Follow TV Tropes

Following

History UsefulNotes / YanksWithTanks

Go To

OR

Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
Added note on 5-stars.

Added DiffLines:

** Uniquely in the armed forces, holders of five-star ranks technically remain on active duty for life, receiving full-time pay and benefits even after "retiring". UsefulNotes/DwightDEisenhower resigned his Army commission to become President; he was restored to five-star rank after his Presidency. George C. Marshall received a special waiver from Congress to allow him to serve as Secretary of Defense under Truman; he would have otherwise been barred from the position due to being technically on active duty.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None

Added DiffLines:

* Just starting to replace the HMMWV is the '''JLTV''' (Joint Light Tactical Vehicle), an attempt to apply the protection lessons learned with the HMMWV to a new vehicle that would carry greater loads and retain stock HMMWV mobility without excessive cost.


Added DiffLines:

* The venerable '''M109 Self-Propelled Howitzer''', first built in 1963 and serving through Vietnam, remains in production to this day as the backbone of the Army's self-propelled tube artillery. While criticized for being less capable than newer SPGs on the market, successive upgrades mean that it has all of the capabilities listed for the towed M777 on a more survivable and mobile platform.


Added DiffLines:

* Before HIMARS, there was the '''M270 Multiple Launch Rocket System (MLRS)''', which was much like its successor except tracked and large enough to mount two of HIMARS' rocket pods. While not having the same range of precision rockets as HIMARS due to being older, the M270 was still incredibly devastating, with stories of Iraqi conscripts surrendering so as not to be subjected to the "Iron Rain".
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
A Date With Rosie Palms is no longer a trope


There is a massive amount of US military slang (including [[UnusualEuphemism a worrying number of terms]] on [[ADateWithRosiePalms the subject of self-pleasuring]]), some of which has entered non-military use. "Boomer", for example, is the US slang term for a ballistic missile submarine (because it fires things that go "boom"), which is used in the AtomicHate category.

to:

There is a massive amount of US military slang (including [[UnusualEuphemism a worrying number of terms]] on [[ADateWithRosiePalms the subject of self-pleasuring]]), self-pleasuring), some of which has entered non-military use. "Boomer", for example, is the US slang term for a ballistic missile submarine (because it fires things that go "boom"), which is used in the AtomicHate category.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None


* The '''[=McDonnell=] Douglas F/A-18 Hornet''' is the Navy's and Marine Corps' lightweight air superiority/strike aircraft. (Neither it nor the F-16 is really a ''bomber'', per se: a true bomber's job is really about carpet bombing, and these planes can't even ''carry'' that many munitions. Instead, they do pinpoint strikes on invididual targets.) Like the Falcon, it has served with distinction since being introduced. Like the Falcon, it is also a true workhorse (and has a very high availability due to the designer making "ease of maintenance" a priority) and is even replacing the F-14 at its own job of air combat. It is the current platform for the Navy's Blue Angels, and was the aircraft of choice for the movie ''Film/IndependenceDay''.
* The '''Boeing F/A-18 E/F Super Hornet''', despite the name, is largely a different airframe from the original Hornet, being 20% larger and considerably heavier (Carrier personnel refer to it as the "Rhino" to avoid confusion). It was designed to replace, or "neck down," a number of specialized aircraft carrying out missions the original Hornet couldn't manage[[note]]Namely, the A-6E strike bomber and, via buddy tanking, the KA-6D tanker[[/note]], as well as replace the costly and aging F-14 Tomcat. Currently the top dog among American carrier aircraft, and will be until the F-35C sees widespread use. The Marine Corps have avoided the Super Hornet like the plague, fearing that adoption will cut into funds for the troubled F-35B STOVL variant.

to:

* The '''[=McDonnell=] Douglas F/A-18 Hornet''' is the Navy's and Marine Corps' lightweight air superiority/strike aircraft. (Neither it nor the F-16 is really a ''bomber'', per se: a true bomber's job is really about carpet bombing, and these planes can't even ''carry'' that many munitions. Instead, they do pinpoint strikes on invididual targets.) Like the Falcon, it has served with distinction since being introduced. Like the Falcon, it is also a true workhorse (and has a very high availability due to the designer making "ease of maintenance" a priority) and is even replacing the F-14 at its own job of air combat. It is the current platform for the Navy's Blue Angels, and was the "hero" aircraft of choice for the movie ''Film/IndependenceDay''.
''Film/IndependenceDay'' (partially because the filmmakers could only afford one high-quality CGI model).
* The '''Boeing F/A-18 E/F Super Hornet''', despite the name, is largely a different airframe from the original Hornet, being 20% larger and considerably heavier (Carrier personnel refer to it as the "Rhino" to avoid confusion). It was designed to replace, or "neck down," a number of specialized aircraft carrying out missions the original Hornet couldn't manage[[note]]Namely, the A-6E strike bomber and, via buddy tanking, the KA-6D tanker[[/note]], as well as replace the costly and aging F-14 Tomcat. Currently the top dog among American carrier aircraft, and will be until the F-35C sees widespread use. The Marine Corps have avoided the Super Hornet like the plague, fearing that adoption will cut into funds for the troubled F-35B STOVL variant. It is flown by the Blue Angels, and is the hero plane of ''Film/TopGunMaverick''.



* The '''Lockheed Martin F-22 Raptor''' is the world's first combat-ready Fifth Generation fighter, designed during the UsefulNotes/ColdWar in anticipation of newer aircraft being produced by emerging superpowers like Russia and China. The F-22 Raptor is loaded down with the latest aerospace technologies including stealth, thrust vectoring, supercruise (the ability to break the sound barrier without the use of afterburners), as well as the most advanced avionics available. Like the Eagle, the Raptor is designed to be a pure air superiority fighter, and in simulated exercises, it has been shown that a dozen F-22s can shoot down ''hundreds'' of aircraft ''without a single loss''. Simulated[[note]]emphasis on "simulated"[[/note]] dogfights have also shown that America's current premier air superiority fighter, the F-15, can't even touch the F-22. Currently, the Raptor's only apparent disadvantage is its astronomical building cost, which is approximately $138 million, each. It's claim to fame in media is being featured on the front covers of ''VideoGame/AceCombat'' video games ''4'' and ''7''. (''5'' has the F-14; ''Zero'' and ''6'' feature the F-15.)
** For a long time, there was [[BrokenBase a lot of debate]] about whether or not the F-22 was really needed. The whole "asymmetrical warfare" thing, which has gotten very trendy, involves simply bombing enemy aircraft to bits before they can take off. As such, there is very little need for an air-superiority fighter -- cf the fact that the most recent non-fictional Flying Ace did it in the 80s, back before the F-22 could even claw its way into the sky. So why are we spending gajillions of dollars on an aircraft that is designed to shoot down other planes, something that basically is never done anymore? Recent information on the F-22's contenders (such as the UsefulNotes/RussiansWithRustingRockets' Su-57) suggest that they'll cost about as much as the F-22, though; we may be out of money, but at least everyone else will be too. And, like the F-15 before it, the F-22 can adapt to other missions, despite the "not one pound for air-to-ground" philosophy shared by both planes. This question was resolved in in the [=2010s=] and [=2020s=], when tensions with foreign peer powers like Russia and China have resulted in the hindsight opinion that the premature shutdown of F-22 production was largely a mistake. (Can we restart production? Yes, [[https://www.businessinsider.com/why-the-us-cant-restart-production-of-f22-stealth-fighter-2021-6 but it would be even more expensive than before]], to the point that designing and building an F-23 might be cheaper.)

to:

* The '''Lockheed Martin F-22 Raptor''' is the world's first combat-ready Fifth Generation fighter, designed during the UsefulNotes/ColdWar in anticipation of newer aircraft being produced by emerging superpowers like Russia and China. The F-22 Raptor is loaded down with the latest aerospace technologies including stealth, thrust vectoring, supercruise (the ability to break the sound barrier without the use of afterburners), as well as the most advanced avionics available. Like the Eagle, the Raptor is designed to be a pure air superiority fighter, and in simulated exercises, it has been shown that a dozen F-22s can shoot down ''hundreds'' of aircraft ''without a single loss''. Simulated[[note]]emphasis on "simulated"[[/note]] dogfights have also shown that America's current premier air superiority fighter, the F-15, can't even touch the F-22. Currently, the Raptor's only apparent disadvantage is its astronomical building cost, which is approximately $138 million, each. It's Its claim to fame in media is being featured on the front covers of ''VideoGame/AceCombat'' video games ''4'' and ''7''. (''5'' has the F-14; ''Zero'' and ''6'' feature the F-15.)
** For a long time, there was [[BrokenBase a lot of debate]] about whether or not the F-22 was really needed. The whole "asymmetrical warfare" thing, which has gotten very trendy, involves simply bombing enemy aircraft to bits before they can take off. As such, there is very little need for an air-superiority fighter -- cf the fact that the most recent non-fictional Flying Ace did it in the 80s, back before the F-22 could even claw its way into the sky. So why are we spending gajillions of dollars on an aircraft that is designed to shoot down other planes, something that basically is never done anymore? Recent information on the F-22's contenders (such as the UsefulNotes/RussiansWithRustingRockets' Su-57) suggest that they'll cost about as much as the F-22, though; we may be out of money, but at least everyone else will be too. And, like the F-15 before it, the F-22 can adapt to other missions, despite the "not one pound for air-to-ground" philosophy shared by both planes. This question was resolved in in the [=2010s=] and [=2020s=], when tensions with foreign peer powers like Russia and China have resulted in the hindsight opinion that the premature shutdown of F-22 production was largely a mistake. (Can we restart production? Yes, [[https://www.businessinsider.com/why-the-us-cant-restart-production-of-f22-stealth-fighter-2021-6 but it would be even more expensive than before]], to the point that designing and building an F-23 a completely new aircraft might be cheaper.)
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None


