The Carrier Myth

Air Force Magazine Vol. 82 No. 3 ^ | March 1999 | Rebecca Grant

[dvwjr]

...'The carriers have proven their value, but the claims of some carrier proponents frequently defy reality. Carrier effectiveness, though significant, has been inflated to mythic proportions.

Dramatic film footage of carrier-based aircraft being catapulted into the skies frequently dominates televised coverage of periodic US crises with Iraq, even though that image does not reflect actual composition of the joint US force in the region. In early 1998, Rear Adm. John B. Nathman, commander of Task Force 50 aboard USS Nimitz in the Gulf, actually declared, "I attribute the cessation of Iraqi no-fly zone violations to our presence" in the area.

In official statements, the Navy claims that "the carrier battle group, operating in international waters, does not need the permission of host countries for landing or overflight rights." They can operate independently and present "a unique range of options" to the President, the service adds.' .
.
.

"Navy carriers are a valuable tool, but their warfighting contribution must be judged against an airpower standard, not just against a sea-control standard. World War II's fast carrier task forces won their place in history because they conducted sustained operations, and their commanders, like Adms. Raymond A. Spruance and Marc A. Mitscher, were masters of air warfare. Until carriers have an all-aspect stealth aircraft, naval aviators will be unable to perform many critical wartime missions. Navy aircraft are not expected to match the penetration and survivability of the F-117, much less the payload of the B-2. The nation will call on aircraft carriers to take the lead in smaller-scale contingencies, to provide presence in locations like the Taiwan Strait, and to add their capabilities to joint operations. For many of the most critical tasks, however, only land-based aircraft from in-theater bases will do."

[dvwjr]

Here is an article from the Air Force Magazine (March 1999) which makes interesting reading in light of the US air campaign in Afghanistan conducted by the US Navy and US Air Force. I realize that this is a "zoomie" propaganda rag, but the analyst that wrote this piece had some good data on sortie rates, fueling and distances. However, as much as the US Air Force would like to denigrate US Navy carriers/air groups as compared to its own air wings, they have to realize one very important fact: To win, first you have to get in the game...

Since US air attacks began October 10th, most all US Air Force assets have come from Diego Garcia in the Indian Ocean, or from continental US. By the time substantial in theatre tactical air assets are deployed, air ops in Afghanistan might be substantial completed. Thanks to the Brits for their re-fueling capability to get USN strikes to targets in Afghanistan and return. GO NAVY

[Robert A Cook PE]

Land-based air is always more efficient.

Carrier-based air is always more "convenient" and more readily available on a short time notice, and without having to "negotiage" with "allianaces" for the "right" to use their land, their concrete, and hteir airbases.....nver-mind whether we built them in the first palce or not.

NO land-based air base in ANY country (Vietnam, Germany, Japan, Formosa, Philllipines, Malaysia, Thailand, Argentia, Falklands, Israel, Egypt, Libya, Lebanon, Syria, Iraq, Iran, etc.) has NOT, in the past many years, worked worked very well when assaulted by missiles, bombs, fighter-bombers, or simple mortors.

So take your pick: Cheap (and easily shut-down (if operable at all - the French denied us permission to cross over or land in France when bombing Libya)) or expensive and available.

[Goldi-Lox]

Buncha whiney weinies. Waa Waa Waa!! Sour grapes. Notice that they don't mention the workhorse of the carrier war effort...the F-14 Tomcat. (The F-18s are disposable use aircraft: poorly made for long term duty. Limit of 2000 traps.) Tomcats are like energizer bunnies...they just keep going and going and going. The F-14 Tomcat can access multiple targets from any direction, have updated avionics, LANTIRN, TARPS and other enhancements. Not only are they FIGHTERS, they can function as hi-load BOMBERS (BOMBCAT) for laser guided weapons, and other smart bombs. They can carry at least 3 times more munitions, and fly twice or three times as far before refueling.

Tomcats RULE!!!

