Marine Corps Raptors?

[tac airlifter]

Holy shit I hope you aren't trying to imply an MQ-1 w/ x1 AGM-114 is anywhere close to a DAP or AH-6 at CAS. Don't believe the hype bro. When you add up the cost/benefit analysis wrt UAVs in VI/CAS/SCAR/DA etc. you'll find them far far behind manned assets in every aspect. Steady stare or intel gathering w/ strike capability? Very useful. Dynamic engagement, comm intensive situation? Look elsewhere.

[brabus]

I'm not sure how you made that leap. Home boy said it will do CAS just as well as a Viper or Strike Eagle. I think it's an honest question, at that point, to define how well those two actually do CAS. I didn't say anything about Iraq, Afghanistan, DOC statements, or dicks.

Sounded like you were implying Vipers or Beagles can't do CAS well. My bad if you weren't.

how are you defining "longer and further." Longer and further than what?

In time and range. Seriously, are you really that confused? It can support a longer vul period/time on station than a viper or beagle, as those are the two real platforms it is replacing. I don't know or really care if it can out stay a Hog, it's a stupid idea to replace the Hog with it. That, I agree with.

[tac airlifter]

...pretty sure he was just pointing out another airframe that does OEF/OIF CAS without JDAM.

ah, copy. Disregard rant.

[OverTQ]

I think they are both a waste of money for the USMC. Every get a STOVL check in? Goes like this "Gaspig 11 on station with .3 station, 50 rounds and 1 GP". Don't forget, the USMC is not real big on logistics. The snakes are very cool but the reason they went with them over the Apache was that they could not or would not pay for them. The USMC needs equipment that is simple to operate and easy to maintain.

Edited for grammar

Edited October 25, 2011 by OverTQ

[FallingOsh]

In time and range. Seriously, are you really that confused? It can support a longer vul period/time on station than a viper or beagle, as those are the two real platforms it is replacing.

You have to define what you are comparing it against. You can't just say "longer and further" or "more vul time." Longer and further than what? That's like the toothpaste commercials that say "Colgate cleans your teeth better." Better than what? Charcoal?

If you're saying it will have a longer vul time than a Viper, well... no shit. If you're saying it has more fuel than other fighters so it has a longer vul, then that's wrong. Strapping externals on a jet gives it more time, but that's true because you're talking about the same platform as a constant. Just having more fuel than some of the other fighters doesn't mean anything. Range and vul depend on the fan optimization altitude, engine efficiency, threat avoidance, load out, etc. Making a claim like. "it has more gas so it has more range" is about as ambigous as it gets. So no, I'm not confused.

I don't know or really care if it can out stay a Hog,

Well, that would fall somewhere into the argument of more gas equals more vul time. The hog has significantly less gas than the -22, -35, or -15E.

it's a stupid idea to replace the Hog with it.

My point for the past two pages has been exactly that. Putting all of our eggs into one multi-role basket is stupid.

[busdriver]

adds little to no combat capability that isn't already covered?

Nearest I can tell what the Marine's mean when they say organic CAS, is really Marines doing the flying rather than landing in the field.

The STOVL thing has more to do with flying them from Amphibs than landing in the field. They argue that we might want the ability to move a MAGTF into a region without commiting a CSG, what conflict would require an LO fighter but allow successful RW employment without SEAD is beyond me however.

I guess if you follow their logic, they want a STOVL aircraft and an LO aircraft but their requirements don't neccesarily drive them being merged into one airframe.

I still don't buy the amphib requirement, but whatever.

[TreeA10]

5) If the Marines still want "organic" CAS they can fly F-35C just like their Navy brethren. They still get to fly and do CAS, only from a bo-at.

If the Navy has problems filling the decks of its carriers with aircraft and or crews, I think you might see them asking the Marines to buy the F-35C.

[StoleIt]

If the Navy has problems filling the decks of its carriers with aircraft and or crews, I think you might see them asking the Marines to buy the F-35C.

The Marines are buy both B and C models.

[Guest CAVEMAN]

I think they are both a waste of money for the USMC. Every get a VSTOL check in? Goes like this "Gaspig 11 on station with .3 station, 50 rounds and 1 GP". Don't forget, the USMC is not real big on logistics. The snakes are very cool but the reason they went with them over the Apache was that they could not or would not pay for them. The USMC needs equipment that is simple to operate and easy to maintain.

Apart for the cost issue with the Apache, Logistics was also big decision point. They want to keep the logistics support to a minimum. Cobras and Heuys make up HMLA Squadrons and therefore allowed for part-interchange. The MEU travels light and packs just what it needs. Two completely different aircraft in the same Squadron would have meant maintenance had to carry more. Space is valuable on the LHA/LHD.

4) In regards to the Marine Corps and "organic" CAS. The Marine Corps is an outstanding service component of the Navy. In today's environment why do they need their own "organic" CAS? Give me an example of when Harriers have deployed to the field with the Marines and been use in an "organic" CAS role? I'm talking AV-8s landing in a field or desert with Marines and blowing things up.

How come we are proposing draconian cuts for the Air Force, such as eliminating the B-1 and F-15C fleets, no CSAR-X, no Next Gen Bomber, No KC-Y etc. yet we are willing to purchase an airframe that ONLY one service is going to use and it adds little to no combat capability that isn't already covered? We are talking about a multi-billion dollar program in which only the Marine Corps (and a few Navy dudes) would fly an incredible expensive niche aircraft. It does not make any sense, and it is in fact an incredible waste of money to purchase an airplane so that one service can maintain a portion of their doc statement and not add any major combat capability to the rest of the military.

Cheers,

BeerMan

I agree with you, the F-35B is pretty expensive considering only one service will benefit from it. I guess the same could be said of the F-22.

The F-35B is expensive but questioning the Marine Corps need for organic CAS shows that you don't understand its Mission. One of its responsibility despite the ongoing OIF/OEF cycle has been to maintain 3 MEU's around the globe. They have been doing this long before the wars started.The MEU as part of its mission set is required to respond to the entire gamut of military operations. The LHA/LHD's that carry them have all they need for the first 15 - 30 days while the MPF's resupply as necessary. Everything organic to the MEU needs to fit the LHA/LHD and that is also another he reasons STOVL is required unless we redesign and go to angled decks. So even if we canceled out the requirement to land in austere environment/ unimproved surfaces, you still need an aircraft that can land on USS Boat that is not a big deck. The big deck NAVY is not always close by.

I think the question you should be asking is whether another aircraft can fill that role.

[OverTQ]

That is good point Caveman about the USMC and logistics. I wish I had said something like that before I mentioned the Apache part.