** Also, military-trained pilots. Of the 12 men to walk on the Moon, only one (Harrison Schmitt[[note]]who was too busy earning a [=PhD=] in Geology from Harvard[[/note]]) had never been a member of the US Armed Forces. Of the remaining 11, only the first (Neil Armstrong) was directly employed by NASA: Armstrong was a former Navy fighter pilot, while the remaining 10 were still active-duty Air Force and Navy pilots (4 Air Force, 6 Navy).

to:

** Also, military-trained pilots. Of the 12 men to walk on the Moon, only one (Harrison Schmitt[[note]]who was too busy earning a [=PhD=] in Geology from Harvard[[/note]]) had never been a member of the US Armed Forces. Of the remaining 11, only the first (Neil Armstrong) (UsefulNotes/NeilArmstrong) was directly employed by NASA: Armstrong was a former Navy fighter pilot, while the remaining 10 were still active-duty Air Force and Navy pilots (4 Air Force, 6 Navy).
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None


The buck stops with (of course), the President of the United States who constitutionally is the commander-in-chief of the United States Armed Forces. He has the sole authority to dispatch and remove troops from war zones even without a declaration of war from Congress. However, per the War Powers Resolution of 1973, Congress must approve any troop deployments longer than 60 days[[note]]this act has never been invoked, making it near redundant as a result[[/note]]. In modern times, the President traditionally delegates military matters to his advisors and [=SecDef=], in stark contrast to predecessors like George Washington (the only President to lead troops in battle ''[[AuthorityEqualsAsskicking during]]'' his presidency) and Abraham Lincoln (who actively marshalled the American Civil War, personally appointing Ulysses S. Grant head of the Union Armies).

to:

The buck stops with (of course), the President of the United States who constitutionally is the commander-in-chief of the United States Armed Forces. He has the sole authority to dispatch and remove troops from war zones even without a declaration of war from Congress. However, per the War Powers Resolution of 1973, Congress must approve any troop deployments longer than 60 days[[note]]this act has never been invoked, making it near redundant as a result[[/note]]. In modern times, the President traditionally delegates military matters to his advisors and [=SecDef=], in stark contrast to predecessors like George Washington (the only President to lead troops in battle ''[[AuthorityEqualsAsskicking ''[[FrontlineGeneral during]]'' his presidency) and Abraham Lincoln (who actively marshalled the American Civil War, personally appointing Ulysses S. Grant head of the Union Armies).
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None


* '''Civil War Monitors:''' Generally built on the pattern of USS ''Monitor,'' these ships consisted of a single turret on a very low hull, with minimal upper works to get shot up by enemy fire. They were slow (typical top speed was under 12 knots), cumbersome, and unseaworthy, which limited their utility to coastal waters and rivers, but they were extremely powerful for their size and cost, and took their Confederate counterparts (almost all of them ''Virginia''-style broadside ironclads) apart.

* '''New Navy Monitors:''' In the late 1870s, the US Navy that had been built during the Civil War mostly languished in reserve, its ships slowly moldering and rusting away. To modernize the fleet, the Navy built a series of six new monitors that were ostensibly ''[[BlatantLies repairs]]'' of rotting Civil War-era ships. When the ruse was found out, there was an outcry, but the result was the construction of four new ships without the same pretense, and the beginning of the 20th Century US Navy. The New Navy monitors were marginally more useful than the earlier ones, but still not very seaworthy and underpowered by the standards of the battleships that the Royal Navy was putting to sea. The last of them was built in the 1890s, around the end of the Spanish-American War, and all were discarded at the end of [[UsefulNotes/WorldWarI World War I]].

to:

* '''Civil War Monitors:''' Generally built on the pattern of USS ''Monitor,'' these ships consisted of a single turret on a very low hull, with minimal upper works to get shot up by enemy fire. They were slow (typical top speed was under 12 knots), cumbersome, and unseaworthy, which limited their utility to coastal waters and rivers, but they were extremely powerful for their size and cost, and took their Confederate counterparts (almost all of them ''Virginia''-style broadside ironclads) apart.

apart. A few larger examples at the end of the war had two turrets, one forward and one aft, but remained unseaworthy and only suitable for coast defense roles.

* '''New Navy Monitors:''' In the late 1870s, the US Navy that had been built during the Civil War mostly languished in reserve, its ships slowly moldering and rusting away. To modernize the fleet, the Navy built a series of six new monitors that were ostensibly ''[[BlatantLies repairs]]'' of rotting Civil War-era ships. Aside from the "repair" funds allocated by Congress (utterly insufficient to purchase six new ships of this size) .[[note]]There had been just a few years earlier the utter embarrassment of the 1873 Virginius Affair, in which public demands for war (as retaliation for the execution of American mercenaries who'd been hired by Cuban rebels to fight against Spain) were rejected in favor of diplomacy in no small part because the Spanish ironclad frigate ''Arapiles'' happened to be in New York for minor repairs...and the quite embarrassing realization was made that this one ship (not even Spain's best) was [[EpicFail more powerful than the entire US Navy]]. This desperate state of affairs left Secretary of the Navy George Robeson willing to do anything, regardless of legality, to get modern warships.[[/note]] When the ruse was found out, there was an outcry, but the result was the construction of four new ships without the same pretense, and the beginning of the 20th Century US Navy. The New Navy monitors were marginally more useful than the earlier ones, but still not very seaworthy and underpowered by the standards of the battleships that the Royal Navy was putting to sea. The last of them was built in the 1890s, around the end of the Spanish-American War, and all were discarded at the end of [[UsefulNotes/WorldWarI World War I]].
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None


The armed forces of the United States of America are generally regarded as being altogether the most powerful military force in history. The second-largest military in the world in terms of active personnel, with two million active and reserve personnel, the US also has the second largest existing stock of active nuclear weapons. With eleven aircraft carriers to serve as mobile airstrips (and a lot of amphibious assault ships), and basing rights on every continent except Antarctica (which no one has basing rights to), the US military has a global reach and relative budget as great as that of UsefulNotes/TheBritishEmpire in her heyday.

to:

The armed forces of the [[UsefulNotes/UnitedStates United States of America America]] are generally regarded as being altogether the most powerful military force in history. The second-largest military in the world in terms of active personnel, with two million active and reserve personnel, the US also has the second largest existing stock of active nuclear weapons. With eleven aircraft carriers to serve as mobile airstrips (and a lot of amphibious assault ships), and basing rights on every continent except Antarctica (which no one has basing rights to), the US military has a global reach and relative budget as great as that of UsefulNotes/TheBritishEmpire in her heyday.heyday, if not greater.
Tabs MOD

Changed: 14

Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
Kill Em All was renamed Everybody Dies Ending due to misuse. Dewicking


* The '''[=McDonnell=] Douglas F/A-18 Hornet''' is the Navy's and Marine Corps' lightweight air superiority/strike aircraft. (Neither it nor the F-16 is really a ''bomber'', per se: a true bomber's job is really about [[KillEmAll carpet bombing]], and these planes can't even ''carry'' that many munitions. Instead, they do pinpoint strikes on invididual targets.) Like the Falcon, it has served with distinction since being introduced. Like the Falcon, it is also a true workhorse (and has a very high availability due to the designer making "ease of maintenance" a priority) and is even replacing the F-14 at its own job of air combat. It is the current platform for the Navy's Blue Angels, and was the aircraft of choice for the movie ''Film/IndependenceDay''.

to:

* The '''[=McDonnell=] Douglas F/A-18 Hornet''' is the Navy's and Marine Corps' lightweight air superiority/strike aircraft. (Neither it nor the F-16 is really a ''bomber'', per se: a true bomber's job is really about [[KillEmAll carpet bombing]], bombing, and these planes can't even ''carry'' that many munitions. Instead, they do pinpoint strikes on invididual targets.) Like the Falcon, it has served with distinction since being introduced. Like the Falcon, it is also a true workhorse (and has a very high availability due to the designer making "ease of maintenance" a priority) and is even replacing the F-14 at its own job of air combat. It is the current platform for the Navy's Blue Angels, and was the aircraft of choice for the movie ''Film/IndependenceDay''.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:


As you can see, it's an enormous tangle, with rank, service and experience all getting involved. Fortunately, there's the UsefulNotes/CommonRanks page on this wiki and a [[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/U.S._uniformed_services_pay_grades List of United States uniformed-services pay grades]] on Wiki/TheOtherWiki, which lists comparative ranks across many services, to help us keep things straightened out. The thing we're going to spend time on is the issue of "Generals" (Army, Marines and Air Force) and "Admirals" (Navy and Coast Guard). There are five ranks of General/Admiral, indicated by the number of stars on your uniform:

to:

As you can see, it's an enormous tangle, with rank, service and experience all getting involved. Fortunately, there's the UsefulNotes/CommonRanks page on this wiki and a [[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/U.S._uniformed_services_pay_grades List of United States uniformed-services pay grades]] on Wiki/TheOtherWiki, Website/TheOtherWiki, which lists comparative ranks across many services, to help us keep things straightened out. The thing we're going to spend time on is the issue of "Generals" (Army, Marines and Air Force) and "Admirals" (Navy and Coast Guard). There are five ranks of General/Admiral, indicated by the number of stars on your uniform:
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None


