Replies

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

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.)

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

Its all DOD departmental propoganda. Of course the Airforce doesnt want Carriers to get center stage,,,that would put them on the side lines. YADA YADA YADA. Each service knows that the sqeeky wheel gets the grease, and hopefully there will be some extra grease coming down the pike in the next few years and we will all be able to finance our hi-tech toys. {The F-14 does kick some serious butt!}

Personally , I dont want to hear it. Visit my profile page and you will see why.

Lets see now, how long does it take to get a carrier battle group from say the Atlantic to the Indian Ocean? Two maybe three or more weeks?

How long could the same amount (or really more) of airpower take to get there from a continental US based Air Force base...ummm, 15, 20 hours?

Another thing, what's the cost difference, between sending and refueling planes from a base, versus sending a carrier group? Carrier groups are what, 20, 50 or 100 times as expensive?

In both Bosnia and Iraq, which did the most ammount of damage(by far)--Navy or Air Force planes?