Comments on: The Navy’s Fighter Gap?

By: Tchout

Tchout — Wed, 29 Jul 2009 13:44:42 +0000

Frank Hoffman is a retired Marine Reserve COL and prolific writer on Marine Corps subjects. With regard to aircraft carriers, he has an agenda. The article he wrote that was published by Michelle Flournouy’s think tank (before she was picked to be OSD Policy) is a trial balloon for the Marine Corps party line. This proposal supports limiting the number of Nimitz-type aircraft carriers with catapults and arresting gear because the Department of the Navy doesn’t have enough money to buy those and the larger big-deck amphib the Marine Corps wants to be able to operate the MV-22 and F-35B (STOVL JSF). The proposed LHA® may not be big enough.

By: jason spears

jason spears — Wed, 29 Jul 2009 02:42:35 +0000

american needs more than anything is the next f-16 so our nato friend ect have a new america built plane (TO BUY) for america economy and clout,i’ve heard alot of talk of nato and other counties retiring there f15/f16 and u.s can’t sale the f22 and the f-35 is’nt what they need? and if it was’nt for the pressured put on gates to turn down the traders north grumman/a330 deal that would have send french tanker planes to the usaf.save boeing ass for 16months maybe? that was low life of north grumman! a american builder should get the right to build those planes no matter what! it seems that america plane builder& goverment have really fell asleep at the wheel and boeing needs to be puting something out fast

By: ReconTeam

ReconTeam — Mon, 27 Jul 2009 22:29:35 +0000

The USN should really get going on the F/A-XX program that Boeing has been showcasing concepts for the last couple of months.

I don’t believe the Navy should try to maintain any more than 11 carrier battle groups, considering the current problems the Navy faces. Following the failure of the DDG-1000 program, the Navy needs to get plans for new destroyers and cruisers on track again.

By: CLOID DOKICH

CLOID DOKICH — Mon, 27 Jul 2009 19:28:35 +0000

PS... I have a few diecast planes and model's of planes and the Navy's F-18 Hornet is one of them,and I have a picture of " Pappy,"Boyington of the Marines Black Sheep Squadron from WWII. I would like to point out that Admiral Nimit's has a family hotel in Texas which needs some help to preserve with his Navy heritage along with some Marine generals who need help as well. So instead of spending your next Lberty pay getting drunk at some Shanghai bar why not pass the hat for some of those old timmer's who fought for US in past war's like WWII who like the rest are suffering from the same health care plans we all are facing right now as well !

By: sailortom

sailortom — Mon, 27 Jul 2009 19:19:55 +0000

12 or 11 CVBG’s would be the right fit for the QDR’s projected strategy of one major war and then an irregular conflict or two. Right now the navy is stretched to the max with it’s committments. When you look at a twelve carrier force you have to remember that three are deployed, three more are doing work ups, three to four either just got back from deployment or are in the yards, one is homeported in Japan and one is under construction. So at any one time we really only have 3 or 4 CVBG’s that can immediately react to a threat. Unless someone wants to reduce our oversees committments the reality is that the force needed to fight future wars is the force we have right now.

By: CLOID DOKICH

CLOID DOKICH — Mon, 27 Jul 2009 19:19:24 +0000

I've been reading the Navy's Commentaries from you old salts, and even though I tend to post on the Army's web page I have been suspended for posting threads due to my reference of the human anatomy with a sailor who requested if anyone would help him as he had suffered an injury from active duty.I would like to share with you old Salt's for your patience with each other as you decribe the Human Anatomy in your commentaries as to the Naval policies towards it's crew. If they do their jobs what they do in their quarter's, how they talk,and how much they drink is their business as is their Liberty on Shore. Just don't destroy to much private and public property when you do it !

By: exnuke

exnuke — Mon, 27 Jul 2009 17:26:08 +0000

I hate to tell you Dean, but the actual figure is less than 17 cents per tax dollar going to defense. In the 1980’s it dropped to a quarter and has been dropping ever since.

Now if you really want to discuss things that need changing, why don’t we start with the welfare state, the stimulas, the Waxman Energy bill passed by the House, and Healthcare reform. Compared to these things the defense budget is a drop in the bucket. And speaking of the above, where is the Constitutional authority for any of them? Perhaps you should read the Tenth Amendment: The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.
Just because Congress does something does not make it right or Constitutional. And providing for the common defense is one of the stated perposes in the Constitution.

By: Tony Conner

Tony Conner — Mon, 27 Jul 2009 13:10:38 +0000

The aircraft carrier is a forward power projection tool, but vulnerable to enemy submarines. The new strategy is to divide the air power between big deck carriers and the gator navy. This is a good strategy to reduce the number of big deck carriers required to maintain the forward presence. The DOD is changing everything, so maybe the original Japanese idea of a submarine carrier will look good to them now.

By: BuddhalovesPaine

BuddhalovesPaine — Sun, 26 Jul 2009 16:48:10 +0000

Just like I said in order to justify insanity every little problem has to be turned in to a potential big problem. Do Europeans worry about these NK, Iran, and other places? Hell no and Europeans are a hell of lot closer. Again this is just a perfect example of using any old excuse to go out and wage war to justify your pay check or your blood lust.