Sadly, this fact was partially what motivated the Department of Defense to not only retire the Tomcat but to [[ShootTheDog completely destroy nearly all the retired planes]]: this way Iran doesn't have access to the parts needed to maintain their own F-14 fleet. Iran has boasted that they've developed their own maintenance programs, and there are rumors that corrupt individuals may be supplying them with smuggled scraps to replace what can't be repaired. In the meanwhile, though, those Iranian F-14s tore it up during the Iran-Iraq war of TheEighties. Iran's claims of fifty-ish kills on Iraqi [=MiGs=], to one combat loss, are disputed -- American F-14s have scored five aerial victories, total -- but it's worth noting that whenever Iraqi pilots saw F-14s during Operation Desert Storm, their unanimous reaction was to ''[[ScrewThisImOuttaHere turn tail and flee]]''. The F-14 is also notable for being the platform of the most recent RealLife [[AcePilot Flying Ace]] -- a pilot who has scored five aerial victories; it was one of those Iranians in the 80s -- as well as the most-recent ''fictional'' Flying Ace, as Capt. Pete "Maverick" (Creator/TomCruise) shot down two aircraft in (what must have been) a stolen Iranian bird during ''Film/TopGunMaverick''.

to:

Sadly, this fact was partially what motivated the Department of Defense to not only retire the Tomcat but to [[ShootTheDog completely destroy nearly all the retired planes]]: this way Iran doesn't have access to the parts needed to maintain their own F-14 fleet. Iran has boasted that they've developed their own maintenance programs, and there are rumors that corrupt individuals may be supplying them with smuggled scraps to replace what can't be repaired. In the meanwhile, though, those Iranian F-14s tore it up during the Iran-Iraq war of TheEighties. Iran's claims of fifty-ish kills on Iraqi [=MiGs=], to one combat loss, are disputed -- American F-14s have scored five aerial victories, total -- but it's worth noting that whenever Iraqi pilots saw F-14s during Operation Desert Storm, their unanimous reaction was to ''[[ScrewThisImOuttaHere turn tail and flee]]''. The F-14 is also notable for being the platform of the most recent RealLife [[AcePilot Flying Ace]] -- a pilot who has scored five aerial victories; it was one of those Iranians in the 80s -- as well as the most-recent ''fictional'' Flying Ace, as Capt. Pete "Maverick" Mitchell (Creator/TomCruise) shot down two aircraft in (what must have been) a stolen Iranian bird during ''Film/TopGunMaverick''.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None

Added DiffLines:

Another common depiction of American forces is that since they are generally considered the most powerful military on Earth, some properties will include the American military solely to have them [[CurbstompBattle completely curbstomped]] to show off [[TheWorfEffect how powerful whatever curbstomped them is]] whether it be superpowered individuals, aliens, kaiju, terrorist superweapons, and anything in between.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None

Added DiffLines:

[[folder:Firearms]]
* The '''M2 Browning machine gun''' is one of the longest serving weapons in the history of the American armed forces. Originally developed in 1933, the M2's claim to fame was its ability to fire the heavy .50 caliber bullet on full automatic, giving American infantry and vehicles a serious edge in firepower and armor penetration. During WWII, the M2 was the default weapon for all American aircraft, was regularly mounted on most American ground vehicles, and even had a crew served version. It is so widespread and well regarded in the US military, that it has picked up the AffectionateNickname "Ma Deuce". The M2 has been exported to over a hundred different countries, and is still in service with the US armed forces despite being almost a century old. And it doesn't appear to be going anywhere any time soon.
* The '''M16 Assault Rifle''' and its variants remain the basis for the US military's standard issue weapon. The M16 was the first true assault rifle developed for the US Army, intended to replace older guns like the M1 Garand, M1 Carbine, BAR, and M14 Battle Rifle. The M16 was revolutionary in many aspects, such as using a high velocity 5.56mm intermediate round rather than the heavier 7.62mm rifle rounds its predecessors used, having an all steel and polymer construction, and used the brand new direct impingement system. What resulted was a very lightweight weapon that could maintain a high rate of fire with low recoil, while the ammunition could still prove lethal on hits. While the M16 initially had teething problems during its first deployment in the Vietnam War, several improvements and modifications turned it into one of the reliable and effective infantry weapons ever wielded by the United States. The M16 also popularized the use of intermediate caliber rounds, particulary the 5.56mm which has become the NATO standard caliber. Today, the M16 lives on dozens of derivatives, variants, and copies sold to or manufactured in over 80 countries worldwide and has become a symbol of America's military reach.
[[/folder]]


Added DiffLines:

[[folder:Man Portable Systems]]
* The '''FIM-92 Stinger''' is a man-portable shoulder fired air to surface missile that has been in service since 1981. During the Cold War, the United States recognized the threat that Soviet helicopters and ground attack aircraft posed to their ground forces, so the Stinger was developed to allow infantry to defend themselves against aerial attack. The Stinger is a infrared missile, which means it will automatically target any heat sources it detects, which allows soldiers to fire it and take cover to avoid retaliation. The Stinger first made a name for itself during the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan, when the US Government supplied Afghan rebels with Stingers, allowing them to shoot down the Soviet attack helicopters that were previously hunting them down. Due to its role in neutering Soviet air superiority, the Stinger is commonly attributed to being at least party responsible for the Soviet Union's eventual retreat from Afghanistan. Afterwards, the Stinger has been seen or used in various conflict zones around the world.
* The '''FGM-148 Javelin''' is an anti-tank missile recently developed in 1996 to allow US soldiers to engage the most modern enemy armor from long range. With an infrared seeker, the Javelin missile is able to detect and lock on to heat sources on its own without additional guidance from the gunner. Once fired, the missile can either fly in a "direct attack" or "top attack" mode. In "direct attack" mode, the missile flies in a flat trajectory like a standard missile. However, in "top attack" mode, the missile flies high in the air so it can arc down to attack its target from above, since almost all armored vehicles have their thinnest armor on the top of the vehicle. This makes the Javelin incredibly effective for its size, as it can take out tanks at ranges only crew served anti-tank weapons are capable of. While it was rather prominently used by American troops in Iraq and Afghanistan, the Javelin became world famous during the Russian invasion of Ukraine in 2022, when the US sent shipments of Javelins to Ukraine to defend its capital of Kyiv. Javelin proved to be one of the weapons that served a pivotal role in breaking the siege around Kyiv, and was revered to the point where people sympathetic to Ukraine spread images of "[[MemeticMutation Saint Javelin]]"[[note]]A parody of Mary Magdalene holding a Javelin launcher in the style of an Eastern Orthodox painting.[[/note]]. At least for Ukraine, the Javelin has become the universal symbol of resistance.
[[/folder]]
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None


* Arguably no tank is more iconic than the venerable '''M4 Sherman'' medium tank. While it didn't have the heavy armor or raw firepower of German tanks like the Panther or Tiger, and wasn't as dirt cheap to build as the Russian T-34, the Sherman made a name for itself by being a very effective JackOfAllTrades, being able to be modified to fit an almost endless number of uses. In addition, an unsung benefit the Sherman provided was its unmatched reliablity compared to contemprary tanks of the time. Because America had to ship Shermans overseas and away from the factories that built them, the Sherman had to be engineered so it would need as little mechanical support as possible. This meant that Shermans were put under such strict quality controls that a Sherman could drive for hundreds or even thousands of miles without breaking down, which was leagues ahead of competing foreign tanks which could hardly last a few dozen miles before needing a tow. Add on top if its ability to operate in nearly any climate condition, and it's now wonder that a whopping '''50,000''' of the tanks were built over the course of the war. The Sherman proved to be such a robust design that the very last Shermans to be retired from active duty from an organized military was in '''2018'''.

to:

* Arguably no tank is more iconic than the venerable '''M4 Sherman'' Sherman''' medium tank. While it didn't have the heavy armor or raw firepower of German tanks like the Panther or Tiger, and wasn't as dirt cheap to build as the Russian T-34, the Sherman made a name for itself by being a very effective JackOfAllTrades, being able to be modified to fit an almost endless number of uses. In addition, an unsung benefit the Sherman provided was its unmatched reliablity compared to contemprary tanks of the time. Because America had to ship Shermans overseas and away from the factories that built them, the Sherman had to be engineered so it would need as little mechanical support as possible. This meant that Shermans were put under such strict quality controls that a Sherman could drive for hundreds or even thousands of miles without breaking down, which was leagues ahead of competing foreign tanks which could hardly last a few dozen miles before needing a tow. Add on top if its ability to operate in nearly any climate condition, and it's now wonder that a whopping '''50,000''' of the tanks were built over the course of the war. The Sherman proved to be such a robust design that the very last Shermans to be retired from active duty from an organized military was in '''2018'''.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None

Added DiffLines:

* Arguably no tank is more iconic than the venerable '''M4 Sherman'' medium tank. While it didn't have the heavy armor or raw firepower of German tanks like the Panther or Tiger, and wasn't as dirt cheap to build as the Russian T-34, the Sherman made a name for itself by being a very effective JackOfAllTrades, being able to be modified to fit an almost endless number of uses. In addition, an unsung benefit the Sherman provided was its unmatched reliablity compared to contemprary tanks of the time. Because America had to ship Shermans overseas and away from the factories that built them, the Sherman had to be engineered so it would need as little mechanical support as possible. This meant that Shermans were put under such strict quality controls that a Sherman could drive for hundreds or even thousands of miles without breaking down, which was leagues ahead of competing foreign tanks which could hardly last a few dozen miles before needing a tow. Add on top if its ability to operate in nearly any climate condition, and it's now wonder that a whopping '''50,000''' of the tanks were built over the course of the war. The Sherman proved to be such a robust design that the very last Shermans to be retired from active duty from an organized military was in '''2018'''.


