implemented, however, you had losses from ground fire plummet. It became safe to fly at medium altitudes, outside the range of AAA, and even advanced (For the time) SAMs were surprisingly ineffective.

Just look at Linebacker II. On the first night of the raids, the North Vietnamese launched 164 SAMs at the B-52s, which were flying straight and level at 35,000 feet, coming in several minute intervals, and making steep post-target turns that made them giant vulnerable targets to the enemy air defenses. And yet with all that going against them, they suffered just three losses and three damaged aircraft out of about 100 aircraft sortied. And every single one of those hits happened in the post-target turn.

>>33793404
>low and slow

Almost like an aircraft avoiding SAM coverage by dipping into a valley or below a ridgeline, or a strike craft committed to a run........

You DO understand that precision munitions that could be delivered onto a point target from 30,000 feet at mach 1.8 didnt exist yet right? (Rhetorical question, you clearly believe that vietnam era aircraft had the same capabilities of an F15 or F18)

>>33794186
>Didn't exist yet
Vietnam saw the first use of laser guided bombs.

>>33789449
>hypersonic fighter bomber
>hypersonic
>hyper
You're so fucking stupid. They're not even normally cruising at super Sonic, let alone hyper Sonic you shit

>>33794297
>>33794297
Hes using autistic circular reasoning.

>well its top speed and altitude puts it out of range of that weapon

Aircraft rareley fly at top speed or altitude, attack runs commit the aircraft to a fairly predictable flight path at relativley low speed.

>yeah but the AAA cant traverse as fast as its top speed though

Hes gonna just keep referring to the same stupid scenario as if its an absolute fixed event that occurs the same way every time without change. In his mind a jet is always traveling at top speed at top altitude at an impossible to lead perpendicular angle to the AAA emplacement. Because his statement is true in that one scenario among an infinite multitude of possible tactical situations he will continue to moronically bleat that this renders a weapons system useless in every case.

>>33794186
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pave_Knife