By: Tenn Slim

Tenn Slim — Sun, 26 Jul 2009 14:25:12 +0000

All
Again, into the breach. Do away with the carriers, shut down Boeing Production lines for the F18 Super Hornet, change our Mil. into a Civilian ready force, AKA Minutemen, on and on.
Folks, We stand at the brink of multipule abyss’. NK, Iran, Afghanistan, Unstable Western China, Africa despots, all could, overnight, require mulitpule carriers, on site, around the globe. Ready with whatever we have up for strikes. It is so d… easy to armchair these concepts, of mission degrades, shortages of planes in the forseeable future.
Note the article authors’ response he got for his “Action Oriented Question” a simple shrug of the shoulders.
It is far better to be ready, loaded and capable than to have to go the arms locker and find it empty.
end
Semper FI

By: A Friendly

A Friendly — Sun, 26 Jul 2009 03:57:59 +0000

Jason ran across some new ABM footage thought you might like to take a look(skunk team ftw)

By: Jason

Jason — Sun, 26 Jul 2009 02:25:46 +0000

One more thing before I turn in.…cut the 2nd F-35 engine out of the budget Senate! Two engines mean less F-35’s over the short term. Before the X-47B lands on the Carrier next year, more F-35’s are better then more F-18’s.

By: Jason

Jason — Sun, 26 Jul 2009 02:11:38 +0000

Also, I just found out that the 2010 Defense Budget has been boosted to $680 Billion from the Senate. I don’t want a freakin argument, but that is a %4 increase from 2009…not bad if I say so myself.

And, Jesus H Christ, why don’t you people get over the F-22/35 crap..For the last freakin time, those planes WILL be obsolete by 2025. Maybe not the 35, but the (first day war) F-22 will be.. UCAV’s, anyone? The DoD will spend 5.4 Billion for UCAV’s this year alone! That’s more coin, then the construction of F-22’s at a decent production rate per year.Gates knows something we don’t, eh?

Gentlemen, manned fighters will be considered obsolete by America by 2025, maybe much earlier. Christ, does an UCAV need to sleep? Pass out pulling high G’s? Can re-fuel in air for many, many hours more then manned? And not to mention 10x better stealth! Just look at the B-2…no other bomber can touch it, because of no tail design…which, UCAV’s will have also.

I’m done arguing about the 22 and 35, it’s a lose-lose situation with some of you…

By: Jason

Jason — Sun, 26 Jul 2009 01:50:11 +0000

Geez, our government is Bi-Polar. First, they say, lets restart relations with Russia, then they do this.…

http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/library/news/2009/07/mil-090724-afps04.htm

That is a great way to piss of Russia. I think it’s a good move, however. Some of you talk about the lack of “kickass” attitude America has lost lately…I don’t agree. The US government has always been two-faced. Do the usual talking points to other countries, then back-stab our enemies..And that article says it all.

BTW, if our country makes this statement, I guarantee the Missile Shield WILL go up in Poland…

By: DensityDuck

DensityDuck — Sat, 25 Jul 2009 18:36:54 +0000

Don’t feed the trolls. Instead, email Military.com and ask them to close comments and require everyone to post to a message board instead.

By: bobbymike

bobbymike — Sat, 25 Jul 2009 17:57:17 +0000

Let’s all analogize like our “intellectual” superior BuddhaLP. A soldier was walking his dog by a lake and saw BuddhaLP being held at gunpoint being robbed. BuddhaLP implored the soldier to help, he didn’t want to be hurt by this criminal. The soldier helped because he had volunterred to help puerile simpletons even if they loathed the existence of guys like him.

By: circle8

circle8 — Sat, 25 Jul 2009 16:25:32 +0000

Our Marxist president will call Iran, North Korea, Russia and Hamas to see what they think we should do. Then he will ask China to loan us more money so we can build some piper cubs to protect ourselves. Face it, this Marxist does not want America to have the capability to protect our country from an invasion from a Boy Scout Troop. He is selling the US out to his friends formerly known as “the enemy”. Within a year the Taliban could attack us and WIN. Thanks Traitor.

By: Mark

Mark — Sat, 25 Jul 2009 12:36:51 +0000

Think Bobbymike & Buddhaloveswhatever have unintentionally cast the central argument accurately.…the US must decide: Do we wish to be a 2nd rate regional power by allowing Obama and the American Marxists to destroy capitalism, “grace” us with European style socialism and eliminate our military ability to project power, influence/shape events and protect US interests throughout the world. OR will we remain a captitalist republic and retain our “superpower” capability to defend ourselves, maintain PAX AMERICANNA in Europe, protect the global economy and thwart mass aggression (e.g. the Nazis, Imperial Japan, the Soviet Union, DPRK, Iran). To suggest that the fundamental aggressive nature of man has changed in 2009 and the world will not longer face mass aggression is laughable.…we will see if Obama/Gates will use the QDR, as some suggest, to drawdown US power…but my fellow Americans made a choic in Nov ’08…now you may get change that you could not imagine.

By: pfcem

pfcem — Sat, 25 Jul 2009 00:20:02 +0000

DRW,

You need to learn the difference between ‘provide’ & ‘promote’.

***

Gareth,

No the USN currently has just 10 carriers.

http://www.gonavy.jp/CVLocation.html

CVN-65 USS Enterprise + 9 Nimitz class (the 10th Nimitz class, CVN-77 George H.W. Bush, was commissioned in January 2009 but not scheduled for her 1st operational deployment until early 2010 replacing the already retired USS Kitty Hawk).

The (2) LHAs & (8) LHDs are not carriers. They are Amphibious Assault Ships with only a very limited ability to operate even AV-8Bs.

http://www.gonavy.jp/CVLocation.html

By: Gareth

Gareth — Fri, 24 Jul 2009 11:43:52 +0000

here is a useful link for everyone on here, just to clarify a few points, a few chaps on here have no idea what they are talking about!! not meaning to be rude, just accurate

http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/world/carriers.htm