• Please take a moment and update your account profile. If you have an updated account profile with basic information on why you are on Air Warriors it will help other people respond to your posts. How do you update your profile you ask?

    Go here:

    Edit Account Details and Profile

Should we switch some of the Carrier Strike Groups back to full Battle Groups?

pilot_man

No longer the biggest Hornet asshole on AW.
pilot
#16
This is probably an unpopular opinion around these let’s, but if we ever get into a skirmish with a near-peer adversary, you could drop the “C” on CVW cause we won’t have many carriers left after the first few days.
Yes, because the current plans are to use the carriers as bait and then retaliate once they are all are sunk. We know we will lose a good number of sailors but that is the business we are in. Once those first couple of days are over we will start making new carriers and get new sailors to again use as bait once they are ready. I didn't realize that this plan had leaked out to the general population yet.

Are you sure your name isn't Radical Douche? Your tone is very familiar.
 

RotorBoy83

Dictating how it is.
#17
Yes, because the current plans are to use the carriers as bait and then retaliate once they are all are sunk. We know we will lose a good number of sailors but that is the business we are in. Once those first couple of days are over we will start making new carriers and get new sailors to again use as bait once they are ready. I didn't realize that this plan had leaked out to the general population yet.

Are you sure your name isn't Radical Douche? Your tone is very familiar.
I feel like I’m missing something here.

Been called a douche before, but not too sure about he radical part!

Why do you think they’d be used as bait? I understand the whole “everybody has a plan until they get punched in the face” thing, but it seems shortsighted, sir.
 
Last edited:

Griz882

Well-Known Member
pilot
#20
Haha. Your wish is granted. I present to you the America-class “CVE” w/ 6-10x F-35B and the flight IIA Arleigh Burke-class “CVS” w/ 2x MH-60R.
Thanks for the info. I was, of course, kidding about the CVE and CVS thing, but I looked up the America class and was pleased to see we have a new(ish) USS Makin Island. My father flew with VC-91 off the Makin Island (CVE-93) in WWII!
 

Hair Warrior

New Member
Contributor
#21
Thanks for the info. I was, of course, kidding about the CVE and CVS thing, but I looked up the America class and was pleased to see we have a new(ish) USS Makin Island. My father flew with VC-91 off the Makin Island (CVE-93) in WWII!
Right on, sir.

Of note, LHA-6 and LHA-7 do not have well decks, so they are literally light carriers only.
 

Sculpin

Gulpin' Sculpins faster than you can say IPA
#22
Right on, sir.

Of note, LHA-6 and LHA-7 do not have well decks, so they are literally light carriers only.
Never really understood the purpose of the LHAs / LHDs except to provide for MEUs for the Marine Corps to continue justifying their existence. Otherwise they provide very limited armor/air support and expendable infantry since Army Infantry has evolved into highly skilled and trained elite units, and you always need expendable infantry.
 
Last edited:

robav8r

D-FENS
None
Contributor
#23
Never really understood the purpose of the LHAs / LHDs except to provide for MEUs for the Marine Corps to continue justifying their existence. Otherwise they provide very limited armor/air support and expendable infantry since Army Infantry has evolved into highly skilled and trained elite units.
And let's not even get into the lack of surface & subsurface escort support these ARG's get while on deployment . . .
 

Sculpin

Gulpin' Sculpins faster than you can say IPA
#27
The idea of an adversary with even rudimentary anti-shipping capabilities (as rare as those may be, even) being able to blow several thousand Sailors and Marines without too much trouble doesn't sit well with me. Unless you're bringing along several escort vessels which often doesn't fit into the model for MEUs needing to get somewhere as fast as possible before heavy-duty forces can arrive, they're not going to fare well.

Also to clarify, when I mentioned "very limited armor/air support and expendable infantry" I meant the Marine Corps in general, not just with regard to MEUs.
 

Treetop Flyer

Well-Known Member
pilot
#28
Thanks for the info. I was, of course, kidding about the CVE and CVS thing, but I looked up the America class and was pleased to see we have a new(ish) USS Makin Island. My father flew with VC-91 off the Makin Island (CVE-93) in WWII!
The Makin Island is the last Wasp class LHD. They inexplicably decided to designate the America class back to LHA, so there are two visually almost identical boats both with a big 6 on them. Soon the same will be true for 7 and 8.
 

Treetop Flyer

Well-Known Member
pilot
#29
Never really understood the purpose of the LHAs / LHDs except to provide for MEUs for the Marine Corps to continue justifying their existence. Otherwise they provide very limited armor/air support and expendable infantry since Army Infantry has evolved into highly skilled and trained elite units, and you always need expendable infantry.
I’d love to hear your reasoning behind your idea that Marine infantry is expendable but Army infantry is too highly trained to be expendable.
 
Top