And much of this is driven by shipbuilding jobs....Putting "hard numbers" in Title 10 is an exercise in political kabuki.
And much of this is driven by shipbuilding jobs....Putting "hard numbers" in Title 10 is an exercise in political kabuki.
"11" is in there. There is hope ...Putting "hard numbers" in Title 10 is an exercise in political kabuki.
To what end?"11" is in there. There is hope ...
And if it weren't for McNamara, we'd have had the A2F-2Q Prowler . . . designations are partly political.LHA 6 and 7 should have been called LPH 13 and 14, but then the F-35 was really supposed to be F-24...
Does it really matter how we address it other than nostalgia and esoteric?And if it weren't for McNamara, we'd have had the A2F-2Q Prowler . . . designations are partly political.
That's how I first felt when I saw F-8s and A-7s.The difference between LHA-8 and LHD-8 will be minimal as well. If you moored them next to each other an untrained eye would be hard pressed to tell them apart.
Utilization. In most other navies they use them as carriers, we almost always use them as part of the amphib force.
Who use LH ships as a carriers? First of all, no other navy in the world has something similar to LHA/LHD - of 40 kT, able to carry up to 2 whole squadrons of VSTOL aircraft at the price of helos, plus having well dock, and all of this is just a serving facilities for the Marines, including eagles on the collar of Navy CO....no other navy except USN has something similar to USMC. Second, look at the Brits - while up to a third aircraft embarked on HMS Ocean, a closest peer for USN LHs, are of RAF, the other third belongs to British Army, and there still isn't fixed wings among the whole air group. How do you suppose RN can use this ship as an "aircraft carrier"?
LHD/As have a secondary mission set as a sea control ship. Also, when needed, they've functioned as light carriers, embarking 20+ harriers.
Yes, right, but three Invinsibles and a Garibaldi were ASW carriers from the scratch, with then-fashioned "tailored" air groups built around ASW choppers (Italian design had no VSTOL capability - iron deck - up to 1989). Aimed to hunt the Soviet subs, both classes even considered the sea-skimming cruise missiles' installation just like DDs: Exocet MM38 on Brits (not really but with reserved platforms on fo'c'les) and OTOMat on Eye-Tea ship (actually installed). If Soviet sub is damaged by air attack and forced to surface, those missiles were the weapon to kill her. And LH-abilities of those ships were seriously restricted - only moderated places for light infantry troops, with no artillery, no APC, no armor to beach. Two newer ships from your list, oppositely, are mostly LHAs, while both are able to support VSTOL ops. But I doubt that Harriers of both these navies (Italian and Spain) are good choice for something other than CAS.I was thinking more along the lines of the British Invincible-class, the Italian Cavour and Giuseppe Garibaldi and the Spanish Juan Carlos I which all could be utilized s LPH's and often have but their primary role was/is light aircraft carriers
The Royal Marines have their own dedicated air support element, the Commando Helicopter Force, but it is run by the Royal Navy and not the Marines since they aren't a separate service like they are here.
So, basically the aviators who eventually command carriers receive training, formally and informally, to learn to drive a ship? If so, would this typically happen after a squadron CO tour? Where is such a course provided and how long is it?True, I was on the bridge of the Lincoln during Sea and Anchor detail when the OOD (a SWO) who just relieved said something like "Lee helmsman make turns for 15 knots" the kids face was blank as he was confused, I quietly said to him that was 75 RPM and he adjusted the POT and EOT, and about the same time some other officer said something to the OOD and all his orders after that were in the correct manner.
To me, it seems that the core training "how to drive a ship" is providing during so-called "deep draft" tour, i.e. when the selected NA/NFO is given a command of some USNS ship/vessel: roughly the same types of maneuvering and seamanship that CVN/LHx is intended to use. Brits went deeply - their naval aviators after the squadron CO's tour are given the command either MCM or FF, while their previous surface experience is about a year at best as JOOW.So, basically the aviators who eventually command carriers receive training, formally and informally, to learn to drive a ship? If so, would this typically happen after a squadron CO tour? Where is such a course provided and how long is it?
Holy detailed questions Batman! Am I the only one getting paranoid here?So, basically the aviators who eventually command carriers receive training, formally and informally, to learn to drive a ship? If so, would this typically happen after a squadron CO tour? Where is such a course provided and how long is it?