and Guam May tip over.
And EABO ain’t cheap either. Very difficult and costly to set up, and not too hard to target.
-
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
Road to 350: What Does the US Navy Do Anyway?
- Thread starter Randy Daytona
- Start date
And EABO ain’t cheap either. Very difficult and costly to set up, and not too hard to target.
Interesting article.
www.twz.com
China's Aircraft Carrier Capability Just Made A Stunning Leap Forward
China has simultaneously debuted its J-35 stealth fighter, J-15T fighter and KJ-600 radar plane operating from its first catapult-equipped carrier. The J-35 and J-15T naval fighters and KJ-600 radar plane are all now conducting operations aboard the carrier Fujian, as it prepares for service.
www.twz.com
Interesting article.
China's Aircraft Carrier Capability Just Made A Stunning Leap Forward
China has simultaneously debuted its J-35 stealth fighter, J-15T fighter and KJ-600 radar plane operating from its first catapult-equipped carrier. The J-35 and J-15T naval fighters and KJ-600 radar plane are all now conducting operations aboard the carrier Fujian, as it prepares for service.
Copycat dorks.
Hopefully they have a copy of CV NATOPS. Otherwise, one of their people might have an original thought that wasn’t appropriated from us, and the entire communist party would get absorbed into a quantum singularity.
I think we have very different perceptions of the design and purpose of these airfields and airstrips. Not to mention the scale, time, and space they operate or don’t operate. It’s not a ship - You don’t need to gold plate everything. It’s not a veneer of the “expeditionary” phrasing that people love to throw around but don’t fully understand what it entails. The revealing part is that it’s not unprecedented, and we’ve done similar things in the past. Not surprisingly, we’re actively restoring some of those same airfields.
Everyone is entitled to their own opinion. Fortunately, I’m not the only one that holds these views.
If you’re referring to the airfields of WW2 fame…sure, don’t gold plate it.
But the ability of the adversary to conduct targeting and engage with PGMs has gotten way better as well. If you think a CVN (even under EMCON) is a missile magnet, an EABO airfield, and the sustainment tail to keep it fed, is also probably pretty easy to target. Probably even easier in some ways.
Personally I think everybody is struggling a bit with this being a truly joint fight where we really do need everybody to contribute, and most platforms simply can’t even play without others doing their jobs.
BigRed already said it well, I also want to add that China is investing in not just a lot of weapons that can reach out and touch much of the western and central Pacific but they are also heavily investing stuff to make sure they know where to target those weapons. There are only so many pieces of land in the Pacific and they almost certainly know just as well as us where EABOs would likely be set up. And it isn't just traditional means either, using AI to scrape social media for any indication of some gray and green aircraft or ASCM launchers showing up near a village in BFE Japan is a likely possibility in the near future if not already.
Whether or not those investments translate into an effective targeting cycle is still a big question, without any recent combat experience their system will likely encounter unforeseen issues and obstacles but to what extent that will affect their capabilities...? Russia has certainly demonstrated that while they have much of the means they don't seem to have the ability to utilize it very effectively, I definitely would not assume the same of the Chinese though.
Fair points. Given the vast majority of people don’t understand how fast you can turn an airfield off and on, I don’t doubt there is skepticism. The UkAF had a pretty few interesting weeks at the onset of the conflict if that’s any rough indication (and a lot of that is still compartmentalized). The entire point is to make those airfields low signature, mobile, and risk-worthy. There is enough land to stage hundreds of airfields in the Western and Southern Pacific. We’re also not including other maneuver and effects that can’t be discussed in this forum. I agree that logistics is a joint problem that affects everyone.
When is the carrier mafia going to start saying “maybe we should start doing this differently?” Not saying carrier based aviation isn’t viable, but we’re essentially printing out a very expensive Apple Iphone progression of carriers every 5 years and it will eventually catch up to us. Our adversaries care a lot about carriers and big deck ships - partly because of national prestige. We’re victims of our own success.
I understand expeditionary ops very well - takes a lot of lift to move a 4xplane helo det. It’s not easy to get parts, weapons, food, potable water, POL, medical, comms, and I level support and keep it flowing, even in places where we have decent runways left over since the last war in the Pacific.
No one stated it’s going to be easy. Several of those problems already have active solutions in our force structure and others are in the acquisitions process.
To your last paragraph, I’m finding an even split on people wearing stars that get the idea of “high tide raises all ships.”
The “but these are MY Toys!” is a strong form of inertia to push back against.
I’ll believe it when I see it, especially because you said the “a” word (acquisition). Have to agree to disagree.
Notes to the New CNO: Be Radical
Navy thinkers have already laid the intellectual groundwork for aggressive change. Senior leaders now need to follow through with equally radical actions.
