>> you never did answer the question
I think you misunderstood my comment regarding what Japan lost and how it was lost. I can see how it looked like I was referring to other vessels. Sorry for the confusion.
Maybe there will be a day when the Navy can accomplish what the Air Force has contributed to this day, but the events through the 20th Century really underscore the importance of the air power executed by USAF. If I’m not mistaken, it’ll be a few more years before the Navy has stealth aircraft ready for carrier based combat. But on the other hand, stealth tech has be in use for decades now in critical bombing campaigns. And the funding and engineering for stealth was through the AF branch, right?
I believe the research, innovation, and engineering for each branch combined might not be as valuable if it all fell under one bureaucratic process and budget.
DesScorp, I’ve gone as far as I can on this. I’m in no way expert on any of these things. I was just pointing to things that I accept as conventional wisdom. Regardless of how it’s accomplished, we need to continually improve the processes that provide the Military the technology it uses. Wasted resources and time have serious consequences for all of us.
“Maybe there will be a day when the Navy can accomplish what the Air Force has contributed to this day, but the events through the 20th Century really underscore the importance of the air power executed by USAF.”
Love that Air Force mentality. Accomplishments? The Navy has a 200 year head start on military accomplishments, and had a long history of being this nation’s first line of defense. From John Paul Jones on down, the Navy had a long and glorious history before the Air Force was even a dream. Accomplishments? USAF has had many great ones, but you’re still the new kid on the block. So coming off like the Air Force outweighs the Navy (or any other service) in terms of accomplishments is wrong.
The Navy was using a form of stealth.....hiding under the water....long before the Air Force ever dreamed of the concept. And the Navy hasn’t completely bought into aircraft stealth because they’re wary of putting all their aerial eggs in one basket. History shows that its pretty foolish to rely on a single technology for military victory. Military secrets are the shortest lived secrets of all, and USAF is on its way to totally relying on aircraft stealth tech (that is, special paints, matierials, and aircraft shapes) to defeat radar. What happens when an enemy defeats that technology (as the Australians and Chinese have already claimed to)? USAF retired all their jamming aircraft, and now rely on Navy Prowlers for that capability. The Navy certainly doesn’t think the need for jamming is going away...they’re buying a new dedicated wild weasel bird (the EF-18 Growler) for that purpose. USAF continues to put all their eggs in the stealth basket. Stealth should be but one facet of strategy, not the end all and be all of airpower policy.
“I believe the research, innovation, and engineering for each branch combined might not be as valuable if it all fell under one bureaucratic process and budget.”
I’ll agree with that, but no one was advocating a Canadian style “one service” org.