Added DiffLines:

[[folder:Artillery]]
* The '''M777 Howitzer''' entered the public consciousness thanks to its involvement in the 2022 Russian-Ukrainian War. While the M777 by itself is not particularly special for a howitzer, it is very modern with a titanium construction that allows it to be easily airlifted, a digital fire control system for increased precision, as well as the capability to fire a variety of 155mm artillery shells, including special rocket propelled, GPS guided precision shells. This was a major improvement over the older Cold War era Soviet artillery Ukraine started with, and helped close the major artillery gap between it and Russia.
* The '''M142 High Mobility Artillery Rocket System (HIMARS)''' is a light mobile rocket launcher which really made a name for itself in the 2022 Russian-Ukrainian War. Armed with long range and highly accurate rockets, HIMARS was a departure from the typical SpamAttack tactics other MLRS vehicles used, preferring to use a few guided rockets to hit specific targets. Once Ukraine was able to deploy the vehicles, the Russian advances quickly ground to a halt as the Ukrainians were able to exploit HIMARS' longe range precision capabilities to destroy strategic targets such as ammo dumps, headquarters, and bridges with Russia being utterly unable to find a suitable counter to them. And this isn't even getting into the fact that the US did not provide the longest range rockets, ATACMS and the Precision Strike Missile, which can hit targets up to 500km away. And this was all from only 20 HIMARS launchers. Their performance was so stellar during the war that foreign demand for the system ''exploded'', with the US looking to produce another '''500''' launchers over the next few years.
[[/folder]]
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None


Sadly, this fact was partially what motivated the Department of Defense to not only retire the Tomcat but to [[ShootTheDog completely destroy nearly all the retired planes]]: this way Iran doesn't have access to the parts needed to maintain their own F-14 fleet. Iran has boasted that they've developed their own maintenance programs, and there are rumors that corrupt individuals may be supplying them with smuggled scraps to replace what can't be repaired. In the meanwhile, though, those Iranian F-14s tore it up during the Iran-Iraq war of TheEighties. Iran's claims of fifty-ish kills on Iraqi [=MiGs=], to one combat loss, are disputed (American F-14s have scored five aerial victories, total), but it's worth noting that whenever Iraqi pilots saw F-14s during Operation Desert Storm, their unanimous reaction was to ''[[ScrewThisImOuttaHere turn tail and flee]]''.

to:

Sadly, this fact was partially what motivated the Department of Defense to not only retire the Tomcat but to [[ShootTheDog completely destroy nearly all the retired planes]]: this way Iran doesn't have access to the parts needed to maintain their own F-14 fleet. Iran has boasted that they've developed their own maintenance programs, and there are rumors that corrupt individuals may be supplying them with smuggled scraps to replace what can't be repaired. In the meanwhile, though, those Iranian F-14s tore it up during the Iran-Iraq war of TheEighties. Iran's claims of fifty-ish kills on Iraqi [=MiGs=], to one combat loss, are disputed (American -- American F-14s have scored five aerial victories, total), total -- but it's worth noting that whenever Iraqi pilots saw F-14s during Operation Desert Storm, their unanimous reaction was to ''[[ScrewThisImOuttaHere turn tail and flee]]''.flee]]''. The F-14 is also notable for being the platform of the most recent RealLife [[AcePilot Flying Ace]] -- a pilot who has scored five aerial victories; it was one of those Iranians in the 80s -- as well as the most-recent ''fictional'' Flying Ace, as Capt. Pete "Maverick" (Creator/TomCruise) shot down two aircraft in (what must have been) a stolen Iranian bird during ''Film/TopGunMaverick''.



* The '''General Dynamics F-16 Fighting Falcon''' is the Air Force's version of the light fighter. The first combat aircraft to use true fly-by-wire controls, the "[[Series/BattlestarGalactica1978 Viper]]" (as its pilots call it) has been the workhorse of the Air Force since the early '80s (during the first Gulf War, the F-16 was used in more sorties than any other Coalition aircraft), and is scheduled to remain in service until the 2020s. It's so versatile that's its also found homes among many foreign air forces. It can be configured as an interceptor, an air superiority fighter, a strike aircraft, or a close support aircraft, and does all these jobs well. It is the current vehicle for the Air Force's Thunderbirds. The F-16 was featured heavily in the ''Film/IronEagle'' series of films, which could be a positive or a negative, depending on what you think of those movies, and stars in the ''Falcon'' series of [[SurprisinglyRealisticOutcome brain-breakingly realistic]] flight sims.
** A note on Fly-By-Wire: most aircraft are designed with "positive" "aerodynamic stability," which means that if you let go of the steering wheel, the plane's shape will cause it to drift back into a straight-line heading. The F-16 on the other hand was deliberately designed with aerodynamic ''in''stability; left to its own devices, it will drift ''out of'' a straight-line heading. The FBW computer prevents this by making constant minute adjustments to flaps, ailerons and rudder, which keeps the plane going in the (last) direction its pilot told it to. Why all this trouble? Once you ''tell'' the F-16 to turn, it's off like a rocket; the F-16 can outfly most competitors (a serious advantage in an OldSchoolDogfight) and even its own pilots, who will have passed out from G-forces long before the airframe reaches structural tolerance. In the 21st Century, fly-by-wire is a universal design feature of fighter aircraft, but it was created for the F-16 three decades before they showed up.

to:

* The '''General Dynamics F-16 Fighting Falcon''' is the Air Force's version of the light fighter. The first combat aircraft to use true fly-by-wire controls, the "[[Series/BattlestarGalactica1978 Viper]]" (as its pilots call it) has been the workhorse of the Air Force since the early '80s (during the first Gulf War, the F-16 was used in more sorties than any other Coalition aircraft), and is scheduled to remain in service until the 2020s. It's so versatile that's its also found homes among many foreign air forces. forces, and -- at just shy of 3,000 copies -- it is the second-most-populous aircraft in current military service, and the ''most'' populous that isn't a helicopter. (See below for which helicopter it is.) It can be configured as an interceptor, an air superiority fighter, a strike aircraft, or a close support aircraft, and does all these jobs well. It is the current vehicle for the Air Force's Thunderbirds. The F-16 was featured heavily in the ''Film/IronEagle'' series of films, which could be a positive or a negative, depending on what you think of those movies, and stars in the ''Falcon'' series of [[SurprisinglyRealisticOutcome brain-breakingly realistic]] flight sims.
** A note on Fly-By-Wire: most aircraft are designed with "positive" "aerodynamic stability," which means that if you let go of the steering wheel, the plane's shape will cause it to drift back into a straight-line heading. (Cars have a similar feature for safety reasons.) The F-16 on the other hand was deliberately designed with aerodynamic ''in''stability; left to its own devices, it will drift ''out of'' a straight-line heading. The FBW computer prevents this by making constant minute adjustments to flaps, ailerons and rudder, which keeps the plane going in the (last) direction its pilot told it to. Why all this trouble? Once you ''tell'' the F-16 to turn, it's off like a rocket; the F-16 can outfly most competitors (a serious advantage in an OldSchoolDogfight) and even its own pilots, who will have passed out from G-forces long before the airframe reaches structural tolerance. In the 21st Century, fly-by-wire is a universal design feature of fighter aircraft, but it was created for the F-16 three decades before they showed up.



** For a long time, there was [[BrokenBase a lot of debate]] about whether or not the F-22 was really needed. The whole "asymmetrical warfare" thing, which has gotten very trendy, involves simply bombing enemy aircraft to bits before they can take off. As such, there is very little need for an air-superiority fighter--and hasn't been for some time; it's instructive to note that the last [[AcePilot Flying Ace]], a pilot with five or more air-to-air kills, earned the distinction during TheEighties (he was an Iranian; flying one of those F-14s, amusingly enough). So why are we spending gajillions of dollars on an aircraft that is designed to shoot down other planes, something that basically is never done anymore? Recent information on the F-22's contenders (such as the UsefulNotes/RussiansWithRustingRockets' Su-57) suggest that they'll cost about as much as the F-22, though; we may be out of money, but at least everyone else will be too. And, like the F-15 before it, the F-22 can adapt to other missions, despite the "not one pound for air-to-ground" philosophy shared by both planes. Finally, the tensions in the [=2010s=] and [=2020s=] with foreign peer powers like Russia and China have resulted in the hindsight opinion that the premature shutdown of F-22 production was largely a mistake. (Can we restart production? Yes, [[https://www.businessinsider.com/why-the-us-cant-restart-production-of-f22-stealth-fighter-2021-6 but it would be even more expensive than before]], to the point that simply designing and building an F-36 might be cheaper.)

to:

** For a long time, there was [[BrokenBase a lot of debate]] about whether or not the F-22 was really needed. The whole "asymmetrical warfare" thing, which has gotten very trendy, involves simply bombing enemy aircraft to bits before they can take off. As such, there is very little need for an air-superiority fighter--and hasn't been for some time; it's instructive to note fighter -- cf the fact that the last [[AcePilot most recent non-fictional Flying Ace]], a pilot with five or more air-to-air kills, earned Ace did it in the distinction during TheEighties (he was an Iranian; flying one of those F-14s, amusingly enough).80s, back before the F-22 could even claw its way into the sky. So why are we spending gajillions of dollars on an aircraft that is designed to shoot down other planes, something that basically is never done anymore? Recent information on the F-22's contenders (such as the UsefulNotes/RussiansWithRustingRockets' Su-57) suggest that they'll cost about as much as the F-22, though; we may be out of money, but at least everyone else will be too. And, like the F-15 before it, the F-22 can adapt to other missions, despite the "not one pound for air-to-ground" philosophy shared by both planes. Finally, the tensions This question was resolved in in the [=2010s=] and [=2020s=] [=2020s=], when tensions with foreign peer powers like Russia and China have resulted in the hindsight opinion that the premature shutdown of F-22 production was largely a mistake. (Can we restart production? Yes, [[https://www.businessinsider.com/why-the-us-cant-restart-production-of-f22-stealth-fighter-2021-6 but it would be even more expensive than before]], to the point that simply designing and building an F-36 F-23 might be cheaper.)



