TOPGUN and WTI: similarities / differences

[zippy]

Ultimately, this is a good thing on many levels. This it will serve to wean COCOMs off the CSG crack they've become accustomed to. There's a price to be paid in maintenance and readiness for the OPTEMPO that their demand on our fleet and our Sailors over the last 15 years. That bill is now coming due, so enjoy your <1.0 CSG presence in CENTCOM.

The East Coast carrier schedule is completely effed.

It still amazes me that ships don't keep maintenance going 24hrs a day like while in port squadrons do and things are broken and no one gives a shit until its inspection season. Poor maintence culture leads to events like IKE not being able to make it out of the yards even 6 months later than originally scheduled.

 

[azguy]

Will the world end of the Marines don't deploy with tacair support with a MEU/ESG?

So ESG/ARGs don't have TACAIR now, unless you count Harriers. What am I missing?

Is the plan to start manning DCA stations around ARGs with F-35B?

 

[Treetop Flyer]

So ESG/ARGs don't have TACAIR now, unless you count Harriers. What am I missing?

Is the plan to start manning DCA stations around ARGs with F-35B?

Uhhh

 

[STOVLer]

The ARG/MEU would be fine without any Harriers. They will never say it in public, but most MEU commanders would probably trade in their Harriers for an organic Reaper-quality UAV.

Just... wow. I don't know how to respond to that.




Do we have an RPA that can launch and recover from an LHA with the ordnance and sensors that a Harrier or F-35B has?

So ESG/ARGs don't have TACAIR now, unless you count Harriers. What am I missing?

Is the plan to start manning DCA stations around ARGs with F-35B?

I don't really know what you're asking, but Harriers currently train in DARG specifically to defend the MEU, just as F-35Bs do. But I bet a MEU commander would rather have a Reaper flying DCA overhead, because that's a thing. Another topic discussed ad naseum previously: https://www.airwarriors.com/community/index.php?threads/a-10-article.42597/page-2#post-805982

 

[Brett327]

What am I missing?

Pretty much everything.

 

[azguy]

Pretty much everything.

That's fairly cute; and point taken.

But seriously, are AV-8s assessed to be capable of anything more than acting as AAM sponges against modern threats? Will the ESG commander be willing to suck up F-35B flight hours burning holes in the sky on a DCA station rather than directly supporting the Marines on the ground?

 

[Treetop Flyer]

That's fairly cute; and point taken.

But seriously, are AV-8s assessed to be capable of anything more than acting as AAM sponges against modern threats? Will the ESG commander be willing to suck up F-35B flight hours burning holes in the sky on a DCA station rather than directly supporting the Marines on the ground?

Maybe just sit the next few plays out there champ

 

[azguy]

Maybe just sit the next few plays out there champ

Do Harrier pilots go to TOPGUN?

 

[azguy]

Maybe just sit the next few plays out there champ

Ha - also, how are you controlled? Not making fun-- I'm just so curious about this Air Wing Harrier now!

 

[jarhead]

Do Harrier pilots go to TOPGUN?

No

 

[Flash]

...Specifically, in naval aviation, I'm seeing the crossroads of the future of vertical flight. The Harrier was merely proof of concept, just something to break the ice. The F-35B, the river, is now starting to flow.

And the F-35B is the only raft going down that river, no other VSTOL fighter/attack aircraft is even in development.

The Chinese are looking hard at STOVL.

Really? Where are you getting that?

India is another still operating the Harrier (Sea Harrier) and they're building their own indigenous carriers and the Russians have tried to buy a couple of Mistral Amphibious Assault Ships.

The Indians are only going to be flying their Sea Harrier for the next year, they are buying conventional MiG-29K's to fly off their Soviet-built and indigenous carrier's to replace them. And the Mistral's aren't equipped to handle VSTOL aircraft without very major modifications.

For a smaller country a big deck amphib with a few 1.5 Mach STOVLs on board is likely 'good enough' and certainly cheaper than a supercarrier and her squadrons.

