Why would we reopen the line for a modernized 1970 Chevy Caprice when for the same price we could have a new designed Chevy Impala? (And realistically we don't have the $$ for either)
Good point, in the end it comes down looking at if it is worth building a new airframe/modify an existing plane into a sole tanker roll or using the F-18. On a cost side of things it isn't practical to design a new plane from the ground up but modifying an old/existing may end up be cheaper. In the end it's unlikely the Navy adopts a sole tanker aircraft due to all the cutbacks.
It isn't. The people who designed that airplane, the machinery, the tools and dies, the factories, the drawings, the experience behind that airplane are all gone. You would be reverse engineering an old (1950s, so ancient) aviation technology. It would still have to go through the modern design and testing process. The cost would bloat and we would end up getting something that is marginal for what we pay for and wouldn't save us any money.
Doesn't TOPGUN cover many of these issues along with current strategies in air to ground tactics? I guess this would be more the "hands on" training for the pilots but I don't know if they develop new strategies there or not. TOPGUN has always been sort of a mystery to me so I am not sure exactly what takes place there.
This entire conversation is hurting my brain.
... I'll take an APG-79 Super Hornet over a Phantom or Tomcat any day.
To the ASW piece, I don't even know what that shit is. Shouldn't some fat kid be doing that sort of thing.
This is why the SEAD package is there.But the development of highly effective AA radars & SAM missiles made sub-sonic attack a/c obsolete (e.g., Bekaa Valley). .
Meh, what's to be pissed about? If it wasn't an improvement over it's predecessors, the multi-billions of $$$ wasted could have been better used to bolster the cell phone giveaway, and food stamp programs.Not to piss off the senior "been there done that" crowd and their platforms, who I have great respect for, but I'll take an APG-79 Super Hornet over a Phantom or Tomcat any day.
We may be decent at what we do but even our best crews aren't that good at ASW compared to those guys who got to do it constantly during the cold war (nothing beats real life experience and we don't get a ton of that these days). P-8 will solve part of the reliability problem for a while, and eventually capability will increase but BAMS isn't going to change any of that and takes money away from manned assets that could be used in ASW.
As much as the community hates to admit it, we're not the greatest thing since sliced bread when it comes to ASW. Treating us as such without acknowledging our limitations will only continue to set the stage for disappointment for those who think we are.
We could put a KC-130 on each CVN. After all, it's been proven that those can land on a carrier. I think there is even a video of it... has anyone seen it? Amazing!
I think I can actually hear Brett yelling at his computer
. . . and I'd take an F-4 or F-14 w/ an APG-79 over an F-18 any day. Just sayin' . .