* The '''UH-60 Black Hawk''' is the UH-1's official successor as the US armed force's general transport helicopter. Proven to be one of the most reliable and durable transport helicopters around, there's hardly any depiction of a modern war involving the US military that doesn't have a Black Hawk prominently featured somewhere. Like its predecessor, the Black Hawk has dozens of variants that allow it complete just about any task imaginable. The Black Hawk was made famous by the book ([[FilmOfTheBook and later film]]) ''Film/BlackHawkDown'', where two of the namesake helicopters are shot down during the Battle of Mogadishu.

to:

* The '''UH-60 Black Hawk''' is the UH-1's official successor as the US armed force's general transport helicopter. Proven to be one of the most reliable and durable transport helicopters around, there's hardly any depiction of a modern war involving the US military that doesn't have a Black Hawk prominently featured somewhere. Like its predecessor, the Black Hawk has dozens of variants that allow it complete just about any task imaginable. The Black Hawk was made famous by the book ([[FilmOfTheBook and later film]]) ''Film/BlackHawkDown'', where two of the namesake helicopters are shot down during the Battle of Mogadishu. It is the most populous military aircraft currently in service, with 3,600 made.

Changed: 545

Removed: 214

Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None


** There's been [[BrokenBase a lot of debate]] about whether or not the F-22 is really needed. The whole "asymmetrical warfare" thing, which has gotten very trendy, involves simply bombing enemy aircraft to bits before they can take off. As such, there is very little need for an air-superiority fighter--and hasn't been for some time; it's instructive to note that the last [[AcePilot Flying Ace]], a pilot with five or more air-to-air kills, earned the distinction during TheEighties (he was an Iranian; flying one of those F-14s, amusingly enough). So why are we spending gajillions of dollars on an aircraft that is designed to shoot down other planes, something that basically is never done anymore? Recent information on the F-22's contenders (such as the Russian [=PAK FA=]) suggest that they'll cost about as much as the F-22, though; we may be out of money, but at least everyone else will be too. And, like the F-15 before it, the F-22 can adapt to other missions, despite the "not one pound for air-to-ground" philosophy shared by both planes.
** However, with recent tensions in the [=2010s=] and [=2020s=] with foreign peer powers like Russia and China, it's become the accepted opinion that the premature shutdown of F-22 production was largely a mistake.

to:

** There's been For a long time, there was [[BrokenBase a lot of debate]] about whether or not the F-22 is was really needed. The whole "asymmetrical warfare" thing, which has gotten very trendy, involves simply bombing enemy aircraft to bits before they can take off. As such, there is very little need for an air-superiority fighter--and hasn't been for some time; it's instructive to note that the last [[AcePilot Flying Ace]], a pilot with five or more air-to-air kills, earned the distinction during TheEighties (he was an Iranian; flying one of those F-14s, amusingly enough). So why are we spending gajillions of dollars on an aircraft that is designed to shoot down other planes, something that basically is never done anymore? Recent information on the F-22's contenders (such as the Russian [=PAK FA=]) UsefulNotes/RussiansWithRustingRockets' Su-57) suggest that they'll cost about as much as the F-22, though; we may be out of money, but at least everyone else will be too. And, like the F-15 before it, the F-22 can adapt to other missions, despite the "not one pound for air-to-ground" philosophy shared by both planes.
** However, with recent
planes. Finally, the tensions in the [=2010s=] and [=2020s=] with foreign peer powers like Russia and China, it's become China have resulted in the accepted hindsight opinion that the premature shutdown of F-22 production was largely a mistake. (Can we restart production? Yes, [[https://www.businessinsider.com/why-the-us-cant-restart-production-of-f22-stealth-fighter-2021-6 but it would be even more expensive than before]], to the point that simply designing and building an F-36 might be cheaper.)
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None


The armed forces of the United States of America are generally regarded as being altogether the most powerful military force in history. The second-largest military in the world in terms of active personnel, with two million active and reserve personnel, the US also has the second largest existing stock of active nuclear weapons. With eleven aircraft carriers to serve as mobile airstrips and basing rights on nearly every continent (and a lot of amphibious assault ships), the US military has a global reach and relative budget as great as that of UsefulNotes/TheBritishEmpire in her heyday.

to:

The armed forces of the United States of America are generally regarded as being altogether the most powerful military force in history. The second-largest military in the world in terms of active personnel, with two million active and reserve personnel, the US also has the second largest existing stock of active nuclear weapons. With eleven aircraft carriers to serve as mobile airstrips and basing rights on nearly every continent (and a lot of amphibious assault ships), and basing rights on every continent except Antarctica (which no one has basing rights to), the US military has a global reach and relative budget as great as that of UsefulNotes/TheBritishEmpire in her heyday.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None


* The Air Force is often falsely depicted as if it only had pilots, but in fact there are lots of mechanics, technicians and other categories of personnel (military and civilian) needed to keep it all running. The Air Force and its service members are often portrayed as MildlyMilitary (not slackers, but more like police officers and firefighters in attitude) in comparison with the other services, and their facilities are often cleaner and more modern than the others. This somewhat egalitarian approach is true in real life as well, if only because the usual combat dynamics are reversed -- the officers are the ones fighting (piloting) on the frontlines and the enlisted are not. This stereotype is not ''quite'' true, however, as planes with more than two crew members usually have a number of enlisted operators aboard (two-crew aircraft, such as fighters and the B-2 bomber, have two officers, usually a pilot and a weapon systems officer).

to:

* The Air Force is often falsely depicted as if it only had pilots, but pilots; in fact there reality, they only make up about 4% of the Air Force's personnel. The rest are lots of mechanics, technicians and other categories of personnel (military and civilian) needed to keep it all running. The Air Force and its service members are often portrayed as MildlyMilitary (not slackers, but more like police officers and firefighters in attitude) in comparison with the other services, and their facilities are often cleaner and more modern than the others. This somewhat egalitarian approach is true in real life as well, if only because the usual combat dynamics are reversed -- the officers are the ones fighting (piloting) on the frontlines and the enlisted are not. This stereotype is not ''quite'' true, however, as planes with more than two crew members usually have a number of enlisted operators aboard (two-crew aircraft, such as fighters and the B-2 bomber, have two officers, usually a pilot and a weapon systems officer).
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None

Added DiffLines:

** However, with recent tensions in the [=2010s=] and [=2020s=] with foreign peer powers like Russia and China, it's become the accepted opinion that the premature shutdown of F-22 production was largely a mistake.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
Found some more on Space Force ranks.


Oh, and everything listed above? That was mostly just describing Commissioned Officer ranks. Each branch has an ''entirely'' different rank system for their enlisted troops, which only sometimes lines up in intuitive ways, with similar or identically named ranks being at different levels (for instance, an Army Staff Sergeant outranks an Air Force Staff Sergeant, being one paygrade higher. An Airman First Class and a Private First Class both outrank a Marine Private First Class, the latter being one paygrade lower then the other two. While an Army or Marine Corporal are both at the same paygrade as a Senior Airman, they both outrank the Senior Airman because they are [=NCOs=] while the Senior Airman is still considered junior-enlisted (unlike every other branch, the Air Force does not have an NCO grade at the fourth-lowest level, although Senior Airmen often carry out similar supervisory duties as Corporals would).

to:

Oh, and everything listed above? That was mostly just describing Commissioned Officer ranks. Each branch has an ''entirely'' different rank system for their enlisted troops, which only sometimes lines up in intuitive ways, with similar or identically named ranks being at different levels (for instance, an Army or Marine Staff Sergeant outranks an Air Force Staff Sergeant, being one paygrade higher. An Airman First Class and a Private First Class both outrank a Marine Private First Class, the latter being one paygrade lower then than the other two. While an Army or Marine Corporal are both at the same paygrade as a Senior Airman, Airman or a Specialist Four in the Space Force, they both outrank the Senior Airman and [=Spc4=] because they the Corporals are [=NCOs=] while the Senior Airman is and [=Spc4=] are still considered junior-enlisted (unlike every all other branch, branches, the Air Force does and Space Force do not have an NCO grade at the fourth-lowest level, although Senior Airmen and [=Spc4s=] often carry out similar supervisory duties as Corporals would).



