Swanee

I liked Oblivion. Saw it in IMAX. Definitely worth the extra $$$, the sound and visuals are pretty amazing and Tom Cruise actually does a pretty decent job. Even the wifey liked it, and she isn't a scifi fan very often.

Saw one here at Oceana while sitting in marshal a couple of weeks ago. Cool airplane. Never thought I'd actually see one turning/flying.

They changed the procedure from release ~10ft above the water to release when your feet hit the water because of this incident. They also added a mod to the buckle to ensure the stick wouldn't touch it. When I flew the T-34 a couples years ago it was still part of the NATOPs checklist to ensure the stick couldn't undo the buckle during a wipeout.

You're one of the first guys in that pipeline as far as Marine types go. It's owned by the CO of MATSG-22 in Corpus Christi. The monitors did a road show and stopped by Kingsville. They gave us a presentation on the latest and greatest MOS in the Marine aviation world- your UAV MOS. They threw a bunch of buzzwords as us while our eyes glazed over. At the end of their spiel they asked if anyone was interested in leaving the jet world and lat moving to UAVs. Crickets... FWIW I remember him saying something about training at Randolph and Ft Huachuca.

Cool show. Some of it seemed a little over dramaticized but that makes good TV I guess. But it is definitely cool to see how that side operates. Quick question: one of the dudes was bitching about a 4 month deployment. 4 months? Is that a standard deployment for AF AD units? Seems short compared to the 6-10 that we (Marines) are doing, the 7/7/7 that the Navy is doing and the effing huge debacle that the Army does with their whole 12+ month shit sandwiches.

It's still the plopter- and that's pretty effing silly.

I won't support No Easy Day or Zero Dark Thirty. There are 9 people serving hard time in Pakistani prisons because of classified information leaked in said book. You can find out more about that from the SIPR JPRA site- there isn't much, but it's there. Also important to note: "Mark Owen" is no longer welcome in the SEAL community. Seems as those guys see it that he sold out 9 people for book and movie royalties.

It still is.

Legs (Boat has to be closer to the beach), speed (can't escort/keep up with an Osprey), loiter time, carries different weapons, can't fly high, exposed to threats (small arms, shoulder fired SAMs, etc...) that don't exist when doing a level lay down from higher. No radar in a Zulu, giving it limited all weather capability. And as far as the concept to work? It's scaleable, if we don't need it, we don't use it. Seriously though, I ask why the AF needs fixed wing CAS? I get the F-22 and A/A stuff (we Marines don't need that) and I get the transport, tankers, bombers and AWACs type airplanes- but you guys don't have boots on the ground to support, that's Army and Marine territory- How is that not a self licking ice cream cone on the AF side? The argument could be made to let the Army fly fixed wing airplanes in combat again...

How about we turn this around a bit. Why does the Air Force need fixed wing CAS airplanes? You don't have boots on the ground who need it. Why should we call the AF if the Army and we Marines can supply our own?

I Because no one else is going to provide it for us. You aren't going to get a det of AF dudes flying around the world to provide it for us, that is going to be much more expensive than having a det on the boat. The CSG is vastly more expensive than the ESG, and sometimes we don't need the entire CVW. Because Operational Maneuver from the Sea still exists, and some places don't allow quick access for AF types because of overflight rules. Because it's a bigger show of force when that MEU sitting off of your coast can launch a strike and hit anywhere/anyone in your country, and then land a bunch of Marines ready to go- all before anyone else could get there. Serious question: Why don't we need it?

We aren't, we were used as one but it required a lot of stuff to get us there. I don't think you truly understand what the Marine Corps brings to the fight. But I don't expect you to. We have 237 years of operating off of ships, 100 years of flying airplanes, we've been around longer than your service, we do it cheaper, and in many cases better than the others. We cut programs that we don't need- look at the EFV. Again I ask, what should Marine TACAIR fly if we don't fly the F-35? It's too big to fail, we put all of our eggs in that basket and without it we lose the VMFA, VMA and VMAQ squadron in a few short years. The Marine Corps will always have it's own TACAIR, and it has to be capable of effectively operating from a boat to justify the Marine Corps owning it. But hey, I'm just a dumb Yut who is trying to explain why MY service needs this airplane. You seem to know more about being a Marine and what the Marine Corps is than I do. Tell me, where did you learn this? Where did you earn your Eagle, Globe and Anchor?

OV-10X. Can't take off with a full combat load and gas to get there and back. Would need tanker support- that defeats the purpose.

