• 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

Future of Marines and Tailhooks?

Status
Not open for further replies.
E

eddie

Working Plan B
Contributor
If the tranistion to the STOVL F-35 is complete by 2015 (assuming everything goes to the current scheduale, that is), does that mean that someday, Marines may stop learning how to trap on the boat?

Just a thought.
 
B

Blutonski816

Guest
As long as the Marine Corps is learning to fly jets side-by-side with the Navy (and as long as some of those jets operate from a CVN), there will always be Leathernecks who are tailhookers....
 
A

Aviator4000

Registered User
eddiemac0 said:
If the tranistion to the STOVL F-35 is complete by 2015 (assuming everything goes to the current scheduale, that is), does that mean that someday, Marines may stop learning how to trap on the boat?

Just a thought.
Click to expand...

I'm pretty sure I read somewhere that the Marine Corps is going to purchase some carrier versions of this plane. I also heard that the Air Force is going to by some STOVL F-35's, I forget the exact reasoning behind it but that is what I read.
 
mmx1

mmx1

Woof!
pilot
Contributor
I believe the STOVL F-35's for the Air Force are intended to replace the A-10.
 
M

mat

Registered User
I was wondering the same thing, but more along the lines of the tacair integration. I thought the order for Marine tacair was 1st support Maines and 2nd supplement Naval carrier aviation. Wouldn't that mean either CVN versions of the 35 for Marines or CVNs that accept STOVL?
 
Grant

Grant

Registered User
If the Navy expects the Marines to continue deploying squadrons as part of carrier air wings on CVN's, it would seem logical that the Marines would buy some naval versions of the F-35, and keep the STOVL's on the Gators.
 
Physicx

Physicx

Banned
From what I heard the way they can make the position of the engine change not just up and downl.But at different angles they could land on a carrier without hovering like the harrier.And the Air Force just realized like everyone said the F-35 is not going to replace the A-10.Thats why there upgrading them.
 
E

eddie

Working Plan B
Contributor
I guess I just got the wrong impression that all USMC F-35s (F/A-35s??) were going to be STOVL.

Could A-10's be converted for carrier work... they have beefy gear, no (my pre-emptive apology if its has been discussed)?

Again, just a thought.
 
Grant

Grant

Registered User
eddiemac0 said:
I guess I just got the wrong impression that all USMC F-35s (F/A-35s??) were going to be STOVL.

Could A-10's be converted for carrier work... they have beefy gear, no (my pre-emptive apology if its has been discussed)?

Again, just a thought.
Click to expand...

Yes, its been discussed before on the forum. And the general concensus was that it would be more hassle that it would be worthwhile.
 
Brett327

Brett327

Well-Known Member
None
Super Moderator
Contributor
eddiemac0 said:
I guess I just got the wrong impression that all USMC F-35s (F/A-35s??) were going to be STOVL.

Could A-10's be converted for carrier work... they have beefy gear, no (my pre-emptive apology if its has been discussed)?

Again, just a thought.
Click to expand...
Why in the world would you want to put an A-10 on a carrier? This is wrong on so many levels. For starters, can you say wing fold, boys and girls? That's right, I knew you could. :) :)

Brett
 
skidkid

skidkid

CAS Czar
pilot
Super Moderator
Contributor
Not sure the Marine Corps can handle any more A-10 support. Though a cool airplane, they killed quite a few Marines heading up to Bagdad, that and the Patriot missiles were the most effective weapons in the Iraqi inventory. (sarcasm-no the Iraqis didnt have Patriots)

Moral of the story learn your damn Recce and when in doubt if its friendly or not dont fvcking shoot, we're winning it will be ok.
 
Flash

Flash

SEVAL/ECMO
None
Super Moderator
Contributor
skidkid said:
Not sure the Marine Corps can handle any more A-10 support. Though a cool airplane, they killed quite a few Marines heading up to Bagdad, that and the Patriot missiles were the most effective weapons in the Iraqi inventory. (sarcasm-no the Iraqis didnt have Patriots)

Moral of the story learn your damn Recce and when in doubt if its friendly or not dont fvcking shoot, we're winning it will be ok.
Click to expand...

I read a pretty extensive Marine Corps Times article that said a Marine FAC (F/A-18 WSO) was at fault in the incident at the bridge in Nasiriyah. He did not know that there were Marines across the bridge and called in an airstrike. As for Recce, it is pretty damn hard to see the difference between a LAV, BMP or a AAV in an urban enviroment in a tactical jet.

I looked fo rand could not find the MC Times article but found this one from the BBC:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/3581151.stm
 
skidkid

skidkid

CAS Czar
pilot
Super Moderator
Contributor
Yes, there was blame to go around in that incident however A-10 shot up some LAVs in Gulf War I and were at fault. The common denominator in both was A-10s. The FAC did screw up but so did the pilots. All in all a bad day for the team.
 
D

dufault.2

Registered User
eddiemac0 said:
Could A-10's be converted for carrier work... they have beefy gear, no (my pre-emptive apology if its has been discussed)?
Click to expand...

Trust me man, no apology needed for bringing up an old post. I think it is a safe bet to say you are the first person ever to ask if an A-10 could be carrier based.

Kudos
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top