F/A-18D question

[Grant]

OK... so that leads me to another question. Why would they build a jet that is supposed to be carrier capable, if it isnt rated/built adequately to actually land with a combat load? In that case, why even bother having a tailhook? Seems to be that other than FRS training purposes, the carrier capabilities are unnecessary.

Dont get me wrong, I'm not intending to minimize the importance of the Hornet's service with the Marine Corps. Just curious.

 

[Flash]

Currently, I think just about every single C squadron is attached to a CVW. Marine C's go to the boat quite often. Only one A+ squadron doesn't (not counting reserves) b/c their birds are trapped out.

Only 4 of the 10 Air Wings have a single Marine VMFA squadron. The future plan is to have 1 VMFA squadorn to each Air Wing in the next few years due to the contraction of Marine and Navy Tacair. There are quite a few C squadorns that are not on the boat, there were 3, including the permanent squadron there, I think it was VMFA-212.

I meant to say that when I was in Iwakuni, Japan (which is probably getting hammered right now with a Typhoon) this past winter there were several C squadrons there. My typing ran ahead of my brain, typical problem with me .

 

[Road Program]

Yeah, if you look at a chart of the Arabian Gulf, you will see a couple "ordance disposal areas." These are unclas charts, BTW, before anyone gets their britches in a pinch. So the point is that yes, dumping ordance is/was so commonplace that they have areas specifically designated for it in international charts.

 

[Arc Angel]

Alright what about the Super? I'm not sure about their max landing weight, but I thought they were already being deployed with the boats (in small numbers of course). If the Echos can deploy what about the Foxtrots?

 

[Flash]

Alright what about the Super? I'm not sure about their max landing weight, but I thought they were already being deployed with the boats (in small numbers of course). If the Echos can deploy what about the Foxtrots?

E and F's both deploy.

 

[Fly Navy]

E and F's both deploy.

Are the E's still tanking?

 

[Flash]

Are the E's still tanking?

As far as I know, who else is going to do it? By the way, they have more give than an S-3, which is not saying a whole lot.

 

[Fly Navy]

As far as I know, who else is going to do it? By the way, they have more give than an S-3, which is not saying a whole lot.

So are they getting any strike/CAP/whatever time? Do they go in with a strike package?

 

[Pags]

Alright what about the Super? I'm not sure about their max landing weight, but I thought they were already being deployed with the boats (in small numbers of course). If the Echos can deploy what about the Foxtrots?

Both E and F (don't write out the phonetic pronunciations) have better bring-back capabilities (or a higher max landing weight), but don't forget, both the Es and Fs are an entirely new jet, they just share a common nose with the A-D Hornets. The B, D, and F may look similar due to the dual cockpit, but they are different jets.

 

[SteveG75]

Are the E's still tanking?

I heard that VFA-115 flew about 40% 2Q6 (tanker) hops on their last deployments. That is about what we did in A-6's so I have little sympathy for the FAG's (Fighter Attack Guys :icon_magi ).

 

[Rainman]

Grant, all fighters have tailhooks. necessary for emergency overrun gear and whatnot. Hornet B and Ds can certainly trap aboard ship. . no worries. difference in fuel is one VFR trip around the pattern.

But yes, as it was stated. . .in an operation profile . . loaded up, the small difference in fuel and perhaps CG is critical for mission effectiveness :icon_smil . . news flash :: boat hornets don't land with any extra gas.

18Cs, especially lately are rotating in and out of the carrier wings (west coast anyways). 4 out of 10 sounds about right (half the boat squadrons).

semper fi