"Scott Ferrin" wrote...

The idea back in the day was that with the Tomcat 21 they would have
made improvements to the maintanance aspects similar to the Super
Hornet. It would have been essentially a "clean sheet" Tomcat much as
the Super Hornet was a clean sheet Hornet.

Dude, Tomcat's numbers suck, get over it.

"It would have been essentially a "clean sheet" Tomcat much as the
Super Hornet was a clean sheet Hornet."


Which part of that did ya miss? They wouldn't have been simply
sticking new sensors on a D. It would have been essentially all new.
New engines, new avionics, new and redesigned airframe, etc. It would
have incorporated a lot of "lessons learned" from a maintainability
standpoint. Would it have been exaclty as good as a Super Hornet re.
maintianability? Who knows. It would have been a hell of a lot
better than a D's though.

Tarver can't see through the fog of his prejudices. The Tomcat 21 might well
have been a great airplane, and actually had the range to replace the A-6 in the
Attack role.

However, the bean counters bought the McAir hype, and the A-12 debacle sealed
the fate of Navy TacAir to rely on a sole-source platform to try to do
everything. It might have even worked if "From the Sea" was a real, viable
philosophy.

However, experience in Afghanistan has proven that "From the Sea" is NOT the
appropriate Navy/Marine philosophy for the 21st century. We're barely making do
with what we have (so far). Too bad we can't compare what we could have had...