Some Aussies are worried. http://www.ausairpower.net/APA-NOTAM-311210-1.html
Phillip,
The America class were designed for purpose. The deletion of the well deck was to allow the use of that space plus additional spaces through the vessel for air-optimised useage. SRL techniques should not be confused with CATOBAR approaches. You are looking at over-the-deck speeds of 30knts or so. Shorter through decks should present no problem for SRL as you are hardly going to get a bolter at 30knts!.
Kilo,
I think you will find that is more your misunderstanding about Marine air, and what it does, than anything else. No-one has suggested Marine air will replace carrier airwings. The point of Marine air is to be there to support the Marines ashore. The job of the carrier airwing is to secure the amphib assembly area in the first place – if the threat environment warrants it. F-35B’s from the MATF could assist the carrier airwing of course, but, principally shooting in the amphibs is a job for the CAW.
One the assembly area has been secured by the carrier fleet then the Marine forces, including air, go inshore. THAT is where F-35B comes into play. With the threat level attrited and with F-35B covering the assembly area and beachhead FROM the assembly area the CSG is now free to manoever without being fully tied to a geographic location. An opponent attempting to smash a beachhead may try and concentrate forces and present a strategic target-of-opportunity to a CAW able to manoever and exploit.
Likewise if the scenario is sub-warfighting it could be that attaching an LHA with 18 or so F-35B’s to a couple of LPD’s and an LHD etc provides sufficient combat power to obviate the need for a CVN. How much of a force multiplier is that?.
Please read the post I was commenting on. There ias NO misunderstanding on my part.
Not a good year for the F-35 program. Lets hope 2011 is better. http://blogs.star-telegram.com/sky_talk/2010/12/no-2-f-35-program-continues-to-run-overbudget-and-behind-schedule.html
No, the Amphibious Forces are not safer. Which, is why they need support from the F-35B’s. As the Carriers have to keep a safe distance and Land Based Forces maybe to far away. (i.e. Likely)
So, by your logic, a handful (not more than 12 per big ship, probably more like 8) of less capable fighters will be able to do what one or two complete CV wings will be unable to do. I see.
Ben,
Its only integrated if its there when its called on. STOVL F-35B, if/when the major kinks get worked out, means there is no need for outside integration and THAT is optimal. One service – one chain of command cant be simpler can it?.
I have gandered. The America class boats seem to suggest that STOVL is high on the agenda.
The fact remains that, despite yours and others views on here, Marine Tacair isnt a USN benefit-in-kind. USMC tacair isnt ‘winged artillery’ and isnt the quaint image of open cockpitted Corsairs making strafing runs against Japanese positions.
The USMC have a requirement for surviveable, flexible, precision strike that is independent of the full-aspect airbases the USAF types demand and the big deck carriers that the USN types demand. The ONLY answer to that, that allows for deployment to their specialised LHA’s, is the F-35B. End of conversation. No rotary-air allows for it, no UAV/UCAV currently allows for it with equal surviveability, no tube or rocket artillery currently available can match the effects and engagement flexibility.
Simple as that. You can talk at length about how the USMC requirement is flawed, but, to be frank its irrelevent. The simple fact is that the service requirement stands and the ONLY system that comes close to meeting it is F-35B.
And the big question is: Why? And can we afford that now?
So….when Nimrod goes, the UK will have no air launched antiship missile from fixed wing a/c?
I’ll have to get that. Allways liked the F-5G …..I mean…..F-20!
Four F-15 Eagle pilots from the 3rd Wing walk to their respective jets at Elmendorf Air Force Base, Alaska, on Wednesday, July 5, for the fini flight of Maj. Andrea Misener (far left). To her right are Capt. Jammie Jamieson, Maj. Carey Jones and Capt. Samantha Weeks.
They are hot! I wonder if they….you know…….”groom” themselves.
Would the Aussies have bought Sea Harriers? Or gone with AV-8Bs?
In my mind, it would be the other way round. If I had one nuke, Id target the gators not the carriers……..unless the carriers have wheels…..
Completely agree! I’d go for the gators befor I hit the CVs. Gators go….threat of invasion is gone.
NO, NO, NO, You don’t dare tie a Carrier so close to any Amphibious Force. As it tells any potential enemy exactly were the Carrier or Carriers are……..:eek:
So it the Carrier isnt near the amphibioud force, the gators are safer?
So if the US was truely serious about cutting cost, the “A” and “B” models could be axed and everyone could use the “C”.
Because they’re made by SAAB! Now if Mercedes made a fighter………:D
If the “B” is axed……let the Marines buy Grippens. Good STOL performance…….and if we fund “Sea Grippen” (cost…..about 4 or 5 F-35s) presto….carrier compatibility! 😀
Manned CAS is coming to an end, long range manned interdiction is already dead, the only thing which requires a manned aircraft is A2A operations (and always will due to the sensitive politics surrounding peacetime intercepts).
As for only looking where it is told to look, the UAV does quite the opposite, it scans over everything, it doesn’t blink, it doesn’t get tired and it can see in a far greater spectrum than a human can, satcom bandwidth may be an issue but that can be solved.
Cylons! You just described CYLONS!!!!!!!!:D