AF, Navy Fighter ?

[Occam's Razor]

Scrappy,

1. It's "oo-rah"...not "hooah".
2. If you're not careful, we'll arrange to "meet at the merge" on the other side of the International Date Line. Then you'll be screwed!

Take care, bro.

 

[Scrapdog]

Scrappy,

1. It's "oo-rah"...not "hooah".
2. If you're not careful, we'll arrange to "meet at the merge" on the other side of the International Date Line. Then you'll be screwed!

Take care, bro.

Occam - now that is funny stuff. Hey look, a Marine with a good personality...go figure. At least I'm not being threatened with a gunny down my throat...batting .500 is better than nothin'.

 

[Rez O. Lewshun]

Occam - now that is funny stuff. Hey look, a Marine with a good personality...go figure. At least I'm not being threatened with a gunny down my throat...batting .500 is better than nothin'.

SD-

Good call.... not sure you have the wit to handle OR on the message boards. The guy is sharp....then again...maybe you do....

 

[coho92]

just remember its not head - its crainium - as for me and the merge... time to head downstairs and heat that good lookin box 2A with the extra pack of M&Ms oh yeah the real way to fly, only two more hours till the AR and another 6 1/2 to go after that to destination.

 

[BiffF15]

Sure.... but you can say that about anything. That's a pretty far out timeline too. The Navy has CVN-77 coming and wants 300 or so JSF (small amount compaired to the AF's over 2000) to complement almost 500 Super Hornets. Figuring the shelf life of a carrier to be over 40 years (Kitty Hawk is 46 years old) I'd say we'll be around for a while.

I agree that the boat will be around for years. My point is as a tax payer there are more cost effective ways to get blivets on target. How much would it cost the USN to get a 500lb into the Kremlin versus the USAF? Cost of the ship / Hornets / JSF's vice two B-2's and two tankers...
The boat is very good at intimidating third world dictators when it's sitting off their coast (if they have one).
It's also not like we are planning on doing WW2 style large sea battles.
Okay, lets speak to a hypothetical battle with China across the straights from Taiwan. We will also assume the USA is going to throw serious assets at it. USAF deploys F22's, F15's, and F16's via tankers and arrive on station with in just a couple of days of being tasked. The USN brings F18 via carriers. Which is more expensive to get into position? The carriers / Hornets are. When the war starts you will want to shore base the USN assets to increase their payload and range AND keep the carriers far from threats / risk. If you don't land deploy the aviation assets then their range / payload becomes more limiting. Or you keep them in reserve totally out of the fight so you have something in case things go badly (which keeps them out of the "overwhelming" part of the firepower equation.
Obviously this is a very simple example as I didn't go into the requirements to attack the double digit SAMS / follow on logistics, etc..

 

[Future SNA]

I'm not getting into any of this argument mostly because the only AF guy I've ever met that I really didn't like was an AF O-4 at Sun N Fun who just about got his a$$ beat for being a mouthy sob...flying the mighty 135 no less. BUT, what was stated above, you make it sound like it's not just as easy to take out an airfield as it is to take out a carrier? I can't see the Navy land basing their Hornets, now the Marines.....hey, get the tents ready

 

[BiffF15]

Actually it's easier to take out a an airfield than the boat (tough to move airfields). However, there are more airfields than their are flat tops. Also, during the last war the B2's used the homeplate as well as just a few other places (none of which were close to the front).
Every point has a counter and I'm approaching this from dollars and cents or bang for the buck.

 

[GenericPilot]

There's a reason guys end up in their particular service

I sure hope I never have to take a three day trip with some of the AF guys on this board bantering about "who's safer" at flying. If you want safety, stay on the ground, talk about how to fly, and be the ASO. My first boss, now a two star once told me, "the safety guys are just here to earn their pay and sit behind their desks. Now fix our safety records and get back to flying." He was a good Marine.

That being said, be careful out there and fly the hell out of your planes. Try not to kill some other guys in the process.

 

[Deuce130]

IMy first boss, now a two star once told me, "the safety guys are just here to earn their pay and sit behind their desks. Now fix our safety records and get back to flying." He was a good Marine.

That being said, be careful out there and fly the hell out of your planes. Try not to kill some other guys in the process.

Was he kind of like the marine SQ/CC who falsified the MV-22 safety records that led to the deaths of over 20 Marines? Sounds like he might have been. What's the difference in saying "Be careful out there and fly the hell out of your planes. Try not to kill some other guys in the process." and being safety oriented? Doesn't sound like there's that much of a difference.

 

[anotherF16pilot]

tag for entertainment... It's so funny when this stuff gets personal... Somebody might have to fill out a hurt feelings report...