Cheaper but still very, very expensive. Part of the reason only three countries, soon to be down to only two, are now flying Harriers off carriers right now and only two, maybe three, plan to fly the F-35B in addition to the USMC.

 

[Flash]

Good point. That line of reasoning hasn't raised it's head in congress for a while and I sort of forgot about it. The Air Force has done a good job of keeping anything fixed wing that can shoot something from the Army for 70 odd years (not counting a handful of OV-1s). The Corps has it's history and its expeditionary capability to justify its existence to those that want to see it folded into the Army.

That is true but the Army isn't great about managing their aviation branch in the first place so that isn't necessarily a bad thing overall. The only completely new aircraft they have succeeded in buying in the 25 years or so was a COTS buy for light transport helos and even then they had issues, every other attempt has ended in abject failure (RAH-66, ARH-70, Aerial Common Sensor).

And yes, the Marines have been very good about making sure they are different enough from the Army (mostly in good ways) to ensure their long term survival as a separate branch of the military. I am just not sure it requires such a large tactical aviation arm to do its mission well, I think their are good arguments for and against. It is quite the testament to the Marines though that they are so unique compared to other Marine/naval infantry forces around the world, almost every other Marine Corps in the world is subordinate to the nation's Navy and much smaller and more specialized than the USMC.

 

[Pags]

@Flash, you've mentioned that to use the F-35 other nations would have to modify their existing ships. As a data point, USN is no exception to this rule; LHDs have had to receive mods to support the F-35. If these other navies want it bad enough, I'm sure they can make the appropriate ship mods just like we've had to do. Will it change the calculus? Maybe, but that's something that each country will have to work out on their own.

My .02 is that the JMSDF will quietly look in to the F-35B. Their new "destroyer that happens to pretty much look like an LHD", in my opinion, could easily accommodate F-35s. Sure, they'd have to train VSTOL pilots and maybe mod the hulls, but if you're already buying some JSFs, what's a few more million? Yes, it comes with a huge political cost for the Japanese, but if they decide they need a bigger stick, I wouldn't be surprised to see them decide to use the F-35. Same for the Aussies. A few more LHD-type ships operating F-35s in the western pacific could be advantageous.

 

[Recovering LSO]

But seriously, are AV-8s assessed to be capable of anything more than acting as AAM sponges against modern threats?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/McDonnell_Douglas_AV-8B_Harrier_II

Not usually going to recommend Wikipedia as a source, but based on your demonstrated knowledge base, it's probably a decent place to start. More specifically, look at the armament section toward the bottom - specifically the air-to-air piece.

 

[Flash]

@Flash, you've mentioned that to use the F-35 other nations would have to modify their existing ships. As a data point, USN is no exception to this rule; LHDs have had to receive mods to support the F-35. If these other navies want it bad enough, I'm sure they can make the appropriate ship mods just like we've had to do. Will it change the calculus? Maybe, but that's something that each country will have to work out on their own.

My .02 is that the JMSDF will quietly look in to the F-35B. Their new "destroyer that happens to pretty much look like an LHD", in my opinion, could easily accommodate F-35s. Sure, they'd have to train VSTOL pilots and maybe mod the hulls, but if you're already buying some JSFs, what's a few more million? Yes, it comes with a huge political cost for the Japanese, but if they decide they need a bigger stick, I wouldn't be surprised to see them decide to use the F-35. Same for the Aussies. A few more LHD-type ships operating F-35s in the western pacific could be advantageous.

I don't think folks realize just how much modification some foreign ships will require in order to accommodate the JSF. Some of our older LHD/LHA's need mods/upgrades to accommodate the F-35 but they were built to accommodate VSTOL fighter-attack aircraft in the first place so they will not be as significant or expensive, that is not the case with many foreign LHA/LHD/LPH-type ships. It is very likely that for some of them their decks, hangars and other ship infrastructure would not be able to accommodate a VSTOL aircraft without substantial and expensive modifications. Just because it looks somewhat like one of our ships doesn't mean that it is like one of them.