Both Marine staff non-commissioned officers and Navy Chief Petty Officers are always referred to by their specific rank (e.g.: always "''Staff'' Sergeant," or "''Master''" Chief and ''never'' just "Sergeant" or "Chief"). In the Army and Air Force the proper address is "Sergeant" regardless of specific rank. No NCO is ''ever, EVER'' called [[BerserkButton "Sarge"]], though a Gunnery Sergeant, Master Sergeant or First Sergeant may respectively be "Gunny" or "Top" by their own ''if'' they permit that.

Senior and experienced non-commissioned officers and master chief petty officers in all branches of the military may take a "First Sergeant" or "command master chief" professional track as they are promoted to certain grades or are placed in the appropriate billet. Such [=NCOs=] are act as "senior enlisted advisers" within units to act as a link between the commanding officer and the enlisted personnel. In the Army, E-8s and E-9s serving in such roles are respectively "First Sergeants" and "Command Sergeants Major". In the Air Force, "First Sergeant" is not a rank, but instead a special duty that can be held by any NCO at Master Sergeant (E-7) level or above; most units in fact fill that position with an E-7, though larger units may have an E-8 or even E-9 as First Sergeant. Navy Master Chiefs become "Command Master Chiefs". The Marine Corps uses completely separate parallel tracks by which Gunnery Sergeants elect a choice on their regular fitness reports to be promoted either to First Sergeant, and thereafter Sergeant Major, or to Master Sergeant and then Master Gunnery Sergeant, and the Marines do not allow lateral move between these parallel ranks. Each branch of the service also has a specific billet and rank for the seniormost enlisted member of each service, known in military parlance as a "senior enlisted advisor" or SEA, who is meant to act as a representative for all enlisted members and as the senior enlisted adviser to the service's chief. These are respectively the Sergeant Major of the Army, the Master Chief Petty Officer of the Navy, the Chief Master Sergeant of the Air Force, and the Sergeant Major of the Marine Corps. The Coast Guard, National Guard, and Space Force also have [=SEAs=], respectively the Master Chief Petty Officer of the Coast Guard, Senior Enlisted Advisor for the National Guard Bureau, and [[OverlyLongName Command Senior Enlisted Leader, United States Space Command and Command Chief]]. Finally, ''the'' highest-ranking enlisted member in the entire armed forces is the Senior Enlisted Advisor to the Chairman (SEAC), who is appointed by and reports to the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. He[[note]](no woman has yet been appointed to this position)[[/note]] serves for a four-year term, meant to coincide with that of the Chairman. That said, the SEAC earns the same salary as all other [=SEAs=].

to:

Both Marine staff non-commissioned officers and Navy Chief Petty Officers are always referred to by their specific rank (e.g.: always "''Staff'' Sergeant," or "''Master''" Chief and ''never'' just "Sergeant" or "Chief"). In the Army and Air Force Army, the proper address is "Sergeant" regardless of specific rank.rank (except in certain training environments). In the Air Force and Space Force, either "Sergeant" or the specific rank is acceptable. No NCO is ''ever, EVER'' called [[BerserkButton "Sarge"]], though a Gunnery Sergeant, Master Sergeant or First Sergeant may respectively be "Gunny" or "Top" by their own ''if'' they permit that.

Senior and experienced non-commissioned officers and master chief petty officers in all branches of the military may take a "First Sergeant" or "command master chief" professional track as they are promoted to certain grades or are placed in the appropriate billet. Such [=NCOs=] are act as "senior enlisted advisers" within units to act as a link between the commanding officer and the enlisted personnel. In the Army, E-8s and E-9s serving in such roles are respectively "First Sergeants" and "Command Sergeants Major". In the Air Force and Space Force, "First Sergeant" is not a rank, but instead a special duty that can be held by any NCO at Master Sergeant (E-7) level or above; most units in fact fill that position with an E-7, though larger units may have an E-8 or even E-9 as First Sergeant. Navy Master Chiefs become "Command Master Chiefs". The Marine Corps uses completely separate parallel tracks by which Gunnery Sergeants elect a choice on their regular fitness reports to be promoted either to First Sergeant, and thereafter Sergeant Major, or to Master Sergeant and then Master Gunnery Sergeant, and the Marines do not allow lateral move between these parallel ranks. Each branch of the service also has a specific billet and rank for the seniormost enlisted member of each service, known in military parlance as a "senior enlisted advisor" or SEA, who is meant to act as a representative for all enlisted members and as the senior enlisted adviser to the service's chief. These are respectively the Sergeant Major of the Army, the Master Chief Petty Officer of the Navy, the Chief Master Sergeant of the Air Force, and the Sergeant Major of the Marine Corps. The Coast Guard, National Guard, and Space Force also have [=SEAs=], respectively the Master Chief Petty Officer of the Coast Guard, Senior Enlisted Advisor for the National Guard Bureau, and [[OverlyLongName Command Senior Enlisted Leader, United States Chief Master Sergeant of the Space Command and Command Chief]].Force. Finally, ''the'' highest-ranking enlisted member in the entire armed forces is the Senior Enlisted Advisor to the Chairman (SEAC), who is appointed by and reports to the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. He[[note]](no woman has yet been appointed to this position)[[/note]] serves for a four-year term, meant to coincide with that of the Chairman. That said, the SEAC earns the same salary as all other [=SEAs=].
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
I have no idea how the original phrasing was supposed to be parsed.


The armed forces of the United States of America are generally regarded as being altogether the most powerful military force in history. The second-largest military in the world in terms of active personnel, with two million active and reserve personnel, the US also has the second largest existing stock of active nuclear weapons. With eleven aircraft carriers to serve as mobile airstrips and basing rights near on continent (and a lot of amphibious assault ships), the US military has a global reach and relative budget as great as that of UsefulNotes/TheBritishEmpire in her heyday.

to:

The armed forces of the United States of America are generally regarded as being altogether the most powerful military force in history. The second-largest military in the world in terms of active personnel, with two million active and reserve personnel, the US also has the second largest existing stock of active nuclear weapons. With eleven aircraft carriers to serve as mobile airstrips and basing rights near on nearly every continent (and a lot of amphibious assault ships), the US military has a global reach and relative budget as great as that of UsefulNotes/TheBritishEmpire in her heyday.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None


There are specific but very noteworthy pieces of culture within the services, too. For example, from 1989 to 2004, the F-14 Tomcat squadrons in the Navy Air Corps released an annual ''Fighter Fling,'' a sort of yearbook turned into one long FanVid celebrating all the Tomcat squadrons by setting clips of them being badass or [[BunnyEarsLawyer Bunny-Eared]] to whatever music was popular at the time. Some of these videos show up on Website/YouTube occasionally, but as is the case with modern anime/movie/video game-based {{Fan Vid}}s, they are often taken down thanks to DMCA (due to the music—the visual elements are public domain from their creation as U.S. government works).

to:

There are specific but very noteworthy pieces of culture within the services, too. For example, from 1989 to 2004, the F-14 Tomcat squadrons in the Navy Air Corps released an annual ''Fighter Fling,'' Fling'', a sort of yearbook turned into one long FanVid celebrating all the Tomcat squadrons by setting clips of them being badass or [[BunnyEarsLawyer Bunny-Eared]] to whatever music was popular at the time. Some of these videos show up on Website/YouTube occasionally, but as is the case with modern anime/movie/video game-based {{Fan Vid}}s, they are often taken down thanks to DMCA (due to the music—the visual elements are public domain from their creation as U.S. government works).



Every branch of service except the Air Force (and, as of late 2021, Space Force, since it was mainly staffed from the USAF) also has Warrant Officers, who are former highly-experienced senior enlisted personnel who are promoted to a grade of officers below commissioned officers but above enlisted personnel. Warrant officers are usually experts in particular technical or other specialized fields and the ranks exist so the military can hang on to their expertise and keep them in a particular billet while continuing to promote them. In the Navy and Marines, Warrant Officers are often referred to as [[EveryoneCallsHimBarkeep "Gunners"]] (though, technically, in the Marines, this is only supposed to apply to Infantry Weapons Officers).

to:

Every branch of service except the Air Force (and, as of late 2021, 2022, Space Force, since it was mainly staffed from the USAF) also has Warrant Officers, who are former highly-experienced senior enlisted personnel who are promoted to a grade of officers below commissioned officers but above enlisted personnel. Warrant officers are usually experts in particular technical or other specialized fields and the ranks exist so the military can hang on to their expertise and keep them in a particular billet while continuing to promote them. In the Navy and Marines, Warrant Officers are often referred to as [[EveryoneCallsHimBarkeep "Gunners"]] (though, technically, in the Marines, this is only supposed to apply to Infantry Weapons Officers).
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None


For more details about the Presidency itself, see UsefulNotes/ThePresidents.

to:

For more details about the Presidency itself, see UsefulNotes/ThePresidents.UsefulNotes/ThePresidentsOfTheUnitedStates.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None


The US military is ''so'' powerful because theirs is the world's single-largest economy, and the equivalent value of 4% of everything bought and sold in the country is spent on the military.[[labelnote:*]]4% of GDP, about ''twice'' the figure of similarly well-developed economies.[[/labelnote]] The United States' spending on its military has generally remained above this level since about 1940, when it first decided to field a military on the same level as the other Great Powers of the day, and the cumulative effect of this high spending has been an increase of its capabilities. The United States' UsefulNotes/WorldWarII and [[TheGreatPoliticsMessUp Cold War military budgets were much higher]] than today's, and when paired with US belligerency scared the Soviets so much it nearly resulted in WorldWarThree on two notable occasions.[[labelnote:*]]the 'Cuban Crisis' of '62 and 'Able Archer Exercise' of '83.[[/labelnote]] After the conciliatory attitude of UsefulNotes/RonaldReagan laid Soviet fears of annihilation to rest, the USSR's long-term high military expenses (previously needed to keep up with the US) caught up with her and contributed to her relatively peaceful self-dismemberment and suicide.