Sheesh, scotch and posting on the internets mixes so well for me. At the time I think it fires me up, looking back it makes me look like every other Yut Yut who is afraid that one day Congress is going to decide to do away with my beloved Corps. No you're right on a few levels. We won't put them in places like Camp Bastion, or even further forward deployed. They are National Treasures- I don't want to think about what would happen if we lost 8 F-35s like we lost those 8 Harriers. I seriously doubt that we will put this airplane in that same threat environment. And that is the talk, do we as Marines really need all of the capability that the F-35 gives? Maybe, but probably not. Deep strike capabilites, those are a carry over from when we flew A-6s, off of big CVs and CVNs. We don't do that. We shouldn't do that. The Navy and you AF types should be in that business. I do think we need some DCA/OCA ability. An ESG is cheaper than a CSG, and if we can get away from having to deploy with the Carrier Air Wing it makes sense. So we'll take it. That doesn't mean we're only sending an ESG to go big some boot up Iran/NK/China's ass, but it means that we can operate independently and have the ability to deal with some type of air threat. We can also do things like give localized air superiority so our CAS and Assault Support guys can operate for those first few days in a reduced A/A threat environment. Plus that frees up other services sorties for other missions. The F-35 for a CAS asset is... well, time will tell. What we need is a light attack airplane. Something with longer/faster legs than a Helo but that also has loiter time. A-29, AT-6 come to mind. But how to we get those off of a small deck with a full combat load? I'm not an engineer, I don't know. Make no mistake, the guys I've talked to who fly it tell me it's a game changer. It has some great capabilities and it has the ability to grow. As far as MAGTF capabilities, the focus of the Marine Corps is to get away from the land army that we have become. We are getting rid of all of those big ass vehicles that we've been riding around in in Iraq and AFG. We want to be a 911 force, first strike and boots on the ground in a matter of hours from getting the call. We fight long enough to get everyone else's logistical shit together so you guys can come with the Army and roll though the asshole. That's the idea at least. We'll see what happens.

There are many in my world that agree to the first. As to the second- the Marine Corps isn't going away from the MAGTF idea. It is what makes us who we are, it's how we fight. If you can get a battalion(+) of Army dudes with all of their shit they need to fight for 15 days and have their air support with them ready to go anywhere in the world in a matter of hours you can talk about changing Marine Corps doctrine. We as a service have a very specific purpose, (one that has been bastardized as a second land army in the last 10 years, but we're getting away from that) and we know what that purpose is. Maybe that effort of yours should be spent figuring out Air Force doctrine; it seems you guys have an identity crisis going on and can't figure out where/how you want to fit in.

Doctrinally that is a problem. Helos alone can't provide the 6 functions of Marine Air. Nor can they fill the fairly large gap that losing organic fixed wing assets leaves. The MEU couldn't do what it did in Libya with only some HMLA types. We Marines are frugal types, if we don't need it we'd rather spend the money elsewhere on shit we do need.

What else are we going to use? Are there any other jets out there capable of taking off and landing from an LHD/LPD/LSD? Our Harriers aren't exactly low time airframes. Our Hornets aren't any better. We needed this stuff years ago. We have cadre'd squadrons because we don't have enough airplanes to go around. We can't wait for another airplane to be developed.

It's all about having fixed wing air assets organic to the MEU. We don't deploy entire squadrons of Harriers- instead 4-6 are attached to the HMM (Phrog) or VMM (Osprey) squadron, along with some Cobras and Hueys. Because the ESG doesn't go out with the CSG those Harriers and now F-35s are it. We put the old APG-65s into the Harrier to give them some DCA and OCA capability as well as improve their mud moving abilities/give them all weather attack ability. That is the cool thing about a MEU- you get a complete fighting unit with air, ground and logistic support anywhere in the world for 15+ days before they need to be resupplied. Without a VSTOL capable fixed wing jet you don't get that.

This is why flight deck crews wear float coats and cranials and why our helmets are taped up with reflective tape.

Meh- it all depends on whether you're the pitcher or the catcher...

Make no mistake- VT-3 is an AF squadron at a Navy base.

I argue that aviation is inherently safe- but unforgiving. What we do isn't any more dangerous than getting in a car, if we do it right. People die in car races- but the desire for some to climb into a high performance machine and take it to the edge to see who is better is greater than their fear of dying while they do it. The same can be said about those of us who strap airplanes to our backs and take to the skies. It is not the job of the Government to rise us and save ourselves from ourselves.

Not true. But anyone who wants to be in a gun squadron for a career but doesn't want to go to war is. We are paid to kill people and break things. If you don't want to go do that when our civilian leadership decides that some killin' and breakin' is in order then you need to leave the gun club (or at least go find a non deployable job)- combat vet or not. This isn't to say I don't respect a guy who says," I've done my time, I'm out." Indeed I do respect them much, and if they decide they don't want to go on that's perfectly fine.

.... Don't ever ask why Marines think that the AF are a bunch of pussies.

The Navy/Marine IFS Program isn't worth much. It was originally designed to reduce DORs- yet 3 of the guys I went to IFS with (3 years ago) ended up DORing within the first few flights in Primary. Oops. Word on the street is that the Marine Corps is done with sending SNA's through IFS. In fact- the Marine Corps is done with sending Marines to Vance for primary also. To be honest, there were many guys who had their first flight in a T-34 and did just fine. Doubtful that big Navy would send SNA's through AF IFS- you guys do this flying business a little bit differently that we do. Would the Navy create a program based on the AF model of IFS? That's more likely. Hell, the last above/below stud in Kingsville is going to wing in a couple of weeks. After that it's all MPTS/MIF stuff for all of the VTs.