"Doug "Woody" and Erin Beal" wrote in message
...
On 2/28/04 4:09 AM, in article
,
"Guy Alcala" wrote:

SNIP
The USMC's AV-8Bs did this to
very good effect in 1991, for instance.

Using a helicopter airfield with a 6,000 foot runway in very poor
repair,
about
half of which was usable. They also operated from poor condition
forward
airfields in Iraq this past year, with fuel, weapons and
sparesapparently
brought
in mostly by truck.

Guy


Guy, it's obvious you know how to build an airfield.

The AV-8B's worked from forward airfields because they could. It was a
way
to use the assets we already have in a way that reduced crowding at
existing
airfields and slightly reduced tanker requirements.

And improved the response time and sortie generation rates, just as a FARP
alows an attack helo to generate more sorties due to reduced transit time
back and forth to the unit operating location.


It was a "nice to have" not a requirement. The war would have gone just
fine had they been F-16's or F/A-18's operating from fixed runways or
aircraft carriers.

The groundpounder who wants responsive CAS available *immediately*
throughout an operation would differ with you as to whether having an asset
capable of hitting a FARP and returning quickly to station is just "nice to
have".

Which is why the V/STOL F-35 is unnecessary.

Logic fault. You are claiming that because it was allegedly not required in
this instance, it will never be required. Kind of hard to support that kind
of argument. Given a scenario like Afghanistan, where the CAS assets had to
transit great distances to and from the required area of operations, the
ability to get STOVL assets into the A/O early in the campaign could be a
big advantage, and reduces the load on the other assets (like those F-15E's
and F-16's transiting out of the Gulf area). If it is unnecessary, why is
the USAF now joining the STOVL bandwagon--merely to make nice with their
USMC brethren? I doubt that. Is STVL the way to go for all TACAIR? Of course
not. But eliminating it just reduces your own versatility, and that would
not be a wise move in the current environment of uncertainty (as regards
where/when/how we'll have to fight).

Brooks


--Woody