to:

The US military is ''so'' powerful because theirs is the world's single-largest economy, and the equivalent value of 4% of everything bought and sold in the country is spent on the military.[[labelnote:*]]4% of GDP, about ''twice'' the figure of similarly well-developed economies.[[/labelnote]] The United States' spending on its military has generally remained above this level since about 1940, when it first decided to field a military on the same level as the other Great Powers of the day, and the cumulative effect of this high spending has been an increase of its capabilities. The United States' UsefulNotes/WorldWarII and [[TheGreatPoliticsMessUp Cold War military budgets were much higher]] higher than today's, and when paired with US belligerency scared the Soviets so much it nearly resulted in WorldWarThree on two notable occasions.[[labelnote:*]]the 'Cuban Crisis' of '62 and 'Able Archer Exercise' of '83.[[/labelnote]] After the conciliatory attitude of UsefulNotes/RonaldReagan laid Soviet fears of annihilation to rest, the USSR's long-term high military expenses (previously needed to keep up with the US) caught up with her and contributed to her relatively peaceful self-dismemberment and suicide.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
Most satnav systems are now incorporated into smartphones.


Both Marine staff non-commissioned officers and Navy Chief Petty Officers are always referred to by their specific rank (e.g.: always "''Staff'' Sergeant," or "''Master''" Chief and ''never'' just "Sergeant" or "Chief"). In the Army and Air Force the proper address is "Sergeant". No NCO is ''never, ever'' called [[BerserkButton "Sarge"]], though a Gunnery Sergeant, Master Sergeant or First Sergeant may respectively be "Gunny" or "Top" by their own ''if'' they permit that.

to:

Both Marine staff non-commissioned officers and Navy Chief Petty Officers are always referred to by their specific rank (e.g.: always "''Staff'' Sergeant," or "''Master''" Chief and ''never'' just "Sergeant" or "Chief"). In the Army and Air Force the proper address is "Sergeant". "Sergeant" regardless of specific rank. No NCO is ''never, ever'' ''ever, EVER'' called [[BerserkButton "Sarge"]], though a Gunnery Sergeant, Master Sergeant or First Sergeant may respectively be "Gunny" or "Top" by their own ''if'' they permit that.



Every branch of service except the Air Force (and, as of March 2020, Space Force, since it was mainly staffed from the USAF) also has Warrant Officers, who are former highly-experienced senior enlisted personnel who are promoted to a grade of officers below commissioned officers but above enlisted personnel. Warrant officers are usually experts in particular technical or other specialized fields and the ranks exist so the military can hang on to their expertise and keep them in a particular billet while continuing to promote them. In the Navy and Marines, Warrant Officers are often referred to as [[EveryoneCallsHimBarkeep "Gunners"]] (though, technically, in the Marines, this is only supposed to apply to Infantry Weapons Officers).

to:

Every branch of service except the Air Force (and, as of March 2020, late 2021, Space Force, since it was mainly staffed from the USAF) also has Warrant Officers, who are former highly-experienced senior enlisted personnel who are promoted to a grade of officers below commissioned officers but above enlisted personnel. Warrant officers are usually experts in particular technical or other specialized fields and the ranks exist so the military can hang on to their expertise and keep them in a particular billet while continuing to promote them. In the Navy and Marines, Warrant Officers are often referred to as [[EveryoneCallsHimBarkeep "Gunners"]] (though, technically, in the Marines, this is only supposed to apply to Infantry Weapons Officers).



The Chairman of the Joints Chiefs of Staff (acronym: CJCS) is the third most important official, and the officeholder is the highest ranked commissioned officer in the armed forces. While he [[note]](as with the Secretary of Defense, no woman has yet been appointed)[[/note]] doesn't have the vast legal powers like his immediate superior, the Secretary of Defense; the officeholder usually has lots on informal influence in military matters on the President, the Congress and the public. Some would say it's all because of the uniform. While the Chairman is forbidden by law from independently exercising command over the Armed Forces as a whole, he is allowed to assist the President and the Secretary of Defense in their command responsibilities. While the Chairman is technically appointed by the President, it's practically always the Secretary of Defense’s recommended choice who gets appointed (following Senate confirmation.) Since 1987, there is also a Vice Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff (acronym: VCJCS); and much like the Deputy Secretary of Defense he is usually less publicly visible than the immediate boss. For the Joint Chiefs of Staff itself see further below.

to:

The Chairman of the Joints Joint Chiefs of Staff (acronym: CJCS) is the third most important official, and the officeholder is the highest ranked commissioned officer in the armed forces. While he [[note]](as with the Secretary of Defense, no woman has yet been appointed)[[/note]] doesn't have the vast legal powers like his immediate superior, the Secretary of Defense; the officeholder usually has lots on informal influence in military matters on the President, the Congress and the public. Some would say it's all because of the uniform. While the Chairman is forbidden by law from independently exercising command over the Armed Forces as a whole, he is allowed to assist the President and the Secretary of Defense in their command responsibilities. While the Chairman is technically appointed by the President, it's practically always the Secretary of Defense’s recommended choice who gets appointed (following Senate confirmation.) Since 1987, there is also a Vice Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff (acronym: VCJCS); and much like the Deputy Secretary of Defense he is usually less publicly visible than the immediate boss. For the Joint Chiefs of Staff itself see further below.



However, this does not mean domestic deployment of federal troops is impossible. Under the Insurrection Act, troops may be deployed if the President declares martial law. In most cases, troops can be deployed domestically due to LoopholeAbuse. Posse Comitatus prohibits federal troops from ''enforcing'' the law, but there is nothing that prohibits them from supporting local law enforcement agencies. For example, US Navy ships are legally allowed to search, track, and stop ships they consider suspicious. However, only civilian law enforcement or Coast Guard personnel can actually board the ship, seize it, and arrest any criminals on board, which is why many Navy ships carry a small contingent of Coast Guard officers. Federal troops can also be attached to law enforcement units for training purposes, as long as they are not directly involved law enforcement activities. For example, US Marines were allowed to man sobriety checkpoints alongside deputies from the San Bernardino Sherrif's Department to observe sobriety enforcement tactics and techniques for use on Marine bases.

to:

However, this does not mean domestic deployment of federal troops is impossible. Under the Insurrection Act, troops may be deployed if the President declares martial law. In most cases, troops can be deployed domestically due to LoopholeAbuse. Posse Comitatus prohibits federal troops from ''enforcing'' the law, but there is nothing that prohibits them from supporting local law enforcement agencies. For example, US Navy ships are legally allowed to search, track, and stop ships they consider suspicious. However, only civilian law enforcement or Coast Guard personnel can actually board the ship, seize it, and arrest any criminals on board, which is why many Navy ships carry a small contingent of Coast Guard officers. Federal troops can also be attached to law enforcement units for training purposes, as long as they are not directly involved law enforcement activities. For example, US Marines were allowed to man sobriety checkpoints alongside deputies from the San Bernardino Sherrif's Sheriff's Department to observe sobriety enforcement tactics and techniques for use on Marine bases.



* Your sat-nav. NAVSTAR GPS, developed for the US military and made available for public use after the KAL 007 shoot-down.

to:

* Your sat-nav.sat-nav, whether it's a standalone unit or incorporated into a smartphone. NAVSTAR GPS, developed for the US military and made available for public use after the KAL 007 shoot-down.



** The Bell XS-1 (redesignated X-1 in December, 1946, becoming the first of fifty-six experimental aircraft and spacecraft designs in the X series to date) was the first aircraft able to fly ''faster than sound, in level flight.'' Though previous aircraft (most notably the North American F-86 Sabre) were ''capable'' of flying faster than sound, they could only do so in a dive. The X-1 demonstrated the necessary characteristics for a powered aircraft to fly faster than sound (streamlining, powerful engines, shorter wings than the shape of the supersonic shock cone) and set the stage for decades of aircraft design.

to:

** The Bell XS-1 (redesignated X-1 in December, December 1946, becoming the first of fifty-six experimental aircraft and spacecraft designs in the X series to date) was the first aircraft able to fly ''faster than sound, in level flight.'' Though previous aircraft (most notably the North American F-86 Sabre) were ''capable'' of flying faster than sound, they could only do so in a dive. The X-1 demonstrated the necessary characteristics for a powered aircraft to fly faster than sound (streamlining, powerful engines, shorter wings than the shape of the supersonic shock cone) and set the stage for decades of aircraft design.