Last edited:
Apparently SECDEF is ordering in-person meeting with all 3 & 4 Star GO/FO next week in Quantico - and no one knows what its about....
Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth has ordered hundreds of the U.S. military’s generals and admirals to gather on short notice — and without a stated reason — at a Marine Corps base in Virginia next week, sowing confusion and alarm after the Trump administration’s firing of numerous senior leaders this year.
The highly unusual directive was sent to virtually all of the military’s top commanders worldwide, according to more than a dozen people familiar with the matter. The directive was issued earlier this week, as a government shutdown looms, and months after Hegseth’s team at the Pentagon announced plans to undertake a sweeping consolidation of top military commands.
In a statement Thursday, Pentagon spokesman Sean Parnell affirmed that Hegseth “will be addressing his senior military leaders early next week,” but he offered no additional details. Parnell, a senior adviser to the defense secretary, voiced no concerns about The Washington Post reporting on the meeting, scheduled for Tuesday in Quantico, Virginia.
There are about 800 generals and admirals spread across the United States and dozens of other countries and time zones. Hegseth’s order, people familiar with the matter said, applies to all senior officers with the rank of brigadier general or above, or their Navy equivalent, serving in command positions and their top enlisted advisers. Typically, these officers each oversee hundreds or thousands of rank-and-file troops.
Top commanders in conflict zones and senior military leaders stationed throughout Europe, the Middle East and the Asia-Pacific region are among those expected to attend Hegseth’s meeting, said people familiar with the matter, who spoke on the condition of anonymity as they were not authorized to publicly discuss the issue. The order does not apply to top military officers who hold staff positions.
None of the people who spoke with The Post could recall a defense secretary ever ordering so many of the military’s generals and admirals to assemble like this. Several said it raised security concerns.
“People are very concerned. They have no idea what it means,” one person said.
Two others expressed frustration that even many commanders stationed overseas will be required to attend. One said, this is “not how this is done.”
“You don’t call GOFOs leading their people and the global force into an auditorium outside D.C. and not tell them why/what the topic or agenda is,” this person said, using an abbreviation for general officer or flag officer.
“Are we taking every general and flag officer out of the Pacific right now?” one U.S. official said. “All of it is weird.”
The orders come as Hegseth has unilaterally directed massive recent changes at the Pentagon — including directing that the number of general officers be reduced by 20 percent, firing senior leaders without cause and a high-profile new order to rebrand the Defense Department as the Department of War.
Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth has ordered hundreds of the U.S. military’s generals and admirals to gather on short notice — and without a stated reason — at a Marine Corps base in Virginia next week, sowing confusion and alarm after the Trump administration’s firing of numerous senior leaders this year.
The highly unusual directive was sent to virtually all of the military’s top commanders worldwide, according to more than a dozen people familiar with the matter. The directive was issued earlier this week, as a government shutdown looms, and months after Hegseth’s team at the Pentagon announced plans to undertake a sweeping consolidation of top military commands.
In a statement Thursday, Pentagon spokesman Sean Parnell affirmed that Hegseth “will be addressing his senior military leaders early next week,” but he offered no additional details. Parnell, a senior adviser to the defense secretary, voiced no concerns about The Washington Post reporting on the meeting, scheduled for Tuesday in Quantico, Virginia.
There are about 800 generals and admirals spread across the United States and dozens of other countries and time zones. Hegseth’s order, people familiar with the matter said, applies to all senior officers with the rank of brigadier general or above, or their Navy equivalent, serving in command positions and their top enlisted advisers. Typically, these officers each oversee hundreds or thousands of rank-and-file troops.
Top commanders in conflict zones and senior military leaders stationed throughout Europe, the Middle East and the Asia-Pacific region are among those expected to attend Hegseth’s meeting, said people familiar with the matter, who spoke on the condition of anonymity as they were not authorized to publicly discuss the issue. The order does not apply to top military officers who hold staff positions.
None of the people who spoke with The Post could recall a defense secretary ever ordering so many of the military’s generals and admirals to assemble like this. Several said it raised security concerns.
“People are very concerned. They have no idea what it means,” one person said.
Two others expressed frustration that even many commanders stationed overseas will be required to attend. One said, this is “not how this is done.”
“You don’t call GOFOs leading their people and the global force into an auditorium outside D.C. and not tell them why/what the topic or agenda is,” this person said, using an abbreviation for general officer or flag officer.
“Are we taking every general and flag officer out of the Pacific right now?” one U.S. official said. “All of it is weird.”
The orders come as Hegseth has unilaterally directed massive recent changes at the Pentagon — including directing that the number of general officers be reduced by 20 percent, firing senior leaders without cause and a high-profile new order to rebrand the Defense Department as the Department of War.
Not according to the article, it says all Generals and Flag Officers in command positions.