I think the AF flyboys are suffering from "tomcat" envy.

So what does the government do with a TOTAL WINNER like the Tomcat...pays several million dollars to destroy the tooling so they can never be built again! Thank Dick Chaney personally for that one. (Price for F-14 was $36 Mil each; Price for an F-18 $34 Mil each. It's like a VW bug vs a Cadillac Seville.)

[Al B.]

Re: Tomcats

They're also being phsaed out of the fleet. For instance, VF-41, the "Black Aces," that just returned on the Big E have flown their Tomcats for the last time. They're switching to F-18's.

[Goldi-Lox]

I work on the program. They will be in service until 2010...unless another "transition plan" is signed to extend their service life. We just found a way to add another 2000 hours to the fatigue life. We got a "Golden Hammer" last year for that one.

For the life of me, I can't understand why they are being replaced with ratty F-18s. Most of the pilots I've spoken to say there's no comparison. The Tomcat is the pilots choice. The F-18 is run by computer, the pilot is "along for the ride," but the Tomcat is pilot controlled...all the way.

[Nitro]

Rock-n-Roll!!

[Goldi-Lox]

Check this out: http://www.anft.net/f-14/

or click here and you'd better plan to have a bunch of time. Lot's there.

[magglepuss]

[Arkinsaw]

Yawn, carriers have proven themselves over and over. When the A-10's get to Kandahar let me know.

[IronJack]

I talked to a Tomcat driver who said his airplane was fantastic, but his engines sucked. Talked about the flameout problem and attempts to correct it. And he admitted that when that wind rider was flying right, it was better than sex. But that didn't happen very often. Not nearly often enough.

[magglepuss]

Exactly how many knots can Diego Garcia achieve at full throttle?

Efficiency=10, mobility=0.

[BigFLPanhandleDude]

Ahhhh the ZOOMIES are starting to get their panties in a wad.....it makes me so misty eyed.

As my high school football coach(a 6'4" retired USMC Gunnery Sgt., One of the Chosin Few) used to say...... "How can you say Air Force with any pride?

Semper FI

[Robert A Cook PE]

Concur....The USN (for all its well-earned pride - cause I was part of it for some ten years) gas NOT been challenged at sea (mines, port bombardment, subs, rockets, etc) by any opposition.

War game victories do not ensure combat victory.

[Gordian Blade]

How can you say Air Force with any pride?

Because my uncle was in the US Army Air Corps (precursor to the Air Force) and lost his life as the pilot of a B-26 attacking the Third Reich, flying into the teeth of heavy German AAA defending a bridge, but managed to hold his crippled and burning plane straight and level long enough for 3 crew to bail out. One of the men managed to sneak back to friendly lines with the help of the French Resistance and survived to return home. The other two went MIA and were assumed killed. That's how.

That said, I don't like one service branch trying to promote itself at the expense of another. Heck, haven't we also seen pictures of B-52's and AC-130's? I say, throw everything at them we possibly can!

[hinckley buzzard]

How can you say "Air Force" with any pride?

I know how Marines say it: "Hey Lookit... lookit up dere--airplane up dere!

signed/ B-17 pilot's kid.

[WhiskeyPapa]

I'm a big fan of the Baker One Seven myself. But the Army Arir Corps is not/was not the U.S. Air Force. It should be remembered that just the 8th Air Force had more KIA than the Navy and Marine Corps COMBINED in WWII.

A lot of thing have changed. The Air Force.......gee, I guess I just don't get it; and those bus driver looking uniforms...Yuck.

Semper Fi

Walt

[quietolong]

destroy the tooling so they can never be built again!

WHAT ! I missed that announcement Dumb.

Boy I hate to sound tinfoil. But the more I hear of things like this. The more I think were being set up for a China takeover.

[Vigilant1]

magglepuss:
"Exactly how many knots can Diego Garcia achieve at full throttle?"

Yeah, but you can't sink Diego Garcia.