Leaderboard

I won't get into the amphib V/STOL argument right now (there are valid arguments on both sides, although in an era of fiscal austerity I have serious issues with paying for a "nice to have" capability for the navy's army's air force when other services are cutting their core capabilities especially when we aren't going to deploy an ESG into a region where it faces an air threat without a big deck CSG to provide overwatch), but if we're going to have an honest conversation about the land side of this we need to define "austere" base. As the OP identified, the main LIMFAC for austere bases is logistics, to include maintenance support. Do we as a military have a need to operate out of extremely austere bases? Absolutely, and we have the logistical ability to support operations from these bases (within reason) provided they possess a runway large enough to get a C-130 in and out (assuming the base is forward enough that we don't have reliable, secure, and regular surface transport for stuff like fuel and ammo). Of course, this raises the obvious question of, "If we can get a C-130 in and out why do we need V/STOL strike aircraft?" There is "austere base with limited available support that can support conventional fixed wing operations," and then there is the definition of "austere" that V/STOL proponents use, which refers to operating out of locations that are only capable of supporting V/STOL ops. Harriers have operated in combat out of austere bases that nominally couldn't support conventional fighters (more on this in the next paragraph) but the reality is that these were more or less publicity stunts to attempt to demonstrate V/STOL's relevance. During Desert Storm the Marines operated Harriers in a V/STOL manner out of an abandoned airbase (capable of STOVL only operations) in northern Saudi Arabia (it's popularly known as operating out of a soccer stadium due to them setting up admin support in a soccer stadium next to the airfield). Despite the Harriers being marginally closer to the FEBA, a similar number of USAF A-10s were able to generate more sorties carrying more ordnance with fewer logistical bottlenecks by operating from a forward airbase capable of supporting conventional fixed wing operations. The Marines tried a similar thing during the invasion of Iraq, and have done similar things in Afghanistan (setting up a FARP outside Marjah a year or two ago, for example, to support Harrier operations out of Kandahar). The dirty little secret with all of these is that while they netted some impressive sounding metrics for the USMC and V/STOL, the cost that wasn't counted was the logistical effort necessary to keep these bases supplied with fuel, ammo, and maintenance support...as one example, one of the things that the Marines tout as being a benefit of V/STOL ops is reducing the burden on tanking support required by setting up FARPs closer to the action. That's all well and good, but you'll forgive me if I find it hard to believe that it is smarter/safer (forget cheaper) to truck fuel tankers overland outside the wire to a FARP on a road or parking lot somewhere instead of adding a few jets to the tanking support requirements for the day. The fact is that fixed wing aircraft (including USMC Hornets) were able to operate in the same areas more effectively and efficiently than Harriers doing V/STOL in each of the instances listed above, and this was due largely to the logistical burdens imposed by operating out of V/STOL only capable locations, which is why I think it is important to define what we mean when we talk about "austere" bases. And all of the above ignores the very significant differences between the F-35 and Harrier: cost (if you think the raid earlier this year on VMA-211 was bad, imagine it with F-35s being the target...putting your hundred million dollar+ stealth fighter within range of any asshole with a mortar seems like a very poor cost-benefit tradeoff), LO maintenance, increased fuel requirements, the increased heat footprint of the F-35 compared to the Harrier...all of these things further count against it from operating out of an austere V/STOL only location. I should be clear, this isn't an attack on Marines operating fixed wing aircraft, or the MAGTF concept...I think both are vital components of the way the Marine Corps does business, but if we're going to assess an idea's value we need to be honest about all its limitations, and the idea of effectively operating F-35s out of a truly forward austere base where they can only operate V/STOL is a pipe dream.

My thoughts exactly. Even if logistics weren't a limfac, what do you think the odds are a $160M jet will spend one day in a truly austere location? I also found it funny the Marines went ahead and stood up a squadron.

No? Then why is this section called this:

Guys, we need to get rid of Tops In Blue a LONG, LOOOOOONNNNNGGGGG time before we should worry about generals and their aides*. TIB just breezed through Misawa. AFN saw a "blockbuster event," but all I saw (metaphorically, as I didn't attend) was 35 airmen not doing their primary duties. Surprise surprise...no operators. Recommend a total TIB disband to make room for USO acts we actually want to see, like country musicians and hooters girls. At least the folks working for flag officers are actually enhancing their efficiency. If I were a 4-star (HA!) and had to host dinner parties at home, there's no way my wifey would be cool making appetizers and drinks for "socialites" like Jill Kelley. *

Aww... Come ON dude- that was the perfect application of the 4 steps to turning around an accusation. And he knows it. Young ones take notes. Normally I'd agree with you- here, not so much. I applaud. BK

Except the office that said airman is manning is closed 'cause he's out raking leaves or painting fences or whatever and we're supposed to do more with less so he's in a one-deep job and the mission suffers because of it. Long sentence....sorry.

I can't believe such claims, it's shocking and this ain't gonna happen; I never typed her name, just copied a press article and pasted it, so it's no foul on my part. I am being falsely accused, maliciously libeled and viciously slandered with great malice, and Horde187 is the primary suspect. I demand an immediate apology from him for smearing my good name and reputation, and it better happen soon or craniums will roll! Technique only.

"Usually capable of handling mundane tasks with supervision." Ouch.

Seemed relevant...

Good thing it landed in that smoking hole, or someone may have gotten hurt.

Don't be the guy that volunteers to be an airdropper in hopes of bettering their odds of staying in the C-17, do it because you want to execute the airdrop mission. Its a lot of extra work and probably won't help your chances significantly for ops to ops anyways. That being said, the airdrop mission is rewarding.

Why can't the four star hire his own lawn guys out of his own pocket if he wants his yard taken care of for him?

Sounds delicious.

Perhaps the gun needs some jumping so that Mr Kerry spends his days worrying about launching that new line of spicy ketchup. Out

Time to put active duty SF troops at the gate and show these guys the door.