USMCFLYR

Maybe the C-17s out of WA are in addition to those already deployed to otehr regions or already involved in the relief efforts. Are you saying that they would really have C-17s sitting on the ramp unused for no good reason on the east coast? If so....I would definitely expect better planning on the AF's part; but having been involved in some logistical planning before - I'll give the big view planners some credit and say that I'll wager they are doing a pretty good job of allocating assets.

USMCFLYR

vagabond

I don't know, but I sure enjoyed these pictures. Couple years ago, Moose gave my husband and me a personal tour of one of these birds. It was eye-opening and very interesting. The C-17 is one big plane.

With them going to Haiti, that's probably why I haven't seen them flying over my coffee shop.

McChord airlift to Haiti | Photos from seattlepi.com

KC10 FATboy

An emphatic YES !!! It isn't planning, it is the government.

Ironically, Obama is going to Massachussetts tomorrow. Anyone want to guess which has hire priority? Presidential support aircraft used for a last ditch effort hail mary political campaign stunt, or any other AMC mission including humanitarian relief?

Kasserine06

Thanks, I was afraid that this thread was going to remain un-political. As stated by you, the airport is full, so those C-17s (even if he did need all the C-17s from both Langley and Pope) would not really help. The problem is getting supplies off the ramp and into the city.

Also, as President, he cannot focus on one issue, he has to multitask. His direct leadership is not needed in Haiti, which is why it has been delegated to the USAID. Like it, or not, he wants healthcare passed and he is not going to sacrifice his domestic policy so that every possible C-17 can be mobilized when current conditions will not be able to utilize all of them. Even if he wasn’t going to Massachusetts, it would still be a good idea to keep some C-17s for the President in case he needs to travel for a different emergency. Not everything has to be politicized.

USMCFLYR

Point-counterpoint - now let's keep the rest of thread going down the intended path. There is NO reason to politicize this thread. Further commentary along these lines will cause this thread to be closed.

USMCFLYR

GRDHound

I know you want to keep this form un-political but you asked the question and the answer can't avoid politics. FATboy is on the right track. I won't say anything else so as not to close the thread but I doubt that asset location even entered some planners minds......
I hope I'm wrong.

Jetjok

FATboy is not only not on the right track, he's not even close. Do you actually expect the full resources of this country to be set in motion to provide support for Haiti. If so, how do you propose to do this with a single runway operation, and even then, the much harder part is to get the supplies and resources out into the field, where they will actually help those effected by this horror. No, this is going to be a very long term commitment by us and the international community, if any semblance of normalcy is to be returned to these poor people, and suggesting that this country is not doing all it can is not only unreasonable, but patently untrue.

JJ

USMCFLYR

I'm not sure what part of my response you think invited a politically bias response. I was talking about military mission planners. Many levels below anything political enough to get the thread closed. Starting the usual this or that President is at fault for all problems (and dropping names) invites unproductive dialogue, as demonstrated by the very next post.

USMCFLYR

BDGERJMN

GRDHound, the GFM(Global Force Management for the unaware) process looks at alot of things not just a capability to fit a requirement or a COCOM demand signal. There are priorities set at the Joint Staff level that impact the movement of assets globally. The Services have some play in the ability to just move assets depending on availability windows. The force flow for this operation is a huge nut to crack and the ability for our planners to look at 2nd and 3rd order effects for decisions made in a 'vacuum' is key.

GRDHound

USMCFLYR I'm not saying it's a political discussion of the rep/dem level or anything like that. I'm just saying that some of the units and aircraft that get picked to fly these missions may not be picked purely on their ability to get the mission done in the most effective manner. Their are politics involved and if somebody wants their unit to fly these missions to make a bullet point later on they're going to do everything they can to make it happen. Weather they're in the best position to get the job done or not.
I think that is what KC10 was trying to say in his first post which I was referring to, not his second. It's all just part of big bureaucratic politics which has been going on for a long time, it's just frustrating some times.