* Antibiotics. In order to reduce deaths from wounds and illness, the US Military developed a mould-based antibiotic to supplement their supply of Sulfa (chemical-based) Antibiotics. These were so effective they phased out the use of medical maggots[[note]] used because they only eat rotting flesh and keep wounds miraculously clean and infection-free, but they are more finicky to care for (e.g. can't handle extremes of temperature) and have a shorter shelf life than penicillin pills [[/note]] entirely in the latter half of UsefulNotes/WorldWarII[[note]]Interesting aside: The penicillin was based on a sample from a moldy cantaloupe found in Peoria, discovered after a months-long nationwide search. That's right: to save thousands of soldiers and millions of others, the US Armed Forces dispatched people across the country to stick their noses in moldy fruit. Also, until then, it was accepted practice in the military for soldiers being treated with penicillin to collect their pee so the penicillin could be purified out of it--most of a dose of penicillin doesn't actually do anything, but rather gets expelled through the urinary system. When penicillin is cheap this isn't a problem, but when it's expensive...[[/note]]

to:

* Antibiotics. In order to reduce deaths from wounds and illness, the US Military developed a mould-based antibiotic to supplement their supply of Sulfa sulfa (chemical-based) Antibiotics.antibiotics. These were so effective they phased out the use of medical maggots[[note]] used because they only eat rotting flesh and keep wounds miraculously clean and infection-free, but they are more finicky to care for (e.g. can't handle extremes of temperature) and have a shorter shelf life than penicillin pills [[/note]] entirely in the latter half of UsefulNotes/WorldWarII[[note]]Interesting aside: The penicillin was based on a sample from a moldy cantaloupe found in Peoria, discovered after a months-long nationwide search. That's right: to save thousands of soldiers and millions of others, the US Armed Forces dispatched people across the country to stick their noses in moldy fruit. Also, until then, it was accepted practice in the military for soldiers being treated with penicillin to collect their pee so the penicillin could be purified out of it--most of a dose of penicillin doesn't actually do anything, but rather gets expelled through the urinary system. When penicillin is cheap this isn't a problem, but when it's expensive...[[/note]]



** On the internet an anecdote exists of a supposed conference listing some of the capabilities of aircraft carriers in disaster situations, including on-board hospitals, cafeterias designed to feed thousands, the ability to provide electricity to shore-based facilities, a landing point for rescue aircraft, and cargo space for thousands of tons of relief supplies and, to a lesser degree, the land and air vehicles to transport such. A side effect for nuclear-powered carriers [[labelnote:note]]The last conventionally fueled carrier, the ''Kitty Hawk'' was decommissioned in 2017. The main reason it lasted so long was because it had spent most of its time since the turn of the millennium as the flagship in the U.S. Seventh Fleet in Yokosuka, Japan, and the Japanese had objections to basing any nuclear vessel in its waters. It was only after these objections were addressed that ''Kitty Hawk'', which for the preceding decade or more had spent more time in the shipyards than it had underway due to age and mileage, was recalled to the U.S. to be replaced by a newer generation carrier and was decommissioned soon after.[[/labelnote]] is that their nuclear plants' cooling systems have the side effect of being the world's largest portable desalination plants[[labelnote:*]]Nearly 400,000 gallons (or 1,500 cubic meters) per day—more than a typical suburban American family will use in ''a year''. A generous high end estimate of around 150-200k of that is used daily for average shipboard use for a full crew complement, though with some restrictions, they can make do on under 100k without much trouble. At sea, any excess is normally discharged, but easy pumping for disaster relief and emergency storage is built into the design for just such an occasion.[[/labelnote]] capable of supplying fresh water indefinitely, just as fast as containers can be set up to receive and distribute it.

to:

** On the internet an anecdote exists of a supposed conference listing some of the capabilities of aircraft carriers in disaster situations, including on-board hospitals, cafeterias designed to feed thousands, the ability to provide electricity to shore-based facilities, a landing point for rescue aircraft, and cargo space for thousands of tons of relief supplies and, to a lesser degree, the land and air vehicles to transport such. A side effect for nuclear-powered carriers [[labelnote:note]]The last conventionally fueled carrier, the ''Kitty Hawk'' Hawk'', was decommissioned in 2017. The main reason it lasted so long was because it had spent most of its time since the turn of the millennium as the flagship in the U.S. Seventh Fleet in Yokosuka, Japan, and the Japanese had objections to basing any nuclear vessel in its waters. It was only after these objections were addressed that ''Kitty Hawk'', which for the preceding decade or more had spent more time in the shipyards than it had underway due to age and mileage, was recalled to the U.S. to be replaced by a newer generation carrier and was decommissioned soon after.[[/labelnote]] is that their nuclear plants' cooling systems have the side effect of being the world's largest portable desalination plants[[labelnote:*]]Nearly 400,000 gallons (or 1,500 cubic meters) per day—more than a typical suburban American family will use in ''a year''. A generous high end estimate of around 150-200k of that is used daily for average shipboard use for a full crew complement, though with some restrictions, they can make do on under 100k without much trouble. At sea, any excess is normally discharged, but easy pumping for disaster relief and emergency storage is built into the design for just such an occasion.[[/labelnote]] capable of supplying fresh water indefinitely, just as fast as containers can be set up to receive and distribute it.



The United States was first to develop the atomic bomb, as well as the first and only nation to actually use the atomic bomb offensively. To date, no one has used the atomic bomb ''defensively,'' either, so except for setting them off to see if they will in fact explode at all, the US is simply "the only nation to use the atomic bomb." The US is now the biggest holder of nuclear weapons. See UsefulNotes/PeaceThroughSuperiorFirepower, since they turn up a bit in fiction.


to:

The United States was first to develop the atomic bomb, as well as the first and only nation to actually use the atomic bomb offensively. To date, no one has used the atomic bomb ''defensively,'' ''defensively'' either, so except for setting them off to see if they will in fact explode at all, the US is simply "the only nation to use the atomic bomb." The US is now the biggest holder of nuclear weapons. See UsefulNotes/PeaceThroughSuperiorFirepower, since they turn up a bit in fiction.

Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None


'''Current commander:''' GEN Stephen R. Lyons, U.S. Army\\

to:

'''Current commander:''' GEN Stephen R. Lyons, Gen Jacqueline D. Van Ovost, U.S. Army\\Air Force\\
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None


* The Air Force is often falsely depicted as if it only had pilots, but in fact there are lots of mechanics, technicians and other categories of personnel (military and civilian) needed to keep it all running. The Air Force and its service members are often portrayed as MildlyMilitary (not slackers, but more like police officers and firefighters in attitude) in comparison with the other services, and their facilities are often cleaner and more modern than the others. This somewhat egalitarian approach is true in real life as well, if only because the usual combat dynamics are reversed -- the officers are the ones fighting (piloting) on the frontlines and the enlisted are not.

to:

* The Air Force is often falsely depicted as if it only had pilots, but in fact there are lots of mechanics, technicians and other categories of personnel (military and civilian) needed to keep it all running. The Air Force and its service members are often portrayed as MildlyMilitary (not slackers, but more like police officers and firefighters in attitude) in comparison with the other services, and their facilities are often cleaner and more modern than the others. This somewhat egalitarian approach is true in real life as well, if only because the usual combat dynamics are reversed -- the officers are the ones fighting (piloting) on the frontlines and the enlisted are not. This stereotype is not ''quite'' true, however, as planes with more than two crew members usually have a number of enlisted operators aboard (two-crew aircraft, such as fighters and the B-2 bomber, have two officers, usually a pilot and a weapon systems officer).
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None


If you're wondering, aircraft designations are: F for Fighter, A for Attack, B for Bomber, C for Cargo, E for Electronic warfare, H for Helicopter, K for tanKer, M for special Missions, V for [=VTOL=], U for Utility, Q for unmanned drone, and in the case of the WWII planes, P for Pursuit. Before 1962, the US Navy had a separate designation system: One to three function letters, a sequence number indicating which design it was, and a manufacturer letter, followed by a dash and a digit to communicate which variant it was. The McDonnell F-4 Phantom II, for example, entered service as the F4H-2 (Fourth fighter design by McDonnell Aircraft Corporation, second variant). Most single-digit numbers under the post-1962 system were taken up by redesignated Naval aircraft, while their Air Force counterparts mostly continued to use the same designations as before, with one significant exception which we will get to.

to:

If you're wondering, aircraft designations are: F for Fighter, A for Attack, B for Bomber, C for Cargo, E for Electronic warfare, H for Helicopter, K for tanKer, M for special Missions, V for [=VTOL=], U for Utility, Q for unmanned drone, and in the case of the WWII planes, P for Pursuit. Before 1962, the US Navy had a separate designation system: One to three function letters, a sequence number indicating which design it was, and a manufacturer letter, followed by a dash and a digit to communicate which variant it was. The McDonnell F-4 Phantom II, for example, entered service as the F4H-2 (Fourth fighter design by McDonnell Aircraft Corporation, second variant). The first design of each manufacturer omitted the sequence number, and somewhat confusingly, the same aircraft built by different manufacturers had a different designation (the Vought Corsair, for example, was built as F4U (fourth fighter airplane by the Vought company), F3A (third fighter airplane by Brewster Aeronautical Corporation), and FG (First fighter airplane by Goodyear - yes, the rubber company)). Most single-digit numbers under the post-1962 system were taken up by redesignated Naval aircraft, while their Air Force counterparts mostly continued to use the same designations as before, with one significant exception which we will get to.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None

Added DiffLines:

* The '''Boeing MQ-25 Stingray''' is one of the newest drones. Unlike other drones on this list, its function is to provide an airborne refueling capability for US Navy aircraft carriers, replacing the long-gone KA-6 Intruders and S-3 Viking aircraft in providing a refueling capacity that doesn't reduce the number of long-range strike aircraft available aboard a carrier. The MQ-25 is expected to deploy for the first time in 2021, after what for modern aircraft is an incredibly short development cycle (contracted in 2016, first flight in 2019).

Top